The Nation Newspaper

Tag: politics

  • Amaechi and the politics of appointment

    Amaechi and the politics of appointment

    Mark Anthony in one of Shakesapeare’s plays plays, Julius Caesar said “Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I came to bury Caesar, not to praise him. The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones; So, let it be with Caesar.”

    This write-up is about bringing Hon. Rotimi Amaechi to the public domain and to let the people know why he should be made a minister. Before delving into why, it is pertinent to know that, Hon. Amaechi served the people of Rivers State in various capacities.

    He was Speaker of the Rivers House of Assembly for eight years during which he stabilised the legislative arm of government. We are all living witnesses to what transpired there afterwards. He later became the executive governor of Rivers State for two terms. For those who do not know or might have forgotten in a hurry what his stewardship as governor was, I will tabulate just a few.

    It is unarguable that he built and fully furnished state-of-the-art primary schools in most communities of the 23 local government areas in Rivers State. This was acknowledged by all well-meaning Nigerians and the international partner agencies. Besides, Amaechi won awards for the laudable initiative. The Universal Basic Education (UBE) national office in Abuja still has the records for doubting Thomases.

    Again, secondary education was not left out in the scheme of Amaechi’s stewardship. I am very happy they are physical structures; they are there for everyone to see.

    He also built health centres in most communities in the 23 local government areas. These health centres were fully equipped with medical doctors to attend to the patients. It should not be forgotten that drugs were equally provided in these hospitals and dispensed to patients.

    In order to make the people and the state self-sufficient in food production, Amaechi revamped the agricultural industry in Rivers State. We are all living witnesses to when the former President Olusegun Obasanjo was in Rivers State to inaugurate the projects.

    For free and easy movement, he expanded most of the roads in Port Harcourt metropolis and its environs; thus easing traffic congestions in the state.

    It is also on record that under his administration, peace and security returned to the state, as the incessant cult clashes were brought to the minimum. Besides, he was able to restore decency and order in Port Harcourt, the capital city by allaying people’s fears concerning the incessant kidnapping of expatriates and citizens.

    It is also on record that Hon. Amaechi remains one of the governors in Nigeria who drove themselves around the city as sitting governors without any fear of being attacked or molested by the people.

    Hon. Rotimi Amaechi is a detribalised Nigerian who believes in the oneness and unity of the country. Against all odds, he joined forces with other well-meaning progressives to fight the injustice in the then ruling party to bring about the much-needed change Nigerians have been yearning for.

    Feelers coming from the Senate have it that two Senators from the state must recommend his ministerial nomination. Unfortunately, the Senators from Rivers State are members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and have drawn the battle line with Amaechi long ago. It was also reported that they have submitted a petition against him.

    But my view is that the Senators from Rivers State should allow national interest to prevail instead of allowing personal vendetta to guide their sense of reasoning at this point when the country is in dire need of competent hands to help stir the ship of this nation to the Promised Land.

    The Senators representing Rivers State should, as a matter of urgency, do a rethink and take a cue from their colleagues from Ekiti and Lagos and support the nomination of Amaechi. They should not deny the country of his service.

    Except they are telling Nigerians that Amaechi did not perform creditably as a governor for the eight years he served the state. Electioneering campaigns are over and this is the time for reality. The worst that could ever happen to Nigeria and Nigerians in this dispensation is to be denied of the service of this young, dynamic, energetic, straight-forward looking man for the sake of bitter politics.

    If we have a few more Amaechi in Nigeria, we would be better for it. Nigeria is in dire need of his kind.

     

    • Moses Animikhenal is a former aide to President Olusegun Obasanjo and currently resides in Abuja. 
  • Exposing the tricks in politics

    Exposing the tricks in politics

    In this book, the author took excursion into the chequered history of Nigeria right from 1914 Amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates and Lagos Colony into a geographical expression called Nigeria. The country became a conglomeration of people from diverse cultures and orientations, customs and traditions, religions and world outlook.

    Incidentally, the features of ethnic and cultural contradictions rather than become a source of strength and unity seem to have become Nigeria’s albatross as it is still grappling with the problem of nationhood after over 100 years of the amalgamation.  And to address the attendant uneven power equation and distribution inherent in the system which had created tension and fear of domination by any particular group, some phrases had been coined.

    Ozekhome borrowed the title of the book from one of such coinages by Dr. K.O. Mbadiwe, the most grandiloquent politician of the Second Republic who used the term, Zoning To Unzone, in his National Party of Nigeria to address the vexed issue of zoning the presidency in Nigeria as a recipe to douse the fear of the minority groups or a section of the country to lord it over other parts.

    In the book, Ozekhome synthesises the arguments generated by both protagonists and antagonists of zoning, exploring the perspectives of law and national history. He examines the issues of the Fiscal Federalism, Federal Character and the intense competition for power, resource control and derivation by different ethnic nationalities. He also discusses the vexed issues of rotational presidency and devolution of power.

    Ozekhome posits that the continuous controversy generated about zoning is simply a ploy by the political elite to partition the country into fiefdoms and share her booty; that it is all about sharing the national cake, not bothering about baking it.

    The book throws light into the reason zoning had been fervently canvassed and advocated to be the core of political scheme of things in the country, highlighting the remote and immediate causes of the great debate.  The legal luminary writes that while it seems logical to conclude that zoning has been muted by political actors and which was to be in a continual state of political evolution in Nigeria, the word did not come into prominent usage until the death of President Umaru Yar’Adua.  Ozekhome observes that after his death “Political Samurais unsheathed their swords, whipping up ethnic, sectional and regional sentiments to create an atmosphere of political uncertainty while gleefully riding on the word ‘zoning’.”

    Ozekhome warns that the way and manner the concept is used or rather misused has the tendency of creating situations capable of cataclysmic effects thereby leaving the polity at the mercy of regressive forces.

    Of particular interest is the Chapter Four in which he critically examined and analysed the link between Boko Haram terrorism that has been ravaging the North East Nigeria and the politics of zoning.

