The Nation Newspaper

Tag: politics

  • A case for sacrificial leadership

    Politics is essentially the negotiation of instrumentality for a place and for a time. Every political agenda is predicated on an ideological philosophy that finds expression in its manifesto. The manifesto is an aggregation of philosophical abstractions that are seeking practical materialisation. I believe that the two dominant parties understand the seriousness of what confronts Nigeria and we would resort to a certain political pragmatism that would enable Nigeria overcome these existential adversaries as I mentioned in my letter.

    There are many patriots within these parties who understand that we have an aboriginal connectivity as a nation or as a people that cannot be vitiated by any political philosophy or alliance. We have come to that point in our political evolution where we must be willing to be messianic, that is, sacrificial in our disposition towards Nigeria. Even if it is just based on the terms of examining the Constitution and re-ordering it, and all of the ramifications that derive therefrom. I am sure that we can find a certain level of philosophical syncretism that will enable us take Nigeria to the next level.

    The present political scenario in Nigeria is not unusual and is characteristic of a free democracy like ours which empowers you to establish a position and to pursue it, looking for a platform on which you can articulate and crystallise that political posture. This phenomenon, in my view, represents birth pangs and it portends good things; that there is light at the end of the tunnel and the renaissance of our great nation.

    These things will play out in their natural sequence and eventually, we will come to a place where we will all recognise the need for a certain mutuality that must be available to each political party and all political actors involved; for the sake of the unity, holistic existence of our nation and posterity.

    I am not seeking to wrest power from the elites. What I am trying to do is to establish a new concept of government that I have christened aboriginal democracy, which will re-establish the parameters for political participation and will enlighten the polity as to their responsibilities within the democratic setting.

    The word, democracy derives from the Greek word, demokratia which is a compound word. It speaks of demos, that is, people and kratia which speaks of power; and that word is taken from the Greek word, kratos. When you put those two words together, they translate into people and power. But, the thing about our system is that the nomenclature has not really exemplified the true meaning of that terminology because kratos is power that is made visible.

    However, the Nigerian experience doesn’t depict the power of the people but the power of the government. All we need to do is to change the concept and make it more practicable for the participation of the people and that will be done progressively. It is something that has to go through a process where the people learn to appreciate the responsibilities that they have in the governing process.

    This process must come to its logical conclusion. The bottom line for development of any kind of economic or security structure is usually predicated on the political will. We have men and women who understand these concepts but have not been able to practically change the situation in our country as they relate to either the economy or security issue because of political will and that itself is predicated on a lot of factors that are ramified into intricate administrative red-tapism. That is why I am saying that it is too early in the day to begin to discuss these issues. But when the time comes, one will be able to table these issues within the confines of normative civility where everybody understands the seriousness of what is at stake and can participate in the process of re-engineering our nation.

    I adamantly hold out an olive branch towards the two dominant parties. I believe that the Chris Okotie option will establish a no victor no vanquished scenario. It will ameliorate and pacify partisan tension which has been amplified by the current political recalibration. The option of peace is the only option as articulated by Okotie letters. We must focus on nationalistic sentiments and expand our vision beyond the perimeter of political affiliations.

     

    • Rev Okotie, a presidential aspirant, is the Pastor of The Household of God Church, Lagos.

     

     

  • Do we really want women in politics?

    President Muhammadu Buhari on Thursday charged Nigerian women to contest for political positions in order to help effect the needed changes in the country at a women political aspirants’ summit in Abuja.

    While stating that he was in support of the Gender and Equal Opportunity Bill now before the National Assembly and the implementation of 35 percent affirmative action, among others, the president said he is confident that women can make great leaders and move the nation forward.

    He also urged all political parties to create the enabling environment for free and fair playing field where women can contest elective positions and participate in our political process.

    I was particularly interested in the call on women not because what the president said was new, but because of a programme I participated in a day before the Abuja summit. Women have always been encouraged to take the bold step of vying for political positions at all levels and they have always done, but they don’t usually get the desired support they need when it matters most.

    The roundtable I spoke at on Wednesday was about curbing gender-based hate speech online organised by the International Press Centre (IPC), Lagos in partnership with West Africa Network for Peacebuilding (WANEP) and Humanity Family Foundation for Peace and Development (HUFFPED) and funded by Peace Tech Lab.

    Among others, the objectives of the project is to change public perception and stereotypes about women positioning and functioning in society and to mitigate hate speech that hinders women participation in politics.

    Gender-based hate speech is indeed one of the major factors hindering women’s participation in politics.

    The definition of hate speech by Ulrick Neisser as communication (whether verbal, written, symbolic) that insults a racial, ethnic (gender) and political group, whether by suggesting that they are inferior in some respect or by indicating that they are despised or not welcome for any other reasons captures how our calls for women participation by especially men don’t match their actions.

    Consciously and unconsciously, many indulge in hate speech which includes threats and violence, celebration of gender-based violence, sexist rhetoric based on prejudice and stereotypes, morality/hierarchy policing.

