The Nation Newspaper

Tag: letter

  • Nyako’s letter

    Nyako’s letter

    • The governor should not make statements that undermine the fight on terror

    Governor Murtala Nyako of Adamawa State took the blame-game over the raging insurgency one notch up when, in a letter dated April 16, and addressed to his colleagues in the Northern Governors Forum, he accused the Jonathan-led administration of genocide against Northern Nigeria. The governor would appear to have upped his earlier charge in the United States where he first accused the federal government of fuellin g the insurgency. This time, the governor did not only pointedly accuse the Jonathan administration of “full-fledged genocide”, he also alleged other sundry crimes said to be targeted against prominent citizens of the north.

    Having borne the direct brunt of the emergency for nearly the whole of a year running without visible signs of effective containment, we can understand the governor’s frustrations perhaps, in the context of the rather limited result of the counter-insurgency.

    In the first place, the human tolls in the number of deaths – of innocent civilians both in the hands of the security agencies and the terrorists – have continued to rise, calling into question, the efficacy of current strategies to contain the menace. Secondly, rather than see the emergency as a means to an end – the end being the restoration of normalcy to the region – the federal government would appear to have opted to see the emergency as an end in itself.

    Having said that, we must also say that there is a huge divide between fair criticisms of the current approaches to fighting the terror – whether of the dreaded Boko Haram or of the carnage by Fulani herdsmen – and the divisive, opportunistic pot shot by a functionary of state. It would certainly appear that the governor prefers the soap-box approach to solving the security problems as against exploring possible behind-the-scene channels with the federal government. We certainly cannot fathom his sweeping characterisation of the counter-insurgency as “genocide” in the absence of any shred of evidence. Coming from a holder of high office of governor, we consider it inappropriate, distasteful and most regrettable. So also is his virtual insistence on seeing current wave of terrorism as a creation of the federal government unhelpful.

    We have nothing against the attempt by the governor to rally the governors as indeed the leaders of the north against the menace. This is however a different call from tagging the Jonathan administration as the chief culprit, or even tainting other regions with tar brush all because of President Jonathan’s weak-kneed approach to the menace. As it is, all – federal, states and the local authorities – have in various ways failed the people.

    However, more than the federal government, the leaders in the North – whether governors or traditional rulers – must see themselves as bearing a larger portion of the responsibility for tackling the problems at the roots. They have greater role in settling internecine conflicts, for promoting brotherhood among the people, and for integrating the people currently torn apart by atavistic forces.

    We do not consider this as the time to open new battle flanks. What the nation needs at this time are wise counsels from elders, mature judgments from statesmen and for all hands to be on deck in the fight against terror. It is time to end all divisive rhetoric which aside playing into the hands of the terrorists – would in the end unduly prolong the agonies of Nigerians in the region. What the north as indeed Nigeria needs is peace without which development would remain elusive. Leaders like Nyako have a great role to play in this regard.

  • Letter to all comrades

    In the past, students’ unionism was sweet. Way back in the 1976 “Alli must go” riot, several students were killed in Amadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria. Some were badly wounded, but did they merit the assault? They firmly stood against injustice which is the song now chanted by today’s union leaders who failed to make the supposed egalitarian society real. Then, unionism was at its peak and it has no contender other than its strong counterpart which was activism. I believe every union is created to fight for its member and the sole aim of students union is activism.

    However, we do not need a prophet to tell us what we already know and to see the woes that are betiding student unionism at present. This is solely because unionism has deviated from its sole aim of activism to materialism. The times of the uncompromising and radical unionist are gone and unionism has become a platform to gratify selfish interest. The patriotic ones have sold their birthright for stipends and the uprights have compromised their stand for peanuts. The reputation that was claimed by the earlier union heroes has been soiled; their white garments have been spotted with stains of sharp practices of materialists and egoists.

    Gone are the days when students hold elections without interference by politician, but all has changed at present. Today, politicians influence students union to pursue their ambitions. No wonder, our students’ union leaders find it pretty difficult to criticise these “god-fathers” whenever they initiate anti-students policies, let alone frown at issues of national concern. All that the union leaders want to see happen is an abracadabra that will make them overnight millionaires from government purse. They have dropped activism and made materialism their watchword. Where are we headed?

    The only way to revive unionism is to embrace activism and reject materialism. Student unionism will be revived back to life if activism is seen as the principal tool and main objective of unionism. That way, unionism will take its pride of place. It is important to let all student unionists see activism as the sole aim of unionism right from inception and stop pursuing selfish ends.

     

    Elijah, 400-Level French Education, EKSU

  • Much ado about a letter

    Much ado about a letter

    Since he received the letter of the 11 defecting Senators from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Senate President David Mark has sat on it. Last week at a closed door session, he said he could not read the letter because of a court order. Did the court restrain him from reading the letter? The APC says the court did not. Lawyers believe that he should read the letter. Will he? What happens if the case he referred to is not decided before the 2015 elections? Adebisi Onanuga takes lawyers’ views.

    It is a simple matter of reading a letter, but Senate President David Mark has made a mountain out of a mole hill. For weeks, he has sat on the letter of the 11 defecting Senators from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC). In the letter, the Senators are seeking to inform their colleagues that they are now in APC.

    Mark has declined to read the letter because, according to him, there is a court order restraining him from doing so. He said he would seek legal advice on the matter. Mark said since the issue is in court, his hands are tied by Order 53 (5) of the Senate Standing Rules, which states: “Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending in such a way as might in the opinion of the President of the senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto.”

    Some questions arise: Is the Senate President’s hands really tied as he claimed? With the registration of APC members going on, must the letter be read before the senators can register? What will happen if the court case Mark referred to is not resolved before 2015 elections? What is the way out?

    The senators who defected are led by Bukola Saraki (Kwara Central). Others are Shaba Lafiagi (Kwara North); Mohammed Ndume (Borno South); Danjuma Goje (Gombe Central); Abdullahi Adamu (Nasarawa West); Magnus Abe (Rivers South East) and Wilson Ake (Rivers West). Others are Bindo Jubrilla (Adamawa North), Abdullahi Gobir (Sokoto East) and Alhassan Aisha Jummai (Taraba North).

