Tag: democracy

  • Nigeria’s democracy is for a clique, says Okorocha

    Imo State Governor Rochas Okorocha yesterday described Nigeria’s democracy as a “democracy of the clique”.

    He said Nigeria’s democracy must be redefined to meet the yearnings of the masses.

    Okorocha spoke in Abuja at the public presentation of a book, entitled: “An Assessment of the Nigerian University Environment”.

    He said: “Democracy is supposed to be the government of the people, by the people and for the people, but it is a democracy of the few, by the few and for the people. Or we can say our democracy is the government of the clique, by the clique and for the clique. There is need for us to redefine democracy in Nigeria.”

    The governor called for an overhaul of the education system. He said education should be made free and given top priority.

    Okorocha said: “We must give priority to education and make it free. If not, the problems of Nigeria will not stop.

    “We are repackaging education in Imo State. Our security votes have been diverted to education. Education should be made free and there should be punishment for any parent, who does not allow a child to go to school.

    “We must change our educational system and make universities have areas of specialisation. There is no more professionalism because there is no specialisation. I propose that we establish a University of Energy to end our problem in the power sector.”

    Minister of Information Labaran Maku attributed the declining state of education in the country to the replacement of the Teachers Grade 2 Certificate with the National Certificate in Education (NCE).

    He said the root cause of the education sector’s problems is at the primary and secondary level.

    Maku said: “Until primary and secondary schools are properly managed, the country can never get it right. You can never be a good student in the university, if you had no good foundation from the primary and secondary school.”

    He urged corporate organisations to support the sector

    The author of the book, Mr. Temple Onyeukwu, spoke on the need to streamline certain examinations, especially the Post Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination (UTME), so that it would not clash with other examinations.

     

  • Nigeria as an emerging democracy: Dilemma, promise (Part 2)

    Nigeria as an emerging democracy: Dilemma, promise (Part 2)

    Text of the keynote address by Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Sokoto, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah, at the NBA Annual General Conference in Abuja

     

    Godatherism and cronyism have destroyed and are destroying Nigeria.

    Today, it is almost impossible to convince any young man or woman that a first class degree can guarantee you a job anywhere including the areas in which you have excelled. Hardly a day passes that a young man does not send me a text to say, I have heard on good authority that they are recruiting at X and Y establishments, but, I am told it depends on whom you know. I initially dismissed these young people by telling them to go, sit for the examination/test and to pass before they come to me. They laughed at what they considered to be my innocence or ignorance, until I woke up to the situation.

    Right now, we are faced with an uncertain future in which, some ten or so years ahead, we shall have a generation of young men and women running the bureaucracy or in public life who owe their future to a godfather, not a country that offered them a chance to excel. This is dangerous because what we are doing is investing in an unproductive system of clientelism which destroys excellence, stunts national cohesion and compromises our public ethos.

    How can we have a country in which the future is being mortgaged on the altars of prebendalism and feudalism? How can the President preside over a country in which his children rely on others for their wellbeing and welfare? We are going to end up say, twenty years ahead when we shall have Ambassadors, Permanent Secretaries, Directors, Ministers, Governors and Presidents who came to prominence not by dint of hard work or the transparency of their environment but men and women who will be running a country that is not the primary basis of their allegiance. The reason is because they were pushed to a job with no qualifications other than that they came from a list presented by a man or woman with connections. In life, we have all been guided by others, but in our situation in Nigeria where public officers are openly engaged in the most non transparent ways of recruiting into public service, we face a future that is in mortal danger and a country that will be a mere shell with only such shallow symbols or flags to which command no respect. Are we therefore surprise that communities and states are creating distractions by hoisting their own flags? This is just the beginning of the mess that lies ahead.

    Dispute Resolution Mechanisms:

    The Nigerian environment is still largely hostile to such indicators for modernization and business as, rule of law, due process, transparency, contract enforcement etc. This is a legacy of our authoritarian background. For Nigeria to redefine its laws to be able to grow and attract investors, it must rethink the nature of the legal system it wishes to adopt. We have not paid much attention to the inherent problems in the legal system that we have adopted in Nigeria. For example, even as a layman, serving at the Oputa Panel opened my eyes to the great injury of the legal system that we have for a largely communal, poverty stricken society like ours. We watched as highly paid lawyers took the stage and turned the platform for articulating the grievance of ordinary victims of injustice and abuse into a legal gymnasium. It is time for us to wake up to what many people in the world already know; that conflicts and disputes can be resolved as if there is no tomorrow, they can be resolved in less hostile terms.

    Rwanda provides Africa with the best test case. The country has become a model for reconciliation with a leadership that has focus and is prepared for sacrifices. Recently, a journalist asked a Rwandan if he expected Paul Kagame to go in 2017. The man replied: Yes, I hope so, and if he does, I will cry.

    This is not the place to review the legacy of Mr. Kagame, but the man has become the cynosure of many eyes around the world and has shown that it is better to have talent and honesty than to have oil and dishonesty. Now, Nigerians are hovering around him as a model of leadership. I went to Kigali on a field research in 2004. In the course of my work, I sat through the Gacaca traditional courts which had been set up to resolve some of the issues that were pending in a country where over 200 thousand people were awaiting trial. In less than ten years, 12,000 Gacaca courts have disposed of 1. 2m cases at very minimal financial costs. The Gacaca courts have not replaced the conventional courts in the land, but what we have is evidence of a country that its leadership is determined to ensure justice through the adoption of some creative means that guarantees integrative and restorative justice.

    Needed, a Constitution:

    As usual, with eyes on 2015, the politicians are angling for the best strategy to position themselves for power. Ordinarily, there is nothing wrong with this. There are calls for the amendment of the Constitution while others are calling for a Sovereign National Conference. The general belief is that this is what we need to redress the injustice that is in the system.

    How do we account for constitutional mortality? The American Constitution has survived for over two hundred years largely because it has focused on how to reduce the power of the sovereign. There have been three key concepts guiding Constitutions; amendment, suspension or replacement all aimed at guaranteeing Constitutional endurance, resilience or longevity.

