The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Nigeria

  • Nigeria too old to divorce?

    Nigeria too old to divorce?

    There seems to be no end to President Goodluck Jonathan’s inundating sermons. Every time he goes to a church, the pastors have formed a habit of giving him the opportunity to talk to the congregation on anything that catches his fancy. And quite some talk he does, sometimes as candid and esoteric as ever. It was on one such pulpit sometime ago that he made his famous Pharaohnic comparison, one that threw the entire country into dialectical uproar. And since one does not necessarily have to be anointed to mount any pulpit these days, it has become standard practice for top government officials to assail the country with exegetic flourish, with pastors having found a constructive corollary to permit secular authorities access.

    It was also on another pulpit that the president spoke glowingly of the virtue of caution, or what he inelegantly described as slow governance. But every time he spoke out of turn, and the country seethed in anguish or quaked with consternation, the president became angry and his aides bespattered us with furious denunciations. Well, Hardball will anger them one more time.

    On Sunday, and on another pulpit, the president heaved a fresh supply of his politico-religious homilies at us. This time, it was about the correlation between age and divorce. Speaking during the Armed Forces Remembrance Day inter-denominational service at the National Ecumenical Centre, Abuja, the president said: “In 2014, we are going to celebrate our centenary; our 100 years of existence. You cannot stay in a marriage for 100 years and say that is the time you will divorce. If there are issues that we have been managing, we will continue to manage them. We will not talk about separation.” President Jonathan assumed a marriage, let alone a turbulent one, could last for 100 years. But the president was simply being dramatic and hyperbolic to catch our attention. Not only is it unlikely for any modern marriage to last so long, given the sheer number of years involved, it is a bit of a stretch to expect that bitter and disgruntled partners would resign themselves in their dotage to unnatural tastes and frustrations. Moreover, judging from the president’s statement, it does seem we must prepare ourselves for a very grand centenary, one obviously based on appalling superfluities.

    But the president wasn’t through with his homilies. Apart from strangely and implausibly basing what he described as Nigeria’s greatness on its population and diversity, he also inspiringly declared: “Nigeria will not disintegrate. Anybody who is doing any research on sociology, psychology or political science can do his work, but Nigeria will remain one.” A researcher himself, it is indeed puzzling that the president seemed to think Nigeria’s fortunes were antithetical to scientific inquiry. Anyone interested could do research to any level, the president seemed to say, obviously in response to sceptics’ prediction of Nigeria’s breakup, but it would have little or no bearing on the country’s troubled future.

    The pulpits on which President Jonathan has declaimed so fervently and ponderously in the past two years or so have enabled us interesting peeks into the president’s psychoanalytical profile. We will get more such peeks in the coming months, for the 2015 elections are still far away. At least for now, it must be reassuring to the president and his aides that economic, political and socio-cultural factors have no effect on Nigeria’s unity, contrary to what science tells us, and what history says. The president believes Nigeria’s unity depends on its age and the forced marriage of its peoples. With such strange, unscientific beliefs, it is not surprising that he and his men have been quite unable to grapple scientifically with the real developmental challenges fracturing the country so badly down the middle.

     

  • Whether a state is littoral or not in Nigeria is a question of fact

    To demand and obtain regular and relevant information, data or returns from any government agencies.

    Every state of the Federation in Nigeria and the FCT is a member of the Commission. The states are usually represented at all the meetings of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation Fiscal Commission including the Inter-Agency meetings of April 15, 2008 and August 2008. The RMAFC, Inter-Agency meeting of August 2008 was convened to attribute off shore oil wells/fields to Nigeria’s Littoral States and for the purpose of calculating the derivation funds payable to the littoral states in accordance with the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The RMAFC’s meeting of 15th April 2008 affirmed that Cross River State is now a non-littoral state in Nigeria sequel to the judgment of the International Court of Justice delivered in October 2002 in the Cameroon/Nigeria boundary dispute and Supreme Court judgment in A-G Federation v. A-G Abia State & ors (No.2) 2002 6 NWLR (Pt.764) Pg.542. After the execution of the International Court of Justice judgment which ceded Bakassi Peninsula and the estuarine part of the internal waters called ‘Cross River’ to the Cameroons, the plaintiff no longer qualify as a littoral state. It has no maritime boundary with the 2nd defendant. Prior to the judgment of the International Court of Justice, the plaintiff was a littoral state in that it had direct access to the sea through Bakassi Peninsula and Cross River Estuary without passing through any other state’s territory. As the plaintiff is no longer a littoral state and as it has no Maritime Territory, the 76 oil wells which now lie offshore within another maritime territory not that of the plaintiff cannot be attributed to the plaintiff. In order that any Nigerian littoral state may be entitled to the attribution of any off-shore oil field/well within the 200 meters Isobath and the derivations therefrom, the oil field/well must lie off-shore but within the state’s Maritime Territory which means that the state itself must abut and/or lie contiguous or proximate to the sea and have a Maritime Territory up to the 200 meters Isobath.

    The Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission did not demarcate any boundary at the August 2008 Inter-Agencies Kano retreat. The plaintiff would have remained a littoral state if the effort made by President Olusegun Obasanjo to retain the western part of Bakassi Peninsula in Nigeria had succeeded. The plaintiff would have retained the direct access to the sea. The 1st defendant emphasized

    1. The letter dated January 4, 2005 addressed to the former President Olusegun Obasanjo caption “Akwa Ibom/Cross River Interstate Maritime Boundary”.