    Their January 29 letter to Mark reads: “We the undersigned Senators of the Federal Republic of Nigeria elected under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) wish to notify you that we have severally and jointly joined the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    “This action and decision is as a result of the division and factionalisation in the Peoples Democratic Party that sponsored our election into the Senate.

    “In view of the above, we write to inform you that following the division and factionalisation in the PDP, we have formally joined the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    “This communication is made pursuant to Section 68 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) for your information, guidance and record purposes.”

    Saraki submitted the letter to Mark at plenary, but it was not read. Mark was said to have rebuffed Saraki ‘s  request  to invoke Order 14, which deals with Privileges, to read the letter.

    Rather than reading the letter, Mark was said to have noted that the planned defection had been caught under Order 53(5) of the Senate Standing Rules, which states that the Senate may not mention any issue already before the court if the Senate President believes that such a mention would jeopardise the suit.

    But the defecting Senators were said to have argued that the Mark should not tie his hands with court matters, so as not to set a precedent that can not be sustained.

    Saraki and his colleagues, it was said, argued that their letter was not debatable, adding that reading it does not amount to a violation of the court injunction or Order 53(5) of the Senate Standing Rules.

    Mark reportedly stood his ground that he would not allow the Clerk of the Senate nor Saraki to read the letter.

    It was said that Mark took this position  because  the leadership of the Senate had earlier indicated that there could not be group defection, as every senator was supposed to come by way of personal explanation as contained in Order 43 of the Senate Standing Rules.

    However, the impasse caused by the refusal to read the letter has led to a division in the Senate as some senators loyal to the ruling party  are mounting pressure on Mark to invoke Section 68(1) (g) of the 1999 Constitution and declare the defecting senators’ seats vacant. But, to the APC, there is no court order barring the 11 former PDP senators from defecting to the party.

    The party’s  Interim National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said the existing court order is to the effect that the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives should maintain the status quo n defecting lawmakers.

    “What this order means is that neither the President of the Senate nor the Speaker of the House can declare vacant the seats of the defecting lawmakers. It does not mean that the letter of notification from defecting members cannot be read on the Floor of the chambers,” he said.

    APC said the argument that the defecting letter cannot be read on the Floor, so as not to contravene the Senate’s Standing Rules that precludes the Upper Chamber from discussing any matter that is already in court, does not apply in the case.

    “We are not asking that the issue of the defection should be discussed or debated on the Floor of the Senate. All we are saying is that the Senate President should read the letter of notification. The coast is very clear for this to be done, and the Senate President is duty bound to do so,” the party said.

    The party  maintained that the 11 senators can no longer be prevented from defecting from the PDP to the APC and that it is too late in the day for anyone to stall the move on the basis of a non-existent court order or a Standing Rule that will only be operational if, indeed, there is a court order expressly concerning the senators’ letter.

    “The act of defection by the 11 senators took place the moment they handed their letter to the Senate President at 10 am on Wednesday, January 29, 2014 whether or not the Senate President goes ahead to read the letter.

    “Therefore, trying to stall the defection by stonewalling on the letter or attempting to secure a dubious injunction, especially when our lawyers were not served the motion papers until about 4pm of the same Wednesday, is like seeking to abort a pregnancy when the baby has already been born.

    “The existing court order that the Senate President and the House Speaker should maintain the status quo actually strengthens the letter written by the Senators who defected, because it says that their seats cannot be declared vacant until the issue has been determined, hence their defection letter should be read without delay,” the APC said.

    Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Publicity, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, however, told reporters last week that as a way out of the logjam, Mark has been mandated to seek legal advice on the matter.

     

    Lawyers speak

    Lawyers who spoke on the issue agreed with the APC, saying there was no legal hurdle barring the Senate from reading the letter.

    To them, Mark’s position is not necessarily because of the law, but one intended to buy more time for the ruling  party Chairman, Adamu Mu’azu, who is on a reconciliation mission to bring back aggrieved party members. They argued that the matter at hand was political and as such required political solution.

    Others, however, said Mark was only applying the law as expected of him in a situation like this.

    The legal experts included Constitutional lawyers Fred Agbaje; Ike Ofuokwu; Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Ikeja Branch, Monday Ubani; Lagos lawyer Ikechukwu Ikeji and Executive Director, Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP), Mr. Chino Obianwu.

    Agbaje urged Mark to stand on the side of constitutionalism as against dirty party politics.

    “Where in Section 68 of the Constitution dealing with tenure of legislators is the requirement of letter writing?  Couldn’t the defection be done orally on the Floor of the house? Where is the freedom of association in all this?

    “The issue of letter, which David Mark is glamourising and dramatising, is a mere additional mathematics which has nothing to do with the fact that the affected legislators had defected.

    “The pending judicial proceedings has nothing to do with the defection, which in the eyes of equity had been done!”

    Ubani said Mark was playing out a script and that it was, unfortunately, that of his political party.

    ”His hands are not tied as alleged.  On the contrary, his political party has tied his hands, his mouth including his legs. The rules he quoted does not apply here,” he said.

    Ubani advised the defecting senators to register with their new party as it is in line with equity. He maintained that the defecting senators are already, in spirit and in truth, members of the APC, only that the Senate President is bowing to his political party’s pressure in refusing to do the needful.

    To him, the case in court will either be thrown out or will be resolved in favour of the defecting senators.

    “We have several decided cases in favour of the defecting senators. It is only a matter of time. PDP is embroiled in crisis, they know it, the whole world knows it. They are just wasting their time. The president was in Sokoto to receive a defected former governor of the state, Attahiru Bafarawa with fanfare. What is good for the goose, is equally good for the gander,” he stressed.

    Obianwu does not agree that reading of the letter of intention of the defecting senators will affect the case in court.

    “In what way will reading out the letter be detrimental to the pending litigation? Clearly, in no way. There is nothing judicially prejudicial about what is already a public knowledge that the senators have joined another political party.

    “There’s no injunction from the court restraining their joining their new party. Is there any legal reason for not joining the new party? There is none,” he said.

    According to Obianwu, the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of association. The Constitution provides that a legislator can defect to another party without loosing his or her seat if the former party is fractionalised.