    Ozekhome points the way forward.  He submits unequivocally that the assumption that the principle of power rotation and zoning are mutually exclusive is patently fallacious.  He insists that one actually presupposes the other, observing that the thought of giving every citizen and zone a sense of belonging and inclusiveness in the government of the country through rotation actually necessitated the concept of zoning.

    He contends that zoning without power rotation is meaningless and irrelevant in the political scheme of things in Nigeria; that zoning standing on its own, is no more than systemic quest to maintain the status quo thereby defeating the actual reason for the evolution of the concept.  He says that even the PDP which saw the wisdom of inserting the word zoning in its constitution never contemplated the subject in isolation of rotation.

    Ozekhome submits that there is no zone in Nigeria that has the exclusive right to access the Presidency of Nigeria to the exclusion of all others.  He argues that though zoning among the six geopolitical zones is not recognised by the 1999 Constitution, the same constitution which allows every Nigerian to aspire to the presidency, does not also state expressly the manner and order it should take.  He contends that the constitution therefore does not prohibit the concept of rotation or principle of zoning, which brings about orderliness and a sense of belonging to and hope by all segments of the society that it would one day be their turn to govern.

     

     

    “This brings about patriotism and a sense of nationalism.  Were we to use majoritorial or numerical strength alone, some of the country would lord it over others for ever, while some other will be perpetually dominated and subjugated,” he says.

    The author concludes by saying that rotational presidency and zoning help to unite the heterogeneous, religious, cultural, linguistic and ethnic diversity of Nigeria that consists of many nationalities.

    He therefore recommends for all Nigerians of whatever gender, religion, language, ethnic group, state in life, circumstances of birth, academic and cultural backgrounds the philosophy of live and let live, and learn the principle of zoning to unzone.

    The book is very relevant in the contemporary politics of Nigeria.  For students, teachers of Nigerian History, Politics and Government, any one aspiring to the leadership of Nigeria and all patriotic Nigerians, Zone To Unzone is a must read.

    The book has the touch of a master. It is written in lucid and easy to understand language which only a person with exceptional communication skills can accomplish. The organisation of facts, printing and layout of the book are superb and done with clinical finesse. All bear the mark of professionalism.

    The book has four postscripts. The first and second deal with the South South Quest for President: The search for Equity, Justice and Fair play and the intrigues that preceded the 2015 General Elections and the limits of President’s power to declare state of emergency.  Postscript four relives the author’s traumatic experience in the hand of kidnappers.

    Chief Ozekhome, a radical lawyer and leading Human Rights Crusader  brought his commitment and dint of hard-work and perseverance to bear in this work.

    The pro-democracy campaigner, public affairs analyst reputed for being the nemesis of many opposing Counsel, Ozekhome, is deep in the knowledge of the Law and procedures and is a flamboyant master of advocacy and researcher who deploys the product of his insatiable appetite for knowledge even in fields outside the Law, to dust formidable opponents in the law courts.

    As a student and lover of philosophy, literature, history and the scriptures, Ozekhome has a way with words and possesses profound oratorical skills which enable him to strike the right chord, while painting mentally-recorded picture with words.

     

     

  • Omo-Ojo’s politics of stomach infrastructure

    Omo-Ojo’s politics of stomach infrastructure

    I have not stopped laughing since reading an interview published by a national daily featuring the immediate past Edo State Transport Commissioner, Orobosa Omo-Ojo. The reason is simple: it was an audacious attempt by a pathetic character to falsify the facts of recent history but ended up making a fool of himself. On the day his sack was announced, for instance, only Omo-Ojo’s army of rough-necks clothed in funny-looking white uniform who had been terrorizing and extorting hapless motorists in Benin City under the guise of regulating traffic did not jubilate.  Having been so dismissed ignominiously from his job to the applause of the Edo public, a sensible man would have saved himself further ridicule by simply making himself less visible.

    Not Omo-Ojo. Rather, blinded by malice, the self-acclaimed “technocrat-in-government” (another big lie) now tried hard to belittle what is generally acknowledged as the monumental achievements of the incumbent governor, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. In his desperation to project the Comrade Governor as a let-down, Omo-Ojo comically resorted to praising – wait for it – the much discredited Lucky Igbinedion as a great achiever!

    But this serial political failure (he lost in the ACN senatorial primaries of 2011 and APC House of Reps primaries of 2015) is only acting true to character: a flutist who blows his pipe in your praise so long as you look after his “stomach infrastructure”. By his tone in the said interview, it would seem Omo-Ojo does not consider the Comrade Governor to be worthy of his office. So, the question is: if Omo-Ojo is truly a man of high principle that he now pretends to be, why did he serve that administration in various capacities for seven whole years? Let us even rewind to last year. The same Omo-Ojo had granted another interview in the national daily where he praised Oshiomhole to high heavens as a great “inspiration from whom I have drawn invaluable leadership lessons and skills”. Now relieved of his juicy portfolio, the man is singing a different tune. Isn’t there shame at all again?

    In his tales-by-the-moonlight, Omo-Ojo listed the “achievements” of his new-found paymaster as the founding of many fantastic industries and a sprawling housing estate in Benin City. Seriously? Really?

    Well, if any viable industry was bequeathed by the Igbinedion administration, it must be existing in Omo-Ojo’s infertile imagination. The truth of the matter is that the so-called industries purportedly set up by Igbinedion were nothing but creative drain-pipes through which public funds were siphoned. For instance, whereas it is on record that a whopping N700m was expended in setting up one of such, the same company was eventually sold for less than N50m by the same Igbinedion administration years later in the name of privatization.  Talking about “sprawling estate”, Omo-Ojo also needs to clarify whether it is the same as one of the assets forfeited by the former governor to EFCC under a plea-bargain arrangement years ago.

    The harder cheap hirelings like Omo-Ojo try, Oshiomhole’s sterling records can never be tarnished. His handworks and indeed footprints across the 192 wards of Edo State are too visible even for the blind to see. Space constraint will not permit one to go into a catalogue here. But suffice it to say that Edo people, who had suffered the atrophy of PDP for 10 dark years and Oshiomhole’s redemptive exertions of the past seven years, are indeed appreciative. No wonder that in the 2012 polls, they gave the governor unprecedented 75 percent of the vote such that he won in all the 18 councils of the state. And despite the huge ill-gotten cash Omo-Ojo’s new paymasters deployed in the last state elections, Edo people again demonstrated their confidence in Oshiomhole by voting overwhelmingly for APC.