    The focus of all Constitutions must be to limit the power of government by ensuring that those who have power use it well and that those who do not have power are adequately protected so that they do not resort to unconstitutional means. This has been at the heart of the social crises in Nigeria. To the military, the Constitution was a distraction to their ambition to hold on to power. Thus, without one, the Nigerian Sovereign appropriated power to himself and the result is what we see today with the dictatorial and intolerant postures of public officers to principles of Constitutionalism, order and process.

    Individual citizens usually have competing identities and interests that are based a variety of identities. These include ethnic, communal, religious, regional, class and so on. The duty of a Constitution is to serve as a vehicle for transferring the allegiance of these citizens from these narrow interests to the higher interests of the state. To do this, the state must, through the lofty ideals of the Constitution hold up a higher goal of protection, security, welfare and so on to the citizen. It must command his loyalty and respect.

    The next challenge is to create the institutions that will align with the ideals encapsulated in the Constitution. These require maturation and the political elites must never be allowed to apply the principles of quick fixes to turn the constitution into a tool that merely accelerates their political climbing. Thus, there is need for courage, patience, disciple, maturity and statesmanship. Although there is a case to be made of the how a Constitution comes about, popular participation is not necessarily the litmus test. Some of the most enduring Constitution were crafted in smoke filled rooms by the elite, the result of disciplined bargaining and negotiation. There is clearly a causal relationship between constitutional longevity and political, economic and democratic growth of a nation.

    Constitutions must be self-enforcing, they must possess and inherent equilibrium from which none can deviate without consequence. They must possess a quantum of incentives that are sufficiently appealing to all the constituent units and penalties that serve as disincentives to infringement. By way of judicial activism, some unforeseen aspects of the Constitution can be brought to the fore by judicial rulings by radical judges. Here, we recall the roles played by people like the late Gani Fawehinmi or the Bar under the leadership of the combative and assertive late Aka Bashorun. In the United States of America for example, such land mark judgments like Brown vs. Board of Education or the Civil Rights Act, are all evidence of what the Bar and the Bench can do if we are committed to judicial activism.

    Constitutions must also include the whole issue of hidden information that is not available to all parties at the time of the framing of the Constitution.

    Our Constitution must include the right to rebel and this must be clearly spelt out. Rebellion and public interest litigations help ordinary voices to serve as mechanism for restraint against the excesses of the state. Nigerians have often asked, can we have an Arab spring in Nigeria? The answer is not yet because so far, we are weighed down by petty allegiances and hiding behind little mole hills of ethnicity erected by our village and town crooks who continue to ensure that we do not see the big picture of our collective agony.

    Summary and Conclusion: Where

    I believe that we all agree with Professor Soludo in his vision of a Nigeria that is a dream waiting to happen. This is not the place for us to enter into a debate as to why this miracle has not happened. I believe most of us are familiar with the reason why this is so.

  • ‘How to strengthen democracy’

    ‘How to strengthen democracy’

    Experts who converged last week at the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS) for the 2012 memorial lecture of a distinguished lawyer, Dr Felix Okoye, have said that a strong judiciary is requred for true democracy.

    They said an effective judicial system is necessary to achieve political stability.

    Among the participants at the lecture were Justice of the Supreme Court, Dr Ibrahim Mohammad, Appeal Court Judge, Dauda Bage, former Director General, NIALS, Prof. Ayo Ojomo, former Senator, Oyabo Obi, wife and brother of the late Dr. Okoye, Mrs. Ijeoma Okoye, and Chief J.C. Okoye respectively, and constitutional lawyer, Mr. Fred Agbaje.

    They said although the apex court had lived up to its responsibility in ensuring constitutionalism, there was more to be done to avoid anarchy, even as they maintained that laws that restrict the powers of the judiciary should be reviewed by the legislature.

    Mohammad in his lecture “Judicialism and electoral process in Nigeria: what the Supreme Court did; what it may do”, noted that the apex court had since 1979 intervened in the electoral process as many elections have been litigated.

    Citing disqualification, substitution and tenure elongation as examples, he said the essence of the apex court’s intervention has always been to promote democratic culture among the populace, strengthen the confidence of the people in the process as well as promote constitutionalism and due process in the political system.

    He said: ‘’The fact remains that for a constitutional government to emerge and democracy to become institutionalised in any nation for that matter, the role of the judiciary is crucial because the responsibility to ensure that the standards and procedures laid down in a constitution are observed rests with the courts.’’

    On the issue of disqualification of a candidate political party’s candidate by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the judge noted that the apex court in a unanimous decision held that such powers was vested solely in the court.

    He said there was nothing within the provision of section 137(1) of the 1999 Constitution that empowers INEC to disqualify any candidate. ‘’By virtue of section 6(1) and (6) of the Constitution, it is only a court of law that can exercise a function which is exclusively adjudicative in nature.

    ‘’The court pronounced with finality that within the meaning of section 32(4) of the Electoral Act, mere allegation of crime or dishonest conduct, without evidence of trial and conviction, is not enough to ground the disqualification of a person from contesting a primary election of a political party or any other election,’’ he said.

    On the substitution of an elected candidate’s name by INEC or a political party, Mohammad said the court held that no party is permitted to bulldoze its way to rescind the mandate given to a nominated candidate whether wrongly or rightly for no justifiable cause.

    He said: ‘’The Supreme Court per Oguntade held that politics is not anarchy; it is not disorderliness. It must be punctuated by justice, fairness and orderliness.’’

    Although the apex court holds itself bound by its previous decision, Mohammad pointed out that there are cases where the court has overruled itself because it gladly accepts it is better to admit error than persevere in error.

    ‘’For the Supreme Court, the most important consideration is the interest of justice, the development of the law and issues of public policy.’’

    He called on the government to institute deep and elaborate reforms that will lead to the restoration of the integrity of the electoral system as well as ensure that future elections meet minimum acceptable international standards.

    ‘’Government should be magnanimous enough to implement the enduring and durable recommendations made by the Uwais’ panel on electoral rest of the democratic comity of nations as having arrived,’’ Mohammad said.

    Agbaje who described section 285(7) of the constitution which gives limited time within which electoral matters should be heard and disposed of as an infringement to the right of hearing, even as he asked if the said section 285(7) was not usurpation to the doctrine of separation of powers.