    “It is clear that the PDP is fractionalised. There is no legal basis for the Senate President to refuse the senators to declare their new party in the Senate.

    “There has been so many legislators that cross carpeted in the past even under President Mark. There is no basis for the Senate President to take advantage of the privilege of his office to withhold the reading of the letter of the senators.”

    Ofuokwu said that it was immaterial whether the letter of the 11 defecting senators is read on the Floor of the senate or not.

    “So far as it has been handed over and accepted by the Senate President, it is enough to validate their defection,” he said.

    He said the conduct of the Senate President was simply tantamount to parliamentary tyranny and an act of legislative rascality.

    “The earlier members of the National Assembly appreciate and understand that no standing order whatsoever can override constitutional provisions, the better for our democracy.

    “Any bye law of any kind  or standing order of the Senate that is in conflict with the constitutional provision as in this case where freedom of association is guaranteed is, to the extent of its inconsistency, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    “The Senate President by relying on a senate standing rule, which he has jettisoned severally in the past, is only acting out a script of the ruling PDP and he is only attempting to abort a pregnancy that is already successfully delivered.

    “The 11 senators do not need the letter to be read publicly in the House before registering and participating as APC members. The Senate President’s hands are not tied in anyway. Its all about self preservation of his position even when it is inimical to our democracy”, he said.

    “What legal advice can a Senate that parades lawyers and even a member of the Inner Bar be seeking for many days?” he asked.

    Ikeji, however, espressed a divergent view, saying it was disrespectful to a court to do anything that would render its eventual judgment nugatory or merely academic.

    “This is a very popular principle of law enunciated in the case of OJUKWU v. MILITARY GVERNR OF LAGOS STATE. Once parties have submitted their dispute to the court, they must hold all actions regarding the dispute until the court gives its final decision.

    “If the senators had gone to court to restrain the Senate President or anyone from declaring their seats vacant, the case will also affect any person sued or any person who has knowledge of the case.

    “The Senate President is a party to the case, so he is very right in not acting on the letter if he finds his action on the afore-referred senate rules and the court case, especially in view of the opposing contentions regarding the purport of Section 68 (1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, which provides for division in a party or merger as the only grounds upon which a senator or a member of the House of Representatives can defect without losing his or her seat.

    “The appropriate thing to do for the senators is to withdraw the case and allow the law take its course and, if they disagree, they can then go to court.

    “In my view, I think the Senate President’s hands may, indeed, be tied since he may be adopting a reconciliatory tactic. I also think that what the senators want to do amounts to approbation and reprobation, wanting to eat their cake and still have it.

    “If the court says maintain status quo, the appropriate question to ask is, what is the status quo? There is no doubt that the senators are already in APC. They are already body and spirit members of APC.

    “Nobody can stop them in that regard, but inside the Senate chambers and until the case is finally dispensed with, they remain within the ambit of status quo meaning they still remain in PDP and they still keep their seats irrespective of whether the Senate President wants to declare their seats vacant or not. Those two things must go together,” he argued.

    Ikeji also said the Senate President cannot declare the seats of the defecting senators vacant for now until the case is decided and that they remain in PDP. Likewise, he said status quo simply means the position of things before the dispute arose.

    He noted that it is not a must that the letter of the defecting senators be read before they register with their new political party.

    According to him, while they can register with their new party, they must relinquish everything concerning their old parties since it has been held that there are no two PDPs. That, he said, is the intendment of Section 68(1) (g) of the Constitution.

     

    The way out

    According to Agbaje, the only way out is for Mark to read the letter and “ let my people go in peace”. “Why is PDP scared?,” he asked.

    Ubani advised that the PDP should stop heating the polity. “Right things should be done to avoid political crisis in the country. Let the law of the land be supreme over and above individual whims and caprices. My comment is without prejudice to how genuine and people-motivated these defections are”, he said.

    Obianwu, on the other hand, counselled Mark against using his position to create tension in the Senate. He advised Mark to allow the letter be read on the Floor of the House so that the nation could move forward.

    Ikeji, however, said the best way out of the impasse was for the parties to wait for the final decision of the court or the senators can just vacate their seats and insist on immediate election to fill in the vacancies where they shall then offer themselves for re-election. That is the moral and ethical thing to do.

    “The power to declare a seat vacant should be vested in INEC to whom all notices of defection shall be sent, on individual basis, for them to ascertain whether such defections qualify for the affected seats to be declared vacant or not.

  • Jonathan and the letter to Obasanjo

    If the president’s uninspiring response to the weighty issues his godfather had raised in his December 2, 18-page letter about the shortcomings of his administration was all the committee he appointed to draft a reply came up with, the president should consider that as a betrayal. They have done great injustice to the president as a statesman either due to incompetence or because they are self-serving sycophants that have succeeded in capturing the president as alleged by Obasanjo.

    In any case, if moaning, name-calling and bellyaching were the answers to the issues ex-President Obasanjo had identified, what many of us have said of Obasanjo and his brand of politics would have been sufficient. In this regard, help for the presidency even came from an unlikely quarters, Iyabo Obasanjo, the ex-president beloved daughter. Her alleged letter to his father which our peerless columnist Olatunji Dare says “is perfuse with contempt, ridicule, scorn, and loathing abhorrence of the most visceral kind”, inflicted more damage to her father’s reputation than Jonathan’s abuses could have ever achieved.

    Just as we have said of Obasanjo who calls himself ‘Mr. Nigeria’, who Jonathan, his godson has since reminded us does not own Nigeria, of trying to define his baleful legacies including imposition of Jonathan on Nigeria, it is also obvious Jonathan was motivated only by concern for survival and his legacies and not about Nigerians. This came out clearly from the tenth reason he advanced for responding to his godfather’s letter. “The tenth and final reason why my reply is inevitable”, he says, “is that you have written similar letters and made public comments in reference to all former Presidents and Heads of Government starting from Alhaji Shehu Shagari and these have instigated different actions and reactions. The purpose and direction of your letter is distinctly ominous…” Consequently, nearly everything the president says in his letter is about his own survival and legacies which he like his godfather erroneously thinks he can define.

