The Nation Newspaper

Tag: opinion

  • Atiku’s unrelenting appeal to emotion: A gambit doom to fail – by Femi Adesina

    First, it was laughable, now it gets progressively pitiable, to see and hear efforts by presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in the last general elections, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, appeal to the emotions of Nigerians, particularly members of the judiciary, perchance it would influence decision in the ongoing legal tussle over the result of the presidential poll.

    When the Supreme Court recently pronounced the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate as due winner of Osun State gubernatorial contest, Alhaji Abubakar, a former Vice President, had chided the court, saying it should have considered “the pulse of the nation,” and reflected it in the judgment.

    That was when the jigsaw puzzle began to fall in place. Were most of the challenges in the country being orchestrated by hidden hostile hands, who think such would influence the judiciary, which would consider the so-called “pulse of the nation” in arriving at judgment on the presidential poll?

    Before and after the Osun State judgement, the PDP candidate had always been quick to play up negative developments in the country, the latest of which is the tendentious story by Wall Street Journal, alleging that about one thousand Nigerian soldiers had been recently killed by Boko Haram and Islamic State of West Africa terrorists, and secretly buried by Nigerian military authorities.

    The military has duly countered the story, educating the Wall Street Journal on the hollowness of its publication. But Alhaji Abubakar has quickly weighed in on the matter, as part of his gambit to whip up emotions, and perhaps get the judiciary to reflect the “pulse of the nation” in its judgment.

    According to the PDP candidate, who lost the last February poll by nearly four million votes, as released by the electoral umpire, he could “not fathom that in the space of a year, scores of great patriots were killed and buried secretly without their families being told.”

    READ ALSO: Don’t politicise economy, Femi Adesina tells Nigerians

    In an apparent afterthought and doublespeak, he added that he was hesitant to believe that “such grand scale of deceit is even possible under a democracy, such as Nigeria is expected to be.”

    The above, rather than mitigate Alhaji Abubakar’s position, gives him out as someone who denigrates the country’s democracy, which he was part of building, in his heyday, before unbridled ambition blinded.

    Yes, soldiers fighting insurgency and terrorism are great patriots. But the same can’t be said of anyone quick to believe any negative story about his country, however fictive and lacking in verity as the story could be. Well, except such person had the motive of whipping up negative sentiments and emotions, so that the judiciary could respond to the “pulse of the nation and reflect it.”

    We have told Alhaji Abubakar and his co-travelers that the judiciary would always come to conclusions, drawing from matters of the law placed before it, and not sentiments or so-called “pulse of the nation.”

    Therefore, in vain does anybody labour to devalue the government and its military, thinking it would fall into a grand plan to get into office through artifice. The campaigns and elections for 2019 are long over. The country has moved on. And those who know it actually know it.

  • Opinion poll shows I’ll win, says Ize-Iyamu

    Opinion poll shows I’ll win, says Ize-Iyamu

    Edo State Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) factional candidate in the September 10 governorship election, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu, has said an opinion poll showed that he will win the election.

    But he was however silent on the organisation that conducted the poll.

    Ize-Iyamu addressed reporters in Benin, the state capital, where he declared his intention to begin his campaigns today.

    The PDP factional candidate said over 20,000 seats would be moved to the venue of the event since the state government had allegedly denied him the use of the Dr. Samuel Ogbemudia Stadium.

    State Chairman of the Ahmed Makarfi’s PDP faction, Chief Dan Orbih, said the members were surprised to receive words that the approval for the use of the stadium had been cancelled.

    The chairman said a new venue had been secured, adding that “a hundred Oshiomholes cannot stop the flagging off on Monday”.

    He described the election of a factional candidate of the PDP as “a gathering of APC members, who voted for a suspended PDP member”.

    Orbih insisted that various judgments on the party’s leadership tussle showed that Senator Ahmed Makarfi is the recognised caretaker chairman of the PDP.

    But Edo State Commissioner for Sports, Priestley Ediagbonya, said he only received PDP’s letter, dated June 28, to use the stadium last Friday.

