The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Jonathan

  • Jonathan meets four governors

    Jonathan meets four governors

    For about two hours yesterday President Goodluck Jonathan met with four governors at the Presidential Villa.

    Three PDP governors Godswill Akpabio (Akwa Ibom), Emmanuel Uduaghan (Delta), and Seriake Dickson (Bayelsa) were joined by Ondo State Governor Olusegun Mimiko (Labour Party)

    Vice President Namadi Sambo was also at the meeting.

    Details of the discussions at the meeting were not made public.

    Mimiko told reporters that “It is an informal meeting. From time to time issues come up that we have to discuss with him”.

    Asked about the issues discussed at the meeting, he said “Issue bothering on governance.”

  • National dialogue: Jonathan’s dilemma

    National dialogue: Jonathan’s dilemma

    President Jonathan’s plan for a national conference/dialogue is beginning to run into some obstacles. It is going awry. First, the main opposition party, the All Progressives Congress, has questioned the good faith and motives of President Jonathan and dismissed the whole idea as a ‘Greek’ gift. It has decided that it will only accept and participate in a ‘sovereign’ national conference. What this means practically is that the whole of the South West, except the opposition parties there, will not participate in the proposed national conference. Governor Adams Oshiomole of Edo State also declared at a recent public hearing in Benin that his government will not participate in the conference too. This is a big blow to President Jonathan as a boycott of the conference by the APC governments in the South West states and Edo State will be difficult to ignore. It will make the conference less credible, and its decision will not be binding on those governments and states. Even those who might otherwise support the conference consider the offer as too late and too little, and too close to the 2015 presidential elections. They smell a rat. There is no national consensus in support of the dialogue.

    But President Jonathan can count on the support of the South East states for his proposed conference. Regardless of the merits or demerits of the proposed conference, that is where the president can always rely upon for political support. The situation in the North is not yet quite clear or decisive. The Northern Arewa Consultative Forum has endorsed the conference and urged all Northern leaders to accept and participate in it fully. But Northern support for the conference is by no means total. The Northern leaders of the new Peoples’ Democratic Party, particularly the determined dissidents in the North, will almost certainly boycott the conference, unless President Jonathan can find a way of making peace with them. He is working furiously at this.

    But the chances of getting a peace settlement with the dissidents are slim unless President Jonathan abandons his intention to contest the presidential elections in 2015. This is unlikely. The reported harassment of the dissidents by the security agencies, apparently with the support or connivance of the Presidency, is not helping matters either. This will make reconciliation in the Party harder to achieve. There seems to be a deadlock here that will be difficult to resolve. Both sides in the PDP are sticking to their guns. Neither side is willing to give way as the stakes involved in the political dispute are quite high.

    Now the outrageous conduct of retired Colonel Tony Nyiam, a member of the Okunrounmu panel, in joining other hecklers in a verbal assault on Governor Oshiomole of Edo State, during the recent public hearings in Benin, has created fresh doubts in the minds of those who were willing to support the President’s decision to have a national conference. Nyiam’s conduct has undermined the independence of the Okunrounmu panel and left many observers outraged that a member of the panel could behave in such a reprehensible manner at the public hearings of the panel. Although appointed by the president, the members of the panel are not expected to demonstrate so openly such partisanship and intolerance for the free expression of public views on the matter. It negates the idea of a free national dialogue. This may have irreparably damaged the credibility of the Okurounmu panel. It does not matter that Nyiam is no longer attending the public hearings of the panel. He should have been forced to resign immediately or dismissed from the panel by the President.

    To be sure, the mandate of the panel is advisory, limited, and specific. It is merely to take public soundings on just how the proposed conference should be organised. It is expected to address issues such as representation at the conference, its duration, and other procedural matters at the conference. It does not have the mandate to offer advice on whether, or not, the conference should take place. From the government’s perspectives, that is a settled matter, or so it seems. Of the issues confronting the panel, the most difficult is likely to be representation at the conference. Is representation going to be based on ethnicity or on States? How will the delegates be chosen or elected? Will the Federal Government claim a role in the selection of delegates at the conference? What role will the states governments have in the selection of candidates?

    President Jonathan has already declared in advance that the conclusions of the conference will have to be forwarded for ratification to the National Assembly. President Obasanjo did the same when he referred the conclusions of the 2007 National Political Conference to the National Assembly for consideration. That document has since then not seen the light of day. After six years it is still under consideration by the National Assembly that is not known to show any sense of urgency on such matters. Many critics are opposed to the National Assembly having anything to do with the conclusions of the conference. Already, these critics are claiming that they have been vindicated in their opposition to the idea of a national conference by the decision of the President that the National Assembly will have to deliberate further on the conclusions of the conference. But then what really is the alternative as President Jonathan does not have the constitutional power to ratify the conclusions of the conference? If he tried to, he would almost certainly be impeached by the National Assembly for exceeding his powers under the Constitution. He is now on the horns of a terrible dilemma.

    Some of his critics are calling instead for a sovereign national conference, the implication being that the conclusions of the proposed conference should be regarded as final, and not subject to any further consideration by the National Assembly, or even the President. This is a revolutionary prescription that is not likely to commend itself to the President or the political establishment. What this means is that the President is being invited to commit political suicide. It is not an idea that either he, or the National Assembly, or even the states governments, regardless of their Party affiliations, are likely to accept, unless he is faced with a revolutionary situation that renders him powerless.

    Proponents of a sovereign national conference have given such examples as the 1776 American conference in Philadelphia that produced the American Constitution, or the French Revolution that produced a new French Republican constitution, or the case of Benin Republic which led to the emergence of a new constitution and leadership in that country. But in all these cases, there was clearly a revolutionary situation, a power vacuum that facilitated the establishment of a new social order and constitution in the country. That is not yet the case in Nigeria where our constitutional and political developments have been evolutionary, not revolutionary. That situation may develop later. But until it does, there is not the slightest chance of having a sovereign national conference in Nigeria. Even the states governors are most unlikely to support such an idea which would mean sweeping them out of power in a non-revolutionary situation.

    In fact, as shown by the poor attendance at the public hearings of the Okunrounmu panel, there is less public enthusiasm now for the proposed conference than when it was first announced by President Jonathan. There is widespread public scepticism that the conference will materially or significantly change things for the better in our country. That is the dilemma now facing President Jonathan as his idea is now beginning to look like a damp squib. Obviously, the country needs more than a mere change of its Constitution. It needs a new social order that will guarantee the entire people of our country fair access to power and equal opportunities.