     

  • Presidency deplores impeachment threats against Jonathan

    Presidency deplores impeachment threats against Jonathan

    The Presidency yesterday deplored what it called the threats of impeachment being dangled before President Goodluck Jonathan by members of the National Assembly at every given opportunity. It said the lawmakers should put the nation’s interest above any other consideration.

    Addressing reporters in Abuja yesterday, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public Affairs, Dr. Doyin Okupe, enjoined the legislators and other members of the public to give due respect to the office of the President, irrespective of their political affiliations.

    Okupe described conflicts between the legislative and the executive arms as normal in a democracy as, according to him, such conflicts tend to strengthen the principle of checks and balances.

    According to him, members of the National Assembly remained the best the nation has produced since the return of democratic rule in 1999. The legislature has always demonstrated its readiness to work harmoniously with the executive for the good of the people, Okupe said.

    He went on: “There are bound to be conflicts and disagreements but moderation must be the order of the day. Even in the face of conflicts and disagreements, the interest of the over 160 million Nigerians must be paramount.

    “The legislative arm of government has the constitutional right to impeach the President. But that impeachment should be the last option. It’s not that any time there is one form of disagreement or the other, the legislature will be threatening the President with impeachment.

    “There is always room for dialogue. Our democracy is new and we have to build it and allow it to grow. The legislature will be passing good laws while the executive will be executing the good laws for the development of the country”, Okupe added.

    The President’s aide said his boss decided to stop action on the proposed N5000 banknote by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) based on protests by the public.

    Okupe explained that the President’s intervention was to allow the CBN enough time to educate the public.

  • ‘Why parties lack internal democracy’

    ‘Why parties lack internal democracy’

    A former Managing Director of the Niger Delta Development Commission(NDDC), Elder Power Aginighan, has advised the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC) to direct the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) and other parties to conduct internal democracy audit.

    He said the move is necessary to ensure compliance with internal democracy and avoid overbearing influences of some political bigwigs.

    Aginighan, a stalwart of the PDP, also called for a review of the Electoral Act 2010 to ensure that the PDP and other parties toe the line of internal democracy.

    He said: “After perusing the Electoral Act, 2010, I am constrained to call on the National Assembly to amend the Act to ensure that all political parties practise full blown internal democracy in Nigeria.”

    The PDP stalwart noted that Section 85 of the Act provides that registered political party shall give the Commission at least 21- day notice of any convention, congress, conference or meeting convened for the purpose of electing members of its executive committees, other governing bodies or nominating candidates for any of the elective offices specified.

    According to him: “I can boldly say that there is no party that has fully complied with this provision in the conduct of its congresses and primaries.

    “At best, the provision has only been observed mainly in the breach. The impunity with which political parties violate this very important provision of the law is traceable to the lack of sanctions for non-compliance in the Act.”

    He said the situation has led to the emergence “of hand-picked executives from the Ward to Local Government to State and National levels.”

    Aginighan added: “Most of the parties are run as private companies of some influential members who subvert the will of the generality of the members of their parties and impose their preferred executives, delegates and candidates on the party.

    “This has in turn led to the emergence of factions in many of the parties.”

  • ‘Ours is not yet  a democracy’

    ‘Ours is not yet a democracy’

    During the heady days of the military rule, Dr. Dipo Fashina and a host of others in the civil rights groups fought to free Nigeria from dictatorship. Fashina, a senior lecturer in the Department of Philosophy, Obafemi Awolowo University, (OAU) Ile-Ife, Osun State, is also a former President of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). Edozie Udeze met him recently.

     

    DO you think that what the Civil Right Groups fought against during the military have been achieved today?

    I think when you look back you find out that, all we did together was to get the military off the stage. There were then the two ‘wes’, okay. The first ‘we’ were groups of people who were already in active politics.

    These were people who were in party politics then and were really fully involved in it. These were those who were in MKO Abiola’s party then; there were those who were in NADECO. All these already had party affiliations, yet they were members of the Civil Rights Groups. These were people who took advantage of party politics to swim through to the other side.

    Then there were the group who had a larger view of what was needed to get Nigeria on the path of progress. There were the people who we saw as the socialists and who were also on the broad left. Those people decided that it was necessary to free the country in order to advance to the next level. That time, there was a coalition of the civil rights people. There was the late Beko Ransome-Kuti who was later joined by the late Gani Fawehinmi and so on.

    All these were led by people who had their antecedents on the left – that is the socialists group. Now, I am saying this because, when you look at it now, what we were fighting for was to be able to get not just the nebulous idea of the people, trying to chose their own type of government, we were also fighting for a situation in which people would be able, generally, to advance the cause of workers. That was the general idea and concept behind the struggle and the motivation to liberate the society. We needed to produce the ordinary people who would build their own society, where there would be at least a minimum welfare state.

    However, coming out of the defect of military rule, we now found out there was not really unity of goals. As far as that other group was concerned, all we needed to do was to get the military off our backs and then life continues. After that there would be party politics so that they would get into power.

    And another said, well, after the defeat of the military, the forces will be reorganized so that we would advance and improve the cause of the working people. Now, what has happened is that those who just saw that anti-military struggle as a way of just getting political power are the ones who have benefited from the status quo. They are the people who now claim and cling to the leadership of the state. You’d be surprised that when you now hear the history of the anti-democratic struggle you only hear about people who were in NADECO. And that is not quite correct.

    NADECO is now what is on the lips of people. Yet there were the CD, the JACON, etc, etc. After the military struggle, it was easy for our patriots who also struggled to enter into the mainstream politics, win governorships, establish political parties and all that. That is where we are presently.

    That other ‘we’ is still trying to reorganise itself. We knew what we wanted to do – to build a socialist country, not to build a Nigeria that is ruled by the same forces who now behave as the military did. Now they are being influenced and controlled by American government, international funders and so on. These are the people who funded the so-called democratic forces and they are now in total control of the affairs of the nation and the people.

    Some Southern leaders of thought have been advocating for state police. Do you think Nigeria is ripe for that now?