    Ediagbonya, who said the letter got to the registry of the Ministry of Sports on June 28, added that he could not look into the requests made to the ministry on Thursday because he spent a good part of the day attending a party’s function.

    He said his ministry had never declined PDP’s approval to use the stadium but did not say if the PDP’s request would be granted.

  • In the court of public opinion: Anti-corruption versus rule of law?

    Those calling for the supremacy of rule of law, regardless of the justness of the law or of the ethicality of the interpreter of the law, may be overlooking the danger that the call for strict constructionist view of the concept may hold.

    One of the most insidious of mythological civic narratives is that our leaders are selfless public servants serving a higher call and order. In a lesser quoted part of Lord Acton’s power/corruption axiom, he offers the chilling statement: “There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it.” Generally, people employed in the public sector are not selfless public servants. They are simple people whose job it is to serve the public. They work for the public, but does that really ennoble them? By the evidence of corruption and venality arrayed about us, the answer must be emphatically, “No.” Yet we still fall prey to the mythology. High public office…. allows some to convince themselves and project to the world that they are all that!  No one is all that—and most everyone, including most everyone in public life, is a whole lot less than all that. And that is okay. But it is also why transparency is so very important— Joseph Ferguson in a foreword to Transparent Government: What it means and how you can make it happen by Donald Gordon.

    One word that is ubiquitous today in print, broadcast, and social media, more than ever before, is Rule of Law. Not since the death of Umaru Yar’Adua, a president who included running a government in compliance with the rule of law in his presidential mission, has the lofty phrase been so popular. When a word is repeated as frequently as rule of law has been since the new government’s efforts to fight corruption by investigating and prosecuting individuals who are suspected to have abused the country’s financial management principles and values, ordinary citizens who are not members of the bar or the bench should be wary. Like some of those who requested me to comment on ‘media-hyping’ of this phrase, I am tempted to look at George Orwell’s 1946 essay, “Politics and the English Language.”

    In Orwell’s essay, he raised many issues about the relationship between words and the meanings they are intended to convey. He said among other things: “Our civilisation is decadent and our language — so the argument runs — must inevitably share in the general collapse…. Political language — and with this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists — is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.” Orwell’s assertion that political speech is more often used to conceal than to inform and often used to justify the unjustifiable may apply to today’s obsession by pundits in both traditional and social media with the rule of law as if it is an ideology-free concept.

    Are these two words: anti-corruption and the rule of law mutually exclusive or should they be bandied about as if each refers to something that is oppositional to the other? Partisan politicians are enthusiastic in emphasising the importance of rule of law at the expense of fighting corruption. In some cases, some media pundits are even asking President Buhari to refrain from fighting corruption, if doing so might jeopardise the non-negotiability of the rule of law. Understandably, ordinary citizens seem to be confused by calls for privileging of rule of law principle over rejection of corruption, even though the two camps are presumably shooting for the same thing, good governance.

    Two issues that have been raised by those who see themselves as whistleblowers against acts that show lack of respect for the rule of law since the beginning of the ongoing fight against corruption is the fact that some who have been given bail by the courts are denied the benefit of bail by the federal government. Undoubtedly, it is not encouraging for any government to do anything to suggest that it does not respect the independence of the judiciary. But one area that is often ignored is that the judiciary, like other sectors of the polity and society, also has its own bad eggs as it is in all professions and occupations in the land.

    Borrowing Joseph Ferguson’s concept of mythological civic narrative and Lord Acton’s assertion: “There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it, “it is logical to say that many of the politicians and media pundits who make efforts to privilege the principle of rule of law over the imperative of identifying, investigating, and prosecuting individuals caught with corrupt acts assume that the judiciary is right all the time. If time is taken to do forthright judicial criticism, it will be demonstrated that many judges use the space of discretion at their disposal to favour those accused of criminal behaviour and the sabotage of the state. For example, if it was not for the Administration of Criminal Act 2015, cases that have been put in the cooler in the name of rule of law since 2006 would not have seen the light of day, as they are now doing at the instance of the EFCC. The rule of law must protect all citizens. This is why most commentators emphasise equality before the law as the core of the political ideology that the law is the king as opposed to the king being law.

