The Nation Newspaper

Tag: manner

  • What manner of third force?

    What manner of third force?

    What manner of ‘movement’ is being launched today in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT)? Can the coalition fly? What are its prospects? Can it overtake the discredited Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and abort the dream of the crisis-ridden All Progressives Congress (APC) to retain federal power in next year’s elections?

    In the opinion of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the Muhammadu Buhari administration has failed. President Buhari, he advised, should not seek re-election next year. Also, both the APC and the PDP should not produce his successor. His reason: the two parties have outlived their usefulness.

    Obasanjo’s remedy is that only a coalition of ‘willing’ Nigerians can salvage the country in 2019. As his associates throw up the ‘Third Force,’ can the new group make a difference? Will it change geo-political calculations? Does the so-called ‘Coalition for Nigeria (CN) offer hope?

    Indisputably, Dr. Obasanjo may have done a scanty spade work before unfolding his agenda. Thus, the movement is springing up in a hurry, barely a week after he released his highly inflammable “special statement.” Unlike the PDP, which metamorphosed into a virile party from the G-34, and the APC, which came into existence after critical deliberations and agreement involving the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), and sections of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) and PDP), the CN emerged from Obasanjo’s bedroom.

    Observers believe that the new political group may be facing a gloomy future. At birth, it is jaundiced. Nigerians were taking aback by its composition. It is the same of the same. There is no line of demarcation. There is no fresh blood. It is still the old wine in a new bottle. In the final analysis, only aggrieved acolytes of the former leader are involved in the new show. Thus, public enthusiasm is waning.

    He who comes to the equity must come with clean hands. The key leaders of the CN are politicians who were associated with PDP’s 16 years of failure. These men of yesteryear shared in the blame for the impunity that had characterised governance. The spent forces, rejected party functionaries and disgruntled PDP stalwarts are seeking relevance. But, Nigerians are not assailed by collective amnesia.  Since the motivation is from Obasanjo, many credible Nigerians may distance themselves from the enterprise because of the former president’s perceived history of personal agenda and self-interest decorated in the garb of public yearning and aspiration.

    Do the arrowheads parade intimidating credentials of honour and integrity? What ideology is driving them? The proxy leader is a beneficiary of election rigging, who was kicked out by the temple of justice for vote stealing. He will be working in tandem with a vocal scholar and an expert in prevarication from the Northcentral, a former governor from the Southeast struggling to bounce back into reckoning on the false platform and another ex-governor from the Northwest, who is standing trial for corruption.

    The implication is that, although Obasanjo has used his stature to swing public opinion against the Buhari administration at a time Nigerians are protesting the mishandling of farmers/herdsmen clashes in Benue and some other states, his message may not be swallowed hook, line and sinker as no credible alternative platform is being offered to compete for power with the two main parties.

    Since the CN is made up of PDP leaders, what can they offer that the PDP has not offered? Are CN members the messiahs Nigerians are expecting? How popular are they in their states? Can Dr.Obasanjo successfully mobilise the people of his ward in Abeokuta during elections? Who will listen to the new foot soldiers? Can the coalition become a formidable party? Can it even meet the criteria for registration by the electoral commission before next year’s polls?

    If Nigerians feel that the third force may not lead them to the promised land, they may start to have a rethink. In fact, many critical minds are re-dissecting Obasanjo’s statement. Although the Benue killings left a sour taste in the mouth, the government has not completely failed the nation in the area of security. The recent killing of troublers of peace in the Southsouth, including ‘Gen.’ Don Wanny, meant that a lip service is not paid to security. Besides, Boko Haram is being pummeled.

    Also, many now realise that Obasanjo’s comment on the economy is not totally true. While it is true that Nigerians are complaining about hardship, it is not because the government is closing its eyes. Experts have pointed out that a significant leap has been recorded in the government’s bid to revatalise the economy. The nation’s foreign reserve is increasing. The forex regime is attracting investors. Electricity is becoming stable. Efforts are on to revatalise the railways. More importantly, there is prospect of food security. The Buhari administration’s achievement in agriculture cannot be ignored. Today, rice importation is becoming a thing of the past.

    Will Nigerians close their eyes to these achievements and prospects and risk their future in the hands of an inexplicable coalition teleguided by Obasanjo?

  • What manner of restructuring?

    What manner of restructuring?

    The debate on the national question may shape the 2019 general elections. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU highlights the elements of restructuring that are germane to the restoration of true federalism in Nigeria.

    Many questions abound about restructuring: how should Nigeria tackle restructuring? What is the role of the Presidency and the National Assembly in the exercise? Is comprehensive or wholesale restructuring possible? Can it be done piecemeal? Does the country require another national conference? Can restructuring be accomplished through referendum or constitution amendment by the parliament?

    Issues that fall within the scope of restructuring are as diverse as Nigeria’s diversity. Legal luminary Chief Kola Awodein (SAN) said the major elements of restructuring include true federalism, devolution of powers, revenue allocation, regionalism, state police, and resource control. Others are the secularity of the state, rotation of the Presidency, role of traditional rulers, ethnicity, inconsistencies in the 1999 Constitution, the Land Use Act, the Petroleum Act, the powers of the National Judicial Council, and the adoption of six zone structure.

    Last month, Lagos State APC expanded the scope when it drew attention to the state’s clamour for a special status. Its representative at the zonal meeting at Ibadan, Prince Abiodun Ogunleye, said the quest for a special status is a national issue because Lagos is the former federal capital, economic nerve centre and the fourth largest economy in Africa.

    Eighteen years after the restoration of civil rule, Nigeria is yet to recover fully from the unitary legacy of the military. Indeed, military rulers dismantled the federal principle. Had the politically ambitious soldiers not disrupted orderly political evolution, perhaps, the country would have been more strengthened and consolidated on its stability to build enduring institutions of democracy.

     

    Why federalism:

    At independence, the founding fathers resolved to operate a federal principle to guarantee unity in diversity. In his book, “Path to Nigeria’s Freedom”, published in 1947, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo identified federalism as the form of government that would be suitable for “the geographical expression.”

    “Experts can propound learned theories as to why people having different languages and cultural backgrounds are unable to live together under a democratic unitary constitution. But, empirical facts of history are enough to guide us. It has been shown beyond all doubt that the best constitution for such diverse peoples is a federal constitution. This is exemplified by the Constitution of Switzerland, which is acclaimed to be the best and the most democratic in the world, since it gives complete autonomy to every racial group within the framework. The amended Constitution of the USSR wherein each republic becomes autonomous is able also an instance in point,” he wrote.

    Under the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, the Federal Government legislated on the Exclusive List. Both federal and regional governments legislated on the Concurrent List. Also, the regional government legislated on the Residual List.

    Military intervention led to what the foremost legal scholar, Prof. Itsey Sagay (SAN), described as ‘federal absolutism.’ The lopsided federal/state power sharing method foisted by the military affected seven items. They are the operation of the police, census, mineral resources, labour, trade and industrial relations, registration of business names, electric power and local government funding. Also, at a lecture in Ibadan in 2008, a political scientist, Prof. Dipo Kolawole, chided the power-loaded Federal Government for transforming itself into an octopus and a bully committing all manners of injustice. The former Vice Chancellor of Ekiti State University, Ado-Ekiti said: “Nigeria is a federation of an excessively strong central government, supposedly partnered by ridiculously weak 36 states with a Federal capital Territory supported by obviously ineffective 774 local governments. All other 801 governments combined are weaker than the Central Government.”

    Frowning at the distribution of appointments, Kolawole added: “A situation where there is glaring lopsidedness in sensitive federal appointments is antithetical to true federalism. In Nigeria today, with specific reference to the centre, who dominates the Presidency, the Senate, the judiciary and the military? Is there any pretext to federal character principle?”

     

    Core issues: Defects of 1999 Constitution:

    The 1999 Constitution was produced by Justice Niki Tobi Constitution Debate Coordinating Committee (CDCC) set up by former military Head of State Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar. It had barely two months to do the assignment in a nation of 120 million people, 36 states and 774 local governments. The constitution avoided the national question. Eminent lawyer, the late Chief Rotimi Williams described it as the worst document that lied against itself. It was a military-imposed constitution, which served as the false foundation for the current political dispensation. Under the constitution, the Federl Government has hijacked the functions of states and local governments. This accounts for the strident calls for its amendment so that it can regain a “federal face.”