    Usually in Nigeria when there is a problem, people will say okay it was there before, that there was regional police before and it was later dismantled. And why not bring it back now? You see, I find those arguments rather light-headed, because, unless you ignore history, you’ll not get to the root of these problems. You have to really analyse history to see what it was like in the past. When we had state or regional police, what was it like, what was the situation then? Why was it dismantled and so on?

    What was the situation in which we had regional police? And what is the situation now? Now where are we going? For me, right now, honestly it is not that I want to dodge the question. It is to get the fundamental problems in proper perspective. What is the police force for? What function does it play in Nigeria today?

    In Nigeria now, as I am talking to you, do the police protect the people, the masses of the nation? Do the police advance the interest of those millions who are suffering in the society? What is the state of the police itself? When you look at it, our police is a rag– tag force. It is badly equipped, badly paid; it is without any doubt in a bad state.

    Clearly from the way the police has been stretched – bad condition of service, corruptive tendencies, you don’t expect them to operate better. Now, again, when you look at it, when the police come out to do a function, it is basically to oppress. To quell riot, to collect money, that is the main function of the police as it is today.

    For me, instead of saying how do we create a society where we will transform the police, to play the role that it ought to play, we are not talking of a police that is so badly run and equipped, badly treated and all it can do is to serve the function of the rulers. This is not proper at all.

    There is no general universal answer to the question of the state police. No, there is none. With the way the Nigerian police is right now people are talking democracy, but there is no class now that is truly committed to democracy. Or is there? That includes the governors.

    What the governors believe is that all you need is to keep power by all means. For me, the question is badly put – a state police issue now, it may turn out that someone wants to use it in the hands of corrupt people and anti – democratic elements. I don’t think that it is historically justified to have a situation when state police can be the answer. It has to be based on the historical function under which we are now in this society. I am answering the question whether or not police should be in state hands or not. I am basing my views on the historical parameter in which we are.

    NUPENG threatened to go on strike based on the oil subsidy probe and other cases of corruption in the system. How do you assess this vis-à-vis the level of corruption in Nigeria?

    The question of the oil subsidy thing is a question I think the working class people of this society who are the ones at the receiving end should be able to defend. Let me say one thing –we are here because of political and economic choices, not by a group of people who have been installed there to lead. It is not a question of who is there now. When we told people that EFCC, ICPC and so on are not our ideas, that they were what they were out of the conditions that we were given, many people did not believe us.

    Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala being there now in government is not an accident. It is not at all. The subsidy probe is part of the agenda why she is there. And you saw all the futile arguments she presented over there about the oil subsidy removal. Now Nigerians know better.

    The question that rises today is: the way we pose this question needs to be re – examined. Should we prosecute the Faruk Lawans or the Femi Otedolas and so on? Should we now have a new PIB bill? Those questions are important; yes we can prosecute them. The first thing we have to do is if we begin to talk about prosecution in a country where the judiciary is bad, even if the judiciary were the best, the question for me still remains how do you punish the offenders. How do you punish people who have been found guilty of fraud? A serious country will of course punish those found guilty.

    But the harder question is, what is the root of this oil theft? How did we get to this level? It is that history we have to look at first to be able to get it right. In this country, many people have been saying that our problem is that the people who are running this country are the same people who are interested in power for the sake of amassing wealth. And as long as power is in the hands of these people, this cannot be called a country.

    So, that is the fundamental question. Those who are in the habit of enabling them – the IMF agents here, the civil servants who join them in this situation… Come to the history of it all. When we removed the military, President Olusegun Obasanjo who took over was the one who created the basis and foundation for all this. When he created all these conglomerates; when he created what he termed captains of industries. And then he created Transcorp through which he created the policy of selling all public institutions to private ownership.

    So, if you want to clean up this mess, you cannot start from here. You have to start from the Obasanjo era. They are all alike; the same set of people. We are talking of a class of rulers all of whom are involved in this melee of corruption. Then you go into it and the task is big. I am not against taking people to court. But taking people to court and appearing to punish them here and there seem to be the same to me. They seem to exchange batons and, therefore, there seems to be no progress at all.

    People are talking about corruption daily and …

    Oh yes, people are criticising it, calling for a final solution. Yes, it is an enfeebled government. But it is an enfeebled government because it is the latest stages of a system of a regime of fraud that started with Obasanjo. That is what all of us should remember. So while we are dealing with it, we should remember it is the latest in an ancestry of the same corruptive tendency by the same people.

    I am saying this because we move from one illusion to the other. And we still come back to the same thing. People should be striking for what they feel is a fraud and it is legitimate. Those who want to solve the problems of this country must put into consideration that all we have are the same class of people who hold the country by the jugular. Until we wriggle free from their tendency to continue to tie us down perpetually, we will continue to run in circles.

    What is your take on private universities that produce so many first class graduates every year?

    Let us also talk about federal universities. In most federal universities there are certain disciplines where you can hardly produce first class graduates. The history is there and it is justified. And nowadays when you produce just one or two first class there after many years, people will know their worth.

    But these days, when I hear of a private university producing dozens and dozens of first class materials, I wonder how and why. Sometimes they produce, double or even triple what a federal university has not produced since its inception or in the past twenty years. When we hear this, of course, we know that something is wrong.

    In some federal universities, there is no one who will tell you that you cannot fail a course. Of course, where you fail you either have a re-sit or carry-over. This is to maintain a standard. But in some private universities that I know you do not fail. No, you do not and this is unorthodox. I also know some people who think private universities are not up to standard. And in order to make the world see them as better, they have to produce many first class to justify their existence.

    I know that if there is any federal university that produces as many first class as the private ones do, you’ll ask what is wrong. It is not a healthy development for education in the country, too many first class is not a tea party and it is not an everyday thing.

    Without prejudice that there are many bright students in the private universities, that is not a guarantee that first class materials are that many. Remember also that they do not have the kind of quality staff we have. Most of them still borrow lecturers from here where we have better qualified teachers and professors. So how come they now do better than federal universities? It is really difficult to imagine how they now train extremely high quality students who garner first class at random.

    Generally, many of us are now very critical of the standard being set for our young graduates by the private universities. We are also worried that this too may not be too healthy for our society, where people with first class cannot easily prove what they are worth. We need to really, really look into it for the benefit of our educational standard and the future of this country.