    The culture of prudence and value-for-money is very much in evidence today. It explains why clueless disciples like Omo-Ojo had to be offloaded along the way. Oshiomhole’s tenacious commitment explains why Edo has more to show in terms of social infrastructure like roads, schools, hospitals relative to its meager resources compared to its oil-rich neighbours. It explains why whereas those oil-rich neighbours began to owe salaries and later craved federal bail-out, not once did Oshiomhole default in paying workers’ salaries at the end of every month in the last seven years.

    Really, it is impossible for the Comrade Governor to fix all the rot accumulated by PDP for 10 years. Take education, for instance. Until Oshiomhole took over, the education sector was in total mess. Not only were our children left to take lessons in classrooms that made pigsty look like five-star luxury, content was also absent. Little wonder then that the secondary school calendar was defined by high failure rate and the state became synonymous with “miracle centres” where parents paid fortune to “mercenaries” to fix certificate exams for their wards.

    But all that is now history. By investing massively in rebuilding schools and motivating teachers to be more committed by way of incentives like prompt payment of salaries and allowances, public confidence had been restored in public schools. Today, more than 60 percent of public primary and secondary schools have been completely reconstructed across the state. Enrolment has doubled, tripled and quadrupled in the past seven years. Nothing perhaps underscores the improved quality than the WAEC/NECO results in the past three years. Last year, overall, Edo came third across the country. This year, it improved to the second position. So, who says Oshiomhole has not changed the Edo story for the better.

    How cheap for Omo-Ojo to say members of Edo Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) were sacked unjustifiably. The truth is that it was not meant to be a permanent scheme. It was an interventionist initiative designed to groom beneficiaries for eventual engagement in the labour market. Over the years, it was discovered that the scheme was increasingly being abused such that many of those who originally enrolled and were drawing monthly salaries had since moved out of Edo. Many were no longer reporting in their places of primary assignment. As a mark of his commitment to ensure judicious use of public funds on the one hand and also harness those who may have proved their mettle on the job, Comrade Oshiomhole decided to phase out YES with a view to deploying those who took their jobs seriously to fill existing vacancies in the public service. The state civil service commission was directed to take steps to regularize their integration into the state civil service. The process is almost completed now. How does this amount to a crime as insinuated by Omo-Ojo?

    Well, one sincerely hopes that the Comrade Governor will put sentiments aside and summon the political will to make public the findings of the administrative panel set up to investigate mind-boggling allegations of unwholesome practices under Omo-Ojo’s watch at the transport ministry. Stories have been told how illegal VIOs were deployed around Benin metropolis to extort money from motorists. After a public outrage, same touts were “re-branded” and given white uniform to continue their siege to Benin streets. Is it true that “rents” were being collected on government premises illegally designated as motor parks? Comrade Governor, please Edo people deserve to know the truth.

     

    • Ighodalo, a social commentator, wrote from Benin.

     

     

  • ‘Shun politics of highest bidders’

    Former Oyo State People Democratic Party (PDP) governorship aspirant Mr Olufemi Babalola has urged Nigerians to shun politics of the highest bidder for the country to move forward.

    He urged professionals to get involved in politics to push the bad politicians out and pave the way for the right people.

    Babalola, who was the guest speaker at the 50th anniversary lecture of the Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan spoke on the theme: “Population, Power and politics: Necessary Tools for Development.”

    According to him, Nigeria politics must be capable of throwing up the right leaders if the right people get involved in politics.

    He identified population as one of the tools of development, urging government to control its growth.

    Babalola said: “Nigerians can help themselves to this utopia by shunning politics of the highest bidders. But it takes an enlightened population to achieve such feat.

    “Politics throw up leaders who exercise power. Hence, our politics must be capable to throw up the right leaders. Politics will drive development if we have at the helms of affairs people who can predict future because they have taken time to study the trend in the past and the present, people who will not mind sacrificing their personal comfort for the wellbeing of the nation, people whose focus is building the legacy not festering their own nest,” he said.

    Commending the achievements of the management of the School of Nursing, the Vice Chancellor, Professor Issaac Adewole, who was represented by the Deputy Chancellor Administration, Professor Emilolorun Ayelari, and the Chief Medical Director of the University College Hospital(UCH), Professor Temitope Alonge said the principle set by the funding fathers of the institution in 1952 is still in place till date.

  • Power separation: rule of law or tricks of politics?

    There was evidence last week that many members of the 8th Senate acted in a way to suggest that they need to be reminded about the need for lawmakers in particular to adhere religiously to the rule of law at all times, if, ironically, they are not to contribute to the collapse of democracy in the country. 

    A principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency. –UN Secretary-General on the Rule of Law

    Nigeria’s democracy may amount to nothing if the principle of rule of law is endangered in any form. It will not matter if threat to the rule of law emanates from any arm of government: executive, legislative, and judicial. More important, commitment to the rule of law cannot afford to be just rhetorical; it has to be religious. There was evidence last week that many members of the 8th Senate acted in a way to suggest that they need to be reminded about the need for lawmakers in particular to adhere religiously to the rule of law at all times, if, ironically, they are not to contribute to the collapse of democracy in the country.

    Shortly after the appearance of Mr. Bukola Saraki at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, 83 senators were reported to have expressed on the floor of Senate a vote of confidence in Saraki’s presidency of the upper house. This announcement was sequel to a report that about 50 senators accompanied Mr. Saraki to the Tribunal when he made his first appearance there. During the debate preceding the expression of vote of confidence in Saraki by 83 of his colleagues, individual senators were reported to have stated that the principle of separation of powers had been endangered by the invitation of Saraki to appear before the Code of Conduct Tribunal to defend himself over allegation of misconduct. Senators’ conflation of two distinct issues: Saraki’s presidency of the senate and Saraki’s need to respond to charges of false declaration of his assets confuses issues and misses the point.