  • Jonathan rules out compensation for Boko Haram victims

    Jonathan rules out compensation for Boko Haram victims

    •To set up advisory committee on continuous dialogue

    President Goodluck Jonathan yesterday ruled out payment of compensation to victims of terrorists attacks carried out by Boko Haram and other groups.

    He spoke while receiving the report from the Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution of Security Challenges in the North at the Presidential Villa.

    The President said the government would only look at ways to help the victims get back to their businesses.

    Despite the challenges faced by the committee at its inauguration, he said it has laid the foundation for follow up action which would lead to the eventual control and end of the crisis.

    Even with the progress made in the fight against terrorism in the north, he maintained that the war is not yet won.

    He said: “We also noted the suggestion about the victims’ support because that is one of the terms of reference; how will government help to see that we can assist. Government is not going to compensate. It is not an issue of compensation but how do we assist people who have suffered to get back to business one or the other.”

    “Government will look into this and other recommendations in your report and see that the right decisions are taken.”

    “Incidentally, we have security council meeting because this committee was an offshoot of the security council and we will review some aspects of this report and probably set up a team to look at it and work out a planned programme in terms of implementation of the recommendations.” He added

    On the challenging assignment, he said: “First, let me on behalf of government welcome you to the State House and indeed, thank you for accepting to serve for the period you have served. Even the day we inaugurated you, we noted that it was quite a challenging job. Its not a ballroom dance because you were asked to meet the kind of characters you cannot even predict their behaviour.”

    “It is quite risky and I believe that some of you within this period, your immediate families believed that if they used to pray two times before, they will be praying ten times because of the assignment to make sure that God see you through.”

    Stressing that Nigeria was going through a challenging period he pointed out that the sect had become one of the most vicious in the world.

    He continued: “We never experienced this kind of internal terror, even external terror. Nigeria has never been a victim of external terror not to talk about internal terror group that came up surprisingly and became so violent that almost becoming classified as one of the most violent group all over the world.”

    “This is a country that never knew terror. Some countries have been passing through terror for years even before the Boko Haram came on board. But within the short period Boko Haram is operating, globally, it is being classified as one of the most deadly terror groups.”

    Maintaining that the recommendations of the committee would be looked into to ensure the right follow up actions, he agreed with the recommendation of the committee towards setting up an advisory committee on continuous dialogue with the terrorists.

    A team, he said, would be set up in the National Security Council to review the recommendations.

    He said: “You have made recommendations, one of them you have suggested the setting up of an advisory committee on continuous dialogue. This I also believe in. We always say that even in war situations, finally, people must discuss at the conference table to make sure that people live in peace.”

    “Force alone, no matter how, cannot bring peace. People must be willingly ready to live in peace. We agree with you that even though this committee is today winding down its activities, we need to set up a follow up committee that will concentrate on dialogue so that some of these issues you raised, that committee will be able to anchor them properly working with other departments of government.” He stated

    Chairman of the Presidential committee and Minister of Special Duties, Alhaji Kabiru Turaki observed that some of the difficulties working against productive dialogue included failures of past attempts at negotiations and resultant distrust by insurgents, and the refusal of their leaders to submit to dialogue.

    He said: “However, many of the key members of the insurgents both in detention and at large have positively responded to contacts and have accepted the dialogue option as capable of fully resolution of the conflict.”

    The committee, which was set up in April, observed that the proliferation of small arms and light weapons in the country exacerbated conflicts and circle of violence in the country.

    It also found out that there is “palpable impunity” in committing crimes and other acts of violence in the country due to the absence of deterrent measures taken to punish perpetrators.

    Turaki also claimed that there is an absence of effective conflict early warning, early response mechanism for anticipation and preventing violent conflicts.

    Noting that the situation of security agencies in the country needed urgent attention to improve their condition of service, equipment and training, he said that problems of synergy and collaboration existed among them.

    Traditional rulers, he said, are not fully involved in security management, which he said resulted in avoidable lapses in the country.

    Among the committee’s recommendations were continuation of the dialogue process through an advisory Committee on Continuous Dialogue and the setting up of a victims support fund.

    Turaki told State House correspondents: “The experience is a very rewarding one because we met with a group of people who passionately believe in something, even if the basis of the belief is a misguided one. We believe there has been a lot of over-radicalisation, we believe there is a lot of misconception particularly of some of the Islamic principles and dogma that have been made the basis of their agitations.”

    “Overall, it has afforded members of the committee opportunity not only to have an overview of the problems afflicting security in this country, but also to understand certain underlying factors that have precipitated acts of insurgency in this country.”

    On amnesty, he said: “I think it is important for Nigerians to appreciate that this is not an amnesty committee. This is a dialogue committee. Our mandates have been among others to go into the field, interact and then have dialogue with key members of the insurgents in addition to bringing a framework that will make a recommendation to government in a way and manner that government will now form to grant support to victims of these various acts of insurgency.”

    “That has been our key mandate and that is what we have done. It is when you now reach the conclusion of the dialogue, peaceful resolution point where ceasefire agreement is signed and other things follow up including issues of disarmament, that is when the issue of amnesty will in the end be an option and be considered by government.”

    “But our mandate does not include the issue of amnesty. Of course, government has asked us to look at situations as they affect the people that we interact with and see where members of insurgency have keyed into the dialogue option and come out to make clear and conscious contributions in such a way and manner as to enable and facilitate peaceful resolution of this matter, we could recommend amnesty in deserving situations.” He added.

  • Jonathan’s dialogue: protecting President’s interest

    Predictably, the Femi Okurounmu National Conference Committee has been moving round the country to seek the views of Nigerians on what they would want discussed when President Goodluck Jonathan’s proposed national dialogue comes on stream.

    Predictable because numerous other similar committees in the past had gone round the country to seek and collate public opinions on what the problem is with Nigeria and how to solve it with little or nothing near the solution being found. Nothing in the horizon suggests that the current exercise would be any different.

    In fact there is every likelihood that the Okurounmu committee might even be worse than its predecessors and be too eager to dance to the tune of the presidency; Jonathan’s presidency.

    Just like most of our past and even present leaders, President Goodluck Jonathan is deficient in integrity as not a few Nigerians have lost faith in his promises and words. Talk about saying one thing and doing another.

    Even his promise of making his proposed conference the “mother” of all such conferences in terms of covering vast areas of our national problems and proffering solutions to them has not dampened the cynicism of critics who believe nothing good can ever come out from this national dialogue. At best, they contend, it would be a rehash of the reports of similar committees in the past that had been gathering dust on the shelf somewhere in the presidency. That such reports are there in Abuja and we are still where we are today, talking of another conference suggest that we have either not learnt from our history or this type of conference is not the solution to our problems.