     

    Creation/merger of states:

    State creation has polarised the country. Some aggrieved ethnic groups want separate states, claiming they are victims of oppression in their present states. They complain that they were lumped together without with other tribes without considering cultural contiguity and the need for identity preservation. Some groups are calling for state mergers. Some sub-ethnic groups want to join their kith and kin in other states.

    State creation agitations are anchored by the elite, who thirst for an increased access to state power, resources and privileges. However, some towns, communities and villages have endorse the agitations because they want separate local governments. Historically, council creation is preceded by state creation. State creation agitation may be fuelled by the distributive practices of the Federal Government and a sense of neglect by minorities across the states. Putting this into perspective, Larry Diamond, a political scholar, said: “Ethnic minority fears and grievances centred around obtaining a fair share of the reward and resources of an expanding economy and state; contracts, loans, scholarships, processing plants, water supplies, street lights, schools, hydro-electric projects. Minority demands for separate states based on the belief, actively promoted by their leaders, that minorities were being cheated in the distribution of these resources by the majority-dominated regional governments.”

    Although there is a popular argument that state creation should not be considered because many states are not economically viable, the argument has not suppressed the clamour for more states. The agitation for state creation is being fuelled by the feeling of marginalization. For example, the Ekiti people in Kwara State who occupy two local governments have not relented in their desire to opt out of the state and re-unite with their relations in Ekiti State, or a separate state is created for them and other Yoruba people in Kogi. In fact, as far back as 1947, Awo objected to groupings that violated geographical contiguity and cultural identity. He observed that the three regions-North, West and East- were constituted without regard to ethnological factors. “The Yorubas of Ilorin, Offa and Kabba are included with the Hausas in the Northern Region…There is no justification whatsoever for this arbitrary grouping. Certainly, these minority groups are at a considerable disadvantage when they are forced to be in the midst of other peoples who differ from them in language, culture and historical background. “ he said. As Awolowo also noted, “under a true federal constitution, each group, however small, is entitled to the same treatment as any other group, however large. Opportunity must be afforded to each to evolve its own peculiar institution. Each group must be autonomous in regard to its internal affairs. Acknowledging the multiplicity of states that may emerge under a federal system, Awo said: “We need not be alarmed at the number of autonomous states, which would thus emerge.”

    The people of Ibadan and Ijebu have been calling for separate states. Ijebu’s and Remo’s claim is that it is the only province that has not been upgraded into a state in the country. In the North and Southsouth, aggrieved ethnic groups believe that state creation is the liberator from the yoke of majority ethnic groups. The East has a major complain too. They want parity, pointing out that it is the only geo-political zone that is made up of five states, unlike the West, Southsouth, Northcentral, and Northeast which have six each and the Northwest, which has seven.

    However, state creation process is tedious under the 1999 Constitution. Unlike under the military, the procedures are very difficult. Section 8(1)(C) of the 1999 Constitution makes creation of state impossible. The section states that the result of the referendum should be approved by a simple majority of the states of the federation, supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly. But, the constitution has not indicated how a simple majority of states can be determined.

     

    Derivation principle and Resource control:

    At independence, the revenue allocation was based on the principles of derivation, need and national interest. The formula was altered by the military. Then, the regions controlled their resources and remitted taxes to the Federal Government. Thus, regional growth and development were premised on proper revenue generation by competing regions. However, the Federal Government now has exclusive powers over the main sources of income, especially oil and mineral resources.

    The question is: what percentage of federal collectable resources, including crude oil, solid minerals and Value Added Tax (VAT), should be given back to their sources? Should states, regions or zones be allowed to exclusively or personally own, exploit and tap the financial benefits of natural resources in their domain and just pay taxes to the Federal Government?

    Currently, Item 39 of the Exclusive Legislative List gives the Federal Government the sole and exclusive power to legislate on mines, minerals, including oil fields, oil mining, and natural gas. The picture contrasts sharply with the provisions of the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, which described the three, later, four regions, as “self-governing regions of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    Sagay recalled that Section 140, which made provision for the sharing of the proceeds of minerals, including mineral oil, stated that “there shall be paid by the Federal Government to a region a sum equal to 50 percent of the proceeds of any royalty received by the Federation in respect of any minerals extracted in that region and any mining rents derived by the Federal Government from within the region.” Civil society groups have pointed out that, if revenue allocation by derivation had remained at 50 per cent, there would not have been crisis in the Niger Delta region because the states in the region would have had more resources to develop their areas, in view of the irreversibility of resource depletion and environmental degradation.

    Also, in the First Republic, 30 percent of federal earnings from resources went into the distributable pool (for all the regions, including the producing region), 20 per cent went to the Federal Government; 30 percent of import duties went to the distributable pool; and import duty on petrol and diesel consigned to any region was refundable to that region. . Under the 1963 Constitution, 85 per cent of mining royalties and rents went to the regions while the Federal Government took 15 per cent. Today, the Federal Government takes 100 per cent. The agreed formula was turned upside down by succeeding regimes, which reduced it, right from the period of the civil war.

    The revenue allocation formula is an issue of discord. There are puzzles: what should be the new sharing formula among federal, state and local government that will reflect their share of constitutional responsibilities? What should be the right of states in the ownership and control of mineral and natural resources on an underground?

     

    Devolution of powers:

    Many stakeholders want the Federal Government to shed weight. What items on the Exclusive Legislative List should be transferred to the Concurrent List to enable states have direct responsibility on state police, community police and prisons?

    During the 1994 Constitutional Conference, the Committee on Power Sharing observed that the inequitable distribution of power between the Federal Government and states underscored a departure from the principle of federalism. It noted that: “In a country like Nigeria, with its diverse peoples and their corresponding diverse political, cultural and economic endowments, true federalism must reflect a genuine attempt to regulate relationship among the groups, as well as a reflection of these identifiable divergences within the framework of national unity. The particular complexion which a country’s federal system takes reflects its diversities, historical experiences and the disposition of its peoples at a particular point in time and each federating unit within a true federal system should have its powers and functions demarcated and guaranteed in such a way as to strike a compromise between local particularisms and national integration. The problem of power sharing had been responsible for much of the tensions, emotions, conflicts, stresses and strains in most countries.”

    Over time, calls for devolution of more powers from the centre to the federating units have preoccupied the advocates of true federalism. One of the questions begging for answer is whether the Federal Government, the sole distributor of national revenue, should continue to exercise direct powers over the local governments. Many have also asked: what is the role of the Federal Government in agriculture? Who owns the land? What is the justification for the federal control of primary schools and local government through financial allocation?

    Rejecting the obvious seizure of concurrent and residual powers of state by the Federal Government, the late Justice Kayode Eso said: “Over-centralisation of power invariably stifles local initiative, promotes inefficiency and a sense of over-dependence on the Federal Government. The paternalistic form of federalism, which is the order of the day in Nigeria, is not sustainable, in view of the ever growing demand on the dwindling resources of the Federal Government.” His colleague, the late Justice Ayo Idigbe, agreed with the submission. He said: “The maintenance of the authority of the states over matters of purely local concern was essential to the preservation of the supremacy of the federal power in all matters entrusted to the nation by the Federal Constitution.”

    Over-centralisation of power by the Federal Government has created a culture of over-dependence on the Federal Government by the fledgling states. This has made the states to neglect the development of resources which the governments of the defunct four regions depended upon to fund their respective developmental programmes before the advent of oil.

    Another contentious issue is the Land Use Act, with its injustices. The provisions of the Act violates the customs of many communities. For many states, it has become an avenue for extracting money from citizens.

     

    State police:

    Opinion is divided on state police. Politicians, lawyers and rights activists have pointed out that a united central police organisation makes serious and effective policing difficult and almost impossible. The chain of control in the Nigerian police is too long and remote from the centre of operation, thereby weakening discipline and resulting in an ineffective law enforcement process. Reflecting on the avoidable limitations to policing, Awodein (SAN) said: “The centralisation and unification have also resulted in significant delay in the administration of criminal justice. Today, the police is overburden as it is responsible for enforcing all federal, state and local government laws and regulations. This is in addition to its responsibilities of investigating cases, prosecuting offenders, controlling traffic and doing other welfare services.”

    The opposition to state police is due to the likely abuse of the institution by governors. Many believe that state governors may use state police to intimidate and harass political opponents and perpetuate electoral fraud. However, majority of Nigerians agree that maintenance of public order and public safety in a federal country is a huge task that has made the decentralisation of security more compelling. In Nigeria, governors who are chief security officers lack control over the Commissioners of Police in their states. They rely on the distant Inspector-General in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to maintain law and order.  In countries like Australia, Canada, United States of America, and India, policing is decentralised, with functions allocated to the tiers of government.