    Saraki is being charged for alleged misconduct committed long before he became senate president. Whatever anyone thinks about the politics of the charges, Saraki is being tried in an open court and therefore has a transparent platform to defend himself according to the law. A superior position that should have been taken by Saraki’s admirers is to give him more free time to defend himself at the Tribunal without having to worry about day-to-day management of the senate. Taking such decision does not derogate from Saraki’s innocence. If anything, it is capable of enriching the principle of rule of law. Mr. Saraki should have been viewed by those who rushed a vote of confidence in him as innocent until he is proven guilty by his accusers. With that mindset, it should have been clear to Saraki’s colleagues that he does not need any special show of solidarity by his fellow senators to boost his confidence. Having pleaded not guilty to all the charges, Saraki should not need any pampering by his colleagues. All he needs are good lawyers and honest support of all categories of citizens who believe in Saraki’s innocence.

    Without doubt, the Senate President’s confidence-boosting comrades acted with very little consideration for ethical standards expected of lawmakers and other citizens in public life. Knowingly or otherwise, Saraki’s 83 senators acted as if they had no faith in the rule of law and independence of the judiciary. As the nation’s lawmakers, they ought to act more ethically by allowing the different branches of government of which they are a part to do their job without any harassment or intimidation. It is, therefore, not surprising that citizens have called the vote of confidence in Saraki an attempt to intimidate the judicial system of the country. It should have occurred to the 83 senators that their rush of vote of confidence in Saraki, while he is facing charges of misconduct for actions taken long before he became senate president, is also liable to be viewed as an attempt to rig the judicial process, thus smashing the principle of separation of powers that the senators believed they could strengthen with expression of vote of confidence.

    On his own part, Senator Saraki should not have had any difficulty in showing superior moral leadership to his colleagues’ by withdrawing himself from the position of senate president while facing trial. Contrary to common belief, doing so would not have shown any weakness on his part or of fear of losing his senate presidency. If anything, it would have raised his moral stature among lawmakers and citizens who subscribe to high ethical standards in public life. It is true that the constitution does not call for temporary withdrawal from senate on his part, but he could have benefited tremendously from applying the wisdom; “discretion is the better part of valour” to the situation of divided attention caused by having to go to court on charges of misconduct while functioning as senate president. This is what most of his counterparts in other democratic countries would have done.

    The rush of vote of confidence by 83 senators from the ruling and the opposition parties has more implications than may appear to the average observer of public affairs. Some social media pundits are already saying that the vote of confidence denotes fear about the impact of the case on Saraki’s current political power and influence. There is also the possibility that such fear may not only be about Saraki. It is likely that the 83 senators may also be afraid of what can happen to them, should the executive branch, preoccupied as it is with a manifesto to fight corruption more aggressively than before, choose to open many more files of lawmakers, ministers, and civil servants.

    Furthermore, the pressure from the NASS in the last three weeks on the executive to release 64 billion naira constituency allowance to lawmakers and the legislators’ resistance of citizens’ strident calls for review of salaries and allowances of lawmakers suggest readiness on the part of the legislative branch to deploy its political arsenal to neutralise the call for higher ethical standards in government. While citizens are worrying about the sense in providing constituency allowance for lawmakers, senators are giving the executive an oppressive deadline to pay lawmakers’ constituency allowances that could not be paid last year by the Jonathan presidency on account of dwindling revenue. The pressure for payment of 2014 constituency allowances for new and returning lawmakers smacks of efforts to divert the attention of the executive from focusing on realignment of the country’s finances in view of continuous fall in national revenue.

    If citizens want change, they have to pay close attention to direct and indirect attempts by the senate to politicise what is essentially a moral issue. Rushing a vote of confidence to divert citizens’ attention from what is a moral or ethical case is absurd and diversionary. Similarly, putting pressure on the executive to pay constituency allowance to the National Assembly at a time that calls for wholesale rationalisation should be high on the priority list of the country is capable of creating avoidable crisis between the executive and the legislature. From the consistency in his public declarations – national and international- there is no doubt that President Buhari is serious about his resolve to reduce corruption, mismanagement, and waste. Nevertheless, citizens have to show unmistakable interest in sustaining the ethic of change, in view of growing enthusiasm of some lawmakers to return to the business-as-usual model of governance.

     

     

  • The end of politics

    The end of politics

    As the end of politics as we know it upon us? Put in another way, the question becomes a double-barrel poser. Is the current refugee crisis in Europe and the poor leadership response to it so far a result of the devaluation of politics and the consequent attenuation of leadership?  And is the continent of Africa even more poorly served by this global poverty of leadership?

    It is surely a remarkable historical spectacle to find European leadership in the main listlessly fretting over and enormously frightened by the ultimate logic of globalization, a phenomenon which has benefitted their people and western civilization for so long. Could it be that nobody ever foresaw the fact that the abolition of time and space and the consequent hybridization of global populace would one day lead to a human armada which will threaten the very foundation of the nation-state paradigm which western civilization has foisted on global space from Afghanistan to New Zealand?

    You cannot eat your cake and have it. Famously described as “the universalization of the particular and the particularization of the universal”, globalization, like the internationalization of slavery in all its dire particularities, has served the metropolitan centre very well. But when the universal decides to converge on the particular that decides to universalize—in this case western modernity and civilization—everybody should be game.  By this logic, one cannot and must not be in a position to choose which aspects of globalization to obey or to reject.

    Prosperity also has its adversities. Those who lament the absence of great leadership in the west are not doing the proper analysis. Great leadership does not just emerge out of nowhere and from a great vacuum. It is usually as a response to deep systemic stress and institutional dysfunction. Charles de Gaulle always averred that in her greatest moment of need, France always throws up a great leader. As examples: Joan of Arc, Charlemagne, Napoleon Bonaparte and, by honorable inference, Charles de Gaulle himself.

    In the west, the great crisis of nationalism of the first half of the twentieth century which led to two world wars threw up exceptional leaders: Woodrow Wilson, the two Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Winston Churchill, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky, Mao Tse Tung, Chou en Lai, Ho Chi Minh and a host of others. If we are not to slander ourselves, the corollary decolonizing project also threw up a string of African avatars: Kwame Nkrumah, Leopold Senghor, Ahmed Sekou Toure, Ahmed Ben Bella, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Herbert Macaulay , Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello ,Nelson Mandela and many others.