    2. The letter dated October 31, 2006 on the political solution in respect of oil wells between Cross River State/Akwa Ibom State/Rivers State were based on the negotiation and expectation that the western parts of the Bakassi Peninsula would be retained as a Nigerian Territory. The International Court of Justice judgment was delivered in 2002. The Greentree Agreement between Nigerian and Cameroon governments was signed on June 12, 2006 while handing over of the entire Bakassi Peninsula was eventually completed on August 14, 2008. There is now in existence a National Boundary Commission 2008 Map showing the seven littoral states in Nigeria after the handover of Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon of which the plaintiff is not one of them. The status of the plaintiff was changed by the ICJ judgment which also disentitled the plaintiff from deriving benefits from the 76 oil wells which now belong to the Second defendant.

    The 1st defendant raised the following issues for determination –

    1. Whether there had been an agreement between the parties upon which the 1st defendant could be stopped from resiling.

    2. Whether the role played by the 1st defendant at her Inter-Agency Retreat held in Kano in August 2008 could be interpreted as a usurpation of the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the court.

    3. Whether from the combined effects of the judgment of the International Court of Justice and the judgment of this court in Suit No. SC.124/1999 which is reported as A-G Gross River State v. A-G Federation & anor (2005) 15 NWLR (Pt.947) Pg.71, the plaintiff has a seaward boundary, estuarine sector or maritime boundary to entitle it to oil wells located off shore.

    The 2nd defendant, Attorney-General Akwa Ibom State adopted and relied on documents as follows – 2nd defendant’s 1st Amended Statement of Defence deemed filed on 14/5/2012; the witnesses statement of Okokon Essien and Augustine Dominic Odokwo the Akwa Ibom State Surveyor-General and Director of Civil Litigation of the Ministry of Justice for and on behalf of the 2nd defendant, the 2nd defendant’s Final Written Address in disputing the claim of the plaintiff to the attribution of 76 oil wells to Akwa Ibom State.

    According to the brief facts of the 2nd defendant’s case, these 76 oil wells are located offshore the coast of Nigeria to which the plaintiff – the Cross River State represented by the Attorney-General of the State lays claim for the purpose of the payment of 13% derivation revenue pursuant to Section 162(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999. The statement of claim of the plaintiff captions the bone of contention in this suit as follows –

    “This unilateral removal of the plaintiffs name among the beneficiaries of the 13% derivation fund and the recalcitrance of the 1st defendant to change the position culminated in the filing of this case.”

    As at the time of the institution of this suit, the controversial 76 oil wells were and are still attributed to Akwa Ibom State represented by the 2nd defendant. The Inter-Agency meeting of the Revenue Mobilization and Fiscal Commission held in August 2008 followed and relied on the 2008 littoral states maritime boundaries delineations by the National Boundary Commission. The letter of the Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission to the Accountant General of the Federation in March 2009 forwarding the 2009 Revised 13 per cent Derivation Indices for the payment of Derivation funds to littoral states omitted the name of Cross River State. It was decided at the RMAFC Inter-Agency meeting of the 15th April 2008 that in line with the National Boundary Commission Littoral States boundaries delineations

    The offshores oil wells will be attributed to the littoral states jointly by all the agencies using the co-ordinates to be supplied by the Department of Petroleum Resources under the supervision of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission.”

    The RMAFC Inter-Agency Report was produced in August 2008. By virtue of Section 6(1)(b) of the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission Act Cap R7 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, the RMAFC is empowered to-

    a. “Monitor the accruals to and disbursement of revenue from the ‘Federation Account and review from time to time, the revenue allocation formulae and principles in operation to ensure conformity with changing realities.

    b. Section 6(2)(b) of the Act also gives the RMAFC the power to demand and obtain regular and relevant information data or returns from any government agencies.”

    On the other hand, Section 7(c) of the National Boundary Commission Act Cap N10 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 gives the National Boundary Commission the power to –

    a. Define and delimitate boundaries between states, local government areas or communities in the Federation and between Nigeria and her neighbours in accordance with delimitation instrument or document established for that purpose.

    At the RMAFC Inter-Agency Meeting of 15th April 2008, Cross River State was factually affirmed as a non-littoral state in Nigeria sequel to the judgment of the International Court of Justice in 2002 in the Cameroon/Nigeria Boundary dispute.