    The cynicism is not helped by the president’s decision to subject whatever became the report of the conference to scrutiny by the National Assembly, with implied powers to either accept, reject or even amend to suit whatever interest they represent.

    But by far the clearest indication yet that the report of the Okurounmu committee and that of the National Conference expected to follow soon could just be a rubber stamp of what the presidency wants was given in Benin, Edo State recently, when the Committee held a public forum to hear and collate the views of the South-south people on the up coming national dialogue.

    A member of the Committee, Colonel Tony Nyiam (of the Orkar coup fame, remember him?) verbally descended on Edo State governor, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole just because of the Comrade Governor’s belief that the conference is a waste of time and would not get us anywhere. His outburst was made more insulting as it came while Oshiomhole was making his personal views known at the forum. Nyiam would have none of this and not only did he shout the governor down, his action also invited some hoodlum who disrupted proceedings which was hurriedly called off by the organizers.

    The rest of the story I am sure you know, including the fact that the Committee Chairman not only reprimanded Nyiam but also apologized to the governor. But surprisingly, Nyiam found nothing wrong with his action and not only did he defend it but also explained that he did so in reaction to what he called insults being poured on President Jonathan and other Edo leaders by Governor Oshiomhole over the conference. He similarly justified his outburst because such ‘insults’ on the person and office of the president by Oshiomhole and others like him were getting too much.

    While Nyiam action (his outburst) is condemnable, I would rather leave that to the public to judge, the same way I would leave the public to make up their minds on Oshiomhole’s purported insult on the president. My concern here is the reasons given by Nyiam for his action. Could that be one of the secret directives (if any) given to the Committee by the president? Or rather one of the directives given to Nyiam to protect the interest of the president? How many of such directives were given to him or other members of the Committee? These we may never know now, but read my lips, if a member could say such things openly, then one could imagine what he would say or do behind closed doors when the Committee writes its report and recommendation to the president.

    How many of the Committee members hold this same or similar view about the person of President Jonathan as Nyiam? It is necessary for us to know to prepare our minds for whatever report they are going to come out with. If all or majority of them are similarly inclined then we should be prepared for a report written in the Villa, prepared by the President’s men and handed over to Okurounmu for representation to the Presidency as the views of the Nigerians the Committee met in the course of its jamboree round the country. By the way I wonder, when would they go to Damaturu or Maiduguri to hold the public forum on the conference for the North east zone? I am only being curious.

    But could the Committee be secretly working on a hidden agenda for the president but using the public forum as a decoy? What could this hidden agenda be? Some say it could be tenure elongation for the president or a third term in disguise; that the Committee is just shopping for relevant views to arrive at the answer/report already prepared by the presidency. More like what we call ‘wuruwuru to the answer’ here.

    But whatever it is, the Okurounmu committee has to be very careful and not tamper with the views of the majority in presenting its report because it’s credibility is already at stake, right from the beginning and now made worse by the unnecessary and unwarranted outburst of Nyiam on Oshiomhole.

    For Colonel Nyiam, it is a big disappointment. Here was somebody that participated in the Major Okah led coup purportedly to rid Nigeria of ethnic and religious sentiments that have been militating against our wholehearted oneness as a nation and a people, now pandering towards that same ethnic sentiment to defend President Jonathan who hails from the same South south geo-political zone as the former Army officer. It is well known that Nyiam has a very soft spot for the president on account of this zonal kinship, nothing is wrong with that you may want to say. But to allow that to becloud his sense of reasoning and duty to the nation is highly unfortunate.

    If people abuse or insult the president in airing their views how is that his business and where is the offense there? If it is or was an offense to say uncomplimentary things about the president or any of our leaders then our jails would have been filled to the brim during President Olusegun Obasanjo’s regime. The former president was unarguably the most criticized and abused Nigerian leader in recent times, yet he took all on his chin. And where he felt so bad or annoyed he simply abused or insulted the other party in return and we all laughed over it. Criminalizing insults on the president (Jonathan) as Nyiam’s outburst is suggesting would make Obasanjo a saint or in retrospect looked a tolerant person. But we all know he wasn’t.

    Could Nyiam’s ethnic or regional sympathy for Jonathan account for his jettisoning of his earlier stoic support of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) as opposed to the ‘ordinary’ National Conference (oNC) that the president is proposing? If that was the case, it would only be disappointing to hear that, but he wouldn’t have done anything illegal. Everybody has the right to change his/her mind anytime. After all, the committee chairman, Dr Okurounmu was once a staunch advocate of SNC as the only solution to Nigeria’s problems. He, like Nyiam, has now been converted to evangelizing for oNC. Hmmmmm, time will tell.

    This is also a test for Okurounmu as a person and his committee. The signs of imminent failure are there already. The boycott of the regional forum to collate views in some regions by the A-list leaders in those areas has not only created a credibility problem for the committee’s report but also a window of opportunity for these leaders to lampoon Okurounmu and his group if the committee’s report fell short of public expectations or was tampered with by the president.

    It would do Okurounmu and his committee a lot of good if the President is advised to allow a referendum on the report of the oNC as against passing the report over to the National Assembly. This will put all those ‘enemies of progress’ to shame.

     

     

     

  • Why I attacked Jonathan’s confab, by Oshiomhole

    Why I attacked Jonathan’s confab, by Oshiomhole

    Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomhole has insisted that he acted within his rights to express his views on the proposed national conference when he hosted the committee members in Benin.

    He also said that he was scheduled, contrary to some critics, to speak at the town hall meeting organised for the committee to interact with stakeholders of the state and other representatives from adjoining south-south states.

    He was heckled, when he spoke, by Col. Tony Nyam (Rtd.), whose shouts of “no, no,’ interrupted proceedings.

    The committee has since apologised to the governor for Nyam’s remarks.

    The committee is moving across the country to collate views.

    Col. Nyam was absent at its meeting in Lagos.

    The governor had expressed his reservations about the mission of the committee, saying that Nigeria does not need a conference.

    He also asserted that what was of significance was not a gathering to determine whether Nigeria wants to stay together but how to tackle poverty and other social and economic challenges facing the nation.

    He responded to those who said the meeting he held with members of the committee as private, saying that “it was not a secret meeting,” adding that it was a meeting for the records.

    “Once you speak and what you say is recorded, it cannot be private,” he said, adding that it was covered by the print and broadcast media.