  • ‘Politicians greatest problem of true democracy’

    Justice of the Supreme Court, Dr. Ibrahim Mohammad, has

    described politicians as the greatest problem of democracy.

    He urged them to desist from do-or-die politics even as he decried their recklessness and disregard for court orders.

    Justice Mohammad spoke at the 2012 Dr. Felix Okoye memorial lecture held at the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS), Lagos.

    In his lecture entitled “judicialism and electoral processes in Nigeria: what the Supreme Court did; what the Supreme Court may do”, the judge described the recommendations as enduring and durable.

    Highlighting the roles the apex court has played in shaping the political sphere of the country, Justice Mohammad said a lot of Nigerians have criticised the Court without examining facts.

    He maintained that no matter how hard the Supreme Court tries to put things right, its hands were tight as a result of the constitutional provisions.

    The judge said: “We should not forget that the role of the judiciary is to implement the law and not to make laws. So, when there are bad laws like Section 85(7), which provides that the court should hear and dispose of an election matter within 60 days from the date of delivery, the Supreme Court cannot do anything about it because any contrary action by the apex court will amount to a disregard for the ground norm.

    “The politicians who did it had their reasons; maybe so that they can enjoy their offices as cases that are not filed within 60 days are struck out. Still, it has some positive sides because I can tell you that before we went for vacation, there was not one election matter at the Supreme Court.”

    He urged the Federal Government to implement the recommendations of the Muhammadu Uwais Panel on Electoral Reforms.

    Using the case of Governor Rotimi Amaechi against Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and Sir Celestine Omehia over the substitution of the former’s name by the party, the judge said it was obvious some judges and lawyers were being used to delay the course of justice.

    According to the judge, the judgments delivered by the Supreme Court clarified the issues of substitution of candidate’s name by political parties as well as elongation of tenures of elected officers, among others.

    He said:”It is for us as a people and the politicians in particular to learn to accept defeat gallantly. There must be an end to the culture of do- or-die politics in this country.

    “Both the leaders and the led must appreciate the role of the Court in general and the Supreme Court in particular in the development of the democratic values and practices.

    “It is if and only when this is done and we all learn to accord respect to the orders of court that we will join the rest of the democratic comity of nations as having arrived.”

    Justice Mohammad said if the request of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to the National Assembly that all interlocutory appeals terminate at the Appeal Court is accepted, the burden on the Supreme Court would be lessened.

    He said: “As at yesterday (Monday) we were still treating matters of 2001, yet there is no week that we do not deliver an average of 10 judgments unlike our counterparts in other countries.”

  • Nigeria as an emerging democracy: Dilemma, promise

    Nigeria as an emerging democracy: Dilemma, promise

    Text of the keynote address by Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Sokoto, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah at the NBA Annual General Conference in Abuja