    The 2nd defendant gave the qualification of a littoral state, whether in Nigeria or anywhere in the world or whether a sovereign country or a state in a federation. Such state must have a territory which must abut or be contiguous to the sea; it must be possible to have direct access to the sea from the state without passing through any other state’s territory. Sequel to the judgment of the International Court of Justice delivered in 2002 and the ultimate execution in August 2008, Cross River State became landlocked and no part of its territory is contiguous to nor abuts the sea. The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Attorney-General of Cross River State v. Attorney-General of the Federation and one other (2005) 15 NWLR (Pt.947) Pg.71 pronounced that Cross River State has no maritime boundary with Akwa Ibom State. The 2nd defendant highlighted that prior to the judgment of the International Court of Justice, Cross River State qualified as a littoral state because as at that time it had access to the sea through the Bakassi Peninsula and the estuarian part of the inland waters; the “Cross River”. The Cross River State used to claim a riparian territory abutting the sea through the peninsula and the estuary which then were part of Nigeria. The Bakassi Peninsula lies contiguous to the sea while the Cross River estuary empties into the sea. The fact of Bakassi Peninsula and the Cross River Estuary being part of Cross River State was the sole qualification and reason for being adjudged as a Nigeria littoral state. The National Boundary Commission 2008 Maritime Boundary Map did not reflect Cross River State as a littoral state. The 2nd defendant maintained that by virtue of Cross River State not being a littoral state and therefore not having any maritime territory, the 76 oil wells which are the subject matter of dispute in this suit and which lie offshore, within a maritime territory cannot be attributed to Cross River State. For any Nigerian littoral state to be entitled to the attribution of any offshore oil field/well within the 200 meters isobaths, the oil field/well must be offshore but within the State’s maritime territory which means that the state itself must abut and/or lie contiguous or proximate to the sea and have a maritime territory up to the 200 metres isobaths or as the case may be in some circumstances have a riparian territory abutting the sea. The plaintiff does not presently have a land/shore/baseline abutting the sea. The 76 oil wells, subject matter of dispute, lie off shore and in a maritime territory within 200 meters isobaths from Akwa Ibom State shore/base line into the sea. The 2nd defendant concluded that the RMAFC Inter-Agency meeting report was therefore factually correct in attributing the 76 oil wells to Akwa Ibom while the Federal Government has been acting legally and correctly in paying to Akwa Ibom State the derivation funds from the said 76 oil wells. The 2nd defendant agrees that there was no boundary dispute between Cross River State and Akwa Ibom State.

    The 2nd defendant however formulated two issues for the determination of this court in this suit as follows –

    1. At all times material to this suit, was and is Cross River State a Nigerian Littoral State and entitled thereby to attribution and derivation revenues in respect of the 76 oil wells pursuant to the provisions of Section 162 (2) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 1 of the Allocation of Revenue (Abolition of Dichotomy in the application of the Principle of Derivation) Act Cap A 27 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004?

    2. Does the judgment of this honourable court in Attorney-General, Rivers State v. Attorney-General, Akwa Ibom State & 1 Or (2011) 8 NWLR (Pt.1248) pg. 31 apply to this case and can that judgment be relied upon to entitle Cross River State howsoever to attribution and derivation of revenues in respect of the 76 oil wells?

    The foregoing is the resume of the reliefs sought by the plaintiff in the statement of claim, the case of the parties respectively and the issues formulated by the parties.

    A cursory examination of all these issues reveals the crucial issues raised for determination in this suit. They can easily be identified as follows:

    1. Whether there is in existence any issue of boundary adjustment between the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant in view of the binding agreement and resolution between the parties under the supervision of the 1st defendant since 2006 through its agencies.

    2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the derivation revenue from the seventy-six oil wells which were previously located within the 200 meter water depth isobaths contiguous to its territory as stipulated in Sections 1 & 2 of the Allocation of Revenue (Abolition of Dichotomy) with the principle of Derivation Act 2004.

    3. Whether the order of mandatory and perpetual injunctions restraining the 1st defendant by himself or through any of its agents from excluding the plaintiff from its entitlement to 13% derivation in relation to the sharing of revenue from the Federation Accounts as a littoral state are enforceable.

    I intend to be guided by these three issues in the determination of this case.

    Yusuf Ali learned senior advocate for the plaintiff predicated the case of the plaintiff on the processes filed and particularly the written statement on oath of Ralph Idiku Uche. The plaintiff emphasized that by the 31st of January 2005, the issue of boundary was mutually settled by the parties. The 2nd defendant, Akwa Ibom State wrote to the President on the 31st of January 2005 through Exhibit A to confirm her consent to the agreement. By the letter of the National Boundary Commission dated the 4th of January 2005, the agreed maritime boundary between the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant are –

    a. The terminal point of the Akwa Ibom/Cross River Inter-State boundary in the Cross River Estuary has coordinates 43733 N and 82439 E.

    b. The Maritime boundary between Akwa Ibom and Cross River State should be a line drawn from the point referred in (a) above southwards until it intersects with Nigeria/Equatorial Guinea International Maritime boundary.

  • ‘Prayer can save Nigeria’

    The founder of Holy Trumpet Ministries, Ota in Ogun State, Prophet Amos Kehinde, has called for prayers among the political class to avert the death of a prominent politician.

    Kehinde, who spoke during the church’s 8th anniversary, also said the demise of the politician might precipitate a major political crisis in the nation.

    He also warned that kidnapping may take an increased dimension except Nigerians pray fervently.

    The prophet attributed the many challenges confronting Nigeria to God’s wrath, calling on leaders to repent.

    Many of them, he alleged, are fostering hatred among Nigerians to further their selfish political interest, claiming this has led to the untimely death of millions of Nigerians.

    An elder of the church, who is also a human rights activist, Prophet Oladele Omoniyi, stated God can save Nigeria if Christians pray.

  • AFCON: Cape Verde coach rates Nigeria high

    AFCON: Cape Verde coach rates Nigeria high

    Cape Verde Head Coach, Lucio Antunes, has said the Super Eagles put up a gallant performance against his side and he expects the team will go far in the African Cup of Nations in South Africa.

    The Super Eagles and the Blue Sharks settled for a goalless draw in Wednesday’s international friendly with many rating the Cape Verdians slightly above the Nigerian side that fail to shine on the night

    Coach Antunnes, who spoke through an interpreter, declared that his boys met a very experienced side in Nigeria and he was happy that the team played out a draw.

