The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Obasanjo

  • Obasanjo’s sociology zero zero zero?

    Obasanjo’s sociology zero zero zero?

    Who are the examples in Obasanjo’s generation that represent the norms subverted by the generation that succeeds Obasanjo’s?

    General Olusegun Obasanjo stood sociology on its head a few days ago when he posited that the younger generation (younger than his own) failed Nigeria and Africa. As reported in The Nation, Obasanjo theorised “that his generation led the way with purposeful, progressive, visionary leadership marked by accountability and probity while the younger generation of leaders failed to continue with the good legacy that his (Obasanjo’s) generation left.” It is what Obasanjo has refused to acknowledge that raises questions about his own sociological knowledge or imagination, more specifically, about what is expected in all societies to be the responsibility of the older generation in the development of the younger generation.

    Now that Obasanjo has identified the generation that has damaged the chances of Africa to grow and compete with the rest of the world, it is pertinent to ask some questions. How were the members of the generation after Obasanjo socialised? What is the role of Obasanjo’s generation in the socialisation of the generation that has, in the words of Obasanjo, become a generation of deviance from the norms embodied by Obasanjo’s generation? Who are the examples in Obasanjo’s generation that represent the norms subverted by the generation that succeeds Obasanjo’s?

    Historically, Obasanjo’s generation came to power on account of fighting corruption perpetrated by members of the generation before his own or of members of his own generation who happened to have had access to political power. Is this an indication that the generation before Obasanjo was also bad or did Obasanjo’s generation lie to citizens when they accused their predecessors of corruption? The regime that succeeded Obasanjo in 1979 was led by people in a generation older than Obasanjo. Again, this group was removed from power by members of Obasanjo’s generation on account of what they called corruption under the presidency of Alhaji Shehu Shagari. Shortly after, another group from Obasanjo’s generation booted out the regime that was manufactured by members of Obasanjo’s generation to replace ShehuShagari, and the rest is history.

    Sociologists and anthropologists all over the world believe that it should not be easy for a generation to castigate the generation after it for not acting normatively. It is generally believed that no generation emerges on its own into a cultural space. Each generation is groomed directly or indirectly by the generation before it. Each citizen is believed to be a product of socialisation or enculturation. This process includes the transfer of values from one generation to the one coming after it. This is done through schooling, through transfer from the older generation of what is considered acceptable and unacceptable behaviour in society. In addition, members of the younger generation learn by imitating the actions of those before them. In effect, apart from whatever is induced by genes, enculturation accounts significantly for what a citizen does or fails to do in his adulthood. While some section of a citizen’s behaviour or misbehaviour can be blamed on genetic inheritance, so much of it is blamed on the values in circulation when a citizen is growing up.

    Going by elements of sociology and anthropology with respect to the role of an older generation in the moulding of the generation after it, members of Obasanjo’s generation cannot be absolved from dereliction of duty with respect to the values or lack of values passed to the generation after them, even if we have to accept without incontrovertible evidence the claim that Obasanjo’s generation was saintly and stellar as rulers of their countries.To beef up Obasanjo’s claim that the generation after his own prevented Africa in general and Nigeria in particular from growing up, it is important to examine the kind of legacy that the generation of the saints left behind.

    Under General Obasanjo’s supervision, the constitution of Nigeria was changed from a federal constitution to a quasi-unitary one. This meant that powers and responsibilities including moral supervision of politicians by citizens, possible under the regime of devolution of powers in the years preceding the coming of Obasanjo to power, were withdrawn from regions and concentrated at the centre. The centre with no direct relationship with citizens became at the instance of Obasanjo the locus of power and resources, and the site of corruption and impunity. Institutions of learning, a major agency in the business of socialisation, were summarily transferred from the supervision of regional authorities to a federal one that had no known values to protect and promote. Moreover, members of Obasanjo’s own generation also introduced a policy that prevented older politicians from seeking power, on account of their understanding that older politicians were attached to the cultures of the nationalities that constituted Nigeria before the coming of military autocracy and the imposition of a unitary constitution. The new breed political class was a creation of the type of military oligarchy presided over by General Obasanjo.

    Apart from General Obasanjo’s proclivity to praise himself, and by extension, his generation in politics, the matter of why Nigeria or Africa is in a mess today cannot be explained via generation bashing. It has to be viewed as a systemic failure. Mugabe belongs more to Obasanjo’s generation than Dariye does, just as Mandela belongs more to Obasanjo’s generation than Tinubu does. Generation bashing is an over simplification of the problems besetting governance in Africa. It is like profiling or stereotyping. Nigeria and most of Africa have had their own share of good and bad old and young politicians.

    If age is everything, Obasanjo would not have picked Dr. Goodluck Jonathan as vice president to UmaruYar’Adua in 2007, as there were many much older politicians with interest in becoming the vice president at that time. Not including President Jonathan in his list of young people who have failed Africa is an indication that, though Jonathan is one of the youngest presidents in the world, he is still considered a good choice bequeathed to Nigeria by Obasanjo.

    Sociology or Anthropology 101 links older and younger generations in the preparation of citizens for socially adjusted citizenship at all levels; for nurturing by the older generate of the younger generation to sustain the values that keep societies going and predispose them to improvement; for members of an older generation to accept their duties and obligations in the failure of members of the younger generation after them for any moral decline, caused by failure to transfer right values to the new generation. Social continuity in all societies does not derive from a saintly father having a satanic son to succeed him or from an angelic mother raising a devilish daughter.Social continuity thrives on a sociological understanding that comes to terms with the existence of an umbilical cord between generations. To praise a good father under whose nose a bad son has grown is to promote Sociology zero zero zero.

  • Why Mt. Obasanjo erupts

    He makes headlines. This Wednesday was no exception. The papers hit the streets with Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s outburst at a number of Nigeria’s public figures whom he effectively dismissed as failures. Former Delta State Governor James Ibori was one of them. So was ex-governor of Bayelsa State Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, as was former Speaker, House of Representatives Salisu Buhari. Ex-governor of Edo State Lucky Igbinedion was another, as were former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and ex-governor of Lagos State Bola Tinubu.