    He said he only reiterated what he had said earlier to the committee at the hall meeting.

    The governor said he was scheduled to speak but listened to about three persons who spoke before he asked for the permission of the chairman to take the floor, which was granted.

    He said the only speaker who irritated him was the one who questioned why Nigeria should be together.

    “I don’t think we should discuss whether anyone wants to leave Nigeria,” he remarked.

    He added that the remarks he made were not new and had been consistent with those views since his days in the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC).

    “I feel strongly about them,” he said. “If we are not a nation, we should start building.”

    He reflected on his years in the textile industry and how it systematically collapsed.

    He said the workers have lost their jobs and issues of how to revive the industrial base of Nigeria and bring welfare to Nigerians should be the focus of Nigeria today.

    Oshiomhole said the obsession with oil had drifted attention from the economic and industrial base of Nigeria to an attitude of sharing.

    He also spoke on the controversy over the proposed sale of Edo House in Lagos.

    He accused the opposition Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) members of mischief, explaining that the issue was brought up for discussion at a town hall meeting that comprised several stakeholders, including traditional rulers from all the local governments, social groups, market leaders, ethnic groups as well as social groups.

    He said he explained why the government wanted to sell it.

    “Speaker after speaker said the state had a history of selling government properties without consultation and they appreciated the fact that he was making it a matter for collective decision.”

    He said that the hall had been rented out for the past five years and the tenant was not paying the rent but was using court action to stave off his responsibility.

    He also said Lagos state government demanded that the state pay ground rent and other charges of over N60 million.

    “Should we take tax payers’ money to Lagos and the rent is not enough to manage the property?”, adding that the state would “divest from Lagos and invest in Edo.”

    He said the building was built when Lagos was capital, explaining further that the state has built one in Abuja, which makes the Lagos building superfluous.

  • Vote Jonathan out if you don’t want him, Balarabe tells G-7 govs

    Second republic governor of Kaduna State, Balarabe Musa, has asked the G-7 governors and members of the New Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to stop overheating the polity.

    He charged them to wait for the 2015 elections to vote out President Goodluck Jonathan if they don’t want him.

    The former governor also said the All Progressive Congress (APC) can only dislodge the PDP if they capitalise on the crisis in the ruling party.

    He spoke exclusively with The Nation yesterday in his residence.

    Musa said: “As far as I am concerned, I don’t care if he (Jonathan) runs and what I can tell Nigerians is that if they don’t want Jonathan to run, make sure his party does not nominate him and if the party nominates him and you still don’t want him to run and succeed, all you need to do is to organise and vote against him.

    “But don’t mess Nigerians up because it is a simple thing. We say we are in a democracy and in a democracy it is the votes that decide.

    “So, since your protest for or against Jonathan is causing a high level of insecurity and instability in the country, if you are really patriotic and you care, leave that issue until the date of voting.”

    He went on: “If you don’t want Jonathan to be President of Nigeria in the 2015 election, don’t vote for him but organise against him and if you want him to do it, organise for him and vote for him. So, don’t heat the polity the more.

    “PDP has been discredited and nobody wants them right now even within the party, and the evidence is quite open. APC can capitalise on this and let Nigerians know the difference between what APC stands for and what the PDP stands for at least, in terms of the programmes and objectives filed by the two with INEC when they were looking for registration.

    “At the moment, the APC is limited to ACN, CPC, ANPP and APGA. Is that enough? There are credible political parties even among those that don’t control a local government. In any case, where is Labour? Can’t the APC make the compromise and have Labour go with them?

    “But definitely, the APC has a chance but it depends on how they utilise the opportunity. Let them not make the mistake CPC made in 2011. According to our estimate, the CPC would have won at least 12 states in the North simply because of the bankruptcy of the PDP and they would also have been able to win one or two states in the South.

    “Even if they don’t, they would have been able to get the required one third for national spread to avoid a second ballot. If the second ballot became necessary, the CPC could have won by the require majority but they ended up with one state because of the mismanagement of opportunity.

    “They thought they could do it all alone because of the popularity and integrity of one man. So, APC should learn from that. They should learn that they are not the first merger to contest the presidency of the country. There have been three others in the past and the only one that succeeded was that of the SDP.”

    Insisting that leaders of the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP) sold out the June 12 elections, Musa said: “First, let me tell you what happened. Every informed Nigerian knew that MKO Abiola won the presidency and the government also knew this.

    “But a combination of some military men and their civilian counterparts were not prepared to let Abiola be the president because they would not be able to manipulate him.

    “He made it clear that he was for the masses despite his wealth and so, they had to annul the election. You know that later, the Chairman of the election body announced 15 years later that MKO Abiola actually won the presidency.

    “Immediately after that election, you know there was uproar across the country because of the annulment and the threat to security and stability was quite clear.

    “It was so that leaders of the NRC began to think that there is a lot for everybody in Nigeria and the fact that if the instability continues, everybody will pay the price for it. They have actually made money and had opportunity to make more.

    “So, they were prepared for a government of national unity under Abiola and a meeting to this effect was held at NICON NUGA. The SDP held a number of meetings insisting on the disannulment of the June 12 election and then, first at the Benin meeting and later at the Abuja meeting agreed for government of national unity under Abiola.

    “That government was to include both the NRC and the SDP. But those who annulled the election did not want that. So, after we met in Abuja and agreed for a government of national unity under Abiola, they felt threatened and while we were at that meeting, they were organising outside to undermine that decision.

    “We prepared a seven paragraph communiqué at the end of that meeting but in order not to give opportunity for people to misunderstand what we meant by government of national unity, it was reduced to a three paragraph communiqué and agreed openly to call for government of national unity.

    “We were still inside the hall with Jakande when a reporter came and said to me, ‘what are you people doing?’ At the meeting here, you agreed on a government of national unity but outside the meeting venue, some leaders of the SDP are saying something different and that was it.

    “We learnt that money was used to buy six leading members of the SDP with N40 million. At the end, you know what happened. Abiola was harassed until he was murdered.

    “The APC should know this story. At least, members of the SDP who are in the APC should know this story. Those in CPC, ANPP and APGA are ignorant of that time, but those in the ACN were not ignorant of how it happened. It is time they learn lesion from that and not take things for granted.”

  • Jonathan’s legacy

    Jonathan’s legacy

    Sometimes you get the sense that President Goodluck Jonathan missed his calling. Rather than politics I suspect he would have made a good reverend with his preachy speeches.

    He was at it again in Okrika, Rivers State this weekend at the burial of his mother-in-law, Mrs Charity Oba. For the president what really counts is what is left behind.