    He also promised that the Blue Sharks will cause upsets at the AFCON with the quality of players at its disposal.

    Futaa.com reports that Cape Verde and South Africa will play the opening game of the 2013 Africa Nations Cup on January 19.

     

  • Nigeria, as it could be made (2)

    There is no perfect nation to be born yet Nigeria is the worst nation to be born, according to the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) report. No thanks to the Economist magazine’s sister publication, the Nigerian newborn may arrive knowing he has come where the sun dies everlastingly for the bliss of the fig.

    The EIU report ranks Nigeria 80th out of 80 countries assessed in its Where-to-be-born index. Predictably, the report has inspired and incited all manners of conspiracy theories and affirmation of doom; foremost newspapers and columnists have written editorials affirming the report and the poor fate of the Nigerian child; child advocacy groups have regrouped to re-strategize in order to fleece international children foundations off grants that would never get to its touted recipient, the Nigerian child.

    Within the din of socio-politically correct and self-righteous vituperation, a crucial voice dies slowly, painfully but certainly; it is the voice that goes to bat for the Nigerian child. Foremost newspapers may have affirmed the EIU’s claims but very few newspapers would publish as their cover stories, the plight of teenage sex workers or child urchins across the country, unless there is a mass death involving the minors. Such media fare is never strong enough to upstage news of political party intrigues and permutations. And if you examine closely the child rights campaigns, you will find that they have always been meal tickets to duplicitous and luxury-lusting advocacy groups.

    Nobody actually speaks for the newborn. Nobody speaks for the Nigerian child. And nobody truly speaks to the only human force capable of exciting the future in which the Nigerian newborn may arrive assured of a prosperous fate and a better life; the Nigerian youth.

    There is a tragedy inherent in our customary lamentation every time our conscience is roused with a damning report and as it has become customary of us, more racist politicians and activists have suggested that we split and go our separate ways touting it as the only solution to our league of extraordinary problems.

    Secession is the anthem that we should shun. It is the fruit of ‘reason’ that we need to be wary of and I will continue to say this hoping every prospective muscle –the youth – by which the separatists hope to achieve their dreams of dissolution, would listen and learn to let the secessionists risk their skins to prove their platitudes.

    The biggest misconception about secession, insurgence, self-determination or whatever the separatists choose to call it is that it could be peaceful and that the end result would be a conscientious and citizenry-centred dispensation.

    It’s all dirty, greedy politics; the separatists want the youth to fly the flags of their dream nations, they want everybody to brandish a bumper sticker that bellows,”Death to the Federal Republic of Nigeria!” They call anyone that’s anti-war and anti-secession, “pacifist,” “traitor” or whatever colourful adjective suits their rage. Then they promise the youth a prosperous future and better fate under their dream nation. Consequently, youth that ought to know better buy into such farce and they all begin to dream and talk of the great uprising that would set them free from the living hell Nigeria has become.

    Truly, it is a sad thing for us as a nation to be afflicted by such youth whose eyes cannot see and intellect cannot detect the hideous manifestations of the vulpine intellect characteristic of the Nigerian separatists. Thus the Nigerian youth wastes his passion recycling hackneyed criticisms and fomenting trouble in the name of all manners of political godfathers, minority group leaders, human rights activists, tribal rights activists, youth leaders to mention a few.

    He engages in bootless pursuits at the end of which he accomplishes too little or nothing. For himself he probably accomplishes some individualized goal – satisfaction of a sentiment or material gain – which to him is everything but for Nigeria, he accomplishes comparatively nothing.

    Eventually, he grows into the prototypical average, disgruntled man on the street, who suddenly realizes in his twilight that he had squandered God’s greatest gifts to him, his intellect and talent – then the smokescreen of youth and hastily prized platitudes begin to peter out and he realizes that his miraculous talisman is a paltry plated coin, not fit to pass in the shops as a contemptible kobo.

    The attempt to conceive imaginatively, a better ordering of Nigerian society than the destructive, pitiless chaos in which the nation has sunk is by no means modern; it is at least as old as Plato, whose “Republic” set the model for the Utopias of subsequent philosophers and self-styled revolutionaries.

    The secessionists contemplate a new world in the light of an ideal: they claim to feel a great sorrow by the evils that characterize Nigeria, and they claim to be driven by an urgent desire to lead their race to the realization of the collective good. It is this desire which has been the primary force moving the pioneers of Anarchism and horrid tyrannies, as it moved the creators of ideal commonwealths in the past.

    In contemporary Nigeria, it is incense for suspicious revolutionaries claiming to fight for the interests of Nigeria’s ethnic divides. In this there is nothing new; what is new and unpardonably offensive is the pretension of such characters to heartfelt sorrow, shared grief and relation in identity and ideal to the present sufferings of the Nigerian youth and breadlines.

    This has enabled cynical and anarchist political movements to grow out of the frustrations and hopes of Nigeria’s youth and predominantly impressionable thinkers whose thought processes are anything but politically conscious. And this makes the agitation of the Nigerian separatists worrisome and markedly dangerous to the survival of the Nigerian State.

    The process of re-sensitizing the youth away from the establishment of chaos and genocide advocated by the secessionists will be greatly accelerated by the abolition of the current political order; however, this can only be achieved by the nation’s youth – who are unfortunately taken by the platitudes and poetics of Nigeria’s band of self-serving ruling class and racist emancipators.