    The minorities of the Middle Belt unfortunately or fortunately do not have the culturally homogenous and cohesive capacity to inflict injury on anyone. They did their part for one united Nigeria. So, truly, we are set for a new dawn. The challenge is how to bring that about.
    5: Unity by Division: Balkanisation of the State.
    Whatever may have been the circumstances of our union, our history is not different that of other nations which were forcefully created or manufactured. The real challenge is how and why we have not been able to imbibe for example, the E pluribus, Unum, philosophy that has gathered a complex web of humanity like the United States is, into one nation. Under this principle, the Americans admitted their differences but argued that although we are many and diverse, we can aspire to be one. The challenge is to find the institutions to support this unity. Today, the United States with all its difficulties is a fine testimony of how a nation with differences can find common cause by creating a time tested Constitution.
    With hindsight, it is important for us to look back and appreciate why our difficulties have persisted. So far, it is not due to lack of good men and women, good will, good intentions, enthusiasm, even patriotism that Nigeria’s growth remains stunted. We have had our own fair share of good men behaving badly, but the problem is that we have relied on the dubious quest for good men and women rather than relying on creating institutions to support and make it possible for these humans to act rightly or to stop them from acting wrongly.
    Faced with the challenges of nation building, Nigeria did not choose the path of statesmanship, courage and resilience. Rather than follow through the roundtable discussions in Aburi, Ghana in 1966, clarify the issues and seek accommodation, we resorted to states creation as a solution to the problem of national unity. After slicing the nation into states, we then began came up with the mantra that; to keep Nigeria one is a task that must be done! Even when we fought a war with no winners no vanquished, rather than return to the barracks and use politics to create consensus and rebuild our nation, the military stayed on, corrupted politics and destroyed the foundations of the unity it had preached and fought a war to protect. Thus the mantra, to keep Nigeria one was replaced with, To your tents o Israel!
    Under the military, states and local government creation became such a selfish exercise that military officers simply parceled out the country to themselves and their friends as tribal fiefdoms. This diminished a sense of national unity as more and more communities invented new identities amidst cries of freedom from domination. Thus, at the creation of each new state or local government area, yesterday’s brothers and sisters who speak the same language and share the same culture became enemies. Location of state capitals and local government headquarters, the citing of projects intensified these animosities and yesterday’s majority which became a new minority, now demanded its own space. While the country did not grow, these policies only further created new elites with a bloated and unproductive bureaucratic and political elites feeding off the system at the expense of the people. Even right till today, the debate about a new Constitution is merely a fig leaf for seeking further balkanization of the nation as states creation seems to be the most important item on the table with every Senator seeking to deliver a new state to his or her people! For how long can we survive with this joke?
    6: The politics of Land and Taxation:
    From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, the issues of land reforms remain a major source of conflict and instability. From the colonial period, the appetite for choice lands dictated the options for settler or transitory colonialism. In places like Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa and Zimbabwe for example, land has been the main source of conflict. The stories of the Mau of Kenya right up to the Zimbabwean veterans are within the same context. Little wonder the founding fathers of Sierra Leone decided to award the Order of the Mosquito as a sign of appreciation to the anopheles mosquito whose malaria bite kept the white man away from taking over their land.
    The issue of land remains a sore point in Nigeria. The conflict around indigene and settlers, land ownership laws and so on are still to be resolved. Closely tied to this is the question of taxation. The infamous Land Use Act of 1978 has thrown up problems that remain unresolved and since the political class have found this very beneficial, it is not surprising that the poor remain the victims of these unjust laws. Land Laws are fundamental to individual and community growth and development. It is even more so for government and investors. We should learn from the mistake of the Niger Delta and ensure appropriate legal measures that protect the investor, citizen and our country. It is one major way of engendering stability, harmony and growth. Every nation seeking development, growth and national cohesion must address the issues of land and taxation.
    One of the surest signs that our country has not been serious about democracy and economic development has been the issue of taxation. As the old saying goes, no taxation without representation. If we believe this, then, the lack of effective tax laws is a measure of how disconnected the government is from the lives of the people and their economic endeavours. Sadly, perhaps, aware of how little its impact is in the lives of citizens, the government has seemingly been lackadaisical about enforcing the tax laws. Without services, a government has no moral basis to tax its citizens. Clearly, the example of what is happening in Lagos is a lesson and a metaphor for our country. Sadly, fighting a thoroughly corrupt, incompetent and inefficient bureaucracy should pose the biggest challenge.
    The State as a Distribution agency:
    Professor Richard Joseph’s old characterization of the Nigerian state as the arena of prebendalism still holds good, then as now. One of the most egregious areas of this assault is the privatisation of state power where state resources and their allocation are privatised within a tiny circle. Today, the culture of the state as a domain of patronage persists. The saddest part of this problem is that the military Constitution has actually built this anomaly into the Constitution.
     Section 162 of the Constitution specifically states that:  The Federation shall maintain a special account to be called the Federation Account into which shall be paid all revenues collected by the Government of the Federation. The official Head chef, known as the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, presides over the slicing of this beef of state. It is further recommended that the distribution of this largesse shall take into consideration….  population, equality of States, internal revenue generation, landmass, terrain as well as population density.
    Subsections 3-8 continue with this iniquity which focuses on mere distribution of handouts with no clear mechanism for monitoring whether the allocations are properly used for the welfare of the people. We can understand why any census will always be contested and why communal crises over boundaries and new identities will persist in Nigeria. But what is even more invidious is the decision to tie local governments to apron strings of the state governors. It is now possible to appreciate why local government elections will remain at most a charade with the State Governors ensuring that chairmen are firmly under their control. As can be seen, there are hardly any states with more than a token presence of one or two local government chairmen or Women from the opposition Parties.
    For a long time, the so-called Joint-Account was the area where governors proved to be even more reckless. The State Assemblies are almost all the same in terms of membership of the party in power. What these present us with is a seriously compromised political atmosphere where accountability and transparency are the first victims. The governors literally anoint the speakers of the Houses of Assembly. So, with both local government chairmen and speakers each struggling to be governor’s favourite sons, there is no one left to speak out on transparency and accountability. There are no mechanisms for holding government responsible. The occasional hiccups and theatrical attempts at impeachment are merely a symptom of the rumbling of a hungry stomach. This is why our democracy remains so weak at the lowest levels.
     Leadership Recruitment and Capacity in Nigeria:
    Elsewhere, in a paper I wrote for the Nigerian Leadership Initiative, I spoke on what I called, Power without Authority. My interest was to show that the leadership crisis in Nigeria persists because we do not as yet have criteria for ascent to leadership. From my analysis, it is clear that right from the first republic till date, every Nigerian President has literally come to power by good luck. More often than not, those who have prepared for office either by way of the quantum of resources accumulated, have never managed to make it. The result is that the country has not been able to develop a sound political culture.