    It is citizens at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder in particular who have not enjoyed the principle of equality before the law that are now querying in letters to the editor section of newspapers and on blogs the new obsession with the rule of law on account of time between the approval of bail and the actual release of suspects by law enforcers. The masses seem to be wondering if the word rule of law is to conceal rather than to reveal, whether the repetition of the phrase is not an attempt to take attention away from efforts to fight corruption. Citizens who are enraged by the absurdity of appropriation of funds meant for improvement of the life of all or to fight Boko Haram’s war against the nation are worried that the elite are doing what they have always done best: create confusion or distraction in order to prevent any meaningful intervention by those committed to deter corruption through a crime and punishment initiative.

    President Buhari may not have provided a grand narrative of how he plans to govern the country, he has, undoubtedly, clearly stated that no change can come to the economy if and until looters of the economy and the polity in the past are made to return their loot. Many people would argue that If President Buhari had any personal interest in keeping certain persons in jail over the mismanagement of $2.1 billion approved for the purchase of arms to fight Boko Haram, he would or could have given those involved in the case a graver charge. They could have been charged for sabotaging the country at a time of war and thus endangering the population. And doing this would have kept everybody involved in jail until their innocence is proven, as such charge would fall under the category of capital offence.

    Historically, the ritualistic conceptualisation of rule of law had been challenged in the past in many societies. Thomas Paine once said in “Common Sense” that unjust laws threaten the religiosity of the rule of law, just as Henry David Thoreau said in “Civil Disobedience”: “Thus, under the name of Order and Civil Government, we are all made at last to pay homage to and support our own meanness.” Those calling for the supremacy of rule of law, regardless of the justness of the law or of the ethicality of the interpreter of the law, may be overlooking the danger that the call for strict constructionist view of the concept may hold. At a time that corruption has almost brought the country to bankruptcy and international receivership, it is necessary for pundits to be guided by Lord Acton’s axiom that the office may not sanctify the holder. In all the branches of government in our country: executive, legislative, and judicial, the office does sanctify the holders. The two bills being sent by the presidency to NASS may just be a good beginning in the journey to kill corruption before corruption kills the country along with the rule of law.

  • 2015: Every opinion is treasonable

    2015: Every opinion is treasonable

    One of the greatest tragedies of the Fourth Republic is the all-out assault on our national psyche. Each time we enter a new election cycle truth, reason and common sense become casualties. As the darker side of our leaders emerges it’s as if a wet blank has been dumped on the nation’s mood. There’s very little to uplift and all you read and hear depresses.

    We are ostensibly in a democratic dispensation, but never has there been a more anti-democratic temper in the land. Before our very eyes hard worn freedoms are being rolled back by temporary occupants of powerful offices, and Nigerians who are notorious ‘shock absorbers’ are casually taking it in their stride.

    Today, the most dangerous thing you can hold is not a gun but a contrary opinion. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo in his famous epistle to his erstwhile protégé, President Goodluck Jonathan, raised disturbing questions about the actions of this administration.

    Rather than limiting his response to the substance of the letter he received, he veered off into name-calling, bald insinuations and topped it by labelling Obasanjo’s missive a threat to national security.

    Several weeks before the letter-writing saga began this same administration accused the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) of treason – nothing less – over some statement the party issued!

    Ever since there has been no let-up in the flood of tirades and threats from ethnic champions and jobbers falling over themselves to attack anyone who dared criticise the powers-that-be. All this is coming at a time when even Popes are becoming leery of laying claim to infallibility.

    A few days ago, former Minister for the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nasir El-Rufai, was hauled in by agents of the State Security Service (SSS) for making “inciting statements.” Apparently, at some forum in Abuja last week he had predicted that the 2015 elections could be bloody in parts of the country and many would lose their lives.