    It is no doubt the stock in trade of the latter to refer to violent uprisings in Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Iraq, Zanzibar, Tanganyika, India-Pakistan, Mali and parts of Asia among others, as worthy indicators of Nigeria’s need to follow suit. Whenever they dazzle with such informed commentary, tell them to lead the secession they advocate with their wives, children and closest relatives.

    Many activists, youth leaders and self-acclaimed political heroes today have their wives and children safely tucked away in secure schools and sociopolitical climes overseas even as they goad impoverished and clueless youth at home to their doom.

    If it is true that there is appreciable number of Nigerian youth capable of powering revolts for ethnic self-determination, the end of which is dissolution of Nigeria, why can’t the same youth power the social regeneration and reclamation of the Nigerian State from the clutches of the predatory ruling class, ethnic bigots and dissolution activists?

    The current political separation and acute race-sensitiveness must eventually yield to the influences of education and culture, if the youth could endeavour to be truly civilized. But such transformation calls for remarkable wisdom and tolerance.

    To be continued…

  • NIGERIA VS BURKINA FASO Stallions can shock Eagles, says Put

    NIGERIA VS BURKINA FASO Stallions can shock Eagles, says Put

    • Keeps mum on game plan against Nigeria
    • Hires psychologist to boost team

    SportingLife brings you the thoughts of Coach of Burkina Faso, Paul Put from an extract of the interview the Belgian gave an Ouagadogu based newspaper prior to the Stallions’ departure to South Africa for their AFCON preparations in Nelspriut. The Burkinabes are one of Nigeria’s Group C opponents.

    Excerpts…

    With Zambia, Nigeria and Ethiopia, what are the chances of Burkina Faso in this group?

    Its hard to say. But I think we must have confidence in ourselves and play according to our abilities. Everyone sees Nigeria and Zambia as favorites of the group. But Burkina can perhaps be the surprise of the championship as Zambia was in 2012.

    Everything is possible in football. I would not give statistics, but I need a determined and disciplined team with which I can go far with in this year’s CAN.

    In any case, I’m hopefull. But we must be realistic. Nigeria is the second country with the most professional players in the world. There are Nigerians playing in major championships such as in England and Italy. But having individually talented players does not necessarily mean to have a great team.

    Zambia is the defending champion. The players are confident and want to prove again that they are talented. Ethiopia is one of the surprise team of the CAN. But they must be respected from the moment they are qualified. I watched the videos of their games and I analyzed their games. I noticed that the Ethiopian players are very fast, are technical and play with a lot of aggression. In terms of their aggressive nature, we will seek to irritate and cause them to commit many mistakes. But this tactic remains to be investigated.

    I said earlier that I’m hopeful because we have a good team. Our players are talented and they come back to show what they can do. Already I am sure of one thing, the players want to do better than the last CAN.

    Stephen Keshi Nigeria, Herve Renard Zambia. Do you dread their game strategies?

    I followed Stephen Keshi and Hervé Renard interviews in which they claimed that the Eagles and Chipolopolo are the two teams that will come top in our group. For them, they do not speak of Burkina Faso or Ethiopia. This is their strategy but I also have mine. I do not want to give details how Burkina Faso will play against these two teams. To them, their own strategies but I’m sure we’ll do better to go beyond the first round.

    The Stallions will play friendly matches against Niger and Swaziland. Do you think that these games will allow the players to be ready for the championship?

    You should know that preparation matches is one objective we use in measuring the ability of the team. On this level, Niger is at the same level with us, So, choosing to play against Swaziland, we seek a psychological effect. We do not have enough time to play three friendlies as other countries would do, but I think the two games are quite sufficient for our build up.

    Since the CAN ’98, Burkina Faso have not passed the first round of the competition. How will you seek to overcome this jinx?

    In 1998, Burkina Faso had the advantage of being the host. This is not the case in South Africa. But I notice that the players are very determined to do well. They are talented but they must also have the chance to score and be fit at the right time. All these aspects play in the victory of a team during a match. But the main thing for me is the willingness of players to show their pride being Burkinabes.

    Going into the championship, what are your fears?

    I fear nothing other than injury. Because it can affect the performance of a team. But we tried to improve the preparation of players. We have strengthened the medical staff with the arrival of a psychologist.

    For testing physical conditions, we will use devices (its called Polar) that monitors the heart rate of a player. Then we will know if the player works in the red zone or below his capacity.

    The Ministry of Sports and Recreation and the Burkinabe Football Federation have it with this unit. In addition to this, we do a check-up for all players to identify those who need nutritional supplements or vitamins in their blood. In South Africa, we will play at an altitude of 1400 meters. Players therefore need 7 to 8 days to adapt. They will also get used to the schedule.

    We’ll carry out tests in this direction and also know what they need to boost their form during games. The work is to be done by a doctor in Belgium. We will go with these results to Nelspruit and each player will be treated with doctor’s recommendations.

  • How many parties does Nigeria need?

    How many parties does Nigeria need?

    The deregistration of political parties has continued to generate controversy. JEREMIAH OKE examines the views of the protagonists and antagonists of the exercise.

     

    The deregistration of 28 political parties by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) last year has continued to generate serious controversy among the politicians.

    The leaders of the affected parties are also challenging the power of INEC to axe the parties in the court. They claimed that the deregistration of the parties had violated the freedom of association enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.