    In age Obasanjo categorized them as the younger generation. In governance or leadership he dubbed them failures, lacking in morals and integrity. As he named them, he took a bit of time to hint at their ‘sins’ and their ultimate comeuppance. The former president started by drawing some comparisons.

    “During my administration as president, we had some people who were under 50 years in leadership positions. One of them was James Ibori; where is he today? One of them was Alamieyeseigha, where is he today? Lucky Igbinedion; where is he today? The youngest was the Speaker, Buhari; you can still recall what happened to him. You said Bola Tinubu is your master. What Buhari did was not anything worse than what Bola Tinubu did.”

    Obasanjo was speaking on Tuesday at a forum in University of Ibadan.

    On Wednesday morning it was the headline, and predictably, many have returned fire. Some dismissed the Egba chief as impertinent and meddlesome, preferring to spot the speck in other people’s eyes while paying no attention whatsoever to the log in his. Others pointed out that, as lawyers say, he had no locus standi to point the finger of accusation on the people he named as failures. As performance goes, Obasanjo was told that he was not qualified to criticise those he picked on, being no better than them.

    What I find puzzling about the man is his logic and generalisations. His current exertions betray a conclusion that anyone below 50 years is unfit for public office. Judging from his Ibadan salvos, Obasanjo tended to suggest that Atiku and others failed because they were young or younger than the former president and his generation.

    This is worrying. How old was Obasanjo himself when he became Head of State? As a renowned traveller, he surely would have shaken presidential hands younger than 50. I am sure he will remember that Bill Clinton made it to the White House at age 46. Barack Obama was inaugurated president at 48. What about David Cameron? What is it about youth that Obasanjo does not like?

    There is another interesting side of the man: his eruptions. If there is anything we remember him for, it is his penchant for picking a fight. And he does it to such great effect, throwing his weight and his words into it. He has battled Atiku. He has tackled President Goodluck Jonathan. He has locked horns with IBB. There are many, many others, and each time, he comes to the battle line with weighty accusations, dismissing his opponents and making them look small and inconsequential, especially to him.

    What gives Obasanjo such confidence and airs? Why is everybody else wrong and he alone right?

    In truth, he knows that we adore him perhaps even more than we hate him. We search hard and long to find something great his administration left for Nigerians, yet the impression is too often created that he holds the compass to our destination. As the state governors’ crisis persists, worryingly, Obasanjo has been reported as the man to foster the much-needed peace and unity. It has also been said, according to reports, that he is the man to dissuade First Lady Patience Jonathan from meddling in state governments’ affairs, especially Rivers’. Even the feuding governors themselves have reportedly blamed their plight on the former president, whom they accuse of abandoning their party and leaving it rudderless. I read something that amounted to saying, ‘All this calamity would not have befallen the party if Baba had not looked away’.

    Curiously, even the international community seems to believe that Obasanjo is not only a beacon in Nigeria but is also indeed the light in the rest of Africa. How many times has he been begged to mediate in crisis beyond Nigeria? And how many times has the man gladly obliged? Obasanjo has shown up in East Africa. In Ghana Obasanjo has appeared to teach them to conduct free and fair elections. In Senegal, where Abdoulaye Wade, then 86 years old last hear, was angling to return to office a third time, much to the anger of his people, Obasanjo also materialised to shape things up. Beyond Africa, Obasanjo is still wooed.

    Why shouldn’t Mt. Obasanjo erupt?

  • What are Obasanjo’s legacies?

    What are Obasanjo’s legacies?

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has absolved his generation from the allegations of leadership failure and blamed the youth for not building on his legacies. But critics who have revisited his tenure in public office have emerged with contradictory evidence, reports Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU

    Olusegun Obasanjo, (rtd) general, civil war commander and two-time Head of State stirred the hornet nest this week during his review of the roles of the national development.

    He blamed the youths for leadership failure, in contrast to his own generation, which he said, led the way with purposeful, progressive and visionary leadership marked by accountability and probity. Obasanjo came up with the list of failed leaders. He said that they failed in their mandate to rule well. To some people, Obasanjo hit the nail on the head, noting that the youths have not shown enough capacity for purposeful leadership because of their dubious approach to life, penchant for materialism, greed, avarice and corruption. However, many doubted the objective of the message, owing to the messenger’s antecedent and pedigree as a cunning, crafty and partisan politician.

    The remarks by the former Head of State have generated reactions because he absolved the older generation of blame for the rot in the polity. He painted a picture of sainthood by suggesting that his generation did not contribute to the economic and political adversity in the country. He avoided making references to the fact that his generation, the soldiers of fortune, dragged Nigeria into an unnecessary civil war, foisted unitary system on the polity, pillaged the treasury under the prolonged military rule and emerged richer than the entire country in retirement.

    Many believe that Obasanjo is a statesman who had the opportunity to make greater impact in office. But, after serving two terms as the civilian President, he left the stage with a perception that has continued to hunt him in public life. Is Obasanjo a democrat or an impostor who craved for greatness without trying to fulfill its full requirements? Is Obasanjo incorruptible, judging by the latest disclosure by another civil war hero, Gen. Alabi Isama (rtd), that he never won the victory he ascribed to himself in his dubious book, ‘My Command’, and also by the controversial third term gambit?

    The history of Nigeria is incomplete without a mention of him. At critical moments in the life of the country, fate had thrown him up for meaningful intervention. Obasanjo was the General Officer Commanding, Third Marine Commando, when his juniors, including Gen. Alani Akinrinade (rtd), brought the rebels to their knees. Even at that stage, he and other top soldiers have started canvassing for increased political role under the Gowon Administration. Then, except Akinwale Wey, Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, no other combat soldier was a member of the Federal Executive Council. The agitation for political power resulted into the pressure on Gowon, who made the late Gen. Muritala Mohammed Minister of Communications and Obasanjo Minister of Works.