    His words: “The key thing is that whether you are being buried silently or you have the privilege of being honoured by so many people, is what did you leave behind? As a political leader and to most of my friends here who are politicians, politics or holding political office is almost like death.

    “While you are there you are on the stage. The day you leave what will people remember you for? That has always been my guiding principle.”

    Well said, Mr. President. The trouble is most observers don’t get a sense that your legacy is what keeps you awake at night. They suspect that 2015 is more like it.

    As a result of what is shaping up to be a bruising battle for power over the next 15 months, we’re already witnessing the

  • Jonathan, Amaechi close ranks for First Lady’s mother

    Jonathan, Amaechi close ranks for First Lady’s mother

    It was an occasion Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State  chose to forget  his bitter political feud with the first family,even if only momentarily: the funeral of  Madam Charity Fyneface Oba,mother of Dame Patience Jonathan.

    Before  a large number  of  guests at the post-burial reception, the governor took to the dancing floor,swirling to the music  of Gozie Okeke, Buchi and Yinka Ayefele, among other top artistes.

    And he got   massive applause from the crowd for his effort.

    Governor Amaechi has been locked in a prolonged battle  with  the First Lady  since 2010  over the governor’s attempt to demolish some structures in Okrika where both of them hail from to make room  for the expansion of a model primary school.

    The First Lady was displeased by the demolition.

    The first couple are also said not to have taken kindly to the governor’s perceived  presidential ambition in 2015.

    Their differences were aggravated   by the governor’s insistence on seeking re-election as Chairman of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum. He won, defeating the Presidency’s candidate –Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State.

    Yesterday’s  funeral  service at Okrika National Secondary School had in attendance  Vice-President, Namadi Sambo;  Senate President  David Mark; House of Representatives   Deputy Speaker  Emeka Ihedioha; and the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Bamanga Tukur.

    Also there were  Governors Seriake Dickson (Bayelsa State); Emmanuel Uduaghan (Delta); Theodore Orji (Abia);  Peter Obi (Anambra); Godswill Akpabio (Akwa Ibom); Adams Oshiomhole (Edo); Sullivan Chime (Enugu), Health Minister Onyebuchi Chukwu; Minister of State for Education, Chief Nyesom Wike;  former Bayelsa Governor, Chief Diepreye Alamieyeseigha; his wife, Margaret, as well as an ex-Rivers Governor, Dr. Peter Odili, and his wife, Justice Mary Odili .

    Some members of the National Assembly, top Rivers government officials,  self-acclaimed  Speaker of the Rivers House of Assembly, Evans Bipi, who represents Ogu/Bolo constituency, and other eminent persons also attended the funeral.

     The leader of the Niger Delta Vigilance Movement, Ateke Tom, who is also an indigene of Okrika and very close to the First Lady.

     President Jonathan, speaking at the service, urged political office holders to always be conscious of what they would be remembered for after leaving office.

    Once the entertainment segment of the ceremony got underway ,Amaechi stood up and started dancing.

    Madam Oba died in a motor accident on July 22 on the  Port Harcourt-Elele Road on her way to Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital.

    Jonathan, in his address at the funeral, said: “All of us who are here on earth are to play our roles. The key thing is what people will remember us for. Sisi is lucky that so many Nigerians and indeed outside Nigeria have gathered here.

    “Not every person will have that privilege, but the key thing is that whether you are being buried silently or you have the privilege of being honoured by so many people, is what will you leave behind?

    “For me, as a political leader and most of my friends who are politicians, politics or holding political offices is almost like death. While you are there, you are on the stage. The day you leave, what will people remember you for? That has always been my guiding principle, no matter the comments, whether the comments are to the left, to the right or to the centre.

    “What challenges me everyday is that the day I step out of the State House, what will the present and future generations of Nigerians remember me for? I believe that is what should guide most of us who are holding political offices.”

    The President,quoting  the Book of Ecclesiastes, Chapter 3 Verses 1 to 5,  said there is time to be born and  time to die.

    “Sisi has done well. We are remembering her. My family is one family that will surely remember her. In fact, when her biography was being read, my children were crying. My children appear to be the last set of small children that she brought up. That is to tell you how we feel about her.

    “As a mother-in-law, she was a wonderful woman. I do not want to bore you by recounting what she did and how she supported us, but if you have such a lady as a mother-in-law, you will continue to thank God.”

    Dame Jonathan said the deceased  “ continued to feed us up to the time of her untimely death. She continued to provide us with garri and dry fish. She would not demand anything from you and would not consider your status in life. She continued to play the role of a mother.

    “She was not short of charity in her lifetime. She was ever willing to share the little she had, not only with her family members, but with strangers. She accommodated all. She was a disciplinarian and was always asking us to have the fear of God and to get good education.”

    Earlier, Prof. Samuel Nwora, Head of Sabbath Church in Rivers, described death as a submission to the will of God.

    He reminded Christians of the need to be obedient to the will of God, saying that it was unchristian to show rebellion to authority.

    He condemned rebellion and insubordination of all kinds, which he explained, was the sin of Satan in heaven.

    Nwora urged Christians to always respect constituted authority which, he said, had a blessing from God.

  • 2015: Jonathan should honour the agreement he allegedly had with governors, if there is any-Ex-Kwara Governor Bola Latinwo

    2015: Jonathan should honour the agreement he allegedly had with governors, if there is any-Ex-Kwara Governor Bola Latinwo

    Retired Group Captain Salaudeen Adebola Latinwo is former military governor of Kwara State, in the short-lived regime of General Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) between 1984 and 1985. A native of Offa, Kwara State, Latinwo is an aviation technology and management specialist. He is also a public affairs analyst. In this interview with Deputy Editor, VINCENT AKANMODE and Assistant Editor, LINUS OBOGO, Latinwo recalls his travails in the military which culminated in his early retirement from the Nigerian Airforce. He also laments the crippling corruption bedevilling the country, ditto the aviation sector and shares his perspective on the proposed national conference, even as he accuses President Goodluck Jonathan of suffering credibility deficit on account of his several failed accomplishments. Exercepts:

    You had always wanted to be an aeronautic engineer before you were cajoled against your wish, by the late Sardauna of Sokoto and the then Premier of Northern Region, Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, to get enlisted into the Nigerian Airforce. How much of your dream would you say you eventually realised?