    The chairman of the Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP), Alhaji Balarabe Musa, has been critical of the INEC’s decision. However, he said the option for the deregistered parties is to merge with virile parties.

    Musa said, while exploring this option, the battle to enforce Sections 40 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution would continue.

    The chairman of the electoral commission, Professor Atahiru Jega, has maintained that the decision of the commission to deregistered parties was final. He said it was in accordance with the constitutional provision. He pointed out Sections 222 and 223 of the constitution have outlined the conditions for registration and deregistration of political parties.

    “Political parties are supposed to register with INEC and have offices in Abuja. They are supposed to hold periodic internal elections; they are supposed to have executives that represent their federal character composition in two- thirds of the states of the Federation. The Electoral Act, in particular, also says parties which do not win any seat in any of the elections can be deregistered”, he explained.

    In the last presidential election, out of the 68 registered political parties, only 20 parties presented candidates for the presidential race.

    The poll results released by the INEC showed that only four political parties could prove their worth. Other parties scored less than one percent of the total votes cast.

    The breakdown of the 2011 presidential election result indicated that 39,469,484 votes were cast. 1,259,505 were invalidated. TheAction Congress of Nigeria (ACN) polled 2,079,151, which represented 5.41 per cent; All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) 917,012 (2.40 per cent), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) 12, 214,853 (31.98 per cent) and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) 22,495,187 (58.89 per cent). The performance of other parties were poor. The Fresh Democratic Party scored 0.09 per cent, National Conscience Party (0.09 per cent), and Social Democratic Mega party ( 0.03 per cent). Many of the mushroom parties do not have representatives in the state and federal legislature. Neither do they have council chairmen and councillors elected on their platforms.

    However, opinion is divided on the deregistration. A political scientist, Professor Abubakar Momoh, noted that the freedom of political association and assembly is sacrosant in the constitution. But he stressed that the opportunity should not be abused.

    The Lagos State University (LASU) don submitted that the many of the deregistered parties had nothing to offer, adding that their records were not impressive. “ They don’t have personnel, they don’t have offices and they don’t participate in elections. Indeed, many of them just went to register like registered companies waiting for the day they will get a contract. Meanwhile, they are giving the electorate the impression that those political parties exist, but in truth, they do not.

    “If you look at our ballot paper today, you see that it looks like a sellotape. So ,it confuses people and, if INEC deregisters them, it will reduce the numbers of the parties on the ballot paper.

    “The procedure for the registration a political party is very clear. Also, the procedure for the deregisteration is clear in the Electoral Act. The freedom of the association must not therefore, be abused. So, let them be serious about registering a political parties. They are misleading and confusing the electorate. The right to form a party should not be subjected to abuse”, he added.

    Momoh also pointed out that the long list of parties on the ballot paper could confuse voters on poll day.

    Former labour leader Chief Frank Kokori shared the same view. He said Nigeria should have emulated the United States of America (USA), which operates a two party system.

    “I am one of those advocating for two party system. During the SDP days, I was the National Financial Secretary and I contributed so much to the struggle, both at the labor level and political level. Those parties were like Republican and Democratic Parties of the United State of America. Britain has Conservative Party and Labor Party. Beside those parties, you can have few parties to satisfy certain ideological leanings, but the major ideological divide is expressed in those two major political parties. In other words, it could be either right nor left so that INEC will be able to monitor their activities. Therefore, to me, Nigeria does not need multi-party system like we have now”, he added.

    Kokori said the mushroom parties have become business ventures, adding that their founders only collect subventions from government in vain. “Those parties have no business to be in politics. As you can see, those parties were used as machinery. So, all they are doing is to register and collect the take-off grant by the government and portray themselves as political parties. Nigeria does not need that, if we really want to strengthen our democracy. So, I support what the INEC is doing.

    Former Supreme Court Justice Gorge Oguntade supported this argument. He said the proliferation of parties is undesirable.

    “Those parties are meaningless. They are registerd parties, but they are not functioning. If we want to be honest, it is good to deregister them. A party which has no representation at the local government level, no representation at the state level and at the federal level, what is it doing and why do the people refer to it as a political party? After all, political parties are formed to win power. So, I think that INEC has done very well”.

    A member of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mr. Segun Olalude, shared the same opinion. The lawmaker, who represents Epe Constituency 11, said the deregistration is in national interest, adding that it would improve the electoral reform.

    “The deregistration is for the benefit of Nigerians and I will like to say Nigeria does not need many political parties. It will be meaningful, if we can have only two parties, and anybody who wants to go for the conservative bloc will do it, while anybody who wants to go for the progressive camp will do that as well. So, I want to commend what Jega and his people have done”, he said.

    The vice chairman of Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) in Lagos State, Chief Akani Seriki, said: “It is unfortunate that those parties could say they wanted to challenge INEC in court. They should be ashamed of not having even a councillor and they call themselves political parties. If I were Jega, I will deregister more. In Nigeria, we don’t need more than three political parties. So, I think Jega is on course”.

    But CNPP leader Musa disagreed with Seriki. He chided INEC for axing the parties. “The first thing we are considering is legal action in court with two premises. The first is to seek for the annulment of the deregistration. The second option is to register a new political party with clear social objectives. The third is to merge with other political parties”, he said.

    Musa maintained that INEC lacked the power to outlaw registered political parties. He insisted that the move conflicted with Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution.