    Thus, on Obasanjo’s appeal that the president as the leader of PDP takes some measures to prevent the imminent collapse of the party, Jonathan says he is a better PDP leader than Obasanjo backing his position with a long list of PDP founding fathers he rightly claimed Obasanjo frustrated out of PDP.

    On corruption that has become a source of embarrassment to even friends of Nigeria including the late revered Nelson Mandela, Barack Obama and Britain’s Cameron, he says to Obasanjo,: ‘You will recall that your kinsman, the renowned afro-beat maestro, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti famously sang about it during your first stint as Head of State. Even in this Fourth Republic, the Siemens and Halliburton scandals are well known. And for a good effect, he added ‘sons of some of our party leaders are currently facing trial for their involvement in the celebrated subsidy scam affair. I can hardly be blamed if the wheels of justice still grind very slowly in our country’.

    On kidnapping and armed robbery, President Jonathan shot back “it is just as well to remind you that the first major case of kidnapping for ransom took place around 2006. And the Boko Haram crisis dates back to 2002. Goodluck Jonathan was not the President of the country then. Also, armed robbery started in this country immediately after the civil war and since then, it has been’.

    In response to what he described as the most ‘invidious allegation of training snipers to assassinate political opponents’, he said: ‘I have never been associated with any form of political violence. There have certainly been cases of political assassination since the advent of our Fourth Republic, but as you well know, none of them occurred under my leadership.’

    On the president’s alleged undertaking to serve for six years; he turned the heat on his godfather accusing him of a resolve to ‘embark on a virulent campaign to harass (him) out of an undeclared candidature for the 2015 presidential elections so as to pave the way for a successor anointed by Obasanjo.’

    The first nine other reasons the president gave as justification for responding to Obasanjo were equally all about Jonathan: three un investigated assassination attempts on his life in 2007, his administration better score card in foreign relations compared to Obasanjo’s; his administration’s attraction of $25.7 billion FDI in just three years compared to Obasanjo’s $24.9 billion in seven years, and his creation of level playing ground for Labour in Ondo and APGA in Anambra governorship elections unlike Obasanjo who favoured some PDP candidates (short of admitting Obasanjo had rigged for PDP candidates in Edo, Ondo, Ekiti and Osun).

    Many Nigerians must have felt diminished by President Jonathan’s letter. Jonathan was already our vice president when Obama became American President. Obama inherited a deeply divided and disillusioned American society facing two wars and saddled with $16 trillion foreign debt. When his aides started moaning and bellyaching about the legacies of Republicans and their half-educated President George Bush jnr., Obama coolly admonished them insisting American voters elected him to solve those problems. In other words he wouldn’t have been elected president if those challenges were not there.

    But let us for a moment even concede it to the president that he is overwhelmed by challenges of his office, a domestic insurrection by Boko Haram, punctured and leaking PDP family umbrella that once provided sanctuary for all manners of characters from which some elected PDP governors and legislators have since escaped seeking refuge under APC, crisis in his home Bayelsa and Rivers fuelled by Nyesom Wike, supervising minister of education who swears by the name of the president’s wife, kleptomaniac ministers, etc, but what can we say of belligerent and combative advisers, paid through the public purse to protect the president but chose moaning and name-calling as answers to daunting issues merely echoed by Obasanjo?

    Nigerians are not amused that the president chose to agonise over the un-investigated assassinations attempts on his life back in 2007 when he was a governor and vice presidential candidate. What Nigerian expected of the president who has been in power for close to five years was to have revisited not only the attempt on his life but other high profile assassination of his PDP family members like Marshall Harry, Aminasoari Dikibo, Funsho Williams, and others like Chief Alfred Rewane, and Bola Ige, an attorney general killed in his house under the nose of those detailed to protect him. Does a crime cease being a crime because there is a change of guard at the presidency? Once again, Nigerians are not asking the president and his advisers to invent the wheel. They can take a cue from Barack Obama’s five year crusade against American Congress over the battle to allow the 558 detainees in Guantanamo Bay detention Camp in Cuba face criminal charges in American courts or repatriated back to their respective countries.

    Nigerians feel insulted by President Jonathan’s advisers’ trivialization of problem of corruption by making reference to Obasanjo’s kinsman singing about corruption during Obasanjo’s first coming as Head of State. Instead of addressing the serious issues of corruption, it amounts to bringing governance to kindergarten level as alleged by Chief Bisi Akande, the APC interim chairman. The president must not be deceived by his self-serving advisers. Nigerians are angry about Jonathan’s lack of political will to fight corruption as alleged by the speaker of the lower house. Nigerians are angry he has laid a bad precedent by pardoning convicted Diepreye Alamieyeseigha who is also wanted for money laundering in Britain. Nigerians feel insulted and taken for granted by Jonathan’s silence on ‘Oduahgate’ after a House Committee’s indictment.

    Nigerians want their God-fearing president who was given a landslide victory in 2011 because they trusted him, to revisit the KPMG report on NNPC, the Ribadu report on fuel subsidy theft and the House Committee Report on fuel subsidy scandal. Our jobless youths whose future is being mortgaged want the president who was once a ‘shoeless’ youth, to revisit the House Committee Report on Privatization that recommended some of the companies given away to cronies at next to nothing, be taken back by the state so as to create job opportunities for some of our army of unemployed.

  • Sanusi’s letter

    Sanusi’s letter

    Just how much is the shortfall of the cash that should have been sent to the federation account? That was how this newspaper raised the poser in the aftermath of the meeting of the reconciliation team of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the Federal Ministry of Finance and other stakeholders. The reconciliation team was put together in the wake of the controversy stoked by the September 25 letter from the CBN Governor, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, to President Goodluck Jonathan alleging under-remittance of $49.804 billion into the federation account in about 18 months.

    In the letter addressed to the president but which was subsequently leaked to the media, Sanusi had observed of the curious book-keeping in the sector: “Our analysis of the value of crude oil export proceeds based on the documentation received from pre-shipment inspectors shows that between January 2012 and July 2013, NNPC lifted 594,024,107 barrels of crude valued at $65,332,350,514.57.”