    The paradox of the current leadership paralysis in Europe stems from the fact that it is an end product of exemplary leadership of the past. When a society has solved, in the main, the problems of food, shelter and security for the populace, when the political class, despite wide ideological divergences, converges on certain core principles and a cardinal consensus which drive politics, such societies run on an auto-pilot which does not require great exertion and political imagination.

    In Great Britain for example, no matter how rabidly and radically leftwing a party claims to be, it cannot afford to toy with royalty and constitutional monarchy. By the same token, no rightwing structural reengineering however extreme and daring can do away with the abiding fundament of the welfare state. For the foreseeable future in America, no party in its right sense will dare put up a pure Muslim as its presidential candidate.

    Prosperity and the great industrial strides taken by western societies in the last century have led to the industrialization of politics itself or what we propose as political Fordism. Just as the Fordist factory overcame the problems of mass consumption through division of labour which turns the factory worker into a robotic cyborg without much initiative, political Fordism turns the laboratory of politics into a circus of mediocrity through the mass production of leadership wannabes.

    These are Pavlovian political pigmies, creeps of consensus and minimalist managers who are just there to oversee the odd sneeze and stutter in the production belt and the occasional lubing of the engine. Theirs is simply to maintain the status quo and not to engage in any harebrained scheme which may bring the belt and the illusionist fantasia to a shuddering halt. Just get on with it and stop whining about paradise on earth. The order of illusion requires the illusion of order.

    Yet as prosperity brings about greater inequality and greater inequity of opportunity , as the great tide of globalization brings hordes of the great unwashed to the banquet table, as contradictions open up between actual lived experience and the abracadabra of progress, the veil of illusion is torn off. Loud murmurings and great tremors rumble through the land.

    In America, the contradictions have opened the door for Donald Trump’s extreme rightwing hell-raising and Hitlerite hysterics.  In Great Britain, it has led directly to the emergence of Jeremy Corbyn, a classic contrarian and leftwing rabble-rouser, who has no time for elite consensus or conciliation.

    The historic wager is that as the storm breaks in the west and unless there is a dire emergency which puts matters beyond the reach of the populace, the wise and pragmatic voters of Europe and America will choose the golden mean and the middle way out between the xenophobic ranting of Donald Trump and the Communist phantasmagoria of Corbyn. But that may merely be akin to postponing the evil day.

    Postponing the evil day is also a strategy of containment, that is until the evil day refuses to be postponed a day longer. The paradox of human endeavours is that the evil day often opens the door to real visionary leadership. It is not by accident that the greatest government thrown up in Britain in the last century, Churchill’s War Cabinet, was a product of intricate elite pacting and consensus beyond popular franchise.

    In Nigeria, the absence of the core principles which drives a nation and the lack of elite cardinal consensus which guides the immanent destiny of an organic community of citizens with equal rights have continued to aid the devaluation of politics and the attenuation of sterling leadership. There are encouraging signs of proactive leadership in post-PDP Nigeria. But it is also becoming clearer by the day that unless something is done about the architectural configuration of the nation, we may well be jogging in the jungle.

  • Replace Nigeria’s patrimony of oil with politics of hope

    Replace Nigeria’s patrimony of oil with politics of hope

    For too long, Nigerian leaders have acted as though the only decisions they had to make concerned who should get what. When Muhammadu Buhari, the newly elected president, announces his ministerial appointments at the end of the month, he should make clear that his government will follow a different course. He and his colleagues have the power to improve the fortunes of all Nigeria’s people.

    Africa’s most populous country faces huge challenges. Its economy, which is also the continent’s largest, has been battered by external shocks, which have been amplified by its excessive reliance on crude oil revenues. As oil prices have fallen, several states became unable to pay workers salaries and have had to be bailed out by the federal government.

    Unemployment is high, and growth is faltering. After security, engineering a turnround is the greatest challenge for the Buhari administration.

    In part, the country’s troubles reflect its failure to save up for a rainy day when oil prices were high. Foreign reserves have been eroded and the country’s currency, the naira, has been devalued twice in the past year.

    It also reflects the country’s excessive reliance on volatile natural resources markets. Yet efforts to diversify Nigeria’s economy are hamstrung by the parlous state of its infrastructure. Consider the electricity sector, which generates only one-tenth the amount of power produced in South Africa, in a country that has more than three times as many people. Remedying this shortfall provides an opportunity for foreign and domestic investments.

    To make this happen quickly and ensure sustainability, much of the emphasis should be on off-grid renewable energy; Morocco provides the model.

    The Nigerian central bank has recently taken measures to control the depletion of foreign reserves, imposing strict controls on foreign exchange transactions in order to prevent the currency from falling further. That has led many in the financial markets to question Central Bank’s independence; JPMorgan, the US investment bank, removed the country from its Emerging Markets Government Bond Index earlier this month, citing a lack of liquidity in the foreign exchange market,

    Yet the Central Bank must demonstrate that it is independent, not only from the government, but also from vested private sector interests including investors. Although some observers believe that JPMorgan’s action will force foreign investors to sell billions of dollars worth of bond holdings, the extent of the damage may be overstated. (China and India have both sustained years of impressive growth despite never having been listed in JPMorgan’s index.)

    Even so, there is no doubt that Mr Buhari believes the state should play a big role in managing the economy. He has so far proved reluctant, for example, to abolish wasteful petroleum subsidies, apparently believing that to do so would hurt the poor. He is wrong about that. The subsidies overwhelmingly benefit the rich and the middle class. President Buhari would achieve far more by doing away with them, and targeting the resulting savings at conditional cash transfers to the indigent.

    The real test of strategic economic nationalism will be how long it takes Nigeria to achieve a diversified industrial economy that can support the value of its currency and reduce the structural impact of dependence on commodities. This is the crucial task that faces President Buhari’s cabinet. For the factors that weigh on Nigeria’s economic prospects are largely political constraints, which create incentives for officials to pursue misguided policies.