    With what is going in Rivers State today it is hard to see how that comment can faulted. Already, people are being beaten and bloodied for belonging to the “wrong political camp.” The continuing assault on gatherings of supporters of Governor Rotimi Amaechi by the police and hired thugs is a matter of public record. A senator, Magnus Abe, is recuperating in London after his body stopped rubber bullets allegedly shot by the police at one of the aborted rallies.

    Without any sense of shame, the Rivers State police command willingly provides security cover whenever the governor’s foes hold their own events. Mbu Joseph Mbu who presides over this partisan detachment of the “Nigerian Police,” is often quick with the mealy-mouthed response about Amaechi’s supporters not obtaining a police permit.

    The Police force is chock full of lawyers who cannot claim ignorance of the fact that both the Federal High Court and Court of Appeal have ruled that Nigerians do not need a police permit to enjoy what is their constitutional right. Lagos lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) has written a treatise on this referring to the rulings of Justice Gloria Chinyere on a 2006 suit filed by the defunct All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), as well as a subsequent ruling on the same matter by Justice Olufunke Adekeye formerly of the Court of Appeal.

    This is supposedly a democratic dispensation yet court rulings are either ignored or disobeyed without consequences. This is the sort of sick system that our leaders are proud to preside over and bequeath to those who will come after them.

    Unfortunately, this lawlessness, this blatant rape of the constitution continues apace because the police carry guns funded by taxpayers on whom – in cruel irony – they are now turning them in groveling service of their current masters.

    Of course, it suits the Jonathan’s political agenda to destabilise his political foe and to keep Rivers in ferment until 2015 in the hope that this will enable him take the state. It is the selfish thing to do but is it the patriotic thing?

    The stakes are high and nothing short of outright victory will do for either side. That sets the stage for violence and bloodshed in a community with a background for militancy, and where there is mounting evidence that politicians are amassing arms for the coming showdown.

    The week the world mourned former South African leader Nelson Mandela, our own president was at his preachy best – flaying Nigerian politicians for not imbibing the virtues of the great statesman. Sadly, he too has not been preaching what he preaches. Mandela would not have allowed what is playing out in Rivers – i.e. giving winking approval for the police to abuse their powers in one corner of the country – just because it suits him politically.

    In reaction to the crisis in Rivers APC has now directed its lawmakers in the National Assembly to block budget passage and ministerial confirmation. The Presidency and PDP have responded by accusing the opposition of seeking to truncate democracy. Jonathan’s voluble Political Adviser, Ahmed Gulak, regurgitated the usual line about “playing politics with everything.” Talk about hypocrisy!

    What is Jonathan doing by allowing the situation in Rivers to fester if not playing politics? What is he doing with his new cabinet selection if not placing pawns on the 2015 political chess board? If the president as incumbent has power to manipulate the police and armed forces for his own ends, the opposition are within their rights to deploy their limited and new-fangled pull in the National Assembly to full advantage.

    It happens everywhere. Late last year the American government shutdown because the Republicans who controlled the House of Representatives used their numerical clout to frustrate a budget deal until the most powerful president on earth cut a compromise with them. American democracy was not demolished just because of the two-week plus showdown.

    In the same manner Nigeria’s faux democracy will survive any clashing of heads between the APC and PDP. Indeed, in an environment like ours where presidents want to reign like monarchs, only such confrontations can bring them to heel.

    If this is the only way to get Jonathan’s attention to sort out the mess in Rivers, then the opposition deserves the applause of all true patriots.

  • From the cell phone

    For Segun Gbadegesin

     

    PDP covers every member no matter what he or she does as long as it is in the interest of the party. PDP members are like vultures that are eating the carcass of a dead animal. Nigerians are the carcass on which PDP eats and whose bone it cracks without minding the consequence. Now PDP is at it again by endorsing the Jonathan for a second term in office, not minding the suffering of the poor Nigerians who have been suffering insecurity, poverty, and power supply since the inception of the party. Take for instance, fortnight ago NGF election was held and the president that we are all looking up to for direction said 16 is bigger than 19 and the governor who scored the least number, Jang started ‘Janging’ according to Oshimhole. From H. Ozi Momoh