    The point was that as a young man growing up, there was always that ambition of wanting to be a doctor, a lawyer, an accountant or an engineer. The engineering we knew then was aeronautic and everyone wanted to be an aeronautic engineer. Fortunately for some of us, there was this call then by the Sardauna of Sokoto to be part of the young airforce that was being put together then for the country. While some of us thought the opportunity was something that had to do with the building of an aircraft, others thought it was about the military.

    Initially, some of us were reluctant because we did not want to have anything to do with the military. But somehow, the Sardauna of Sokoto recognised the fact that the Northern part of the country needed to be strongly represented in the air force. And so, he started looking for young men with the potential to be enlisted. We were called to the Government House in Kaduna and convinced to take advantage of the opportunity provided we were qualified. It was like a father talking to you and that was how about two or three of us were shortlisted and taken to Germany for the training.

    It was when we got to Germany that we realised that it was a military affair, when they started issuing us military uniforms. When we saw that it had more to do with the military than the building of aircraft, some of us insisted on returning home. We made it clear that it was not something we wanted to do. But we were persuaded to stay and we did. We were told then that being an air force officer was all about prestige, power and authority.

    So, to answer your question, I will say that I did not, as a matter of fact, realise my aeronautic engineering ambition. But some of my children have surpassed that with PhD in aerospace engineering.. In fact, my last child has a Ph.D in aerospace engineering.

    Did any of your children take after you militarily?

    No, but they have been able to excel in their various chosen careers. When you remember the terrible experience some of us had leading to the premature end of my career as an air force officer, it was not something to encourage the children to voluntarily to take after me in terms of career. But despite everything, I still remain grateful to God for His love.

    It is obvious that you are still seething with anger and resentment. Do you still hold the grudge against those you feel were part of your travails and premature exit from the air force?

    It was not exactly about anger, but about unfilled career aspiration. It could be saddening when you remember how you were cajoled into starting something that was initially not part of your life’s desire only to see it, having taken the bold move, terminated abruptly in what I will call the prime of mine youth. At 42, I was a Group Captain, but I would not say that was how early I wanted my career to come to an end. It was a painful experience to find oneself roped into something you knew nothing about and I was faced with the threat of my life being brutally taken away for no just cause. And by a stroke of divine providence, my life was spared.

    Of course, as a human being, you are expected to hold a grudge. But when you realise where the opposition and hate is coming from, what could one do? It came from the very top level because some people wanted power at all costs and in so doing, they stopped at nothing to actualise and retain it, even if it meant doing away with those perceived as standing in the way. This kind of thing is often very prevalent in a developing country such as ours where someone must pull two or three people down through blackmail and conspiracy just to grab power.

    With that being said, I took everything that happened to me as part of my sacrifice that I needed to give to Nigeria as a developing country. I have since moved on because as long as I remain alive, life must go on. One must learn to put aside grudges and move on in life because the attributes you have will always assist you to forge ahead to the envy of those who do not want you to succeed. It was not an easy experience to be forced out of what you know and love all of your life into a world you hardly understood their language. A world where people tell you they are coming while they are going.

    A lot of people would want to attribute your travails and subsequent exit from the force as part of the consequence of the military incursion into the political governance of the country. Would you say that was your own price for the military involvement in politics?

    There is always a misconception in that regard. My understanding is that the military had to step in when there was excessive corruption and ineptitude in the system and they did that for a reason. Unfortunately, in the course of trying to restore sanity in the system, some people had personal ambition and agenda which tended to subsume the larger mission for the intervention.

    My answer to your question is to try to assess the military by narrowing it down to regimes rather than the military as a whole. Every regime must be broken down and assessed by whatever contributions it made while it was in power rather than by wrongly generalising the military. The military incursion was more of a necessary action to better the lot of the country. It was true that some regimes came and twisted everything to zero level and squandered the respect the people had for the military as an entity.

    Whether this is true or not, there was the perception that the country would not be where it is today if the regime under which you served had endured a little while longer. How correct is this perception?

    I think it is matter of personal opinion because nobody knew what would have happened after one and a half years. Sincerely speaking, for the one and a half years that the Muhammadu Buhari’s regime lasted, it was straightforward and focused. It came out with the War Against Indiscipline (WAI), the queue culture, the monthly sanitation culture, among other policies meant to reorient and mobilise the people and galvanise that nationalistic fervour in them. The moment a leader is able to manage the people in the way that they should act, they will be able to see a future where they will not think of stealing public money and doing those things that will bring the name of the country to shame. It was apparent that people admired and embraced the policies the regime of General Buhari was instituting. But unfortunately somebody thought otherwise and decided to alter the regime.

    What is your comment on the alleged highhandedness of that regime?

    No, it was not highhanded. There was no doubt that there was a lot of corruption and embezzlement within the system and the administration said: ‘We heard this and that about your corrupt practices.’ So, the onus was on the politicians to prove that they were not corrupt. But in life generally, sometimes you need to do certain things to galvanise actions from the populace. That was precisely what the regime did at the time. In life also, you cannot sit down and have things too easy with you. If you desire an orderly society, you must be ready to pay a price. That was the price we insisted the Nigerian society must pay. If trading in cocaine was your business and we found out that it was destroying our image internationally, it meant therefore, that you could lose your life by doing business in cocaine. As a matter of fact, that tended to frighten people. I think that was one of the few things people saw as being highhanded.

    It was rather unfortunate that those who succeeded in pulling the regime down were key members of the same regime. That, in itself, highlighted the personal ambition that was at play. I have read about a country which found out that an issue like religion was becoming too difficult to manage and it had to hands off religion as a policy of state for 10 years to concentrate on issues that were of economy. For 10 to 15 years, nobody talked about religion. That is how a nation is built. It must be built on sacrifice from all and sundry, both the leadership and the lead.

    Given your revulsion for corruption, how do you react to the N255 million armoured car scandal surrounding the Minister of Aviation?

    By now, the President should have asked her to step aside until investigations are completed. Stella Oduah is one out of about 170 million Nigerians. Neither the country nor the Ministry of Aviation will grind to a halt if she is shown the door. Even if she was the one who founded the PDP, as far as it has become a party for everyone, it is no longer her party. Therefore, giving her the boot is not something that requires long contemplation. Of course, she could be brought back after the investigation if she is found not culpable. There is no point pampering her and appearing to be glossing over the scandal.

    Aviation is a serious sector. It is like medicine where if you put a quack gynaecologist as your brother or sister in place of an expert, all the patients will die one after another. So, in aviation, you do not put anybody as minister simply because the person is close to you. It will be a recipe for air disaster. The moment corruption has crept into the sector where a minister is exposed to such temptations as gifts of armoured cars, then, there is real and present danger. That is what we are witnessing. (The minister, however, on Thursday denied that the cars were bought for her).