    According to a report by the National Democratic Institute, an informal survey administered to some of the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) observers in North East and South East in the post-election period suggested that gender-based hate speech was sometimes accompanied by other acts of gender-based violence, including threats of divorce, sexual violence, blackmail or destruction of property.

    More than ever before, the various online platforms have become veritable tools for gender-hate speech against women who speak up on some major issues or offer to contest for political positions.

    Instead of sticking to issues being raised or the qualifications of women for positions they are vying for, online commentaries are often snide remarks about their looks and personal lives. They are subjected to unfair criticisms which can be very hurting and discouraging in our kind of society.

    If we really want more women in politics, there’s need to avoid gender-based hate speech online and offline. Evidence abound like President Buhari acknowledged that Nigerian women are as capable as men to hold any political position in the country and worldwide.

    All that is required as discussants at the roundtable agreed is equity and not necessarily equality for women to have the chance to prove their mettle like men.

    Perhaps one other practical way to prove our sincerity about wanting women to participate actively in politics is for men to encourage their wives, sisters and daughters to join political parties, contest for positions and serve in any other capacity open to them.

  • If soldiers can do it, sportsmen too can

    The magnetic pull of politics is strong, very strong. And those hitherto immune to it are now getting enamoured of it. There must be something extraordinary to it. The cynic will attribute it to the not-too-wrong notion that participation in politics is the shortest route to amassing wealth, that you no longer have to work your bones crazy as “Mr Money”, Aliko Dangote or as the “Chairman” or the “Bull” or “Guru” as Mike Niyi Adenuga is variously called, or the “grandfathers” themselves, Otunba Subomi Balogun and Aare Rasaq Akanni Okoya; or the likes of transport guru, Chief Augustine Ilodibe, “Ekene dili Chukwu” of Anambra and Giwa Abudu Benson and Sule Gbadamosi (S.O.G) of Ikorodu or Industrialist Timothy Adeola Odutola of Ijebu Ode, or Aminu Dantata of Kano before them, before you shoot like a meteor to the class of the genuine ‘nouveau riche’

    If in doubt, check the number of super ‘wonders-on-wheels’ in Senator Dino Melaye’s garages in Abuja, Kogi and where else, and confirm if any of the accomplished business titans have as many in their own homes!

    But it can’t be for this myopic or self-serving reason that the pull of politics is waxing stronger. To be sure, it has to do with the postulation of a certain Edmund Burke that “what good people suffer from abstaining from politics is to allow fools and charlatans to rule them.” The reason why people who made their millions, if not billions, in other professions or vocations, now want to get involved in the bubbling but risky business of politics, for the betterment of society.

    Risky? Yes o. Were it not so, an uncle of our own Senator Ganiyu Solomon, one of the redoubtable politicians of the First and Second Republics in Lagos, Chief J.O. Solomon, would not advert our minds to this truism in the 80s that any of these three things are possible in politics – sudden wealth, sudden imprisonment and sudden death, which he wrapped up in his unmistakable Egba dialect as “owo ojiji, ewon ojiji, iku ojiji”.

    But what enterprise, by the way, is not risky? In any case, has it not been well and truly said that only those who dare, win?

    Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu, like Awo before him, was a comfortable man of means, before he threw his all, into the business of politics; and sentiments be damned, his striving and achievements in that arena, are uncommon, if not, unprecedented in this land.

    He must have left his comfort zone for  risky politics because he wanted to impart the polity in an uncommon manner, doing his ‘damnest best’ to surpass the seemingly insurmountable records of the immortal Obafemi Awolowo. Perhaps the reason why Gbenga Daniel, another accomplished young business entrepreneur, plunged into partisan politics and re-wrote political architecture of Ogun State as governor, until the advent of well-established accountant Ibikunle Amosun as governor whose tenure will be remembered, amongst others, as one that has the most flyovers in the whole country, aside Lagos.

    But the pattern that emerged first is that of the soldiers making forays into politics, after their domineering influence on the establishment of the rule of the thumb, otherwise known as military regime. The trail-blazer here was a retired Brigadier-General in the Army, Samuel Osaigbovo Ogbemudia of the defunct Bendel State. He was a great achiever as military governor of the old Mid-West state and a roaring success when he later changed his starched khaki of a soldier for babanriga attire as civilian governor of Bendel State, with Benin-City as his operational base.

    Then emerged another Army officer, who, after a tour of duty in Lagos as military administrator in the early 90s, got retired as a brigadier-general and plunged into the murky waters of politics in his Osun home-state not long after. I remember when we met in London early in 2000, and he headed for Buckingham University for his law degree programme, Brigadier-General Olagunsoye Oyinlola threw jibes at me on a few occasions that we exchanged visits and derided politicians, as he was used to saying when I served as chairman of Mushin local government under him in Lagos in 1994 to 96. He would not touch politics with a foot-long pole, he would say.

    But I knew that the pull of politics is strong for any enlightened person who does not want to submit to the rule of fools, as Edmund Burke said years ago; and when Oyinlola finished his UK course and planned his return to Nigeria, I must be among the first few he confided in, that he would have a go at the Senate back home. But, because God moves in mysterious ways, Oyinlola’s Senate desire translated to the top prize of Osun governorship which was contentious and controversial to the very end.