    They destroyed their party’s constitution in order to actualise their selfish political objectives, we did not speak out because we were not PDP members. Then, they invaded the NGF and tore it to shred, we did not speak out because we did not belong to that association. When they would set the country on fire by their rampaging desperation and anti-democratic practices, it would have become too late for us to speak out. Those who see nothing wrong in this orchestrated infamy should realise that injustice does not begin and end with one individual; it spreads like wild fire. From Ifeanyi O.Ifeanyichukwu

    Re: Echoes of Babel. Most Politicians in Nigeria today are our societal headaches. Only just a few of them are considerate to the mass populace. The intrigues in NGF, the styled tactical declaration for second term on governorship, senatorial repeat is common to them all in all the political parties. The Echoes of Babel is shared by them all! Even the so-called progressives could not challenge those running House of Reps, Senate, House of Assemblies thrice! No other family party member. As for ex-Governor Akala, let us see his joker for success on his new target. From Lanre Oseni

    Your piece ‘Echoes of Babel’ is a master piece. It aptly captures a true picture of the party that has prided itself as the biggest party in Africa . To me, the party is nothing but a house of commotion, a bad manager of internal crises whose leaders are clueless and bereft of ideas. 2015 is around the corner and with the emergence of APC as a formidable party, we will see what becomes of the PDP and the rest of her leaders. From Ojo A. Ayodele, Emure Ekiti

    Segun, you are just too much. Your piece of advice to the president was at the right time. You are a bridge to the unity of this Nation. Please keep the good work. From J. K. Usman

    For Olatunji Dare

     

    Did Tinubu hear what Tofa said? Asiwaju should be very careful the way he romances with the Northerners. Upon all Awo did for the North; won the civil war for them, the only consolation we have is the anullement of June12 elecetion. Make we shine our eyes oh. Anonymous

    Tofa would have remained in his shell rather than commenting on June 12. If he had won the election, he would have been tagged a regional president. It is only a naive who will say remembering June 12 was a colossal waste of time. The like of Tofa should by now try to emulate Sardauna of Sokoto whose legacies are still very alive to emulate. He should know that, the role he played in that election is still very fresh in the memory of Nigerians. He should talk as elderly stateman not as a novice. From Hamza Ozi Momoh, Apapa Lagos

    If Tofa is still bitter about losing to MKO, I think he is a civilian with soldier’s ideology. A true democrat will not even raise an eye brow to say negative things about June 12. He should know that the politics he played 20 years ago was a politics of ‘only we can rule’, which, if played now will be resisted by all. Take note Tofa, you did not win. Abiola won. From Hamza Ozi Momoh, Apapa Lagos

    Congratulations on your piece on Tofa. You said it all especially when talked about the quality of his mind. I only want to say in addition that the dead are better than some who are still living. From Pastor Ugwa Pius

    It was beter Abiola die than Tofa becoming president. Let him contest election again because when you fail in a exam, you will repeat as my mentor, Buhari is doing now. Anonymous

    I have just read your piece at the back page of The Nation. I enjoyed especially your last paragraph. I always admire courage. From K. I. Oleh, Aba

    In my opinion, Bashir Tofa is not a man of strong character. The evil he had done will continue to haunt him as long as he remains defiant to truth. Anonymous

    Olatunji, thanks for your write-up on Bashir Tofa: What manner of man? In my opinion, Gov Jang of Plateau State has just graduated from “Bashir Tofa’s Political School of Embarrassment”, otherwise, how can Tofa and Jang face Nigerians that they won the Presidential election (1993) and Chairmanship of NGF (2013 ) respectively? A very “big thanks” to IBB and Jonathan for their unquantifiable support in promoting anarchy. Whether they like it or not, we are no fools. Anonymous

    The June 12 presidential election has exposed Tofa for what he is. Nigeria was lucky for not having his kind of person as president then. I wonder how he would have ruled Nigeria successfully without grinding the ship of state to a halt. From Ojo A. Ayodele, Emure Ekiti