    “It is clearly stated in Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. But in our own case, we will not rely on legal action alone because we know that INEC did what they did on instruction and the instruction is part of the PDP’s plan to rig 2015 elections. If we rely on going to court alone, they may drop the issue and they may have gotten what they wanted because they know how to manipulate the electoral system. So, we are going to consider the other alternatives”.

    Analysts averred that, if the parties succeed in court, the deregistered parties may bounce back. But if the INEC decision is affirmed by the court, the agency would have succeeded in weeding out the mushroom parties.

     

     

     

     

  • Nigeria is in a mess, says Emir

    The Emir of Zuru in Kebbi State, Maj.-Gen. Muhammadu Sani Sami (Sani Gomo II), yesterday gave a damning verdict on the state of the nation.

    He said: “Nigeria, in reality, is in a mess and is plunging into confusion.”

    The monarch spoke at the palace of the Otaru of Auchi, Etsako West Local Government in Edo State, during the 16th Auchi Day celebration.

    He noted that all aspects of Nigeria’s existence, including its peace and unity, are under threat.

    The retired general said nobody can predict what will happen to the nation if Nigeria is allowed to break up.

    According to him, the derailment from the cardinal principles of the nation’s foundation plunged Nigeria into socio-economic and political upheaval.

    Gen. Sami said the socio-economic and political atrophy weighing down the nation was not sectional but the result of parochial selfish interest.

    He added: “I do not understand why Nigerians should try to destroy Nigeria and believe erroneously that God will save Nigeria. We Nigerians try to wreck Nigeria. We should also know that only us can salvage Nigeria.

    “The sorry state of the nation, or its perilous state, can only be traced to ourselves. We neglect the fundamental reasons for the existence of Nigeria as a country. We threw away the binding principles that brought us all together.

    “We must change our attitude and resolve to respect the principles that gave rise to the emergence of the Nigerian experiment. Our leaders and the led should humble themselves and avoid being guided by corrupt and nepotism.”

    The emir urged traditional rulers to call Nigerian leaders to order to ensure better governance.

    According to him, it was monarchs that cleansed the nation’s mess, which has enabled the government of the day to survive.

    The Chief Imam of the Lagos State House of Assembly’s mosque, Sheikh Abdul-Lateef Abdul-Hakim, in a lecture, entitled: Programming a community for eternal purity, progress and prosperity, urged religious leaders with the fear of God to participate in politics.

    He said those killing in the name of religion are ignorant of the teachings Islam.

    The Imam said Nigeria could be prosperous without reviewing the current constitution.

    According to him, Nigerian leaders only need to abide by its content and implement it with the fear of God.

    Abdul-Hakim said only Section 6 (6c) of the Constitution needs a review.

    Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomhole said Nigeria has a leadership challenge.

    The governor said it is unfortunate that Nigerians lament their woes instead of tackling them.

    He noted that Nigeria can achieve greatness as a nation, even if some people cannot see the way forward.

    Oshiomhole promised to focus on politics of progress and development and not divisive politics.

    He added that his administration would bring more development to Auchi kingdom.

    The Otaru of Auchi, Alhaji Aliru Momoh, said the celebration was to bring the people together to praise God and plan the growth of the community.

     

  • Cleric urges Nigeria to keep hope alive

    The spiritual leader of Cherubim and Seraphim Movement Church, Dr Gabriel Fakeye, has urged Nigerians not to lose faith in the country in spite of the challenges facing it.

    He stated this at the 22nd Inter-denominational Nine Lessons and Xmas Carol Service held at the church premises, Surulere, Lagos.

    Fakeye said: “I want us to know that two forces are at war, one is going to overcome the other. Satan will not and cannot overcome God. What is happening in Nigeria today shows that the more we pray the more the forces of darkness try to overwhelm us. And by the special grace of God Nigerians will win this battle against Satan.”

    He stressed that the country would make process no matter the challenges currently dogging its feet. According to the cleric, Nigerians should rekindle hope in the country and pray for divine help for those who are charged with the responsibilities of providing good governance.

    The carol which attracted prominent citizens from all walks of life, had people of different religious background at the event.

    Speaking, the Deputy Governor of Ogun State, Prince Segun Adesegun noted that it would take some maturity to handle the heavy burden currently confronting government, urged Nigerians to pray for divine intervention from above.

    He said: “It is a bit difficult for me to say that this is the way we are heading because it is obvious that things are difficult and it requires some maturity to handle. The issues of Boko Haram and other challenges have become a burden on government but I believe that if we get our act today we can get it right.”

    Adesegun urged leaders to live a God fearing life by doing what the people wanted, this he further remarked would bring orderliness to the activities of authorities. “We need to live a God fearing life, provide for the people their needs; we should not think evil of others and do what is good in the sight of God.”

    Also present at the event were Lt. General Oladipo Diya (rtd) and Senator Ganiyu Soloman. It was a total package of good musical artistry by the church choir with members dancing and praising God for keeping them alive. Guests and faithful were served given souvenirs and delicious take-away.

  • Nigeria, as it could be made (1)

    There is no odor as vile as that which arises from despoiled citizenship. It is insidious, human and outright malevolent. And it is all that we represent as Nigerians. Let us not make a mockery of citizenship; we are not the model citizens we profess to be.

    We whose idea of citizenship gravitates from arrant skepticism to dilettantism, gruesome criticism to cynicism and utter insincerity will never court hope even when we see it. And the consequence abounds all around us.