    Adducing reason for state police, former APC Interim National Chairman Chief Bisi Akande said :”We ought to have even moved from state police to community police by recruiting policemen from the ethnic groups to be served so that they live in the community, speak the language of the people and understand their culture and environment for effective policing”.

    Local or community police formations may have sprang up in varied forms, owing to the pressing need for an alternative to the central police. Awodein pointed out that, in spite of fears expressed on the establishment of state police, there is the existence today of ethnic militias and vigilante groups performing the statutory functions of the police in terms of crime control.

    What can Nigeria learn from other developed countries? In Australian Federation, the Federal Government has no general power over crime. Public order is under the jurisdiction of states. Local policing, especially matters of domestic violence, is a matter for the states. The Federal Government can only come to the aid of the state at its invitation.

    In Canada, both the Dominion and the Provincial Governments have the power to establish their police. Only two of the 10 provinces maintain police services. The rest rely on the Dominion Police for law enforcement.

    In United States of America, there is a parallel police; a federal police for the enforcement of federal laws and state police for the enforcement of state laws. This has created a challenge of rendition of criminals, which is being curtailed by cooperation among the states through the enactment of uniform laws on the process of rendition of criminals.

     

    Federating units:

    The question is: should the Nigerian federation be based on regions or zones as units or maintain the current 36 state structure?

    Under the federal system, there is a “general government” or central government and component units that are coordinate with the central government. The former component units, the regions, were collapsed in 1966, following the military coup. Yet, there is a sort of emotional attachment to the defunct structures. Despite the collapse of the regions into states, there is the retention of loyalty to the regional arrangements that formed the federal union at independence. The clamour for regional economic integration by contiguous states sharing common identities, cultural values and aspirations is a fall out of the internalisation of regionalism without compromising the federal health of the heterogeneous entity. Thus, experts have canvassed two options, which are focal points of federalist persuasion in contemporary Nigeria. The first is the organisation of the six zones as federating units while retaining the present states as units of government within the zone. If this line of thought is accepted, there is the need to enshrine the six geo-political zones in the constitution. The logical consequence is that states within each of these six zones should be constitutionally empowered to create a zonal organisation for the management of common services, interest and promotion of economic and political cooperation. The second is that the states should remain as federating units.

    However, it appears that regionalism is now old fashioned. There are indications that while states prefer regional economic integration, they loath a return to the old political and administrative regions. Shouts of gedegbe l’Eko wa has deep meaning. Lagosians do not want to return to Ibadan. At the recent Southwest stakeholders meeting, where the APC Committee collated views, majority rejected the push for regionalism, contrary to the suggestion by the Yoruba Assembly which had held a conference on restructuring at Ibadan. They called for the preservation of the 36 state-structure.

    Second Republic Secretary to Lagos State Government Olorunfunmi Basorun observed that regionalism is outdated. “How do you now want the man in Zamfara, Sokoto, Borno to go and report now in  Kaduna? How can you now ask the people of Edo to go and report in Port-Harcourt? Or Lagos, Ogun, Osun and Ekiti to go back to Ibadan?” he queried. Besides, regionalism may aggravate the high cost of administration and governance. “The states cannot wind up. Additionally, there will be regional governments across the six regions, with a regional government, ministers or commissioners and parliament. This will drain the purse of the government,” he added.

     

    Form of government:

    The debate on the form of government has also polarised the polity into three divides. A section wants the retention of presidential system. Another divide has called for a return to parliamentary system, which was practiced in the First Republic. The third group is canvassing a middle way approach, which means that Nigeria should develop a hybrid of the systems?

    The presidential system is expensive and it permits wastage of public resources. In the view of Governor Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State, it may lead to doom. Under the system, electioneering is also expensive, unlike in a parliamentary system, where costs of administration and seeking office are comparatively lower. Many advocates of good governance have contended that a system of administration that does not provide for adequate measures to curtail executive excesses is prone to abuse and corruption. That is the dark side of presidential democracy in Nigeria. Under the current presidential system, checks and balances have been very weak, especially at the state level in Nigeria.  Also, Aregbesola pointed out that party supremacy and party discipline can only be maintained under parliamentary system because the party system appears stronger under the cabinet system.

     

    Parliamentary system is comparatively less expensive.

    The Prime Minister is the Head of Government and a member of parliament. His ministers are also legislators. He will contest election from his constituency. However, there is no separation of powers under the Westminster model. When it was practiced in the First Republic, ceremonial President Nnamidi Azikiwe and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa were usually at loggerheads. The personality clashes constituted a strain on the system.

     

    Independent candidacy:

    Should there be a constitutional provision for eligible citizens to contest elections without being members of registered political parties? The practice of independent candidacy has been popularised in British and American democracy. During the First Republic, it was also in the vogue in Nigeria. The Olubadan of Ibadanland, the late Oba Samuel Lana, was an independent member of the House of Representatives. He was appointed by Balewa as Parliamentary Secretary. In the fifties, when the late Abraham Adesanya was not given the House of Assembly ticket in Ijebu-Igbo, he ran as an independent candidate. He lost. Also, Akinola Aguda and S.O Awokoya, ran as an independent candidate, when he could not secure the re-run ticket for the House of Assembly.

    Every politics is local. A community that has confidence in the ability of an individual may become a beneficiary of independent candidacy, if the individual is edged out of the party’s nomination process.

     

    Local government autonomy:

    Should local government areas be independent of states and have direct revenue sourcing from the Federal Government as the third tier of the federation? Should they be administrative units of states?

    In Nigeria, states are at liberty to create and dissolve local governments, but the National Assembly reserves the right to list the newly created councils in the constitution. This, according to analysts, is an aberration in federalism. Many were taken aback when President Olusegun Obasanjo stopped allocations due to local councils in Lagos State for three years. The move crippled effective grassroots administration; local councils being the closest level of government to the people.

    The push for autonomy of local government has polarised the polity. But, there are questions begging for answers: are councils not administrative units of the state at the grassroots? Is council a third tier in Nigeria? What remains of the state when the local governments are taken away? If the Houses of Assembly are empowered to create the councils, what is the basis for the agitation for autonomy? But, are the governors giving the local governments a fair treatment?

    It is expected that states should also allocate funds to the local governments, apart from the funds accruable to them from the national treasury. Remarkably, during the Second Republic, former Governor Lateef Jakande of Lagos sustained the fiscal practice of allocating 10 percent of the state revenue to the 23 local governments in the state. The governor released the allocation, following proofs of genuine people-oriented programmes by the local government chairmen and his councillors. But, today, the Joint State and Local Government Account (JAC) is monopolised by many states, without consideration for the councils.

    Awodein pointed out that some state governments have continued to subject the local government to great manipulations, including suspending their chairmen at will and threatening to dissolve the councils. Under federalism, the development of the local government falls within the purview of the states. But, there must be adequate constitutional provisions and safeguards to ensure a smooth operation of the system.

    It is also wrong for the Federal Government to deny recognition to councils legally created by the House of Assembly by insisting on their listing in the constitution. This provision should be deleted. It is an abnormality in a federal system. But, complete autonomy for councils may be impracticable because of lack of institutional capacities at the council level. Most local government engineers are mere technicians. In many councils, accountants and treasures lack professional status. The pervading view among anti-autonomy crusaders is that political, administrative and financial autonomy for councils will aggravate corruption in the local governments.

     

    Power sharing and rotation:

    Should Nigeria have a policy of rotation of key elected positions on regional or zonal basis for national offices and by senatorial districts for state offices?

    If this is adopted, what will be the place of merit, competence and credibility? Should these virtues be sacrificed on the altar of zoning?

    The presidency has not been a symbol of national unity. Nigerians still perceive the number one citizen through ethnic lenses as “Hausa/Fulani” president, “Yoruba president,” and “Ijaw or Southsouth.” president.

    To foster a sense of belonging, the 1994/95 National Conference recommended power rotation between the North and South. But, the zoning principle has not become a way of life in the states and districts. For example, since 1999, some minority groups have not been able to produce governor due to the disadvantage of number.

     

    Type of legislature:

    Does Nigeria need a bi-cameral or uni-cameral, part-time or full-time parliament?

    In the First Republics, legislators served as part-time members of the parliament. They held on to their professions while serving as in the legislature.They were also not collecting bogus salaries.