    What a master piece, you have captured very well, not only the person of Tofa, but more importantly the reasoning of a click of power brokers of our country. June 12 was annuled, but definetely, no one can ignore its significance and consequences. Anonymous

    Re: Bashir Tofa: What manner of a man? Bashir Tofa had learnt nothing and remembers rubbish! It was painful witnessing June 12 election result annulment, it was nevertheless better than seeing Tofa won that, or win any election in Nigeria. Islam thought us not to tell lies, never to be joyous at another’s pain and be honest at all times. Tofa broke all those commandments. May MKO Abiola of blessed memory, continue to have his soul rest in peace and rest well in Al-janah firdauz, ameen. Who knows tomorrow? None except God-Allah. From Lanre Oseni

    Your write-up on Bashir Tofa refers. This man was one of those that put this country in this mess we find ourselves now. I knew he will be unhappy whenever he recalls his role in the annulment of the June 12 1993 eletion even to the grave. Anonymous

    What do you expect from a man whose name was not in register, who cannot win his constituency to say? Allow him to warm his mouth. Thank you. From Kenneth Lagos

    June 12 has been turned into an ethnic or tribal affair, which has lost its meaning. As far as you are concerned, everybody must share your opinion, I think that makes you very little in mind and thought. Bashir Tofa is entitled to his opinion as you are entitled to your opinion. Anonymous

    Sir, your article on Tuesday was well written, kudos! Tofa was indeed part of the mischief to frustrate the electoral process. From Dan, Kaduna

    Indomitable Dare, if June 12 has not become a watershed in the history of Nigeria it is a thorn in the flesh of the establishment and those who murdered sleep will sleep no more and it will continue to dangle on their neck like a sword of damocle. You are a gift to this generation. From Ifreke Okon Edet, Port Harcourt

     

    For Tunji Adegboyega

     

    Re: “Doing it gay or straight” (your column of Sunday, June 23 refers). It’s Nigerians, not the British PM that should respect themselves by stopping to beg for any form of the so-called aids. If the British PM has no leverage over Nigerians, his statements should have been regarded as empty threats. From Kunle O.

    Burundi rejected this nonsensical interference in 2009; though a country slightly bigger than Lagos State and its budget is 70 percent sponsored by donor countries. Cameron should advise the British royal to practise same-sex marriage. Anonymous.

    David Cameron should go to hell with his help to Nigeria. History will not take it kindly with anybody who supports the evil offer that the British government is offering Nigeria. I have never seen, not even in the holy books that man to man, woman to woman should marry. Let him come to Nigeria and stand in the open place and say it; whether he will not be pelted with pure water. Insecurity, poverty, political instability are all threatening the existence of Nigeria and he cannot talk about these ones; he is threatening to stop his help to Nigeria. We don’t need Cameron’s help. He should keep his evil plan within his country. From Hamza Ozi Mommoh, Apapa, Lagos.

    This gay thing has become a national problem, particularly amongst educated youths. Check the profile pictures on the Facebook to see how bad this thing has spread in the nation. Anyway, your article is timely and point blank. Thanks. Anonymous.

    Tunji, may the Almighty God bless you for making my Sunday a fulfilling one. As I read your piece titled “Doing it gay or straight’ in The Nation on Sunday newspaper, I received the assurance that Nigeria, my country, is a nation of high moral values. What will the British derive from legalising homosexuality and gay marriage in Nigeria? Homosexuality is so demeaning and dirty that it is not a practice in the animal kingdom. If leaders of the so-called civilised world are looking for new fields to plant their moral decadence, they try it in Siberia with the Russians. As for Nigeria, we are already bent on implementing our economic and moral transformation. From Benjamin.

    Just finished reading your script on same-sex marriage. You made very useful points. We are Africans, we have social norms and values. Part of the reason why we are where we are today is that we compromised some of these norms. Never again! Nice piece. From Eng. Emeka Ikom, Cross River State.

    Tell me, Tunji, how long have you been struggling with the fact that you are a latent homosexual? Because I’ve never seen anyone spew so much vitriol over something that doesn’t affect him in any way. If you wish to hide your preference for men, please do so. But please, leave openly gay people alone to live their lives. Only God has the right to judge anyone. Anonymous.