    In 1979, Gen. Obasanjo made history again. He supervised the voluntary liquidation of military power, thereby emerging as the first military Head of State to relinquish power to civilians. At home, Obasanjo became a critical moral voice, whipping his successors into line, delivering lectures on good governance and chastising the military rulers, who were reluctant to permit democracy to thrive. Besides, he played a role in international community. He was dispatched to troubled spots across the globe to solve problems of civil/military relations. Obasanjo also became the curator of democratic projects in Africa. World leaders hailed him as a man of integrity and credibility.

    When he returned to the State House in 1999, many felt he answered the patriotic call to service; the same task he had performed 20 years earlier. His first term was tedious, but he was about laying a good foundation. When he was re-elected in 2003, Obasanjo became the longest serving Nigerian leader; first as military Head of State for three years and later, as the civilian ruler for eight years.

    However, he had lost the steam by 2007 when he handed over power to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua. The major sin of Obasanjo was the flawed general election. When he left the stage in 1979, the ovation was loud. Expectations were high when he made a dramatic return in 1999. However, in 2003 when he resumed a more stable retirement, his record mocked his antecedent. In 1979, Obasanjo presided over a relatively free and fair election. Why then, did he fail to achieve the same feat in 2003 and 2007? Instructively, his successor, the late Alhaji Umaru Yar’ Adua, acknowledged that the poll that brought him to power was flawed. The puzzle is : In retirement, can the former President still lay claim to being an apostle of transparency, champion of democracy, protector of due process and respect of the sanctity of judiciary?

    Critics have argued that Obasanjo retrogressed politically later in life by acting in direct contradiction to the principles and doctrines, which earned him applause in the international community. He was upgraded to the number one position in 1979 following the assassination of Muritala who wanted to return power to civilians. In the saddle, he did not derail the process. By implementing the three-year transition programme , Nigeria joined the league of democratic nations.

    Many commentators adduced reasons for the success of 1979 and failure of 2003 and 2007. One of them, Kayode Ajibade, reasoned that the 1979 setting contrasted with the 2003 and 2007 settings. If Obasanjo had been outside the power calculus, he would have been very loud in condemning the 2007 electoral mess. “Out of desperation, he became an over-zealous guidance of the political process ,” said Bisi Adegbuyi, a lawyer and politician.

    In the past, Obasanjo, as a critic, hit many statesmen with his sword. It was a self-imposed duty of scrutinizing the Nigerian leaders before and after him. It was in the exercise of his fundamental human rights. Today, some of these leaders are celebrated by Nigerians more than him.

    The retired General had mocked the indomitable Obafemi Awolowo, the first Premier of Western Region, who had visited his school when he was bare footed; a candidate for the Presidency, who missed the position that landed on his palm without struggle. Then, Dr Nnamidi Azikiwe, teacher, philosopher and first ceremonial President was vilified with his abusive pen as a towering leader who fell from the position of pre-eminence nationally, only to carry on with life in his old age as a tribal chieftaincy holder, the Owelle of Onitsha. His assessment of Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim, a First Republic Parliamentarian and Minister of Health from Borno, smacked of emasculation. To him, Ibrahim, the rich businessmen, was an unserious politician bidding for power. From the prime of life, Aminu Kano had championed the cause of the repressed and deprived Northern masses. Obasanjo simply dismissed him as a figure renowned for carrying placards, adding that he could even protest against himself. Former President Shehu Shagari also fell under his hammer as a slow and dull President, who was not in effective control.

    The duo of Mohammadu Buhari and the late Tunde Idiagbon, his juniors in the Army, also came under his hammer. They were autocratic military rulers who held the nation in its jugular. Apart from flaying former Military President Ibrahim Babangida (rtd) for detaining Buhari and Idiagbon, he also criticized his economic policies. On the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP), Obasanjo disagreed with Babangida on the implementation process, saying that adjustment must have human face, human heart and milk of human kindness. When Babangida tinkered with the transition timetable, Obasanjo rallied prominent Nigerians to protest the elongation of military rule. He was one of the leaders who suggested the Interim National Government headed by Chief Ernest Shonekan. He said, the option was regrettable but understandable. The suggestion nailed the coffin of “June 12”. Of course, Obasanjo said the winner of the historic presidential poll, the late Chief Moshood Abiola, was not the messiah.The late Gen. Sani Abacha sacked the interim contraception. He went ahead to imprison Obasanjo after he was roped in a phantom coup. He was saved by divine intervention.

    From grass, he rose to grace. Dusted up by the PDP leaders, he emerged as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate. When he became the civilian President, Nigerians had high hopes. His commonwealth leaders welcomed him back to power with optimism. Former United States President Jimmy Carter hailed his re-emergence. He said, judging by his leadership qualities, he would justify the trust of a model of transparency and leadership committed to higher ideals. It was a wasted expectation. Obasanjo could not fight the infrastructure battle adequately. He left behind a prostrate nation, agonizing over lack of electricity, good roads, good hospitals and good schools. In 2003, there were complaints about electoral malpractices. It was a child play to what happened in 2007. The leader of Campaign for Democracy (CD), Dr Joe Okei-Odumakin, alluded to a large scale electoral fraud unrivalled in Nigeria history. It created a hollow in his record of transparency outside power. Many Nigerians doubted his commitment to the election in the first instance on the account of the third term project, which was knocked out by credible politicians and the media.

    As the election drew nearer, there was confusion. Court orders were disobeyed by a desperate leader itching to force his wish down the throat of Nigerians. The anti-graft body, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), was misused to witch hunt his perceived political enemies. Grassroots development was aborted in some states when the power-loaded President banned council creation and seized the allocation to the states that tended to assert their constitutional rights. Obasanjo ran a large administration. The cabinet size was huge. But, it was largely unproductive. The dividends of democracy were scanty.