    The real test that a country’s democracy is deepening lies in some level of unpredictability about electoral outcomes and fortunes. Thus, the issue of who or which Party will win the elections and who might win or lose a Gubernatorial or Senate seat should not be based on predictable outcomes such as patronage, god-fatherism, capacity to manipulate electoral body, its agents and results, the size of the political war chest, the recruitment and control of well heeled legal gymnasts or anointing of any sort. The notion that a state should look up to whom the President or governor will anoint as a successor, institutionalises corruption, indolence and cronyism. It kills ideas and principles and makes political contest a violent enterprise. By now, politicians would have come to appreciate the fact that this so called anointing is a waste of time because even before the oil of anointing has dried up, the godfather and godson are already at war. This is the story of our anointed Governors right across the country and as we know, only a few have mended their fences! But these quarrels are taking their toll on our people as supporters are constantly forced to move wherever and whenever their patrons change direction.
    Anyone familiar with the political history of Nigeria will appreciate the fact that somehow, when it comes to the Presidency of Nigeria, God’s rules of engagement for Nigeria are different. In the whole of our history, from Alhaji Tafawa Balewa till date, political power has always been a gift of charity from God.  No one has become the President of Nigeria from the size of his war chest or connections. I am not sure whether this will remain our fate, but at least, if we are to take any lesson from all this, it is that we need to be more circumspect.
    Those in power therefore should remember that God has not changed His place on His throne and stop playing God by spending resources, bending the rules and deciding that they must anoint or appoint their successors. I am not saying we should leave everything merely to chance, but that it is important that we appreciate the fact that in nurturing our democracy, there is need to instill peoples’ confidence in the process. So far, for us, elections have always been a war or sorts. Although we are quick to blame the ordinary people and thugs, the truth is that it is the political class that is responsible for criminalizing the process. The lack of internal democracy among the parties, refusal by those at the top to respect the rules of engagement and the Party guidelines, forcing anointed candidates leads to the manufacturing of consent. All these merely stunt our growth and leave the process open to violence and abuse.
    We need to create the kind of space that can allow for people with ideas to persuade and influence public opinion to support their ideas. Although talent is important in any society, clearly, it is important that a nation creates institutions that can enable this talent to flourish. Richard Branson, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg are clearly extraordinarily gifted and talented men. But they would not have nurtured their dreams if they did not have an environment that was wide enough and had the institutions to support and  contain their visions which may have seemed crazy at the early stages.
    Mrs. Chioma Ajunwa was a natural talent, but it took the foresight of someone in the Police Force to rally around her and later, the vision of a Segun Odegbami to have nurtured that talent. Compare that with the situation today where we focus more on funding prayer warriors, sorcerers, magicians and some form of voodoo as the means for winning medals and other laurels in international competitions.
    Godatherism and cronyism have destroyed and are destroying Nigeria. Today, it is almost impossible to convince any young man or woman that a first class degree can guarantee you a job anywhere including the areas in which you have excelled. Hardly a day passes that a young man does not send me a text to say, I have heard on good authority that they are recruiting at X and Y establishments, but, I am told it depends on whom you know. I initially dismissed these young people by telling them to go, sit for the examination/test and to pass before they come to me. They laughed at what they considered to be my innocence or ignorance, until I woke up to the situation.
    Right now, we are faced with an uncertain future in which, some ten or so years ahead, we shall have a generation of young men and women running the bureaucracy or in public life who owe their future to a godfather, not a country that offered them a chance to excel. This is dangerous because what we are doing is investing in an unproductive system of clientelism which destroys excellence, stunts national cohesion and compromises our public ethos.
    How can we have a country in which the future is being mortgaged on the altars of prebendalism and feudalism? How can the President preside over a country in which his children rely on others for their wellbeing and welfare? We are going to end up say, twenty years ahead when we shall have Ambassadors, Permanent Secretaries, Directors, Ministers, Governors and Presidents who came to prominence not by dint of hard work or the transparency of their environment but men and women who will be running a country that is not the primary basis of their allegiance. The reason is because they were pushed to a job with no qualifications other than that they came from a list presented by a man or woman with connections. In life, we have all been guided by others, but in our situation in Nigeria where public officers are openly engaged in the most non transparent ways of recruiting into public service, we face a future that is in mortal danger and a country that will be a mere shell with only such shallow symbols or flags to which command no respect. Are we therefore surprise that communities and states are creating distractions by hoisting their own flags? This is just the beginning of the mess that lies ahead.
     Dispute Resolution Mechanisms:
    The Nigerian environment is still largely hostile to such indicators for modernization and business as, rule of law, due process, transparency, contract enforcement etc. This is a legacy of our authoritarian background. For Nigeria to redefine its laws to be able to grow and attract investors, it must rethink the nature of the legal system it wishes to adopt. We have not paid much attention to the inherent problems in the legal system that we have adopted in Nigeria. For example, even as a layman, serving at the Oputa Panel opened my eyes to the great injury of the legal system that we have for a largely communal, poverty stricken society like ours. We watched as highly paid lawyers took the stage and turned the platform for articulating the grievance of ordinary victims of injustice and abuse into a legal gymnasium. It is time for us to wake up to what many people in the world already know; that conflicts and disputes can be resolved as if there is no tomorrow, they can be resolved in less hostile terms.
    Rwanda provides Africa with the best test case. The country has become a model for reconciliation with a leadership that has focus and is prepared for sacrifices. Recently, a journalist asked a Rwandan if he expected Paul Kagame to go in 2017. The man replied: Yes, I hope so, and if he does, I will cry.
    This is not the place to review the legacy of Mr. Kagame, but the man has become the cynosure of many eyes around the world and has shown that it is better to have talent and honesty than to have oil and dishonesty. Now, Nigerians are hovering around him as a model of leadership. I went to Kigali on a field research in 2004. In the course of my work, I sat through the Gacaca traditional courts which had been set up to resolve some of the issues that were pending in a country where over 200 thousand people were awaiting trial. In less than ten years, 12,000 Gacaca courts have disposed of 1. 2m cases at very minimal financial costs. The Gacaca courts have not replaced the conventional courts in the land, but what we have is evidence of a country that its leadership is determined to ensure justice through the adoption of some creative means that guarantees integrative and restorative justice.
    Needed, a Constitution:
    As usual, with eyes on 2015, the politicians are angling for the best strategy to position themselves for power. Ordinarily, there is nothing wrong with this. There are calls for the amendment of the Constitution while others are calling for a Sovereign National Conference. The general belief is that this is what we need to redress the injustice that is in the system.
    How do we account for constitutional mortality? The American Constitution has survived for over two hundred years largely because it has focused on how to reduce the power of the sovereign. There have been three key concepts guiding Constitutions; amendment, suspension or replacement all aimed at guaranteeing Constitutional endurance, resilience or longevity.
    The focus of all Constitutions must be to limit the power of government by ensuring that those who have power use it well and that those who do not have power are adequately protected so that they do not resort to unconstitutional means. This has been at the heart of the social crises in Nigeria. To the military, the Constitution was a distraction to their ambition to hold on to power. Thus, without one, the Nigerian Sovereign appropriated power to himself and the result is what we see today with the dictatorial and intolerant postures of public officers to principles of Constitutionalism, order and process.
    Individual citizens usually have competing identities and interests that are based a variety of identities. These include ethnic, communal, religious, regional, class and so on. The duty of a Constitution is to serve as a vehicle for transferring the allegiance of these citizens from these narrow interests to the higher interests of the state. To do this, the state must, through the lofty ideals of the Constitution hold up a higher goal of protection, security, welfare and so on to the citizen. It must command his loyalty and respect.