    “Out of this amount”, he noted, “NNPC repatriated only $15,528,410,098.77 representing 24 percent of the value.  This means the NNPC is yet to account for, and repatriate to the Federation Account, an amount in excess of $49.804 billion of the value of oil lifted in the same period.”

    He drew inferences from the apex bank’s table of analysis of the crude oil liftings and repatriations to further observe that “the failure of the NNPC to repatriate the amounts constitutes not only a violation of constitutional provisions but also of both Nigeria’s foreign exchange and pre-shipment inspection of exports laws”.

    He then recommended that the President (1) require NNPC to provide evidence for disposal of all proceeds of crude sales diverted from the CBN and Federation Account; (2) Investigate crude oil lifting and swap contracts, as well as the financial transactions of counter-parties for equity, fairness and transparency; and, (3) Authorise prosecution of suspects in money-laundering transactions, including but not limited to BDCs who are unable to account for hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Dismissing Sanusi’s letter as lacking in substance, the NNPC had insisted that the furore was borne of pure misunderstanding on the part of the CBN governor. The only point of agreement between the NNPC and the CBN governor was that the 24 per cent of total crude oil revenue receipts, which the CBN governor conceded had been remitted into the federation account, actually represents the proceeds from the equity lifting which NNPC is directly responsible for.

    As for the balance of the 76 per cent and which the apex bank chief alleged was unremitted, it explained that these were paid to the agencies statutorily empowered to receive them for onward remittance into the federation account. These agencies are the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS, and the Department of Petroleum Resources, DPR.

    Was the CBN governor therefore crying wolf where there was none? Clearly, the charge of gross misstatement of the matter by the CBN governor, given the facts in public domain, would be hard to dismiss. Writing to the President without perusing the figures is an inexcusable lapse; not even his subsequent explanation that in “trying to understand where those leakages were, our attention was drawn to a huge difference between what appeared to be export of crude made by NNPC and amount repatriated into the crude equity account of the Federal Government” would mitigate the faux pas.

    Throwing away the message would, of course be a greater disservice, particularly as the overall evidence would seem to indicate that a lot is amiss than the gloaters in the NNPC and the finance ministry are willing to admit about the mess they have made the oil industry and the public accounts under their watch.

    To be sure, nothing in the preliminary finding of the joint panel put together to reconcile the figures remotely suggest that the NNPC is anything in the clear, at least not yet. Noteworthy is that the panel has in fact established vast differences between crude sales and remittances, which at the moment, is a question of who to believe between Sanusi’s figure of $12 billion and finance minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s figure of $10.8 billion. That we are talking of yet-to-be reconciled billions of dollars makes the gloating by the finance ministry and the NNPC absurd.

    No doubt, Sanusi may have been typically overzealous – or if you like, alarmist; his charges are neither baseless nor spurious. To dismiss the charges off-hand is to miss completely the underlying concerns aptly captured in the letter. The concerns relate to the “very low rate of accretion to the reserves in spite of very high level of oil prices and in particular, depletion of excess crude account in spite of what seems to be very high level of oil sales”.

    In this, Sanusi must be seen as merely giving vent to the same concerns about the dwindling rate of accretion long expressed by majority of Nigerians, including no less a body than the Nigeria Governors Forum. Not only is the situation at the root of the crises in the monthly meeting of the Federation Accounts Allocation Committee, FAAC, it is at the heart of the dire financial state of the 36 states in the federation.

    The on-going reconciliation should therefore be the starting point in what promises to be a long journey to get the NNPC to become accountable and transparent in its day-to-day activities. Nigerians expect nothing short of the resolution of the puzzle in which oil prices would be moving up while the inflow into the federation account would be headed in the opposite direction. They are interested in how many barrels are sold daily and at what price. What about the grave allegation that the quantum of crude retained by NNPC for local consumption is actually sold at a discount?

    Who are the officials behind the mystery transaction?

    What the present situation demands is a thorough, comprehensive audit of the NNPC. The National Assembly should help kick off the process without further delay. It should bother our lawmakers that past calls for the overhaul of the corporation have been largely ignored. Seems about time something drastic is done about the outlawry in the corporation.

  • Obasanjo’s letter to party-man

    Anthony Momoh, prince of Auchi, it was who as Information and Culture Minister under General Ibrahim Babangida, elevated letter writing to a higher level as a direct marketing tool to engage the citizenry in government’s plans, programmes and policies. He wrote many under the series: Letter to my countryman.

    The art of letter writing has been with mankind since man learnt to put thoughts down in some permanent form. A letter is an exchange of facts, fiction, views, fears, thoughts and ideas between two or more people. In the realm of politics, Momoh’s example was an attempt to hold a conversation with the citizen in a military era, where debate was not a celebrated ethic.

    Two other Nigerians in recent memory known to have used letter writing to telling effect in the nation’s politics are the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief Olusegun Obasanjo.

    Part of Awolowo’s approach to politics was to appeal to reason through cold analysis of issues. Like the trained lawyer and journalist he was, he deployed strong words and imageries to marshal his points, shoot down the opposition, and recommend a different course of action. Having lost to President Shehu Shagari in the 1979 and 1983 Presidential elections, Awolowo had cause to write Shagari at a point that the ship of state was sailing in troubled waters. If urgent corrections were not made to cut waste, and restore confidence, it would not be long before the state ship crashed. He received thunderous abuse from the President’s aides for his unsolicited advice. Many derided him as a prophet of doom, who refused to climb up the political ladder of statesmanship, forgetting public criticism is a form of campaign by the opposition. Barely a year after his warning, Shagari’s government collapsed under its contradictions.

    Obasanjo’s letters to various heads of government who served after him are well known for their intemperate and self-righteous language. His recent letter to President Goodluck Jonathan, no less so. It has also elicited a similar reaction to what Awolowo suffered in the early 80s. It is an open letter, deliberately penned and released for maximum effect. It is a public campaign against the Goodluck administration; a bold attempt to dissuade Jonathan from seeking a second term in 2015. But it differs from Awolowo’s in one respect. Awolowo belonged to the opposition, Obasanjo’s is to his party mate, indeed, a protege.

    If it was legitimate for Awo to have sought to embarrass Shagari through reasoned public denunciation of his programmes and policies, does Obasanjo have a similar moral right?