    When the former President now exposed the ballot box to a virulent attack, all hopes were totally lost. Obasanjo shocked the anxious nation when he said that the contest would be a do-or-die affair. Hell was let loose on poll day. The election paled into a bitter war. Domestic and foreign monitors said it was the worst in the history of the country. Three years after, the cases were still in court. The victory allotted to Obasanjo’s favoured candidates were later upturned by the judiciary after he vacated the exalted seat. Evidence of multiple thumb printing, snatching of ballot boxes, omission of photographs and logos of opposition candidates and parties, ballot hijack, thuggery and violence starred the tribunals and courts in the face. Before he left, it was impossible for him to right the wrongs. Thus, his rating in the international community nosedived.

  • Obasanjo: ‘Statesman’ or rabble-rouser?

    Obasanjo: ‘Statesman’ or rabble-rouser?

    “He is not wise to me whoever is wise in words only, but he who is wise in deeds.”—— — Aristotle

    The presidency of any nation is the apogee of political attainment that any citizen can desire in life. Thus, for anyone to have assumed the leadership position of a nation is no mean task. And to have done that thrice is even a harder and more enviable. But the Eekerin of Egbaland and Balogun/Ebora of Owu land in Abeokuta, Olusegun Aremu Obasanjo, through divine grace, achieved those rare feats. He was military Head of State and twenty years after he relinquished power, he was elected civilian president in 1999 and re-elected in 2003 into the exalted position. And just by this grace, the man erroneously believes that every other living creature must worship at his feat.

    Obasanjo, at the 4th Annual Ibadan Sustainable Development Summit organised by the Centre for Sustainable Development (CESDEV), University of Ibadan (UI), held in collaboration with African Sustainable Development Network (ASUDNET), noted that the crop of younger generation of leaders in the country had failed the citizenry. The truth is that Obasanjo is not competent to give a talk on leadership and sustainable development because of his poor track record in that regard while he was in office. Hence, allocating such topic to him was a misnomer and an abuse of such an important platform.

    The ex-president seized the platform to unleash unstatesmanly bile on his erstwhile political allies and perceived opponents. He accused his former Vice, Atiku Abubakar, of betrayal, citing it as the major reason he did not hand over to him. Yes, Atiku’s presidential ambition might have actually turned him into a political harlot, but not many would easily forget how he betrayed the Action Congress (AC) that rescued him from Obasanjo’s tyranny as when the plot to impeach him was foiled through the political ingenuity of Asiwaju BolaTinubu, then governor of Lagos State. He returned to Lagos after his medical treatment abroad and was welcomed with fun-fare at a time that a presidential booby trap was already awaiting him in Abuja. But his political harlotry should not be justification for Obasanjo to label him a betrayer. Also, the fact that Atiku possibly alerted the world about his tenure elongation agenda should not be a good reason. Atiku was Obasanjo’s nemesis and both men are driven by nothing but their inordinate ambitions.

    Obasanjo also listed names of other leaders from his prejudiced failed younger generation. He mentioned Salisu Buhari, former House of Representatives Speaker; Deprieye Alamieyeseigha, former Bayelsa State Governor; Lucky Igbinedion, former Edo State Governor; James Ibori, former Delta State Governor and Orji Uzor Kalu, the former governor of Abia State. What Obasanjo didn’t tell the gathering at the lecture and the entire world that read the reports was that it was during his tenure as leader and Board of Trustees chairman of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) that his self-appraised failed leaders emerged. For the avoidance of doubt, Obasanjo should avail Nigerians of the truth about who granted Salisu Buhari state pardon despite the fact that he confessed to have forged a university degree. Let him tell us who gave Salisu his first Federal Board appointment, worse still, in an educational and research institute, after this disgraceful act.

    The ex-president who wants people to believe that he is the only saint in Nigeria’s public life should elucidate more on how the money for his first election was raised in 1999. Yours sincerely and many other Nigerians will be interested in knowing the truth about the contributions, in cash and kind, of Orji Uzor Kalu; and at what point did Obasanjo realise Kalu to be a failed leader? On Alamieyeseigha, Obasanjo probably forgot to tell the distinguished gathering that the man during his tenure as governor stood up in Aso-Rock Presidential Villa to challenge him. Obasanjo summoned all the governors for a meeting and in his imperial display of impunity and contempt for others started talking down on the governors. But Alamieyeseigha stood up and bluntly told him that he was not his surrogate, but a governor of his state, who was duly elected by his people like Obasanjo.

    Obasanjo didn’t like Alamieyeseigha’s effrontery that could set in his view among other governors that trembled before him. He merely waited to pay him back by masterminding his money-laundering problem in the United Kingdom and eventual impeachment, arraignment in court and subsequent conviction. The rest is now history, but the truth remains that Obasanjo’s acts in all these were not borne out of true leadership fervour but vindictive proclivity. On James Onanafe Ibori that he mentioned in his list of failed leaders, let him tell us how the money for late President Umaru Yar’Adua’s election was raised. The public needs to know the highest donor among the governors of that era when circumstances forced him (Obasanjo) to organise the 2007 general elections after the truncation of his disgraceful Third Term plan.

    Obasanjo in his vindictive self seems not to have forgiven Asiwaju Tinubu for promoting ideal democratic tenets, constitutionalism and for his advancing the values of ideal federalism. More importantly, the man is not happy that Tinubu’s name has eclipsed his own in the political reckoning of the southwest. This is why Obasanjo could still not forgive Tinubu for not allowing him to capture Lagos State, like he did in other states in the west in 2003 and 2007. Obasanjo hates being floored but Asiwaju actually defeated him at the Apex Court when he won the matter over the with-held monthly allocations of Local Governments in the state over the creation of Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs). Also, Tinubu rescued, like he did to Atiku, Rashidi Ladoja, former governor of Oyo State, from Obasanjo’s tyranny.