    President Buhari needs to devolve more powers, responsibility and accountability to the constituent parts of Nigeria’s federation. The federal system, which concentrates too much power in the capital Abuja, has proved dysfunctional and remote from the people it is supposed to serve. Constitutional amendments are needed to create incentives for economic activity.

    Oil patrimony is the result of an unimaginative politics, which assumes that government cannot do anything to enlarge a country’s economy, and that its only role is to divide the spoils. Politicians have therefore concentrated on rewarding their supporters — and as the bounty has diminished, that debate has become more and more bitter.

    This politics of oil must be supplanted by something more enlightened. The buck stops with President Buhari, but he cannot bear the responsibility alone. He and his government must set Nigeria and its people on a new and more prosperous course.

     

    The writer is a professor at The Fletcher School at Tufts University and was a deputy governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria

     

  • Tukur bids final bye to politics

    Tukur bids final bye to politics

    Former Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Chairman Bamanga Tukur takes stock of his life at 80, saying it is time to play the statesman. Deputy Political Editor RAYMOND MORDI examines the political career of the octogenarian, who is one of the founding members of the former ruling party.

    ELDER statesman and former Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) Chairman Bamanga Tukur chose the occasion of his 80th birthday celebration to say goodbye to partisan politics. One of the founding fathers of the PDP, Tukur who entered politics during the Second Republic in 1983, when he contested and won the governorship election of the defunct Gongola State on the platform of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN), has indeed carved a niche for himself in the field.

    But, the man under whose tenure the PDP broke up, believes he has had enough and, therefore, wants to leave partisan politics for the younger generation. In his address entitled: ‘The Historical Background and Realities of My Earthly Sojourn, So Far,” Tukur said: “It is time to say goodbye to formal politics. I have used several political platforms to serve my country. It is time to rest. At the age of 80, I feel I can serve our dear nation more in the capacity of a statesman and father figure.”

    He, however, said his doors were open to all politicians, business men, business women, “and all Nigerians who may seek my advice or opinion on any issue affecting our country or beyond.”

    On his experiences in politics, particularly his tenure as the PDP chairman, Tukur said he worked hard to entrench internal democracy, party discipline and party supremacy. He enjoined politicians to see politics and government positions as avenues for rendering service to the country and not a bread and butter affair, adding that elected officers and government officials should regard their positions as sacred trust to be used to serve the nation.

    His words: “I wish to enjoin politicians to play the game according to the rules and to take the interest of the country to heart. I had the privilege of serving as the national chairman of the party during which I tried to introduce sanity in the party affairs. I introduced the idea of internal democracy, party discipline and party supremacy. These are the great ingredients of strong party systems which ultimately drive the democratic process.

    “Perhaps, on account of the long period of military reign in Nigeria, politicians have not yet internalised and applied the principle of internal party democracy. I hope that with time, party democracy will be entrenched in our political party system as this strengthens our nascent democracy. Politicians should avail themselves of their constitutional right to assemble with anybody or political party.

    “But, the need to checkmate frequency of defections from one political party to the other can hardly be overstressed. Political parties are stronger when members submit themselves to the rules and regulations of the party and subscribe faithfully to it ideologies.

    “Our political parties should strive to have concrete ideologies as this will certainly help to curtail unmitigated defections in the system for a strong party breeds a strong government. A strong government breeds strong economy. A strong economy brings development, peace and security.”

    Though the PDP was not represented at Tukur’s birthday celebration, it later issued a statement describing the former chairman as a quintessential democrat and humble statesman, who contributed immensely to the development and stability of the nation. The statement added: “It remains proud that the octogenarian, who is one of its founding fathers, has made indelible marks in business and politics within and outside the country”.

    The message, which was signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh, noted that the party remains grateful to Tukur for his leadership roles and sustained selfless contributions since its formation.

    Tukur would be remembered in political circles as the man who paved the way for the crisis that engulfed the former ruling PDP prior to the 2015 general elections. He fell out of favour with party stakeholders when he tried to rein in the powers of the state governors under the platform of the party, who dictated the pace of events even at the national level. His position on the way the party should run pitched him against seven of the serving governors then, who demanded for his immediate resignation as National Chairman. The governors are: Aliyu Wamakko of Sokoto; Abdulfatih Ahmed of Kwara; Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano; Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers; Aliyu Babangida of Niger; Sule Lamido of Jigawa; and Murtala Nyako of Adamawa.

    The crises under him got to a climax when former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and six northern governors staged a walk out during the Special National Convention held August 2013. This development eventually split the party into two parallel National Working Committees (NWCs). Five of the governors that fought him eventually defected to the APC. Some days later, 37 members of the House of Representatives also left the PDP to join the APC, while 27 out of the 30 members of the Sokoto State House of Assembly also jilted the former ruling party.

    Tukur, who emerged National Chairman at the party’s Special National Convention held in March 2012, was compelled to resign on January 15, 2014 to save himself and the party from further embarrassment. He was said to have lost the confidence of key party stakeholders, like the governors, members of the National Working Committee (NWC), the 36 state chairmen plus the chairman of the Federal Capital Territory (Abuja), elders, and leaders.

    Before he eventually capitulated, Tukur had persistently denied media reports at the time that he was being pressured to resign from office. But, he had no other option. In his resignation letter dated January 15, 2014, Tukur said he was resigning in the overall interest of the party. “I remain available to offer my contributions accordingly to the party, whenever it is needed. Thank you and please accept the assurances of my highest esteem always,” he added.

    Announcing Tukur’s resignation at the party’s 63rd NEC meeting, former President Goodluck Jonathan noted that the former party leader agreed to step aside to allow peace to return to the ‘family’. The former President said it was a personal sacrifice for the party to reinvent itself in the face of emerging challenges. Jonathan added that Tukur was not guilty of breach of the party’s constitution.

    According to political observers, Tukur stepped on many toes within the hierarchy of the party. Members of the NWC alleged that after Tukur assumed office he started running the party without carrying them along. They said he no longer convened meetings of the committee. Rather than settling down to face his assignment of leading a national party with national problems, Tukur was also accused of dabbling into the politics of his home state by  dissolving the Adamawa PDP Executive Committee led by Alhaji Umaru Kugama that was loyal to former Governor Nyako and replacing it with a nine-member Caretaker Committee Umar Damagun.