    Still on corruption, the regime which you were a part of postured to be fighting corruption at the time. How would you defend the allegation of ’53 Suit cases’ against that regime and which no response was offered until it was sacked?

    In my mind, I think people got it wrong on the issue of the 53 suit cases. Well, I was not at the headquarters then, but what I gathered was that the father of the ADC to the head of state was returning to the country and he (ADC) was at the airport to assist him with his luggage. I really don’t think there were up to 53 suit cases. But the whole thing was blown out of proportion and out of mischief.

    I knew both General Buhari (rtd) and the late General Tunde Idiagbon very well. They were strict, honest and distinguished gentlemen who operated a zero-tolerance for graft and sleaze. These were men who did not know what was going on at the airport. If his ADC’s father was returning to the country and the boy was at the airport to assist him, I don’t see what is wrong with that.

    Do not forget that this is a country where people take advantage of situations just to blackmail you. And this particular incident could not have been an exception. Even though I was at Ilorin then, I was not fascinated by the story because there was no substance in it. It was more of making a mountain out of a molehill. Beyond this singular incident, I do not think there was any incident that you could lay hands on and say this was what that regime did in terms of compromising itself.

    I was part of that regime and it was one that was honorable, focused and determined to straighten issues. If you look at the character of somebody like General Buhari, you will understand that he is someone with a very strong personality. He is passionate about what he upholds. It is this passion that has been driving him to see if he can turn things round for the country, if allowed the second chance now that he is in politics. Buhari has so much to offer this country and he is propelled by this self-belief and determination. Judging him from his military performance, Buhari is more than capable. But as a politician, I cannot say because that is quite a different constituency altogether. He is not one who listens to gossip. I just hope and pray that he will be allowed the chance one day to offer his service in a leadership position.

    Have you been in touch with him ever since his administration was terminated?

    I have not been in touch with him. Sincerely no! There was really no personal relationship or close relationship. It was purely official. He was my boss as a senior officer and head of state.

    If Buhari believes he has something to offer, do you also believe that he’s got something to offer?

    Well, given the circumstances we found ourselves, we need somebody who is very firm. For now, I do not know of any. The only challenge is the difference in circumstances. At first, he operated under the military, but is it the same circumstance now? No. that is where there could be a constraint. If we have to stay together as a country, then we need somebody as firm and honest as Buhari. I think he has got the attributes. This is not to say that I am recommending him for anything or canvassing for him. So, you have to get me right.

    Some of your colleagues are in politics either in elective or appointive capacity. What has kept you away from politics?

    My own way or my attitude to politics is quite different from other people’s approach to it. I knew I could not fit into the brand of politics being played here. I like doing things in an honorable way. Our politicians are people who say one thing and turn round to do the other. I am someone who stands on his honour. I know places where people find it uncomfortable when they see people like me around them because they know that I operate on the side of truth.

    I have since made up my mind not to be involved in serious politics but to be making contributions when asked upon. I do not want to be involved in active politics. Maybe the opportunity will come one day, but if it does not come, maybe my children will be the ones to take it up.

    Some people are already expressing a sense of foreboding ahead of 2015 because of the opposition to the return bid by Mr. President and the likely backlash this will trigger. Do you nurse this fear as well?

    No. I do not nurse the fear. As a matter of fact, I understand there is an alleged agreement he purportedly went into with some people. I do not know how true this is. But if there existed such an agreement, for me, it is only honorable to honour it. It might be difficult to say there was no agreement, because politicians of the Nigerian hue hardly do anything or go into something without an agreement. So to turn round and say there was no agreement is unacceptable. If the atmosphere was friendly, cordial and involved two to three men and you accepted it, then it is only honorable to abide by it. But if you decide to bring the law or constitution into it, it becomes unmanageable because you have defaulted in your honorable position to honour what you conscionably went into. There is no basis to make recourse to law or constitution because you did not remember the law when you went into an agreement.

    He will be looking for crisis, anarchy if he reneges on an agreement he purportedly went into. I recalled talking about the manner I was retired with my wife and I told her that if this was the sacrifice we had to make to keep the country together, then we had to let go what they did to me. That was how we put the whole thing behind us. This is the way leaders should look at issues. They should learn to look at issues beyond themselves in the overall interest of the country.

  • ‘Niger Delta gods won’t forgive GEJ if he fails to complete East-West Road’

    Why are SSPA and leaders in the Niger Delta drumming support for Jonathan’s reelection?

    Number one it is his legitimate constitutional right to contest for a second term. Number two, by the indices of his policies and actions for just two years, Jonathan has performed better than some of his predecessors who served a second term. The cost of production in this country with its micro effects on other key sectors of the economy was always on the increase simply because of epileptic power supply to the extent that small scale businesses were affected. The only hope against all odds was to privatise the power sector the way the telecom sector was liberalised and for a president to have the courage to do that means that the economy is set for a multi dimensional growth.

    Then look at the railways, moribund for almost three decades. It is not just that somebody started it and budgeted money. Where is the money he budgeted? Nigeria is a country where people dont account for misapplied moneys. For the first time President Jonathan has put the rail business on track such that passengers travel from Lagos to Kano by train. I travel by road and l have seen that the state of Nigerian roads today is not what it was five years. So in want areas of assessment would you say this man has not done enough to earn a second term slot?

    Number three is that as a minority this is the first time a minority has provided leadership for Nigeria. And if other majorities have the opportunity of ruling for eight and ten years, some constitutionally and others unconstitutionally, a minority must never be denied. He must be given his right to rule for eight years. This country belongs to all of us and nobody is superior to any other person. We are all equal.

    All the professors of constitutional law are in unison that nothing debars Mr. President from contesting for a second term. In terms of performance, for the first time in the history of this country, a sitting President decided to put his performance on a paper giving members of the public the opportunity to assess him. That is transparency in action.

    Don’t you foresee this ambition dividing the country because some leaders have also advised him to bow out in the interest of Nigeria’s unity?

    If his ambition will divide Nigeria, let it be so because Nigeria belongs to all of us. Nobody can claim a greater right to Nigeria than the other. So, if what is good for you is not good for me, then let it be. If Hausa/Fulani man can provide leadership for this country for 38 years and a Southsouth man is just there for two years and they said he should not continue; Who is a slave to who now? We are all born equal. The whole craze of Jonathan must not rule is all about the oil economy. Where is the oil coming from? After all Jonathan is from an area where oil was struck in commercial quantity. The OgbIan territory where oil was first struck is where Jonathan is from. You that came from far away Savannah that do not have single drop of oil and you could rule this country for 38 years but you are now saying that a man beneath whose soil is oil which you used in building skyscrapers in your country must not continue after one tenure. Then you do not want Nigeria to continue. Who cares? Nigeria is not the first country that is disintegrating if that is the ultimate, but that is not agenda of any Southsouth man and that is not the agenda of any progressive Nigerian.