    This piece is scintillating. Mr Cameron wants Nigeria to adopt same-sex marriage. The truth is that the ruling class has sold this country to Europe and closed the way to indigenous capitalism. The people must wrest Nigeria from the Camerons. Thanks,. From Amos Ejimonye, Kaduna.

    Cameron should first reverse the gay marriage they introduced before Nigerians would listen to his consultations. We are mature to know the good from the bad and the ugly. So, his consultations would be meaningless if he failed to give us hope on how to solve our problems of insecurity and social vices that are threatening our democracy. From Gordon Chika Nnorom, Umukabia, Abia State.

    Thanks a great deal for giving a clarion call on the need to live ‘straight’. God bless you. From Ade, Lafia, Nasarawa State.

    Re: ‘Uncommon fraternity’ (The Nation, June 16). Glory be to Almighty God. Success shall continue to be yours who took it upon yourself to help him (Faleye) and his family through your column; same to donors and myself with good intention. You mean no senator, House of Reps, state house of assembly members read that request? Na wa o! Presidency via the Minister of Education and state governors too did not read the request? Nigeria! From Lanre Oseni.

    Thank God. Thank you. Thank DHL and thank the DHL staff for this beautiful act. From A.T. Mozie, Nsukka.

  • Can National Assembly uphold public opinion?

    Can National Assembly uphold public opinion?

    The House of Representatives has collated the views of Nigerians on the proposed constitution review across the 360 constituencies. But can the amendment reflect public opinion? ask Victor Oluwasegun and Dele Anofi.

     

    On November 10, last year,the House of Representatives organised public hearings across the 360 constituencies on the proposed constitution amendment. Following the sessions, 43 items were identifiesd as the most important issues germane to the proposed amendment.

    These issues include the immunity for the President and members of the Federal Executive Council, Sovereign National Conference SNC), state police and true federalism. Others are tenure of office holders, state creation, autonomy for Houses of Assembly, financial autonomy for the local government, indigeneship and citizenship and Diaspora voting.

    When the Emeka Ihedioha-led Constitution Review Committee kicked off the assignment on April 18, many Nigerians doubted the sincerity of the legislators.

    However, the Deputy Speaker assured them that, not only would the people be carried along, the amendment would reflect their wishes.

    Now that the collated views have been presented to the House by the committe, the fear has resurfaced again. Will the views collated by the House form the main thrust of the constitution amendment?

    At the presentation, Ihedioha ruled out the manipulation of the public opinion, stressing that the collated views would not be doctored or tampered with.

    The National Assembly only approached the people with items that they felt were of utmost importance. No addition was permitted at the public hearing. Of the 43 items, 24 were considered by the people and 19 discarded. For instance, the decision of the people that Section 197(1) (b) be amended to abolish the State Independent Electoral Commission so that all elections are conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission is still being frowned at some quarters. This is Item 3 on the list.

    Also, Item 13 generated ripples. While some felt that unelected local government should be denied funding, others felt that it would inflict pains on the grassroots. Item 13 was also an emotional issue. There was disagreement over whether the states should create councils without approval by the National Assembly.

    According to the committee, state police was rejected by 307 constituencies. The question was: “Should Section 214(1) be amended to enable the establishment of a state police”. 292 constituencies said that the country should maintain the current police structure and system as in the Constitution.

    The rotational presidency advocated by some Nigerians was defeated as 275 constituencies rejected the proposal that a provision be inserted in the constitution for the rotation of the Office of President between the North and South. In addition, 210 constituencies opposed the proposal that the Office of President should rotate among the six geo-political zones. On the other hand, 147 said yes and three refrained from voting.

    The voting pattern may not dissuade the advocates of zoning. Analysts contend that the verdict of thye constituencies may not silence them too long.

    In the report, one resolution stands out. This is contained in Item 8. Many Nigerians insisted that Sections 81 and 121(1) of the Constitution should be amended to require the President and governors to prepare and lay the annual budget before the Parliament, at least, three months before the end of a financial year. Hailing this resolution, many legislators said that it would avert budget failure.