    Tukur’s non-recognition of Amaechi as the Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF), apparently at the behest of the Presidency, was another sore point. The former National Chairman encouraged the formation of the Governor Godswill Akpabio-led PDP-Governors Forum as a counterpoise to the NGF, notwithstanding that Amaechi won the NGF election. Later, Tukur backed a faction of the body led by former Governor Jonah Jang.

    According to observers, Tukur’s greatest undoing was that he deluded himself that once he had the support of the former President and the First lady, he could do with the party and its members as it pleased his whims and caprices. But, when it became obvious that his excesses posed a threat to Jonathan’s re-election, the former President withdrew that protection and Tukur capitulated.

    The current development, according to observers, is strategy by the Adamawa-born politician cum businessman to reposition himself and continue to remain relevant. He appeared to have gradually stepped into his new role in recent times. Speaking as a guest on a political programme on radio last month, Tukur ascribed the emergence of the All Progressives Congress (APC) at the centre to the quest by Nigerians for alternative to a failed party.

    He said: “Democracy is government of the people by the people for the people. So, if the PDP fails to deliver on its promises, people will go to the alternative. Change is always good, provided it is going to bring better alternative.” The former chairman, who blamed the PDP’s woes on lack of internal democracy, said certain people in the party didn’t want him to practice internal democracy that he was preaching.

    On the contrary, the former governor of Old Gongola State noted that the APC, by making all the elements relevant and allowing the people choose their leaders through elections, allowed the democratic system to prevail for the interest of all.

    Recalling the political machinations that led to his exit as the National Chairman, Tukur said: “Jonathan did not insist I leave the party; there are people in the PDP who felt I should not practice what I preach. President Jonathan could not protect me due to the powers of the governors. The governors are very powerful and therefore, if you do not do what they want, you are done away with and I believe nothing can be done to them.

    “I was accused of being a virus in the PDP, and I did not deny it. I told them I am a virus for good governance, virus for internal democracy, virus for equity and justice. I hope that virus will continue.”

    Born on September 15, 1935, Tukur is a prominent businessman and politician. He served as Minister of Industry in the administration of General Sani Abacha. He is one of the high profile civil servants and military officers who acquired large areas of farmland along the various River Basin authorities. He was President of the Africa Business Roundtable.

    He came to national limelight in the mid 1970s, as the general manager of the Nigerian Ports Authority. It was a time the agency was having problems with congestion as a result of a massive cement importation scheme that was started at the twilight of Yakubu Gowon’s administration. During his tenure, the government built a few more seaports to ease the transaction cost associated with shipping and to ensure adequate facilities for Nigeria’s import and export needs.

    In 1982, he left his position as General Manager and soon contested the Gongola governorship race, which he won. Tukur served as governor for three months before the democratic administration was curtailed by a military coup. After leaving the Gongola State House, he entered full scale entrepreneurship, and was the founder and chairman of BHI holdings. In 1992, he was an unsuccessful presidential candidate for the National Republican Convention (NRC), during which he and a few rivals of Adamu Ciroma lobbied for the cancellation of the first primary due to allegations of favouritism levelled against the leadership of the party.

    Tukur attended the popular London school of Economics, where he read Transportation and Economics in 1965. He went on to obtain a master’s degree in Public and International Affairs from the University of Pittsburg in the United States. Upon his return to Nigeria, he was appointed to manage Lagos ports.

  • Odumakin and Ogun politics

    Mr Yinka Odumakin, author of the piece, “Finishing well: The Osoba example”, is a “change fiend”. At one point he belonged to the Afenifere camp. Later he switched allegiance to the Afenifere Renewal Group, which was and is not in good terms with the parent Yoruba socio-cultural group. Today, he is back in the old Afenifere. At a point, he fought the then President Goodluck Jonathan to a standstill. But just before the 2015 general election, he espoused the virtues of Jonathan to the heavens. He was a prominent figure in the quest of the current President, Muhammadu Buhari, to lead the nation in 2011. Today, he is a budding critic of the Buhari administration. Like a bolt from the blue, Odumakin now sings the praise of Chief Olusegun Osoba. We pray to God to grant Osoba good health and long life so he may be in a position to form the right opinion about Yinka.

    Given this background, I hardly had time for anything written or said by Odumakin, until the very latest assault on my home state. Not even Joseph Goebbels of the Nazi Germany was capable of the propaganda spin introduced by Odumakin in the article published recently in the papers. More worrisome is the timing of his write-up. The SDP, for all you care, is no longer in any public space in Ogun State. Even the ruling APC in the state has been quiet, concentrating on governance. It’s only the PDP that is already preparing for 2019, albeit by subterfuge. I agree with a commentator who says Isiaka has no case but only chose the tribunal option in order to court public opinion ahead of 2019.

    But at the level of political mischief, Ogun State has not been silent, as the opposition hacks outdo themselves in their mission to discredit Governor Ibikunle Amosun. And there are no blinkers in their obsession with “Pull Him Down”, hence the campaign of calumny also directed against his family. So, why did Odumakin choose this time to launch this malevolent propaganda?

    According to Yinka, “They (the Osoba camp) moved to the unknown SDP and campaigned like never before in all nooks and crannies of Ogun state. There wasn’t much electoral dividend to all the efforts given the sham nature of our electoral process…”

    Odumakin was totally wrong when he blamed the woeful performance of SDP on what he termed “the sham nature of our electoral process.” Well, he is not from Ogun State, so I assume he does not know the level of political consciousness of our people. Yes, the SDP “campaigned like never before in all nooks and crannies of Ogun state”. Yes, they spent money like water. Yet, they were overwhelmingly rejected by the electorate because the party was seen as anti-progress and anti-people. From within and without, they did everything possible to sabotage all the pro-masses policies and programmes of the Amosun government. Our people saw all the machinations and punished SDP commensurately at the polls.