    The next challenge is to create the institutions that will align with the ideals encapsulated in the Constitution. These require maturation and the political elites must never be allowed to apply the principles of quick fixes to turn the constitution into a tool that merely accelerates their political climbing. Thus, there is need for courage, patience, disciple, maturity and statesmanship. Although there is a case to be made of the how a Constitution comes about, popular participation is not necessarily the litmus test. Some of the most enduring Constitution were crafted in smoke filled rooms by the elite, the result of disciplined  bargaining and negotiation. There is clearly a causal relationship between constitutional longevity and political, economic and democratic growth of a nation.
    Constitutions must be self-enforcing, they must possess and inherent equilibrium from which none can deviate without consequence. They must possess a quantum of incentives that are sufficiently appealing to all the constituent units and penalties that serve as disincentives to infringement. By way of judicial activism, some unforeseen aspects of the Constitution can be brought to the fore by judicial rulings by radical judges. Here, we recall the roles played by people like the late Gani Fawehinmi or the Bar under the leadership of the combative and assertive late Aka Bashorun. In the United States of America for example, such land mark judgments like Brown vs. Board of Education or the Civil Rights Act, are all evidence of what the Bar and the Bench can do if we are committed to judicial activism.
    Constitutions must also include the whole issue of hidden information that is not available to all parties at the time of the framing of the Constitution.
    Our Constitution must include the right to rebel and this must be clearly spelt out. Rebellion and public interest litigations help ordinary voices to serve as mechanism for restraint against the excesses of the state. Nigerians have often asked, can we have an Arab spring in Nigeria? The answer is not yet because so far, we are weighed down by petty allegiances and hiding behind little mole hills of ethnicity erected by our village and town crooks who continue to ensure that we do not see the big picture of our collective agony.
    Summary and Conclusion: Where
    I believe that we all agree with Professor Soludo in his vision of a Nigeria that is a dream waiting to happen. This is not the place for us to enter into a debate as to why this miracle has not happened. I believe most of us are familiar with the reason why this is so.
    What is most disturbing is the fact that we have completely taken the intellectual contribution to politics out of our process. We are only concerned with how to capture raw power, how to get into the engine room, how to share in this life changing booty called oil money which is gradually looking like blood money in our country. We need to turn the corner and do so with confidence and assurance. I will make five quick points.
    First, we need to fix the economy and I believe that we cannot do better than what we have now under the President and Dr. Ngozi Iweala. We hope that sooner than later, our economy will not only grow, but that we the people shall also grow. This is no easy task. According to the Vision 20-2020 report; The pillars of the Nigerian economy are extremely weak and the continued economic viability of the Nigerian state and the continued economic viability of the Nigerian state is perpetually at risk.
    Of great concern is the need to create the leadership to support this vision. Although every government official has taken the transformation agenda as a mantra, it is important that this message percolates through the other crevices of our national life.  This is why the idea of a performance bond is important. However, this performance should not be confused with sycophantic cooking up of figures and power point slides. There is need to clearly lay out the programmes to be measured. For a country that is used to monitors being compromised, the President must ensure that these measuring mechanisms are clearly explained to the people in a way and manner that they can understand. We will also require at least an annual review of the scorecard and this should go right down to the President. This show of good will in my view will go a long way in ensuring confidence in the system and process.
    There has been the nagging issue of a Sovereign National Conference as a solution to our problems. Nigerians keep saying we need to talk as if we are not talking. The real challenge is the content of these talks and whether indeed, that is the way to solve our problems. It is important to note that we have never been short of talking points. Those who are calling for a Sovereign National Conference made up of representatives of the various ethnic groups must say whether this is different from what the late Anthony Enahoro and Professor Wole Soyinka worked on and they might also honestly tell us the fate of the final document.
    I hold a slightly different view. First, I believe that we need to talk but the talking needs to be of a certain quality that is founded on scholarship and a proper understanding of the issues of statecraft. We also require a level of maturity and an understanding of these processes. It is clear that our problems are not documents but the issues relate to whether we can ever find the political will to focus on how to build our country and how to develop the required time lines and so on.
    Everyone keeps talking about Leadership, Leadership and Leadership. We create the impression that somehow, leadership will simply drive an unwilling band of horses to a river and getting them to drink water by force. We believe that political leadership is the only form of leadership. We all ignore the challenges in our own leadership levels whether it is in the churches, mosques, civil society and professional groups. The curious thing is that what we all accuse the political leadership of exists in our own midst. If we borrow the example of the Fulani man and his herd of cattle, we get an interesting view of leadership. In that scenario, it is interesting to note that it is the cattle that actually lead, after all, the leader who leads them to the grazing field does not eat grass. It is they who eat grass, they know which grass has poison and so on. The shepherd only guides them and also ensures their security, but it is they who know what they want. So, there is need to close in the gap between our perceptions of leadership.
    My view is that we must now address the issues of how justice can become a cardinal point of reference in governance. Here, I still insist that judicial activism is one way of interpreting the mind of the Constitution but also of extending the frontiers of justice. I use just two examples to illustrate the point I am making.
    First, we have the famous story of Rosa Parks whose singular decision on December 1, 1955 not to leave her seat for a white man turned the course of the struggle of black people for freedom. This is one of the events that threw the Rev Martin Luther King into prominence. For, by December 3rd, the bus boycott which would change the tide of history had started.
    Secondly, the Brown vs. Board of Education ruling in 1954 by the Supreme Court, struck down the policy of state segregated education. Other events such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964  followed, but perhaps the case of James Meredith was more phenomenal. An ex air force veteran, he was denied entry into College in Mississippi. He took his case all the way to the Supreme Court whose ruling marked a turning point in the struggle against segregation. It took the courage of both President John Kennedy and his brother, Robert, the Attorney General to enforce the ruling. In the process, lives were lost, but on the day of the enforcement, some 2,500 people turned up to protest. The federal government had to send in some 20,000 troops along with 11,000 National Guards. He finally graduated amidst all the difficulties but his life changed the course of history.
    Finally, the famous I Have a Dream speech contains some assumptions that we have often ignored. The speech was anchored on both the Emancipation Proclamation and the Constitution of the United States of America. What is significant here is the fact that the speech drew its inspiration and a sense of righteous indignation from these two historic documents and the reluctance of the leadership to live by its own laws. He spoke about a promissory note that these documents had promised ordinary Americans but which was not available to the black people. He continued: It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check which has come back marked “insufficient funds.” But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. So we have come to cash this check — a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice….Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to open the doors of opportunity to all of God’s children. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood.
    From our own Constitution, the provisions of Chapter 2 on the Fundamental Directive Principles of State Policy, should be a basis for stirring up a sense of moral revulsion as to how and why a country so richly endowed could allow so much poverty to continue to exist. It is sad that all we have always said about this very important segment of the Constitution is that it is not justiciable. It is the duty of our lawyers to compel to Judiciary to breathe life into this very significant section of the Constitution. This is the challenge and I do hope and believe that the Bar and the Bench in collaboration can indeed, bring about the realization of our own promissory note. Thank you very much for your kind attention.
    + Catholic Bishop of the Diocese of Sokoto,
    Nigeria