    Across the constituencies, indigeneship generated passion. But the majority voted that indigeneship should be defined to include the persons who have resided in an area for a long period and these Nigerians should be entitled to the rights, duties and privileges of citizenship. Many observers believe that this limit the tension and conflict between indigenes and settlers. However, in Southwest, traditional rulers have cautioned that rights for settlers have limitation adding that they cannot aspire to traditional thrones.

    Predictably, many constituencies voted for financial autonomy for the local governments. They canvassed the abrogation of the State/Local Government Joint Accounts.

    However, members of the civil society groups have pointed out that the House had manipulated the public hearings to elicit pre- determined responses to the items.

    An example is Item 36, which asks the question:“Should the derivation component of revenue allocation be increased to, at least, 20 percent? 224 constituencies voted against it, 125 favoured the proposal and 11 abstained.

    On state creation, there were antagonistic answers. Many constituencies that would not benefit from the exercise voted against it.

    The analysis shows that 205 constituencies voted ‘Yes’, 14 voted for one state, five voted for two states, 32 voted for six states, seven voted for seven states, 22 voted for 12 states, three voted for 13 states, and 13 voted for 14 states.

    Furthermore, one constituency voted for 16 states, 107 constituencies voted ‘Yes’, 133 voted ‘No’ and 22 were undecided.

    Item 15 possed a challenging question: “Should the Second Schedule, Part 1 be amended so that some of the items, including those listed below be moved from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List – (a) Fingerprints, identification and criminal records; (b) Insurance; (c) Labour, etc; (d) Prisons; (e) Public holidays; (f) Railways. (g) Bankruptcy and Insolvency (h) Registration of births and deaths. There were multiple answers.

    According to the report, 170 constituencies voted ‘Yes’. 10 voted for sub-section (a) alone, 15 voted for sub-section (b) alone, 11 voted for subsection (c) alone, 10 voted for subsection (d) alone and 12 voted (e) alone.

    Similarly, 15 constituencies – voted for subsection (f) alone, 6 (g) alone and 34 subsection (h) alone. while 57 Federal Constituencies wholesomely voted ‘Yes’, 181 voted ‘No’ and 9 were undecided.

    However, Nigerians achieved consensus on some points. They supported the amendment of the Section 308 of the Constitution alter the immunity for the President, Vice President, governors and deputy governors, except on civil proceedings.

    The rejection of immunity by Nigerians contrasted with the clamour for immunity by the federal legislators. In the House of Representatives, the two consolidated bills on immunity have passed through the second reading.

    The bills, which were sponsored by the Chairman of the House Committee on Justice, Hon. Ali Ahmed, and Hon. Ralph Igbokwe, were consolidated, passed and subsequently referred to the ad hoc committee on the Review of the Constitution. Could the House be working at cross purposes with the wishes of the Nigerians?, many have asked.

    House of Representatives members who spke with our correspondents have clarified that the immunity being sought by the legislators would not insulate them from criminal proceedings.

    The proposed constitution may enhance wider participation in governance. This has reflected in the push for constitutional roles for the traditional rulers. 202 constituencies voted in favour of the proposal, 155 were against it and three abstained.

    Applauding the committee, the Special Adviser to the President on National Assembly, Senator Joy Emordi, said that the outcome of the public session has negated the calls for a national conference.

    She lauded the decision on the state creation, presentation of the budget proposal to the National Assembly three months before the end of the fiscal year, release of funds for unelected local councils, and the state electoral commission. Emordi observed that, if these issues are resolved, there may be no need for a Sovereign National Conference

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)’s representative, Charles Edosomwan, who is also the Chairman of the body’s Constitution Review committee, warned that the result should not be taken wholesome, since it was based on voting.

    He however, expressed optimism that the proposed constitution would be based on consensus.

    The public hearings and collation were laced with flaws. But political analysts have commended the House for the steps taken so far. The question is: will the final decision of the House on the constitution review reflect the wishes of the people?