    Tinubu gave Ladoja presidential treatments all through the period of his travails with Obasanjo and also got the best legal representation to challenge his impeachment. Unlike the vindictive Obasanjo, Tinubu is not begrudging Ladoja for pursuing his political aspiration in another party today.

    It is obvious from Obasanjo’s reference to Tinubu in his lecture that he goaded the Code of Conduct Tribunal to come after the latter. And Obasanjo is shamefully sad that nothing incriminating was found against the former governor. Tinubu has led a pack of reputable progressive leaders to rescue the southwest and Edo State from the claws of the ruling PDP and Obasanjo seems distressed about this fact. He should look elsewhere if he needs to vent his spleen on someone. The blame game on Asiwaju and others is nothing but a manifestation of Obasanjo’s loss of touch with contemporary reality. The public sees him more as a rabble-rouser or at best, a political jester; one that still believes in his primacy long after his magical wand had been extinguished.

    Yours sincerely is using this column to let Obasanjo know that effective leadership is not about making fabulously empty speeches or finding ill-motivated faults. This ex-president should ask himself if his actions, within and outside power, inspire other Nigerians to dream more, learn more and do more positively. Obasanjo is a failed leader because he could not mentor/produce effective younger leaders for the country. What he successfully did was to produce more deceitfully corrupt and incompetent followership. Most Nigerians, except the deceptive few, no longer believe him because his credibility and integrity have long taken flight

  • Obasanjo blames poor leadership on younger generation

    Obasanjo blames poor leadership on younger generation

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo dissected yesterday the poor leadership problem confronting Africa and lampooned the younger generation of leaders as a failure.

    Obasanjo, who gave a keynote address at the summit on leadership failure in Africa, posited that his generation led the way with purposeful, progressive, visionary leadership marked by accountability and probity. He stressed that younger generation of leaders, however, failed to continue with the good legacy that his generation left.

    The former president spoke at the 4th Annual Ibadan Sustainable Development Summit organised by the Centre for Sustainable Development (CESDEV), University of Ibadan(UI), in collaboration with African Sustainable Development Network (ASUDNET).

    Commenting on poor leadership in Africa, Obasanjo noted that the crop of younger generation of leaders failed the citizens.

    The former president also lumpooned former Vice President Atiku Abubakar with the “failed generation of leaders”, saying it was the reason he did not hand over to him.

    He specifically labelled Atiku as a betrayer while making reference to others who failed to live up to expectation when he invited them to serve.

    Obasanjo listed the failed leaders to include former House of Representatives Speaker Salisu Buhari; former Bayelsa State Governor, Deprieye Alamieseigha; former Edo State Governor Lucky Igbinedion, former Delta State Governor James Ibori; and and his counterpart in Abia State during the last dispensation, Orji Uzor Kalu.

    Though he listed former Lagos State Governor Asiwaju Bola Tinubu to the list, Obasanjo quickly paused and avoided further comments on him. Tinubu is one of the national leaders of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Referring to his administration as president in his answer to a question. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chief said: “We had some people who were under 50 years in leadership positions. One of them was James Ibori; where is he today? One of them was Alamieseigha; where is he today? Lucky Igbinedion; where is he today?

    “The youngest was the Speaker, Buhari. You can still recall what happened to him.” Obasanjo claimed that the allegation against Tinubu were not properly investigated, adding that a former governor of Oyo State bungled the investigation.

    The former president went on: “I wanted someone who would succeed me so I took Atiku. Within a year, I started seeing the type of man Atiku is. And you want me to get him there? Atiku’s media office in a statement by Mallam Garba Shehu said: ­”Yes, President Obasanjo is right. He didn’t know Atiku well. It was later he got to know him as a fighter for democracy and defender of the constitution.”

    “I once went to Tanzania because Julius Nyere recognised Biafra. He told me not to mind his aides and others in government. They would say they have one house in town but their five-year old sons and daughters would have houses all over.

    “Some of you who are condemning the leadership would get there tomorrow and it will be a different story. Only very few are actually good.

    “Abacha, my predecessor, got $750m. Through our lawyer in Switzerland, we recovered $1.25bn and the lawyer still said there is probably still another $1bn to be recovered. In 1979, we had 20 new ships specially built for Nigeria. When I came back 20 years after, the National Shipping line had liquidated.

    “The whole thing is not just about leadership. If we talk about good leadership, you should also talk about good followers. If you talk about human rights you should also talk about human duties and obligations.

    “It is sad that after 53 years of independence we have no leader that we can commend. Then we are jinxed and cursed; we should all go to hell. The problem in Africa is that when one person takes over he would not see any good thing that his predecessor did. Let us condemn but with caution.”

    On “Leadership in Africa’s Quest for Sustainable Development”, the former president said the topic came when humanity is in search of innovative ways of managing globally shared challenges.

    He listed some of the problems confronting the country as insecurity and unemployment, stressing that good leadership can stop them all.

    Obasanjo said: “The Nigerian state is currently beset with myriad of security, economic, environmental and social challenges. The issue of security is the most pervasive, not only in terms of Boko Haram but also in terms of armed robbery, kidnapping, corruption, drug and human trafficking. We can only ignore this at our own collective peril. Peace and security require effective and proactive leadership and people’s support. Without adequate mechanism to restore peace, the country risks losing more lives and property and in particular, the goal of sustainable development will be out of reach.

    “Youths unemployment threatens to further worsen the problem of crime if adequate care is not taken. The vulnerability we are all exposed to because of having millions of unemployed people can only worsen when the problem is treated with neglect. The lack of job opportunities for able and capable citizens will only make them lose hope in the system and thereby become frustrated, and make them desperate and fall into despair, bringing up many problem for the system as a whole.”

    In his brief contribution, the Vice-Chancellor, UI, Prof. Isaac Adewole, said lamented the failure of only 36 governors to conduct a credible election within the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF), saying it is a manifestation of the leadership malaise in the country.

    “We have not raised question about the scenario where 35 people found it difficult to conduct a credible election in this country. I then have concern about how 2015 election would be,” Adewole said.