     

    Status of Lagos

    Lagos is the former federal capital. It played the role between 1914 and 1990. It is still the commercial capital, and headquarter of many multi-national companies. There is a daily influx of people from across the federation, thereby making congestion a major challenge. There is a monumental pressure on the social infrastructure. Lagos is host to the major port. The highest VAT is generated from Lagos. Therefore, Lagos deserves a special status within the federation.

  • What manner of LG autonomy?

    A Newly elected Lagos State local government and local council development area chairmen have since resumed work following the administration of their oaths of office on Tuesday July 25. The event which took place at the Lagos Secretariat in Alausa was sequel to the local council polls that held the Saturday before. The local government elections in Lagos followed the nationwide trend of low turnout as residents in the commercial nerve centre of the nation used the day as an opportunity to rest instead of exercising their franchise. Had vehicular movement been allowed, the come out would most likely, have been poorer.

    Certain factors have continuously affected this democratically unhealthy practice. One of such factors is that the voter tends to hold his elected executive in far away State House more accountable than the chairman next door. Another explanation for the apathy for local council polls is the perceived predictability of the process. Take the latest Lagos exercise for example (which is relatively the same in other states of the federation), of the 20 local government and 37 local council development areas’ chairmanship seats for grabs, the ruling All Progressive Congress went victorious in all 57. So at the end of the day, the local council polls is seen more like a rigged referendum in favour of a sitting governor than a fair competitive exercise to pick a chairman. Take the optics of it for a moment: is it not an oddity that a strong political party would win more than a third of the votes in the general elections across a state but can’t win a councillorship seat in a ward within its political stronghold?

    Some have suggested that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) be given the mandate to conduct the grassroots elections instead of the States Independent Electoral Commission. I think this constitutional proposal negates the principle of true federalism that we want for our nation. Also the INEC-conducted local council area elections of the Federal Capital Territory over time have followed the low-voter-turnout and ruling-party-victory patterns observed by elections conducted by SIECs. In other words, it is beyond who conducts the election. Just as INEC was knocked in the past for its impartiality but is becoming more credible, the SIECs should also be given some time to be built up as strong independent institutions.

    Recently, both chambers of the National Assembly voted for local government autonomy in its constitutional amendment exercise. This autonomy is what the National Union of Local Government Employees has eternally canvassed for. This move has received a measure of acceptance from the larger polity but I think before the state Houses of Assembly pass it, we should have a rethink.

    Sovereign local governments may give us a dubious federal structure where states governments become weaker. We already have governors passing the buck of infrastructure to the centre calling some roads federal roads. Autonomous local governments will now make them lazier as they would hands off primary healthcare and education. That aside, states are today insolvent depending on foreign grants to pay salaries and pensions, is it local governments that have been unable to handle floods that we expect to pay salaries?

    Instead making this tier of government autonomous, we should make them administrative departments, not political entities.  What this implies is that instead of having to continuously cast meaningless votes that produce stereotypical results for handicapped executives, the governors appoint senior civil servants to manage all the government agencies in the local council. These council managers will serve as intermediaries between the local community and government.

     

    • Ayodele Okunfolami

    Festac, Lagos

  • Nigeria: What manner of a Senate (2)

     Saraki has gone this far in public life because the Nigerian political space is a product of continuous manipulation. 

    “Nuhu Ribadu was removed over Saraki Societe Generalle issue,  Lamorde was removed for investigating Saraki’s wife; Magu is not being confirmed because, he is probing Paris Club funds diversification involving Saraki.
    With profound respect, Section I7I of our laws takes precedence over Section 2.2, so the president needed not have sent Magu’s name, to the senate, in the first place.’ –Femi Falana SAN.

    When last week I wrote the first part of this article, there were two things I did not foresee, namely: I did not envisage I would so soon be writing this final part nor that I was dealing with a serious issue of character flaw in the leadership of that very important institution of state. Even though I did not fail to compare the literal bedlam in the senate with what now essentially operates in the lower house which I said had become more like a church  and where the citizenry can now observe a much more serious and focused  concern with state affairs, a deeper reflection, as well as others’ views on the senate, which has increasingly turned itself  to nothing more than a labour union, given its increasingly adversarial approach to  everything from the executive, have combined to give me fresh vistas. Why, for instance, have serial allegations of illicit behaviour, running over several years, and in different positions, both in the family business and in public service, cleave to Senator Bukola Saraki, like bee to honey? Why, rather than show remorse, does he continually hide under the woolly saying that an accused is innocent until proven guilty which, in fact, is not the case in some jurisdiction? Is he the only politician in Nigeria? Is he so beyond shame he can’t say enough? Why are otherwise respected senators tagging alongside Saraki? I am sure it has nothing to do with the senate itself, whose integrity, in case they don’t know it, suffers a diminution with every new allegation levelled against its highest ranking member. Or is it voodoo; some collective amnesia?

    The comparison between the house and the senate becomes particularly germane when you reference what is currently happening in the legislative arm of government in the United States of America. It is not without justification that the Senate is always treated with utmost respect as the house of wisdom in any nation practicing democracy. Usually, because of the average age and worldview of members of the lower house, and its much higher number, people are willing to tolerate a measure of  youthful exuberance totally unacceptable in the senate. Therefore, while one is not surprised at the shambolic manner the House Intelligence Committee is handling the ongoing investigation into the issue of Russian interference in last year’s U.S Presidential election, the counterpart committee in the senate has demonstrated not only impeccable seriousness, but an absolutely responsible approach to its own investigation. Where the House Intelligence Committee Chairman has been hobnobbing with the White House, reporting his findings to the President about whose associates the investigation is all about, the senate committee has shown sincere bipartisanship and has since become the trusted reference point for information on the matter.

    That, I believe, should be the natural order of  things but certainly not in the Nigerian senate where the president and his muscle man have become the star attraction either furiously doubling down on whoever catches their fancy or unerringly attracting opprobrium to the otherwise sacred chamber by their actions. Witness, for instance, the fraudulent housing deals allegedly perpetrated through the FCT. One is  beginning to see another member, a senator Nwaobishi, who must have envied  Melaye’s unrestrained aggressiveness for a long time the way he now must be the one to lead in denigrating any citizen or national institution, who they believe have crossed their way. The other day we saw him rail uncontrollably against Professor Itse Sagay, an accomplished citizen whose student he would have been mighty proud to be. I think braggadocio has become their way of covering up their misdemeanours and Nigerians may not have too long to wait to hear about this senator.

    And talking about character flaw, it cannot be more gratifying that it is from Kwara State, where the following came from: Wrote the Vanguard Activists for the development of Kwara State, (slightly edited):

    ”Is Nigerian Senate now Saraki’s Senate?

    1. Lamorde attempted to arraign Saraki’s wife and he was promptly summoned to appear before the Senate.
    2. Saraki was arraigned before CCB and swiftly, the Chairman was summoned, followed by serious attempts to change the laws governing CCB. To demonstrate their love, the entire senate was emptied, with literally all members lining, shamelessly, behind him to court.
    3. The AGF initiated his arraign-ment on forgery charges and he was summoned to appear before the ever available Senate.  Magu’s case is too recent t delay us.
    4. Col Hamid Ali, the Comptroller – General of Customs crossed his path and we know the rest.
    5. The SGF said constituency projects are not for legislative contractors and the heavens must fall.

    The relevant questions are (1)

    Is the Nigerian Senate now Saraki’s Senate? (2)Is Saraki acting on behalf of Nigerians or on his own behalf?

    (3)Must Saraki continue to hold Nigeria to ransom as he does Kwara?”

    Praise be to God Nigerians saw the senate perform under other presidents so we are really not asking Saraki to invent the wheel. What we are seeing daily in this senate is more like a legislative disaster.  lf Saraki  still has  these senators swooning behind him before he  named  members to  senate committees , with what exactly is he now tying them to his  own apron strings? For answers, I think Nigerians  should  set  their sights on  money; billions and billions of  unapproved earnings – that is by RMAC –  coming to them in form of  allowances, oversight manipulations, constituency funds  and  many  others Nigerians  would  never get to know.

    But I ask, for how long shall we play the captured by a people we claim to have elected?

    I can only fittingly conclude this  article  with  a bit of  this slightly edited,  perspicacious  piece  on the  senate  and the executive brouhaha which  Wale Adeoye, a multiple award winning journalist, shared with us on the Ekitipanupo web portal  this past week.