    Indeed, it was sheer happenstance that made my cousin drive along Itoku market in  Abeokuta during the SDP campaign. If the party could not command a modicum of respect in what should ordinarily be the jurisdiction of its leader despite the name, money and well-oiled propaganda against Amosun, I wonder how it should have fared elsewhere. And when the votes were counted at the polling booth of Osoba, news went round that SDP recorded just thirty-six (36) votes as against APC’s one hundred and sixty-nine (169) votes; PDP got twenty-four (24) votes. It was apparent the electorate had taken side with the APC even right to the doorsteps of Chief Osoba. If the poll was rigged as Odumakin tried in vain to establish, was the election also rigged at the polling booth in front of Osoba’s house, where majority of the voters were his neighbours? Haba! Odumakin! Tell us something else!

    No one in Nigeria, except Odumakin and a few wishful-thinkers like him, gave SDP any chance. Check in-depth media reports during the election period, it was a straight fight between APC and PDP, with analysts predicting a landslide for Amosun not just because of his outstanding performance and the fanatical support he enjoyed and still enjoys from the masses, but the tug of war within the Ogun PDP and the political albatross around the neck of its candidate. Therefore “the most sophisticated rigging machine” could only have been around the home of Odumakin. And indeed, they deployed it in Ogun with the support of the then ruling PDP at the centre to deny thousands of supporters of APC their PVCs especially in some of the strongholds of the party. Otherwise the margin of APC’s victory should have been a lot wider. After all, Amosun mauled Isiaka in 2011 by polling three times his votes.

    Yinka was equally economical with the truth when he insinuated that the Amosun government owed salaries before the elections. From the facts available in the media, Amosun did not owe salaries, before, during and after the elections. The problem, according to some workers that I know personally, has to do with co-operative deductions, which was caused by the financial problem in the country. And I read in the papers recently that the deductions in question amounted to only one month salary of workers. So if Amosun owes just a month salary at a time many state governments owe up to nine or thirteen months, how does that imply the governor won elections without winning power?

    However, let me say that I have no sympathy for Amosun on this matter of wages. I remember when the Minimum Wage problem began some years ago, I was on a radio programme where I cautioned Amosun against implementing the increase across board. My argument was that somebody cannot sit in Abuja and decree what the states must pay their workers. We need money for capital projects. The cost of living in Lagos, Rivers, Abuja etc is higher than that of Ogun, yet Amosun decided to pay above the Wage, citing as excuse the need to motivate workers for productivity. He did not stop there, he implemented the percentage increment up to the highest level in the civil service which ballooned the salary bill to twice the figure he inherited from the previous government. Up till today some states have not implemented the minimum wage. Many that did so only stopped at the level of junior staff. When the going was good, we did not hear the voice of Odumakin and by the time the governor will sort out the deductions, no external voice will be needed.

    But the most tragic aspect of Odumakin’s piece was his reference to an incident that did not happen on the day Amosun was inaugurated in 2011. From the two public events that I attended and some that I viewed on television, Amosun always recognised Chief Osoba as “our leader” before recognizing ex-governor Bola Tinubu or any other leader. Interestingly, I relate with a couple of ACN chieftains on another level. They agreed that Odumakin is a good “fiction writer”. According to them, there was no single ACN chieftain that was not aware that Asiwaju Tinubu would not attend the inauguration ceremony early that day as he was billed to honour other ACN governors, with a promise to attend Amosun’s post-inauguration lunch, which he did. Therefore, the idea of tagging a seat next to Amosun for Tinubu instead of Osoba was a criminal lie, a complete fabrication and distortion of history. Where again is honour in this land, Mr Odumakin?

    As I stated earlier, based on the political trajectory of Yinka, I am not sure his publicity stunt for Osoba is with good intentions. Another aspect of his piece does a disservice to Osoba. If Osoba knew the former governor of Lagos was a “rogue” as Odumakin alleged and related with him very closely for years, having their houses beside each other, eating and drinking together, wearing the same clothes to private and public functions,  logic teaches that it is either the two of them are “rogues” or the former Lagos governor is not a “rogue”. I know the two former governors are men of honour, who served their states meritoriously.

    The political battle between Chief Osoba and Senator Amosun remains a tragic interlude in the political evolution of Ogun in this generation. If it’s all about the electorate or public service, then the voters have spoken, and loudly too. And it is commendable that both Osoba and Amosun have since moved on with their lives.

     

     

    • Chief Adetayo writes from Ifo, Ogun State.
  • Ex-PDP chair Tukur quits politics

    Ex-PDP chair Tukur quits politics

    Former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Alhaji Bamanga Tukur has quit partisan politics because of old age.

    Tukur yesterday announced his retirement from politics at a lecture organised to mark his 80th birthday in Abuja.

    He said: “I deem it fit to take this opportunity of my 80th birthday to announce my retirement from partisan politics. It is time to say goodbye to politics.

    “I have used several political platforms to serve my country. It is time to rest. I leave partisan politics for the younger generation. I want to be a statesman and an adviser.

    “At 80, I feel I can serve our dear nation more in the capacity of a statesman and a father figure.”

    The ex-PDP national chairman said his doors were open to politicians, businessmen and other Nigerians who might seek his advice or opinion on issues affecting the country.

    He urged politicians to play the game according to the rules and to have the interest of the country at heart, stressing that politics should be seen as an avenue of rendering service.

    Tukur went on: “Politics should not be a bread and butter affair. Politicians should rededicate themselves to the service of the people.

    “Elected officers and government officials should regard their positions as sacred and they must be used to serve the nation.

    “My country has given me so much. It is now pay-back time. I want to rededicate my time, life and resources to the service of our nation as an elder statesman and a father.

    “My aim is to help take Nigeria to the promised land, to make it great and ensure that it assumes its rightful position in the comity of nations.

    I want Nigeria to be great in line with the dream of its founding fathers.”

    He urged Nigerians to support the President Muhammadu Buhari administration, saying there should be peace in all facets and organs of the government to enable the country move forward.

    “All hands must be on deck to ensure that the dividends of democracy trickle down to the man in the street, the proverbial hewers of wood and drawers of water. Nigeria has the requisite indices to be great and great it must be.” Tukur said.