    Ordinarily no. But Obasanjo has confessed to being shunned on several occasions when private letters were shared with Jonathan, without any acknowledgement much less reply. So in a sense, this latest letter has realized one of its objectives: it has forced the issues into the public domain.

    I submit Obasanjo’s intention is to contain what he regards as the damage the Jonathan presidency has brought on the party through his insistence on rubbishing their succession arrangement, and on the nation through indecisiveness in fighting insecurity, corruption and extolling confidence in the citizenry. It is an admission of the crisis facing the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, the realization that power may slip away through the President’s perceived perfidy, and the need to avoid the brutal verdict of history. It is a charge to the PDP to do everything to ensure Jonathan’s presidency does not extend beyond 2015 in the face of a growing formidable opposition. To do otherwise is to upturn PDP’s choreographed plot to keep its fantasized hold on power for 60 years with dire consequences for all the star actors.

    Central to the crisis is the zoning principle of power sharing in Nigeria, designed by the PDP to give a sense of belonging to the two broad North and South zones of Nigeria. I am no fan of zoning but recognise its political usefulness (when it is not for its sake) in managing a plural society such as Nigeria. Jonathan’s ascendancy following President Umaru Yar’Adua’s death in office has been rightly seen as fortuitous, which should not be pushed beyond the bounds of understanding in our diverse land. Jonathan’s open secret plan to seek another term in the absence of any inspiring record in office is seen as contributing to the heat in the polity. APC’s grand coalition is perceived as a formidable threat that can erode the PDP’s pan Nigeria credentials.

    As a two-time leader of Nigeria, first as an unelected military Head of State, 1975-1979 and as an elected president, 1999-2007, Obasanjo, in and out of office, loves to sermonize. It is as if he has this self imposed moral burden to chide, guide leaders, and prescribe the path they should tread. Often, he strives to cut an image of the conscience of Nigeria but because he has been so involved in the politics of this country, for good and ill, it is easy to dismiss his utterances and actions as frustrations of a disgruntled old man, ruing his loss of political office and relevance.

    Being a self confessed promoter of Umar Yar’Adua-Jonathan presidency, he has a legitimate interest in seeing Jonathan get it right, not by seeking to turn him into a lapdog. It is not wrong for a mentee to declare his independence of his mentor as long as he demonstrates his mastery of the trade. In their case both come with moral garbage. The mentor comes across as the hypocritical all-knowing oracle, without the humility to admit his own failings; the mentee as the dawdling apprentice. For the sake of his presidency and future of Nigeria, President Jonathan should see beyond the strong words of Obasanjo, address the issues raised, and demonstrate his moral and political superiority to earn a second term or quietly retire to the fishing town of Otuoke.

    • Idowu is CEO, Diamond Publications.

  • Letter to EFCC

    Letter to EFCC

    The Chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC),

    This is a formal petition to your Commission against the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC), a Federal Government agency responsible for traffic and safety of roads in Nigeria. The petition is being written on behalf of the overwhelming majority of Nigerians who have been rendered voiceless by the power that be.

    It is quite unusual for a letter of this type to be an open one. But since its subject matter is an open wound which, only the truth can heal, making it an open document becomes a sine qua non especially due to the prevailing expediency. Besides, this is the only easy means of reaching your Commission without any delay or foul play. Perhaps you will recall that a unit of your Commission, (the Special Control Unit on Money Laundering) paid a courtesy visit to the Nigerian Supreme Council (NSCIA) at its headquarters in Abuja last Friday. The purpose of the visit, according to the Head of the Unit, was to sensitize the Nigerian Muslim Ummah under the umbrella of NSCIA, on the need to cooperate with the unit on matters relating to money laundering and other related offences. Whether the same sensitization campaign was extended to the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) is another matter.

    Encounter with an EFCC representative

    Yours sincerely was one of those who played host to that unit. After an elaborate explanation on corruption generally and money laundering in particular, the leader of the team called for comments, questions and observation. As a journalist, my own comment came in form of question. And the question went thus:

    1. Is the duty of EFCC only to run after government officials who have left office and are suspected of stealing public funds? If the answer is no, why is EFCC not running after the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC)? The reason for this question is this: the same FRSC which designed and introduced a new driver’s license to Nigerians a few years ago came round in 2011 to introduce another with 100% tariff and reduced the three year tenor of that license to two years. Yet, the license is said not to be available after making people to pay for it. If that is not fraud what is it? And now, basking in the euphoria of its success on license matter, the same FRSC has gone ahead to design a new number plate to replace the old one without minding the rule of contract guided its transaction between the Commission and the public. Should the EFCC fold its arms and watch idly while a government agency is ripping off the public in such an audacious manner?

    2. What informs the idea of plea bargain that you adopted as a measure of performance? Should recovery of money from a daring thief be enough as punishment for stealing public funds? Isn’t that an encouragement for further theft especially by the younger generations?

    In response to my questions, the head of the EFCC delegation that paid visit to NSCIA admitted that he had been following the debates and controversy trailing the number plate saga but, according to him, nobody had formally petitioned his Commission on the matter. He therefore advised me to write a petition to EFCC if I felt strongly about the way the number plate was being handled in the country vis a vis the populace. I therefore gladly grabbed the advice and took it for a challenge because I really felt not only strongly but also terribly bad about it.

    The matter quickly reminded me of Margaret Thatcher’s impression of Nigerians, as relayed in this column two weeks ago, which enabled the Iron Lady to dream of coming back into this world as a Nigerian ruler after her death. It is unimaginable that any such open day robbery as that of number plate would be committed in any sane country by government officials in the name of generating funds for the government and get away with it. Constitutionally, generating funds is not part of the duties of FRSC but the idea was motivated by the urge to make money using the government as alibi.

    Breach of contract

    The concern here is not about the new number plate per se but about the manner in which it is being used to extort money from gullible Nigerians. For God’s sake, how can anybody breach a contract so audaciously and claim to be acting according to law? What law permits a government agent to dupe the public by any means and insist on enforcing such fraud? Besides asking me to petition his Commission on the matter, the EFCC man neither stated categorically that EFCC would invite FRSC nor express personal opinion on the matter.