    He wrote:

    “Both the Senate and the Executive have their   faults which we can only ignore to our own peril. While Nigerians elected the President, only a minuscule part of Kwara State elected Bukola Saraki with probably less than 200,000 votes. The current Senate has not demonstrated any higher moral ground to command public respect.  Can’t you see that most of the time the Senate is only half filled?  The Senate President has cases of corruption against him. Nigerians know his personal history and his records from the era of the  Societe –Generalle  Bank, part of which Ibrahim  Magu is still, allegedly, being haunted for.  Saraki has gone this far in public life because the Nigerian political space is a product of continuous manipulation.  Why should individuals seek to cover their iniquities under the guise of building strong institutions? Building a strong society is far more important than building a strong Senate. The Senate is not interested in building a strong society, otherwise, it should have been discussing things like   restructuring Nigeria. These senators are only interested in discussing their individual comfort. What the Senate is doing is even more grievous, because it is on a mission to destroy the entire democratic institution, not build it. The Senate is a house built on vendetta and vengeance. The Executive is not faultless. For instance, the DSS should have submitted its report before Magu’s appointment. If there are strong institutions, Saraki should have been disqualified from contesting the senatorial election given the many allegations standing against him.  It is also a question of failure of party discipline that Saraki was allowed to emerge Senate President. And remained unpunished by the party.”

    Nigerians should not be surprised to see Senate President Bukola Saraki contest the 2019 Presidential election on the platform of the PDP. For that purpose, I suspect that everything is being done to completely weaken the APC ahead of that election.

    Therefore, APC had better beware.

     

     

  • Nigeria: What manner of a Senate?

    Nigeria: What manner of a Senate?

    With their N36M monthly salary, have they ever asked themselves what the president earns per month? 

    “If you want to be a true Nigerian, tell the present government where they are going wrong. Power is transient. The only thing that is permanent is what you do for the people when you were alive. If  you are a President or  Minister  (even a Senate President), it does not matter how much you have; you will be remembered  only for service, not the amount of money you have which you cannot even announce” – Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi11.

    For some time now, this column’s concern with Nigeria’s ballooning corruption has ensured that I couldn’t get published here the very timely views of Mr George Umeh on the parlous state of manufacturing in Nigeria. In a mail to the columnist, the concerned citizen wrote as follows in reaction to one of my articles on our literally incurable corruption:

    “Nigerians are to blame. We have a lot of resources and the markets (the demand) but we do not want to manufacture many of the goods we consume. Otherwise how do you explain a nation using 90% to 95% of its income to import 90% to 95% of products it uses? There will be nothing left. Above all, it leaves us with huge economic and social problems – unemployment, crime, prostitution, etc. It has also led to our once cherished social values like honesty giving way to corruption and nepotism as public servants want to avoid economic insecurity. Japan and Italy, for example, have had over 60 prime ministers since World War 11 but their economies are stable owing to manufacturing. Manufacturing creates jobs, reduces imports and makes currencies valuable. It is one stage of development Nigeria wants to avoid thus creating problems for us. Lagos as an industrial centre is too small for a large country like ours. We need three to five ‘Lagoses’ in Nigeria. I have sent a 7-page letter to President Buhari on the only way out in which I told him clearly that he was unlikely to solve the economic problem even in eight years, and why”. As comments on the above, it is hoped that the Central Bank, giddy with our rising foreign reserve, will be patriot, and responsible  enough to ensure that  forex allocations go to only serious manufacturers  and  not to pseudo ones only interested in round tripping.

    May your tribe increase, Mr Umeh.

    For reasons that are very obvious and negative, I found myself unduly involved with matters pertaining to the Nigerian Red Chamber this past week. The immediate leitmotif though, was the withering comments on the Facebook wall of my dear brother, Kayode Samuel. Forever keen on lampooning the APC, he had tried to present the Senate,this same senate in glowing colours, sentiments, which he, being a very perspicacious Nigerian, I know were only skin deep in view of the totally reprehensible things coming out of that chamber.

    Even where the uninitiated would have thought that they  mean well, as in the cases of both the Secretary to the Federal Government and that of the Comptroller-General of Customs, largely because it is not in our senators’ habit to be people friendly, they still managed to shoot themselves on the arm. Take, for instance, the case of the SGF: what rational person would argue that the man does not have questions to answer, not only as to why allegedly unexecuted contracts were awarded to a company he established, not minding the usual phony resignations from the company which such compromised persons claim (even Obasanjo once claimed a blind trust), but also the fact that the awardees were reportedly fake, and untraceable, for contracts running into over a billion naira. This discovery should have drawn commendations to the senate had they afforded Mr Babachir Lawal fair hearing. Even with that lacuna, they still proceeded to recommend his sack by the President. If the senate truly wanted to be respected by the Presidency, they should have remembered that despite all the pressures mounted by the 7th Assembly on President Jonathan, he did not remove Ms  Arunma Oteh who, in any  case, they did not appoint for him. The same thing is now playing out in the CGS case even where they know the man does not have to wear a uniform to be able to explain the rationale for his misplaced policy of wanting to punish vehicle users whereas he should have simply surcharged his officers, retired or still in office, who took bribes in lieu of appropriate custom duties. At least, as INEC and NNPC have indicated they would do, their terminal benefits and pensions could have been converted to that purpose. Again,where they would have received accolades, their desire for vendetta completely smothered that as they were keener on punishing the officer for seizing the senate President’s alleged N300M jeep cleared with fake documents.

    Now, in which depressed country of the world will any serious senate, or its President, be importing a N300m bulletproof Range Rover Sports Utility Vehicle (SUV) even as manufacturers are paying through their noses to get the forex they need for raw materials? Do these people think at all or do they consider themselves more important than every other Nigerian? Since they claimed to have paid, read as bribe, the electorate for their electoral victory, apparently they no longer bother about the fact that many Nigerians do not know where their next meal would come from. With their N36M monthly salary, have they ever asked themselves what the president earns per month? And must we Nigerians continue to watch these people lacerate us every which way like we are bewitched? Are we such zombies?

    This takes me to those Face book comments I referred to earlier.  Kayode Samuel had jabbed the APC claiming that the much criticised senate is a product of the party. While I agreed with him, I had gone further, to say that  the crises in the senate is a result of  both the selfishness and shortsightedness of  both the CPC and the A C N which failed to allocate the Senate Presidency to the N-PDP after they had  each taken the Presidency and Vice –Presidency, respectively. After all, APC owed its victory in the entire North-Central to the N-PDP, adding, however, that as things stand today, Bukola Saraki has taken party disloyalty to a new low.  My final contribution to that topic was that had the framers  of the  Nigerian  constitution anticipated we could ever have a senate like this one, there’s no way they would have assigned to it the heavy and sacred duties allotted to it. Or what with the barrage of allegations, some criminal, daily being made against its members while a least one is in court? In comparison the House of Representatives now looks like a church.

    Allegations of the Senate President importing a vehicle with fake papers had barely broken when Melaye, its most outstanding member, was alleged  to have not graduated from the Ahmadu Bello University. While he has gone to court to redeem his integrity, a fresh scandal has erupted, this time against its President, Deputy, and their House counterparts. In  a petition to the EFCC, the same one they want to behead,  the highly regarded civil Society Network Against Corruption (CSNAC) is asking the EFCC to prosecute the named officers  for alleged fraudulent practices. Signed by its National Chairman, Olarewaju  Suraju,  they are alleged to have converted their private residential properties to official residences so they could collect rent. These officers are believed to have collectively defrauded the country to the tune of N630,25,499.90. According to the petitioners, the men, using some fictitious agents as decoy, “approached  the Federal Capital Development Agency to provide them with residential accommodation, having made arrangement with the agent  who claimed to be the landlord for the purpose of the transaction, purportedly renting to the Federal Capital Development Authority a five bedroom detached duplex for the use of one of the principal officers of the National Assembly at the rate of an annual rent of N50 million, the FCDA having paid for two years in advance. This fraudulent tactic was used for each of them with a common feature of  the transactions being that they were all approved within 48 hours, followed with immediate disbursement of funds, having presented companies that doubled as estate agents and property owners for the exercise”, they wrote.

    Considering all these, and those not yet in the public space, four questions readily come to mind: one, are our legislators beyond shame? Two, must these shenanigans go on unchecked? Three, is President Buhari’s government weaker than the other governments we have had since 1999? And finally, have we, Nigerians, been bewitched into complete inaction or irrelevance?