    A discussant, Prof. Mojeed Alabi, said: “The task of leadership in Africa has been quite challenging. Africans have been so unfortunate. The question is whether our leaders wanted development or power.”

    Another discussant from the Institute of Sustainability and Peace, United Nations University, Tokyo, Dr. Obijiofor Aginam, said: “Unemployment is a bomb that has exploded and manifested itself in hunger, violent attacks, crimes and killings.”

     

  • Obasanjo, governors meet over PDP crisis

    Obasanjo, governors meet over PDP crisis

    FORMER President Olusegun Obasanjo has joined in the search for peace in the crisis-ridden Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    Last night, he met with the party’s governors in Abuja.

    His intervention may have been prompted by a recent visit to him in his Abeokuta, Ogun State country home by five of the governors.

    It could not be ascertained if President Goodluck Jonathan attended the meeting.

    Governors Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano), Babangida Aliyu (Niger), Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto) visited Obasanjo last month to seek his intervention in the PDP and Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) crises..

    It was gathered that top on the agenda at the session was how to resolve the feud between the president and some of the governors, especially over the Rivers State crisis.

    It was also learnt that Obasanjo would use the session to reconcile the governors, some of who had indicated that they would not leave the party.

    A source, who spoke in confidence, said: “The meeting was at the instance of Obasanjo following issues raised by the five governors and the apparent spill over of the division among the governors on cohesion within PDP.

    “But this might just be the first step in the series of interventions being championed by Obasanjo.

    “The former president is expected to meet with other stakeholders in the PDP as a way of restoring true democracy in the party.”

    Responding to a question, the source added: “The crisis in Rivers State is a major issue to be addressed and the ex-President secured the assurance of Governor Rotimi Amaechi that he would attend the session.

    “We are only hopeful that all the key actors will accept to work for peace not only in Rivers but in PDP.”

    A governor, who spoke in confidence before the meeting, which had not started at press time last night, said: “We are eager to put all these challenges behind us because 2015 is fast approaching.”

     

  • Southwest PDP: we’re confident in Obasanjo

    Southwest PDP: we’re confident in Obasanjo

    THE Southwest Zone of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has passed a vote of confidence in former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

    It said the former President is a strong pillar of the party in the country.

    The PDP Caretaker Committee Chairman in the zone, Chief Ishola Filani, spoke at the party’s rally in Ijebu-Igbo, Ogun State.

    Also, the PDP Zonal Secretary, Chief Pegba Otemolu, has denied the alleged exclusion of the ex-President in the affairs of the party.

    At the rally, some members of opposition parties defected into the PDP.

    Present at the event were the Osun PDP Chairman, Alhaji Gani Olaoluwa; his Oyo State counterpart, Yinka Taiwo; Ogun PDP Chairman, Adebayo Dayo and Prince Buruji Kashamu.

    Others include Kayode Amusan, Elder Yemi Akinwonmi, Otunba Leke Adekoya, Mrs. Abosede Ogunleye and Alhaji Agboola Alausa.

    Filani said the Southwest PDP leadership and state chapters in the zone had implicit confidence in Obasanjo, who, according to him, has made the people in Yorubaland proud with his achievements both as a former military and civilian leader.

    He said: “Obasanjo is the only person who was head of state under the military, who was twice president as civilian president and who has continued all over the world to look for peace and ensure that governments internationally are in order.

    “I, on behalf of the six states in the Southwest PDP, tell the whole world that the PDP in the Southwest pass vote of confidence on him. We have implicit confidence in Baba Obasanjo as our father and leader.”

     

     

  • How $1bn Malabu Oil deal was struck

    •Abacha, Obasanjo, Yar’Adua, Jonathan connections revealed

    • US, UK envoys get details of the agreements

     

    Federal Government’s inconsistency in the allocation and revocation of Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL 245) between 1998 and 2001 is largely responsible for the controversy surrounding the payment of $1.092 billion to Malabu Oil, according to fresh details of the deal obtained yesterday.

    The payment to the company owned by a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Chief Dan Etete, bordered on violation of agreement.

    Though the contract was first awarded by the late General Sani Abacha, it has been a recurring decimal through the subsequent administrations of Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Yar’Adua and Goodluck Jonathan.

    The Resolution Agreements signed by the Federal Government with Malabu Oil, Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Limited, (SNUD) and Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Nigeria Limited (SNEPCO) were approved by President Jonathan in 2011 following the amicable settlement of suits relating to OPL at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICISD Arbitration).

    Signatories to the Malabu and SNUD Resolution Agreements, based on an April 29, 2011 presidential directive, were the then Minister of Finance, Mr. Olusegun Aganga ( now Minister of Trade and Investment); Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke; Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke ( SAN); Vice-Chairman /Managing Director and Company Secretary of SNUD; and the then Group Managing Director of NNPC, Austin Oniwon and Company Secretary/ Legal Adviser, Director and Secretary of SNEPCO.

    In its Claimant’s Memorial before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Shell Ultra Deep Limited named those who were involved or intervened at various stages in the OPL 245 dispute with Malabu Oil and Gas as Obasanjo; ex-Minister of Petroleum Resources, Chief Edmund Daukoru; Ex-NNPC GMD, Gaius Obaseki; former DG of SSS, Col. Kayode Are; Special Assistant to the President on Petroleum Matters, Mr. Funsho Kupolokun; NAPIMS; JP Morgan; a board member of Royal Dutch Shell, Mr. Malcom Brinded; the then Director of DPR, Mr. Macaulay Ofurhe; and Assistant Director of DPR, Mr. Andrew Obaje

    It was gathered last night that copies of the Malabu Oil Agreements had been forwarded by government to the British High Commissioner in Abuja and the US Ambassador.

    The British Police had indicated interest in probing the deal.

    Besides, principal officers of the National Assembly have been served copies of the agreements to enable them understand what a source described as reasons for the decision of government to resolve the disputes over OPL 245 instead of allowing the oil block lie fallow.