    In his answer to my second question about plea bargain, the head of the visiting EFCC unit said that plea bargain is a contemporary global norm aimed at minimizing the extent of loss on stolen money. He went ahead to justify it as a rational way of punishing a thief which he described as better than mere imprisonment that could not fetch the defrauded person or institution anything.

    The facts

    Nigeria was using a particular kind of number plates before the creation of FRSC. Soon after its creation, the new road safety corps introduced a new number plate. After a few years, the newly introduced number plate was changed but the populace was not forced to acquire the new one except for new vehicles. Now, nobody is quarreling with FRSC on the introduction of a new number plate. The bone of contention is the contract on the old one. If the FRSC decided to change the number plate again without consulting anybody, why must the populace be forced to acquire it? The only reasonable way of going about it is to replace the old number plate free of charge since there was never an agreement between the agency and the populace on it. If FRSC chooses to force people to acquire the new number plate at (an outrageous) fee what then happens to the money they had paid for the old number plate especially when that old number plate will be collected from the vehicle owner who paid for it?

    VIO’s denial

    The argument here is that the new number plate should be meant for new vehicles while the old plate should remain with the old vehicle. And that is the main gist of this petition. In my quest for the whole truth about the controversial number plate, I visited a Vehicle Inspection Office (VIO) to make inquiry and my findings were shocking. An official in that office who spoke with me on condition of anonymity said the whole exercise was about ‘chop make I chop’ (i.e. a fraud). He said everybody already knew Nigerian flag which was on the old number and queried the rational for placing Nigerian map on number plates of vehicles only to ask vehicle owners to pay exorbitantly for it. He also confirmed that the only difference between the old number plate and the new one is the transfer of the local government number to the beginning from the end an action which he described as a mere gimmick to dupe the public. He then denied any involvement of VIO in the ‘dirty’ exercise and pointed out that the gimmick was between the FRSC and the Nigerian Police saying it all had to do with money.

    Asked to name the exact amount for acquiring a new number plate, the gentle man said it is N25000. And when I pointed out to him that the FRSC announced N10000 for replacement of the old number and N15000 for a new plate he said by replacing an old number a vehicle owner must automatically replace other documents like vehicle license and vehicle insurance documents. All these plus the number plate, according to him, will cost about N25000. Now, this is the question that concerns the EFCC: If the tenor of my vehicle particulars has not expired should I be forced to change them willy-nilly?

    The fraud called driver’s licence

    As for the driver’s licence, no fraud can be more daringly committed. The FRSC introduced a new driver’s licence in 2011 without much ado. It imposed a fee on it and unilaterally reduced its tenure. These were not contested by gullible Nigerians. But now, even after paying the stipulated fee, most Nigerians cannot obtain the license for which they have paid. Instead, they are given what is called a temporary licence which lasts only two months after the expiration of which you can be questioned and fined on the road either by the same FRSC or the Police. Is this not enough as an assignment for EFCC? Is FRSC above the law and immune to investigation?

    Terrorism angle

    The case of number plate as currently being handled by the FRSC is far beyond ordinary fraud. It actually amounts to terrorism by all means which is capable of igniting a keg of gunpowder if not altered. Terrorism, as mentioned in this column last week, is not just about killing and maiming innocent people by aggrieved renegades. What is going on currently about number plate in Nigeria is nothing but terrorism the fight of which falls within the EFCC’s jurisdiction. Some respondents to this column have either called for the boycott of the controversial number plate or rolling out of all vehicles in the country and then abandon them on the roads for the bullying FRSC and its Police counterpart to tow to their stations.

    Why open letter?

    I chose to write this open letter to you as the watchdog of corruption in the country with the intention of making copies available to all Nigerians so that in the near future you will not feign ignorance of information about this type of fraud. We are all Nigerians. If this kind of treatment is given to Nigerians in Diaspora what will be your role as the nation’s watchdog on corruption? With this open letter to you, the trust reposed in you by Nigerians in respect of taming the monster called corruption is being tested. And your success or failure in this case will determine the hope or despair of the citizenry in the national assignment given to you. Through the imposed number plates and the deadline given by FRSC Nigerians are being defrauded and you are generally perceived as a major rescuer.

    Warning

    In journalism, it is no news to report that a dog bites a man. What is news is a report that a man bites a dog. To avoid the latter situation as far as the issue of number plate is concerned your Commission must step in now and stop what may soon become a keg of gunpowder. Nigerians must not be taken for granted perpetually. The nation already has enough problems to grapple with. People’s revolt must not be added. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

  • Open letter to the President

    First, let me apologize if you consider my decision to use this medium rather unusual. I really wish there were better alternative ways of reaching you directly. Sir, you are faced with enormous challenges on all fronts, just as it is needless emphasizing the fact that as the President, you take the blame for the failures of everybody in your cabinet and government, though you are not a spirit to know what they are doing or be everywhere at a time.

    No doubt, this counts among the many irreversible dilemma, which the office cannot be separated from, and which everyone occupying the office of the President all over the world understands, knowing that the office is not a tea party. Interestingly, too, it is also this particular attribute that separates the leader from the uncommon leader, someone who prepared for the challenges inherent in the office, from the one to whom presidency simply happened on, by accident.

    Little wonder everyone expects the President to have a little bit of the character of a genius – acting right and with a sense of honesty, all the time; making good decisions, drawing up and pursuing good policies and above all, taking responsibility for actions and in-actions!

    Indeed, there is no emphasizing the fact that a country is as good as its President, more so as the buck stops at the President’s desk, willy-nilly. This is why, sir, I decided to write you knowing that you have a role to play in putting a wedge on some of the shameful developments in our nation in recent times.

    In the last few months, newspapers have been abuzz with reports regarding the growing crisis of confidence among leaders of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), for which many national leaders of the party have their positions under check; resigned either voluntarily or otherwise.

    While one might say the crisis was undeserving of the media blitz it got, being an internal party issue, the development is a bold pointer to the rough road ahead for the PDP as the nation prepares for the 2015 elections. Worrisome as it is, though, it is not the main reason for writing you this morning. Instead, I want to draw your attention to the growing legion of sycophants and jobless ethnic jingoists that have become the face of your 2015 presidential ambition even when you have yet to officially declare desire to contest.