    What has Jonathan done for the Niger Delta to deserve the support of the region?

    But that is the irony of life. Yet those who don’t know claim that the man is favouring only his people. What special things has he brought to Bayelsamsince he became the President? But the issue is not peculiar to the Niger Delta. Ordinarily, it is our expectation. But a patriotic ruler will look less unto himself to avoid being accused of bias and that is what the President is doing. That is why his own people are not happy with him, he is demonstrating that patriotism to a fault. Nobody will believe that the only East-West Road traversing from Warri to Calabar is impassable.

    I hear the minister crying everyday that the project is underfunded. But Jonathan as a patriotic Nigerian believes more in equity to the extent that he had even forgotten himself. It is the reason why after two years the Eastwest road remained impassable, l have no doubts that he has between this year and next year to correct this mistake because the gods of the Southsouth will not forgive Jonathan if he does not complete the project. We are not asking for too many but make this dualisation work so that we can leave Yenagoa and go to Calabar without headache. Make it work because after leaving the office as the President he won’t be flying to his village in Ogbia with chopper. He won’t.

    Once you leave office, you will become ordinary like us and you will be traveling from Port Harcourt to Otuoke by road. The only way he can shake his head and beat his chest in pride is when he completes the project. Otherwise the gods of the Southsouth will not forgive him.

    Now Jonathan has proposed a national dialogue. How will the proposed conference benefit the region?

    Simple. What has been our primary concern is resource ownership and resource control. That has been our concern. So, we can tell them that oil belongs to us. In the emerging constitution, it can be clearly stated that anybody beneath whose soil a resource is found, he owns it and he has an unfettered access to control the resource found beneath its soil. As a partner of the union called Nigeria, l will agree to contribute whatever; we will sit and agree that federating units will contribute. That is the only way we can use what God has given us to develop our creeks, our rivulets and our rivers.

    But this conference has been criticised; with some referring to it as a Greek gift?

    How is it a Greek gift? NADECO of old called for a national conference. Under late Chief Anthony Enahoro’s National Reformation Movement, the principal issue that body agitated for was the convocation of a Sovereign National Conference. The people of the Southeast have been agitating for a national conference. The people of the Southsouth, at least the South South Peooples Assembly where you rightly acknowledged me as its national secretary, even in our last conference at Warri on 6th of September 2012, we called for a national conference. When the South South People’s Assembly formed a body in conjunction with the Southwest, principally led by the Yoruba Unity Forum and leaders of the southeast under the aegis of Southern People’s Assembly where l am also privileged to serve as one of the coordinating secretaries; in our first national conference at Uyo, in the second conference at Enugu and in the third conference at Lagos, we all called for a national conference.

    The bodies led by Prof. Ben Nwabueze, both The Patriots as well as Project Nigeria, were all agitating for a national conference. Another body l am privileged to also be a member, the Nigerian National Summit Group is a movement for the convocation of a national conference. So if Mr. President has listened to all these several calls to give Nigerians an opportunity to talk, how does that act of a listening President translate to a Greek gift?

    So, with all due respect, the former Governor of Lagos State is totally misplaced in this matter. The truth is that Nigeria is fundamentally at a crossroad as it is today. There are so many things that are wrong with this country and there is the growing need ever for Nigerians to sit and talk for the future of this country. The position we have maintained in all these bodies l belong to is that the only way Nigeria can meaningfully celebrate our centenary is a platform for Nigerians to sit and discuss the future of this country.

    It is well known that my ethnic nationality, the Ijaw did not give consent to be part of a union called Nigeria. The Efik, the Igbo, the Hausa/ Fulani, the Kanuri, the Tiv never gave such consent, yet we were brought together in a forced union called Nigeria. Since we managed this marriage for 100 years, it is only important, it is only necessary, it is only germane that we come together to discuss the tenets of staying together after 100 years. So, it is not a Greek gift. Mr. President has demonstrated that he is a listening President, that he is ever prepared to follow the yearnings of Nigeria.

    Leaders who are against the conference are questioning the motives and the timing. Is it not ill-timed considering that the 2015 election is around the corner?

    What time is ripe? When did Jonathan become the President of Nigeria? The man has just stayed two years in office. And these agitations had been there long before now. Number two, the crisis Nigeria is faced with today where some group of people said they don’t like education and for many holding unto that disposition, they kept killing innocent lives, threatening the corporate existence of this country. Some, people feel that their resources are being shortchanged, you’re using my resources to feed everybody in this country. Give me what is genuinely due me and the fact that 13 per cent derivation in the eyes of others is too much and they are even threatening that if you are complaining of ecological damage, we can relocate you.

    Every little thing will ignite crisis. That a minority for the first time became the President of the Federal Republic in 2011 and somebody who lost election because he refused to accept defeat went public to claim that we will make this country ungovernable. Arising from that statement innocent lives were killed. Subsequent to that massacre, a body in the name of Boko Haram threatened the survival of this country.

    Who says Nigeria doesn’t have issues? Why do we have the MASSOB that is agitating for Biafra Republic? Why do we have the OPC whose primary objective is to create Oduduwa Republic and you say Nigerians don’t have issues that are challenging our corporate existence? What time is ripe? In any case, who attributed political undertone to Obasanjo’s Political Reform Conference which later turned into a third term agenda? But Jonathan has not even finished his second term, so the issue of wanting to transmute a national dialogue to a third term project does not arise. There is no intention behind Jonathan’s quest for national dialogue that will contradict and conflict with the provisions of the constitution as Obasanjo attempted to do with the conference of 2005. So, no timing is right and no timing is wrong. Whatever that happened now is when God says it should be.

    Some states are still nursing some fears about the proposed conference…

    I can tell you very clearly that people fear that the conference may bring many things on the table. And indeed so. A system where states have become apron strings of the Federal Government; a system where states don’t have independence, they must look at the Federal Government to survive is not federalism. Nigeria is not running federalism. You can never succeed in running a unitary system of government in a heterogeneous society like Nigeria. This is a country of 418 nationalities.

    Nigeria needs to go back to the fundamentals of a Federal Government. Nigeria needs to go back to true federalism.