    An introductory note on the controversy gave insight into how Malabu Oil and Gas became a stakeholder in the petroleum sector.

    It said: “Records indicate that Malabu, an indigenous Oil and Gas company was allocated OPL 245 in April 1998 by the FGN in furtherance of its Indigenous Exploration Programme Policy introduced in the early 1990s to encourage effective development of indigenous capability in the upstream factor of the oil industry.

    “Malabu and other indigenous Oil and Gas companies were accordingly allocated Oil Blocks which they were expected to develop in partnership with international oil companies as Technical Partners.

    “Malabu had in accordance with the terms of the grant, appointed Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep Limited (SNUD) as its Technical Partner.”

    One of the agreements, shedding light on how the deal was struck, said: “Whereas on the 29th of April 1998, the Federal Government of granted an Oil Prospecting Licence (OPL 245) over oil block 245(Block 245 to Malabu.

    “On 30th March 2001, Malabu and Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep Limited (SNUD) entered into a Farm-in Agreement, and a Deed of Assignment under which Malabu assigned 40 per cent equity interest in OPL 245 to SNUD.

    “On the 2nd July 2001, FGN revoked OPL 245. By a letter dated the 23rd May 2002, the then Honourable Minister of Petroleum Resources, on behalf of FGN awarded Block 245 to SNUD on the basis of a Production Sharing Contract (PSC) following a competitive bid with another international oil company, on the invitation of the FGN.

    “On 22nd December 2003, Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) executed a PSC with SNUD (hereinafter referred to as the 2003 PSC ) granting SNUD the right to exclusively operate Block 245 as contractor for a term of 30 years.

    “Subsequent to the revocation referred to in paragraph C above and the execution of the 2003 PSC, various law suits involving FGN, Malabu, and SNUD, were filed to determine disputes arising from the revocation of OPL 245 by the FGN, the termination of the agreements between Malabu and SNUD and the execution of the 2003 PSC in respect thereof, with SNUD.

    “On 30th November 2006, the FGN executed a settlement agreement with Malabu wherein the FGN, without admission of liability for any alleged wrongful, unlawful, unjust or any like conduct agreed to re-allocate Block 245 to Malabu in consideration of Malabu discharging and releasing the FGN from all claims and suits filed by Malabu against the FGN in connection with the revocation of Malabu’s interest on 2nd July 2001.

    “As a result of the execution of the settlement agreement, a number of dispute resolution proceedings were initiated by SNUD against FGN and/ or Malabu, including Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) arbitration No. ARB/07/8 pending at the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes ( ICSD Arbitration) to enforce SNUD’s rights to exclusively operate Block 245 as Contractor on the basis of the2003 PSC beaten NNPC and SNUD.

    “The cases remaining between FGN, Malabu and SNUD are (I) CA/A/25M/ 2003- SNUD vs. The House of Representatives and Malabu ; (ii ) ICC No. 12136 MS(C12137 MS) SNUD vs. Malabu ( Arbitration with resulting award in favour of SNUD delivered on 20th December 2004 and costs of $2.735million awarded against Malabu; iii FHC/NRJ/ 01/2009-SNUD vs. Malabu, by which the ICC Award was registered on 29 March 2010, making it enforceable in Nigeria; iv ICSD Case No. ARB/07/18-Bilateral Investment Treaty arbitration between SNUD and the FGN (Ruling pending).

    “On 2nd July 2010, FGN again issued a letter to Malabu, re-allocating Block 245 to Malabu. FGN has decided to resolve its differences with Malabu amicably with respect to Block 245.

    “Pursuant to paragraphs above and with the full concurrence and agreement of Malabu, FGN is willing to reallocate Block 245 to Nigerian Agip Exploration Limited (NAE) and Shell Exploration and Production Company Limited (SNEPCO) in accordance with the terms of a reallocation agreement of even date to be entered into between FGN, SNUD, SNEPCO, NAE AND NNPC (Reallocation Agreement).

    “Now therefore, FGN and Malabu have agreed as follows with respect to Block 245:

    “All existing, claimed, asserted or disputed rights and privileges of Malabu, contracts and arrangements arising from or pursuant to Blick 245 whether such rights and privileges existed, are claimed, asserted or disputed among themselves, or against the whole world ( including SNUD or any party claiming through SNUD) shall at the Execution Date, be substituted by the following arrangement.

    “FGN agrees to pay to Malabu subject to Clause 2 and 3, the sum of US $1.092,040,000 in full and final settlement of any and all claims, interests or rights relating to or in connection with Block 245.

    “Malabu, as stipulated in Clause 4 herein settles and waives any and all claims, interests, or rights relating to or in connection with Block 245 and hereby consents to the reallocation of the interests in Block by the FGN as granted in Clause 1.3 herein.”

  • Obasanjo to head AU observer mission for Zimbabwe elections – Zuma

    Obasanjo to head AU observer mission for Zimbabwe elections – Zuma

    Former president Olusegun Obasanjo has been accepted by the government of Zimbabwe to be the AU Observer Mission Chairman for the July 31, presidential election.

    Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, the chairperson of AU Commission, in a statement on Friday said that Obasanjo is expected in Zimbabwe on Saturday to lead the team of international observers.

    Dlamini-Zuma made this known in a statement after paying a courtesy call on President Robert Mugabe at the State House in Harare on Thursday to announce the AU team’s presence in the country ahead of elections.

    She said that Mugabe welcomed the scheduled arrival of Obasanjo.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that with the acceptance by Mugabe it clears doubts over Obasanjo’s visit to Zimbabwe as head of AU Observer Mission.

    It will be recalled that the Pan African Forum and the Zimbabwe ruling party, Zanu-PF had rejected the former Nigerian leader as head of the AU observer mission, claiming he will be biased towards the main opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

    Dlamini-Zuma in an interview on Thursday before meeting with Mugabe said that Obasanjo can only visit Zimbabwe if allow by the government of the country.