    Not only that. I am equally troubled like most Nigerians about the apparent division along ethnic and religious lines in Nigeria. While the roots of this nerve-wrecking development cannot be totally blamed on your administration, it is clear, however, to the discerning that it has risen geometrically in your tenure.

    Thirdly, I return to the PDP again. Truth is, the party has fought many battles and made needless enemies than was necessary and like a patient on life support, its leadership, including the Presidency, needs to act fast. And, like some of your kinsmen, who through unguided and inflammatory comments regarding whether or not you plan to seek re-election in 2015 have grossed some enemies for you, PDP is increasingly gaining a notorious reputation that is casting a negative perception on your person. While you have the right to seek re-election and your kinsmen, the right to get your back as their brother, it calls for caution. This is so because with the benefit of history, this method is far too familiar. It is dangerous, particularly when the re-election clamour is coming mostly from your kinsmen while other regions simply give themselves to the ‘siddon look’ approach.

    Recall that while former President Olusegun Obasanjo, primed himself for the controversial Third Term bid, the most vociferous of the opposition camps was his kinsmen, who against all odds – losing juicy contracts and board appointments – condemned the move to the point of pulling the strings when it mattered most. This cannot be said of your kinsmen for whom every decision you have made so far is in order. Mr President, this is dangerous and I urge you to sieve facts from fiction.

    While they are entitled to their opinion, I am wondering if it has ever bothered you that but for your kinsmen, no region – South-east or South-west – has shown so much passion and dedication regarding your 2015 election plans. Or, if, and when you decide to run, would the votes from the South-south region alone deliver the Presidency for you? Or, if, and when you win, would you become the President of South-south region alone? This explains why, sir, you must move quickly to stop these men with ‘creek’ mentality before they cause problems for you and disappear into thin air.

    Worse still, Mr President, I am afraid the unity of Nigeria is under clear threat. It is no longer news that the war on the Boko Haram insurgents, a war right on time though, has further divided the country along ethnic lines. Many, today, blame it all on its handling. But whether right or wrong, it cannot be disputed that Boko Haram emergence also points to the growing disunity in the land. Commendable as the drastic measures so far taken by your government to curtail their activities is, the nation having teetered on the feral zone in the northern region following their acts of terror, you must know that though the battle has been won in the field or almost won as the case maybe, it continues in the mind.

    So, no drums as yet, because those who would rather the group continued making Nigeria ungovernable for you now see the ‘war’ as the South against the north or, what a friend simply tagged: ‘President Goodluck Jonathan against the north.’ This is why I urge you to put on your thinking cap and make more friends even from every bad situation. In doing this, you would have extended a handshake of love across the north, and in return, winning over the willing among them as the 2015 elections approaches. Let no one beguile you by way of a noisy support on the pages of newspapers, for, at the risk of sounding pessimistic, the signs are pregnant with surprises. Yet they would amount to a child’s play when compared with the endless internal wrangling within the PDP leadership, the lack of internal democracy and increasing number of battles and enemies of the party. At a time when the opposition parties are mobilizing support, the PDP is neck-deep in destroying itself, ostracising real and imagined enemies of party leaders as if it were an instrument for fighting personal wars.

    Truth is, everybody in a party cannot subscribe to party decisions, because as they say, what an old man sees sitting down, a young man cannot see standing up. So, who says he’s infallible? While party leaders may have their way, it does not foreclose dissenting views. Therefore, suspending a member for whatever phantom offences it maybe, would be counter-productive at the end and can only point to dictatorship, especially where such a member was not given the right of say, to defend him or herself. Unfortunately, this seems to be common with PDP leadership from history. Without pretext, Mr President, this should stop. Let the ongoing reconciliatory overtures continue. And, let every hitherto estranged PDP member share in equal and honest treatment. Only this can put PDP ahead of very determined opposition parties in 2015.

    • Aiyenigba writes in from Ilorin

  • Open letter to Ajimobi

    Open letter to Ajimobi

    SIR: Ibadan is known to be one of the dirtiest cities in Nigeria. But since you became governor, you have been committed to erasing that ugly impression. I wish to use this avenue to laud your efforts and to also plead with you that the ongoing demolition of illegal structures should be done with leniency as many people have been rendered shopless. This has really affected many people not only the citizens of the state but also the visitors.

    We all know the state of the roads in Ibadan before you came into power. Mokola roundabout used to be very clumsy for both motorists and pedestrians but that is expected to be enhanced with the construction of the new Fly-over.

    Sir, I will like to call your attention to some unreasonable and bad attitudes of some motorists and private car owners. I learnt that it has been said that nobody should park his/her car at the junction to enable free movement of vehicles on the roads but some people are still paying deaf ear to that. Most often, cars coming out from the street of Mokola to head to the major roads often clash with motorcycles or passerby due to the way some cars are parked.

    Also, in some streets of Mokola, some shop owners have been ordered to remove the extensions they constructed in the shops not those shops near the major roads but those in the streets where vehicles seldom pass. Even though my mother’s shop is not affected, I still have to write on behalf of affected people to implore the governor to look at the situation of things and ask them to reconstruct their cubicles to avoid rain flooding their shops incessantly.

     

    • Waziri Mohammed

    Mokola, Ibadan.

     

  • A daughter’s letter to mum

    A daughter’s letter to mum

    Dear Mrs O,

    How is it going? I know you are getting as much rest as possible in the bosom of our Saviour.

    I honestly cannot believe my phone is not going to ring showing your name and I’ll pick up and you’ll say “Mama Mia!”

    I miss you so much already. However, I am comforted by the priceless values and lessons you have taught my sisters and me.

    I will always remember to make my bed once I wake up every morning. I will always walk with my back straight and head high.

    I will miss your hugs, I’ll miss sitting in your bathroom and gisting with you while you shower.

    Thank you for the wonderful memories and being the best mother any girl could ask for.

    I pray to be as amazing a woman as you!!!!

    I love you for forever and a day.

    Your daughter,

    Yeside Ajoke Olayinka.