  • Fayose: What manner of immunity?

    SIR: If Nigeria must survive as a sovereign entity governed by internationally acceptable best practices, Nigerians from all walks of life must agree to certain irreducible minimum on the issue of governance.

    There comes a time in a trajectory of a nation when its citizens must discountenance cleavages of primordial propensities and sectional irredentism and seek a patriotic middle ground. With the humongous amount allegedly traced to the account of Ekiti State governor, AyodeleFayose, one is nonplussed that some Nigerians could still belly ache on the clause of immunity to frustrate the investigation efforts of the anti-graft agency.

    In other climes, this type of heinous discovery is enough to provoke legislative activism and civil disobedience seeking the removal of any impediment to the investigation of the officials particularly the right of police or any investigating agency to freeze their accounts without violating prosecutorial immunity. If governors are constitutionally protected from prosecution, are they also insulated from investigation? Does the constitution interminably absolve them of any wrong doing irrespective of the right of the injured party which are citizens over which they exercise a term of office? Wouldn’t the rights of injured citizens be violated when investigation is delayed till the end of the term of the suspect governor? And wouldn’t it be logical to infer that any account under investigation be subject to some sort of restrictions?

    The civil society, the organized labour, students union and all lovers of propriety should rise in support of the federal government in the last ditch attempt to wean Nigeria from the cliff-hanger of governors  and other assailants using immunity to obstruct the development of Nigeria.

    For political rouble-rousers, I think the federal government has chosen to use Fayose as an archetype in sending a message to all the governors that immunity against prosecution is not the same as immunity against investigation. Whilst this remains another veritable money spinning prospect for permissive lawyers across the spectrum, it ought to represent a sad commentary in the annals of our nationhood and should generate sober reflection from counsels who cannot see beyond immediate gratification to contemplate a country envisioned for the next generation.

    President Buhari has chosen a path which may not politically correct as he has demonstrated patriotism on a bipartisan cadence not minding how governors in his party would be affected.

     

    • BukolaAjisola,

    Victoria Island, Lagos.

  • What manner of local govt election?

    What manner of local govt election?

    The recent local government election in Ekiti State was marred by poor turnout of voters.  In this report, Odunayo Ogunmola examines the controversy surounding the election and factors responsible for the voter apathy.

    The people of Ekiti State were aloof during the recent local government elections. They shunned the polling booths across the 16 councils.

    Few days to the December 19 date, there was nothing on ground to show that an election was about to be conducted. There was no serious campaign by the parties.

    The five parties on the ballot are: the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the United Progressives Party (UPP), the Kowa Party, the African Peoples Alliance (APA) and the Peoples Party of Nigeria (PPA).

    Fayose went on air few days before the poll to appeal to the people of the state to come out and perform their civic responsibility of choosing their leaders at the grassroots level.

    A major hurdle standing between the conduct of the poll was a suit filed by the main opposition party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), challenging the composition of the Ekiti State Independent Electoral Commission (EKSIEC).

    The APC in the suit alleged that EKSIEC members are card-carrying  members of the PDP and associates of Fayose who could not be relied upon to conduct and deliver an election that is transparent, credible, free and fair.

    The suit created anxiety in some quarters as the judgment was delivered on the Monday preceding the election. Justice Bamidele Omotoso dismissed the case for lacking merit holding that the plaintiffs failed to adduce evidence to prove that the state electoral agency are PDP members and Fayose’s associates.

    Save the restriction of vehicular movement leading to streets bare of traffic, commercial and social activities, there was no life at majority of the 2,195 polling units across the state as eligible voters stayed away.

    The poll recorded an unprecedented low turnout of voters in virtually all parts of the state as majority of the eligible electorate chose to stay at home while others went to their farms. Some other residents were seen drinking at beer joints.

    Only the electoral officials, security officers and agents of the ruling PDP were present at all the polling units opened for voting at the election. The presence of only PDP agents at the election was contrary to the claim of EKSIEC that five parties are participating in the election.

    Apart from the state capital Ikere, Ikole, Otun, Ido, Ifaki, Omuo, Ise, Igede, Aramoko, Okemesi, Ayetoro, Iworoko, Iyin, Efon and Ilawe, voter apathy was apparent.

    Some presiding officers confirmed the low turnout of the electorate at their units with the polling officials and security agents idle.

    The directive of EKSIEC that voting should commence at 1.00 pm after accreditation, expected to have taken place between 8.00 am and 12 noon was violated in many polling stations in the state capital where voting had commenced as early as 10.00 am.

    In Ado  Ward 9, Unit 008 opposite Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital (EKSUTH), only 20 voters have been accredited out of 1,450 voters registered at the unit at about 11.30 pm.

    At Unit 006, Ajitadidun Ward 9 in Ado, only 16 voters have been accredited and voted  out of 1,471 whose names appear on the register as at 11.41 am while 18 voters out 1,046 have been accredited and cast their votes as at 11.49 am.

    At Unit 016 Ward 5 in Okeyinmi area in Ado, only 11 voters have accredited and voted out of 626 registered voters as at 11.17 am.

    At Unit 007, Ward 4 in Ijigbo area of Ado, 105 persons have voted out of 581 accredited with the presiding officer, while in Unit 17 Ward 10 in Basiri, only 18 persons had voted out of 1, 046 accredited voters.

    In Ikere, the second largest town in the state, virtually all polling stations were boycotted by voters

    At  Agbado/Oyo Ward, Unit 003, only 35 were accredited out of 426 registered voters as at 10.10 am , while a total of 32 were accredited at unit 004 out of 405 in the same ward.

    The same situation was witnessed at  Oke Iruku Ward  , unit 005,54 out of over 500 were accredited as  at 10.30am.

    EKSIEC Chairman, retired Justice Kayode Bamisile, absolved his agency from blame over early voting recorded in many parts of Ado and absence of agents of the four other political parties cleared to participate at the poll.

    Speaking on the poor turnout, Bamisile said: “It is very easy to take the horse to the river but you cannot force the horse to drink water”.

    Bamisile explained that EKSIEC had written to the affected parties to forward their list of agents saying such agents are expected to be on the field to represent their parties.

    Governor Ayo Fayose described the council poll as free, fair and credible contending that the turnout was ‘impressive.’

    Speaking through his Chief Press Secretary, Idowu Adelusi, Fayose also commended voters for turning out to cast their votes.

    He said: “The information we are getting have been impressive. The turnout was impressive. In some places, the turnout  were very impressive , while people came out late in some areas. But  the turnout has been impressive.

    “I have been contacting those on the field what we are getting were quite impressive and I commend our people for that”.

    In a statement issued later in the day, Fayose, said the conduct of the local government election by his administration is a promise kept.

    He said he was glad that he was the first governor in the South-West geo-political zone to conduct local government election in the last few years.

    The governor, who described the use of caretaker committees to run local government as an aberration, said the hallmark of a genuine democrat was allowing people to express their choice on who governs them.

    “It is an electoral promise by my administration and we have fulfilled the promise. Today, we stand out as the state that has conducted local government election. We did not expect the unpopular APC to take part in the election.

    “It is important that we do not usurp the rights of our people. Despite APC’s plan to use court to stop the election, the people came out to vote.

    The APC people are afraid because they did not want to suffer huge electoral loss again. We won all seats in the general elections and we are winning all the 16 chairmanship and the 177 councillorship seats. The APC are not on ground and they have failed woefully in the state,” he said.

    The governor added that to assist as many people as possible, the incoming councillors would use N20,000 out of their monthly salaries to empower two persons in their wards.

    The APC in its reaction hailed voters for boycotting the local government poll saying “ the people behaved honourably for staying away from the election boycotted by all political parties except the PDP”.

    In a statement by Publicity Secretary, Taiwo Olatunbosun, the party said the widespread apathy observed across the state was evidence that Ekiti people had rejected Governor Ayo Fayose and his PDP.

    The party described the exercise as a mockery of democratic election, saying an election with a single party participating while also raising PDP members to pose as candidates of obscure parties would never pass the test of representative poll.

    The party added that across the state, Ekiti people spoke with one voice by staying in their homes and watched from distance as PDP members engaged in multiple thumb-printing to give the impression that there was massive turn-out of voters.

    “To cover their shame in most of the empty polling units, PDP members and Fayose’s political appointees engaged in multiple thumb-printing to give a false impression of a large turn-out of voters,” he explained.