    Mugabe, who has been governing the country since independence, will contest the presidential polls with the Prime Minister and MDC candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai.

     

  • 2015: Jonathan, four Northern govs in hide and seek drama in Obasanjo’s house

    2015: Jonathan, four Northern govs in hide and seek drama in Obasanjo’s house

    •President visits Abati over mum’s death

    The undercurrents in the PDP ahead of the 2015 presidential race played out on a grand scale yesterday in Abeokuta with President Goodluck Jonathan, former President Olusegun Obasanjo and Governors Murtala Nyako (Adamawa State), Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Aliyu Wamako (Sokoto) and Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano) as dramatis personae.

    President Jonathan and the governors were on separate appointments with Obasanjo at his Hilltop residence but the state chief executives, who are not on the best of terms with the president, avoided contact with him all through their stay in Abeokuta.

    All the four voted for Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State in the recent election of Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF), shunning Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State who was President Jonathan’s candidate.

    They followed up their support for Amaechi with a solidarity visit to Port Harcourt on Tuesday only to be pelted with stones on their arrival at the city’s airport by hoodlums.

    Also on the Port Harcourt trip was Governor Babangida Aliyu of Niger State. Wamako was not on the trip to Port Harcourt.

    The President reportedly refused to see Kwankwaso when the governor recently went to the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

    President Jonathan was principally in Abeokuta to commiserate with his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Dr. Reuben Abati, on the death of his mother who was buried at the weekend and had used the opportunity to visit Obasanjo.

    The former President has reduced his involvement in PDP affairs, and resigned as BoT chairman.

    There are speculations that the relationship between him and the President is not as smooth as it used to be.

    It was not clear why the governors went to see the former president, although one source said it might not be unconnected with the dispute over the chairmanship of the NGF.

    The Chairman of the PDP Governors Forum, Chief Godswill Akpabio, had visited Obasanjo last week to seek his intervention in the matter.

    The President and his entourage including Senator Grace Folashade Bent arrived Obasanjo’s residence at about 11:52am.

    The gate was immediately shut against other visitors.

    Security was beefed up outside and along the windy road leading to the compound.

    The four PDP governors who were also scheduled to meet Obasanjo almost at the same time Jonathan arrived there were said to have diverted to an undisclosed location in the town apparently to avoid contact with Jonathan.

    But some five minutes after the President’s departure from Obasanjo’s House at 1.28pm, the governors drove in a convoy in a manner that suggested they were playing a hide-and -seek game.

    Emerging from the meeting with their host after about one hour, Nyako told reporters that they were in Abeokuta for “consultation” with the former president on “very important matters.”

    “We have come to greet the most accomplished Nigerian ever and would remain so for a very long time and to consult him on very important matters,” he said, giving no details.

    Sources said President Jonathan’s visit might not be unconnected with his ambition to seek re-election in 2015, the festering crisis in PDP and his sour relationship with the former Chairman of PDP’s BoT.

    Apart from the NGF crisis which has pitched President Jonathan against some northern governors, the region has been clamouring for the return of power to that part of the country in 2015.

    Governors Kwankwaso and Lamido are some of the northern political actors said to be interested in the race.

    Lamido is said to be eyeing Amaechi as his running mate and observers say this is the main cause of the current face-off between Jonathan and the Rivers governor.

    As a fallout of the crisis of confidence, Amaechi is currently locked in a battle for survival with many political forces in Abuja and Rivers who are bent on scuttling his career.

    The State House of Assembly, for instance, is split into two factions with 27 members of the House rooting for him and the remaining five supporting the Minister of State for Education, Chief Nyesom Wike.

    Wike, in turn, enjoys the backing of the Presidency.

    From Obasanjo’s residence, President Jonathan and his entourage drove to Abati’s home at Asero, Abeokuta to console him on the death of his mother, Maria Taiwo.

    Jonathan told reporters that it would have been out of order for him to go straight to Abati’s house without first seeing the former chairman of the Board of Trustees (BoT) of the PDP.

    “Of course, you know that Reuben’s house and Obasanjo’s house are just about ten minutes drive from each other. It would not be proper if I’m coming to Ogun State to see Reuben who is just at Obasanjo’s backyard and I would not stop over to greet him (Obasanjo),” he said.

    “Even the man (Obasanjo) himself would not be happy if we didn’t visit him. I am like a son to Obasanjo. People would think the president and Obasanjo probably have some differences. So, I said that before coming to greet the family, let us stop over and greet Obasanjo and we did that.

    “We stopped over there. Even our helicopters are there in the Government House, we drove down here.”

    He said he would have attended the Friday burial but for the fact that he had to go to Lome, Togo, on an official assignment.

    He described Abati as a member of his larger family and the death of Madam Abati as one that touched everybody.

    The President said: “Yesterday (Friday) when the main burial took place, I sent a team to represent me because I was in Lome. I would have been in the church service, but of course, as the head of state, you have some international programmes. There was nothing we could do.

    “So, we were all there. Of course, political families and administrative set ups are just like the families we have in our homes. Reuben, being my media adviser, is a part of my larger family. And just like you have siblings here in this community, Reuben has siblings amongst my aides—my ADC, my chief of protocol and others. We all belong to the same family.

    “So, if anything happens to any of us, it happens to all of us. And of course, we believe in our traditions, we are religious people. We love the way we live with our siblings and extended family. “The death of Madam Maria Taiwo Abati touches all of us and we must collectively play our role.

    “Since we were unable to be here for the church programme, we said that this morning, we have to be here.

    “We must come and greet our brothers and sisters to express our condolence and to encourage the family. Those of us who are Christians, the Bible says that we are supposed to live three scores and ten. So any number of years above that three scores and ten, is a blessing.

    “So, for her to have lived to this ripe age, her departure should be celebrated and not mourned. So, our being here is to encourage them and to reassure the family that we are together and we’ll continue to be together.”