    Yesterday, our grief was of marginalization, unemployment, religious and ethnic bigotry, corruption in high places and enfant terrible godfathers. Today, we grieve because our youths are unemployed, our mothers are impoverished and our daughters litter dimly lit brothels and recesses of the sidewalk within and outside the country.

    Today, we talk of going to war and sing to ourselves, blood-spattered choruses of youthful rebellion. We love to sing such ballads that beguile our will and caress our eardrums; that is why we court and fete such leadership as we have now. It is that time of the year when they promise us stable electricity, gallantry in governance, dependable economy and security. It is that time of the year when they recite the same old platitudes to the same old electorate.

    They promise us honor, status, glory, and a prosperous future as usual and as usual, we fail to hold these promises up against their culture of leadership; that flagrant norm of theirs that blesses us with dead-end jobs of small-town life, religious and financial terrorism, bankruptcy, ethnic bigotry, substandard healthcare, inferior education and unemployment.

    But we believe them anyway. We who are conditioned by poverty and lust for unearned riches perpetually seek all manners of benefits and self-actualization, like greater State autonomy, more States and secession. We, who have learnt to enjoy dwellings like hell, are promised nations like Eden, by men who couldn’t enrich their households had they all the riches in the world.

    The dream of secession is the call of the Sirens, the enticement that has for generations seduced old and young Nigerians struggling to keep inadequate jobs in fast food restaurants, construction sites and bus parks, and behind the counters at city malls.

    We desperately crave and embrace the secession alternative because every other cul-de-sac in our lives breaks our spirit and dignity. Pick up advocacy group manifestos or human rights reports of genocide and marginalization. Listen to self-acclaimed youth leaders, weepy politicians and activists, the allure of greater autonomy, self-determination or whatever they choose to call it is touted as our next best alternative.

    They will not tell you it’s a trap, a ploy, an old, dirty game of deceit in which the powerful and informed who will not go to war, promises a mirage to youth who will. We have seen this in the tragedy of suicide bombers, political thugs and ethno-religious death squads holding the nation by the jugular.

    We have seen and felt this in our tragic obsequiousness to the ruling class on the political, economic and socio-cultural turfs that condition you and me to serve the privileged class, even as we are perpetually consigned by them to the backwaters of the breadlines.

    Some of us, the somewhat privileged to be precise, get to travel between two universes: one where everybody gets a chance and a second chance to break out of our socio-political and economic jailhouse, where education, connections, money and influence almost guarantee that you would not fail if you strive. In the other universe, no one ever gets to enjoy a first or second chance. In this universe, when the poor fails and falls, no one picks them up even as the rich stumble and trip their way to the top.

    It is not my wish to attack or castigate the rich; they didn’t get to enslave us simply by ordering us to be poor, did they? You and I are willing participants in the impoverishment and eternal enslavement of the Nigerian citizenry.

    We are in such dire state because like ones habitually programmed to self-destruct, we love to identify and propound practical solutions to our tragedies but when puts gets to shove, and we are faced with the chance to change our stars, we begin to speak in discordant voices.

    Thus this year as all others, we have begun to criticize and speak the thoughts of a growing number of natives seeking relief. What is so sad however is that despite our pretentious protestations and insight, we go about our daily lives perpetuating the same old oddities, self-interests and absurdities.

    Thus this year, President Goodluck Jonathan and our league of extraordinary looters have promised to improve our lot even as they get set to further pauperize us. And while we curse our luck and cry, many of us continue to foster the status quo by abhorrent citizenship and conduct. We who lament corruption in high places wholeheartedly nurture duplicity and corruption in low places.

    Bloody revolution is never the answer. Neither shall greater autonomy or secession improve our lot; if eventually, every agitating part of Nigeria gets to secede, every new nation we establish shall parade the same old brutes with the same old lusts and self-interests in high and low places.

    Any story of secession is a story of elites preying on the weak, the gullible, the marginal, and the poor. The pageantry ends the day we pronounce we secede, particularly for those of us that will occupy the low places. The pageantry will wear off and there will be fewer patriots, and fewer patriots, until there is not a single cheer but tireless shrieks in the street. Whatever contraption we manage to create shall evolve into the monstrosity we have made Nigeria to be.

    People who are singing the secession song are the real traitors – like the average Nigerian who scorned merit and conscience to elect President Goodluck Jonathan and company. Such characters would sell out Nigeria for an offshore account, picturesque mansion, soothing sentimentality and membership of high society.

    To achieve their plot, they would sentimentalize and hoodwink everyone else to buy into their fount of deceptive freedom. To escape such grotesqueness, we need to raise our voices in dissent, and rally in protest in our communities, on the streets and our square gardens. We need to produce the candidates that will fight our fight and take our risks. We need to unseat the men making our fatherland more toxic and hateful to the rest of the world.

    If you don’t think that the policies and actions of the incumbent ruling class is costing us immeasurable damages, then do nothing. But if you can see through the smoke and mirrors, and you realize that you’ll be paying more state and local taxes, while your assets continue to depreciate and the cost of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) and staple food continues to soar out of reach, then you’ll understand the need to invest in producing and supporting the candidates who will successfully defeat and tame the army of predators and executioners occupying our seats of power. Be ready to contribute the most you’ve ever given for a political cause. Be ready to sacrifice.

    • To be continued…