    Berating Fayose for holding the election despite pendency of the election case at the Court of Appeal, the party also accused the governor of wasting N300 million of taxpayers’ money on an election that would not stand the test of legality.

    He said: “Fayose is playing games with Ekiti people by voting N300m of the state’s money to his party for his kangaroo election.

    “We know that the money allocated for the exercise is more important to Fayose than the actual election because we know that more than half of the N300m will end up in private pocket.

    “But we, are sure that just as PDP leaders at the national level are now accounting for the money they spent on President Goodluck Jonathan’s election, Fayose will also account for the N300 million taxpayers’ money he has just wasted for this illegal election.”

    The party also frowned at the governor’s directive asking political appointees to be deployed as election observers as announced on state radio and television, saying the council election was a “contest between PDP and PDP”.

    “The council election was a PDP affair with PDP contesting against itself. It is purely a contest between PDP and PDP.

    “We sympathise with his so-called candidates who just wasted their time and money to participate in an illegal election that cannot stand the test of constitutionality and integrity.

    “Just like what is happening to the states controlled by PDP over the last general elections, Fayose will have his days in courts where he will pay for all his constitutional infractions and financial misappropriation over illegal council poll,” Olatunbosun concluded.

    The governorship candidate of the Accord Party in the last governorship poll, Kole Ajayi, has condemned the weekend local government election.

    He said the poll was fraudulently organised by Fayose, who understood that the exercise was patently illegal, but still went ahead to conduct the poll after allegedly voting N300m, half of which would be misapplied for selfish reasons.

    Ajayi also cautioned the governor over imposition of frivolous levies on poor market women already burdened by current economic woes that made it difficult to take care of their families.

    The former governorship candidate listed tipper contractors, butchers and petty traders as the alleged victims of Fayose’s obnoxious tax policy.

    Accusing the governor of imposing hardship on the common people in the name of revenue generation, the legal practitioner said “taxes are normal, but that it is always done with human face”.

    He frowned at the desperate ways the governor is employing in raising revenue and called for caution “because the downtrodden masses are being unduly levied in an unprecedented manner in the history of Ekiti State with its attendant pains”.

    He also faulted the re-introduction of school fees and WEAC fees, stating that all these were direct war against the masses already decimated economically “hence, they are helplessly and quietly crying for help”.

    EKSIEC has declared the PDP winner of all the 16 chairmanship and 177 councillorship seats in the local government election held on Saturday.

    EKSIEC chief Bamisile, who spoke after the results were declared said the polls were credible, transparent, free and fair.

    He urged parties dissatisfied with the result of the election to ventilate their grievances at the Local Government Election Tribunal to be constituted in due course.

    “There was no case of ballot snatching, violent conduct or hooliganism during the election,” he said.

    The state secretary of EKSIEC, Mrs. Bolanle Awe, commended all stakeholders that worked together to ensure the success of the election.

    The results declared by Bamisile areas follows: Ilejemeje LG:  APA 53, KP 103, PDP 6993, PPN 59, UPP 29. EFON LG:  APA 124 , KP 156, PDP 9661, PPN 151, UPP 60. Ise/OrunLG:  APA 40, KP 156, PDP 9661, PPN 151, UPP 60. Emure LG: PDP 14,853, Other political parties, NIL.

    Others are Ado LG:  APA 440, KP 456, PDP 47,120, PPN 590, UPP 299. IKERE LG:  APA 167, KP 226, PDP 19,750, PPN 191, UPP 83. Gbonyin LG:  APA  248, KP 253, PPN 154, PDP 22,456. Ekiti East LG:  APA 151, PDP 17,373, PPN 134 (no candidate), UPP 72. Ikole LG: APA 218, KP 219, PDP 207, UPN 175. Ekiti West LG: APA 855, KP 191, PDP 17,815, PPN 163, UPN 79.

    The rest are Moba LG: APA 187, KP 133, PDP 11,247, PPN 96, UPP 65.  Ijero LG: APA 247, KP 281, PDP 22,612, PPN 287, UPP 152. Oye LG: APA 128, KP 174, PDP 18,899, PPN 129, UPP 170. IDI/OSI LG: APA 94, KP 158, PDP 14,856, PPN 98, UPP 53. Irepodun/Ifelodun LG: APA 416, KP 477, PDP 32,298, PPN 397, UPP 259.

    The Conference of Nigeria Political Parties (CNPP) in Ekiti State attributed the low turnout to the alleged partisanship and shoddy preparations by EKSIEC.

    The CNPP, in a statement by its Chairman, Tunji Ogunlola, said the state electoral agency failed to carry other parties along but was only dealing with the ruling PDP.

    He said the refusal of the majority of the electorate to stay away from polling booths at the council poll was an indication that the people of the state lacks confidence in the ability of SIEC to organize a credible, free and fair poll.

    Ogunlola said: SIEC displayed crass dishonesty in the preparations for the election. It had earlier made a public declaration that only PDP signified and certified to be the sole party for the election later changed that public statement that other political parties were participating.

    “We marvel at this inconsistent and dishonest conduct by SIEC, which first declared PDP as the only party contesting the election only to later clone other four parties to make it five to give a semblance of credibility to a clear charade and fraud on the people of Ekiti State,” he said.

    “It is not by coincidence that many polling units recorded zero vote as at 1pm. Even though it is only PDP members that participated, they still did not come out to vote for their candidates, a situation that confirms that ruling PDP has alienated many of its  own party members who daily complain of neglect.”

    The Senator representing Ekiti North  District, Duro Faseyi, said the election was conducted in line with the best practices of electoral standard.

    Addressing a briefing in his hometown, Iludun Ekiti in Ilejemeje Local Government Area barely 24 hours after the polls, Faseyi praised Fayose for exhibiting the courage to conduct the council poll for the first time in seven years in the state.

    The Senator said: “But whichever way you view the conduct of the polls, Fayose deserves accolade. This will serve as a challenge to other governors who have been operating caretaker arrangement for like eight years”.

    He reasoned that the conduct of the council poll and emergence of new chairmen and councillors would guarantee a level of independence for the third-tier of government in the state.

    Faseyi, who is also the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Air Force, urged other governors who have not conducted council election in their states to emulate Fayose and allow democracy to flourish in the grassroots a d bring governance nearer to the people.

    He criticised the main opposition party, the APC for boycotting the election saying the party was afraid of a repeat of defeats suffered since the 2014 governorship poll.

    The new council chairmen were sworn in on Monday by Fayose who charged them to make the welfare of the people their priority and look for alternative ways to generate revenue.

    Speaking on behalf of her colleagues, the Chairman of Gbonyin Local Government, Mrs Folashade Akinrinmola, thanked the governor, party leaders and people of the state for the opportunity given them to serve.

    Other new chairmen are: Kazeem Ogunsakin (Ado), Bolaji Jeje (Efon), Adekunle Adeniyi (Ekiti East), Olanrewaju Omolase (Ekiti Southwest), Omotunde Kolawole (Ekiti West), Taiwo Oguntuase (Emure), Ayodele Arogbodo (Ido/Osi), Abiodun Dada (Ijero), Ola Alonge (Ikere), Yemi Adeyanju (Ikole), Oladapo Olagunju (Irepodun/Ifelodun), Olumide Falade (Ise/Orun), Adeniyi Adebayo (Moba) and Omotayo Ogundare (Oye).

    With the way it turned out to be, the December 19 council election has thrown up questions begging for answers.

    Was EKSIEC prepared for the election? Was the electoral body well mobilized with funds and needed logistics? How much was EKSIEC given and how much was spent? Did the electoral body carry all parties along? Did it carry out the needed public enlightenment and voter education? Are the figures declared by EKSIEC in consonance with the poor turnout of voters?

    Have the electorate reaped dividends of democracy from the Fayose administration since it came to power on October 16, 2014? Did it meet the expectations of the masses? Are the people happy with some policies executed by the administration?

    Between June 21, 2014 and December 19, 2015, a lot of water has passed under the bridge in Ekiti State and this reflected largely in the voter behavior witnessed at the LG poll.

    But indications emerged less than 48 hours before the election that voter apathy would mar the poll.

    A good number of eligible voters who spoke with The Nation said they won’t vote at the election because of the prevailing economic situation in the state.

    Many civil servants, teachers, local government workers, artisans and market women who form the bulk of the voting population said voting at the council poll is not compulsory for them unlike last year’s governorship poll.

    A civil servant, Paul Arowosafe, said many of them are still owed two-month arrears of salaries and “the morale is still low” hence lack of interest in the council poll.

    “My brother, local government election is not a priority for me and my family now because there is no money in town and we are still being owed arrears of salaries.

    “Although some workers received alerts on Wednesday (December 16)  for their October salaries, many of us are yet to receive alerts and you cannot tell a hungry person to go out and vote.”

    Another civil servant who spoke on condition of anonymity said: “This local government election cannot be like the 2014 governorship election in which we sacrificed ourselves and endured many inconveniences to vote in the current government.

    Fayose enjoyed a massive goodwill on assumption of office and expectations were high after being sworn in but a little over a year after coming to power, the goodwill is on the decline and this could be traced to some factors.

    The factors include various category of taxes imposed on the people of the state some of which triggered public protests recently.

    Hoteliers, market men and women, commercial motorcycle riders, private school owners, butchers, tipper owners, owners of small and medium scale businesses, just to mention a few are groaning under taxes slammed on them by the Fayose administration.

    Other policies which have triggered discontent in the land include the demolition of Ado Ekiti Main Market which has displaced thousands of market women, N10,000 fine slammed on owners of vehicles parked in wrong places, scrapping of free education policy enjoyed under the previous government and abrogation of free WAEC fees of final year secondary school students among others.

    Government workers and teachers are not happy with irregular payment of their salaries and non-payment of fringe benefits and they are not ready to listen to Fayose’s explanation that the problem could be traced to reduction of allocations from the Federal Government.

  • Dino Melaye: What manner of Senator?

    SIR: I voted for change to rescue my dear nation from the hands of PDP and its 15 years of misrule and bad governance. We saw Muhammadu Buhari as the messiah that will lead this blessed country and its people to the promised land. As a result, some disgruntled, corrupt evil-minded politicians also hid under the name of ‘change’ and Buhari to win elections. My

    My senator, Dino Melaye was among the politicians who used the name of Buhari to win election. We know how he emerged victorious through the efforts of the people of Lokoja/Koton-karfe, chanting the APC change slogan even as his Okun people rejected him.

    Dino Melaye has disappointed our people with his infamous new role as a bodyguard to Bukola Saraki’s wife. We didn’t vote for Dino to serve the interest of a woman under investigation on corruption. He should apologize to our people or we are going to use the same votes to remove him any time!

     

    • Abdullateef Tanko,

    nayashit @yahoo.com

  • What manner of democracy is this?

    What manner of democracy is this?

    “Each nation gives life to democracy in its own way, and in line with its own traditions” – Barack Obama

    Democracy must be the most sought-after bride in the world. Everyone lays claim to her. Everyone trumpets an undying love for this highly desired bride. Even the meanest form of dictatorship never shies away from showcasing to the world,  elements in its mode of governance, in which it sees any semblance to the tenets of democracy.

    Bernard Crick best captures it. Democracy, he says, is “perhaps the most promiscuous word in the world of public affairs. She is everybody’s mistress and yet somehow retains her magic, even when a lover sees that her favours are being, in his light, illicitly shared by many another.”

    A few months to the Presidential elections, the results are virtually decided. According to INEC guidelines, the period for campaign is not upon us yet. Political parties cannot even conduct primary elections to decide on their candidates until the final quarter of the year. Yet, the sitting President, who already enjoys a massive advantage by virtue of his office, and most likely to run in the elections, is way ahead of everyone else, with a media campaign that has been in our face for almost a year now. Indeed, those behind the campaign are quick to tell us they have not jumped the gun, teasing us that what they have running is not a campaign. Wonder what it would be like when the campaign really starts.

    The advertising campaign by the Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria and her co-travellers, obviously well-oiled from an abundance of unexplained resources, has been running for over six months now. The government has nothing to do with it, we are told, yet the Secretary to the Government of the Federation always finds time to be at these rallies to receive a pile of signatures. The President has nothing to do with it, yet his ministers, from time to time, abandon their duty posts to partake in this ritual. Even Ministers Adesina and Okonjo-Iweala could not help but leave their busy desks to partake in rallies at Ibadan and Port-Harcourt.

    At whose expense are they making these trips?

    The rally in Port-Harcourt was so urgent that public health risks from the Ebola Virus Disease could not make the Transformation Ambassadors quarantine their desperation over 2015 and shelve it. Not even the advisory from the President for Nigerians to restrain themselves from large gatherings counted for anything with the Transformation Ambassadors. They will rather defy the President’s directive and put lives at risk, in order to convince him to run. To them, all that matters is winning the 2015 elections.

    But do you blame the transformation ambassadors? You will think with rules in place, the umpire will be up and doing with enforcement. INEC will rather pretend that it has not noticed what is going on. When it comes to standing its ground against infractions by the party that has promised to be in power for 60 years, INEC suddenly catches cold.

    But when it comes to bullying other political parties, withholding recognition of one, in clear defiance of valid court pronouncement, INEC finds its voice. It is bad enough that the field is not level for all players within the political space. To make an open show of it, as the case is now, is simply obscene. It is like a case of putting two boxers in the ring, with the hands of one of them, tied behind him.

    To bring impunity to an end, Nigerians will have to take a stand to demand for change. It is not enough to simply desire freedom and true democracy; citizens are expected to possess what Heater calls an ‘educated sense of political responsibility’. This, “entails a positive  interest in public affairs, a sense of responsibility to use one’s political rights for the public good, a certain minimum of education in order to be capable of making a responsible and independent political judgement, and finally, the existence of political debate to stimulate thought”.

    It is time to take the country back from those whose only obsession is winning elections and attaining power for purposes not in tandem with a meaningful developmental agenda for the country. You cannot simply appropriate Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King as your pals, hoping to fool the people. You cannot keep harassing us with disjointed lies, patched together to con the gullible, and sell that to us, because you have the resources to beat the gun, and expect us to believe you have some altruistic objectives for the country.

    A democracy practised with rigged dice cannot give birth to national transformation.

     

    • Simbo Olorunfemi,

    Lagos

     

     

  • What manner of Presidency?

    SIR: President Jonathan has demonstrated more committment to the 2015 elections than the peace and security of Nigeria. He has continued to deploy security forces under the guise of ensuring peace during elections to intimidate and harass law abiding Nigerian citizens. We have seen it before during the extreme militarization of the Ekiti State governorship elections. Similarly, in Osun State, the deployed DSS officers announced their presence with masked faces and shooting sporadically into the air to intimidate and harass Osun State residents ahead of tomorrow’s governorship elections. The good people of Osun State complained about this anomaly. The President did not give a damn. The security officers have become more emboldened and prevented Osun State workers from staging a pro-Aregbesola rally at the Freedom Park in Osogbo, the state capital. Gov. Aregbesola belongs to APC, the main opposition party in Nigeria. The only interpretation here is injustice in action. Similarly, residents continue to complain of being harassed by masked security officers.

    The security officers deployed to Osun State are fellow citizens, so why are they masked while on duty? How do we differentiate between fake armed thugs in ‘military regalia’ from the real security officers when our own dear officers are masked? Can there be freedom in a state of intimidation, harassment and fear?

    If the security officers deployed to Osun State are for peace to ensure a free and fair election, then we can clearly say the aim is already defeated. There can be no peace, without freedom and justice. There can be no free and fair election in the absence of freedom and justice.

    Our Commander-in-Chief continues to deploy security forces based on political partisanship while the Boko Haram terrorists continue to kill, kidnap and abduct our people as well as taking over territories. Reports say Damboa had been taken over weeks ago and the terrorists have not only driven away our soldiers from military barracks, hosted their flags in the town but have taken over Maiduguri-Dikwa-Gamboru Ngala road and now collect toll gates, kill our people and kidnap girls.

    The terrorists are apparently winning more territories and have reportedly taken over Gwoza (one of the largest towns in Borno State) and the new Emir of Gwoza’s whereabouts is said to be unknown. The former Emir of Gwoza was killed by the terrorists too.

    President Jonathan’s supporters have continued to insult our collective intelligence by displaying the photos of our President with President Barrack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and First Lady Michelle Obama, describing President Jonathan as a prophet who is not honoured at home.

    Let President Jonathan change for the better and write his name in gold. Let him disengage from the culture of recklessness and impunity. Let him activate the political will to deal with our systemic corruption, sponsors of terrorism and resolve human rights abuses by our security agents to establish justice and to solidify civilian-security agencies’ relationship.

    Akinlolu, Abdulazeez Adelaja,

     University of Ilorin