    So, if the pull was strong for soldiers who were trained to dominate their environment, to submit to democratic dictates such that saw General Olusegun Obasanjo and General Muhammad Buhari become Nigeria’s democratically elected Predident, the bug of ‘can-do’ mentality has also caught up with accomplished sportsmen across the globe.

    George Weah, a successful professional footballer in the European league, returned home to Liberia and fought a titanic battle on the political turf to emerge his country’s current president. He must have been inspired to dare, by the successful exploits of a fellow sportsman, Imran Khan, a 65-years-old international cricketer who graduated in philosophy from Keble College in Oxford, and moved on to become the 22nd and current President of Pakistan.

    The can-do spirit, espoused by Barack Obama in his successful struggle to become the first black President of the United States of America, has caught fire with the world and, it is no wonder the fad is common with renown footballers now, or to be generally fair, sportsmen at the moment; perhaps the trigger for Ibadan Polytechnic mechanical engineering graduate and well-accorded footballer who got the sobriquet “Mathematical” in his playing days as a tactical and precision attacker, Segun Odegbami.

    If he’s not aiming for Nigeria’s Presidency yet, it could be that he did not advance his football career to professional level where those in it make as much as millions in hard currency weekly, before he hung his boots. One, on the nation’s honours list, Odegbami has made it be known that he wants to be governor of Ogun, after Senator Ibikunle Amosun whose regime has become a yardstick to measure his successor when he emerges.

    His political platform may be a major decider, after from his personal attributes, but given that the world of politics is replete with surprises and shocks, the type that made Donald Trump upset all rational forecasts to emerge the first American President to be appropriately tagged “maverick”, I won’t wager a bet if Mathematical Odegbami will not meander his way to the Oke Mosan Governor’s Villa in Ogun State.

    Segun was a genius on the football field in his IICC “Shooting Stars” and the “Green Eagles” days and what, anyway, is genius, if not according to how Scott Fitzgerald put it, the ability to put into effect what is on one’s mind.

    The likeable footballer has the human heart that is a frail craft on which one wishes to reach the stars; he also has the right attitude that can determine his altitude; but has he the opportunity of the right platform and the financial wherewithal to prosecute this one battle? I ask because I know from experience that ability without opportunity is a nullity.

                                                                                                                     

     

     

  • Politics of ransom

    In the middle of the most tumultuous period in Nigerian politics since 2014/2015, the legislature, judiciary and the president of the country are all currently on vacation. In their wake, they have left uncertainty and discord amongst the people, as the country stands by for more political drama in the coming weeks. Some say our democracy is going through a necessary learning curve, while others see the recent gale of defections and political rigmarole as signs of a system in decline.

    Whatever one believes, the impact of the intense political activity of the last couple of weeks will fall on ordinary citizens and that is why we must look very closely at the unfolding events. There are many talking points, but none can be as bothersome as the case of abuse of power that has featured repeatedly in the last few weeks. It appears that the idea of “federal might” is being taken too seriously, with the brazen and unapologetic deployment of security agents in purely political ‘manoeuvres’.

    The nation woke up to the news of the blockade by the police and other security agents on Senate President Bukola Saraki’s residence and that of his deputy, Ike Ikweremadu, on the morning of July 24, the day the defection of a large number of legislators from the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, was to be announced. Although the presidency has denied any involvement or interference with investigations, the timing and the manner of the supposed “invitations” that led to the blockade was very suspect. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, also issued an invitation to the deputy senate president on the same morning requesting that he report to the agency on that same day.

    Days after that incident, there was trouble involving the police again in Benue State, after Governor Samuel Ortom announced his defection from the APC to the People’s Democratic Party, PDP. Scores of police officers reportedly cleared out and cordoned off the Benue State House of Assembly to pave way for eight members of the house to carry out a shambolic impeachment of Governor Ortom. Their futile efforts were not only ridiculous because of lack of majority to carry out such a step in a 30-man assembly, it was also in direct contravention of a court order served on impeached speaker of the house, Terkibir Ikyange and the seven others he led to disobey the law. While the trend of misapplied impeachment is not new to the Nigerian political scene, the heavy involvement of the police was the most troubling issue about that episode.

    Hours after Ortom’s defection, allegations about his misappropriation of around N22 billion based on investigations by the EFCC also resurfaced. This follows in the same line as the Code of Conduct Tribunal trial of Saraki which began after he defied the ruling party to grab the seat of senate president. After Saraki was vindicated by the courts, he was ‘co-incidentally’ roped into another investigation by the police of a bloody robbery operation that took place in Offa, in Kwara State, as his supposed anti-party activities continued. Not to forget also, that Senator Dino Melaye who displayed similar anti-party behaviour is still the subject of prosecution by the police over similar allegations in Kogi State.

    The picture that is emerging from all of this is that of misuse of power to hound political rivals. There is always a tendency for this kind of power play in politics, but the brazen manner in which it has been carried out in recent years, especially by the police, leaves one to wonder whether the security agents are familiar with their core duty, which is to the people and not as pawns to politicians or those in power.  Too many instances of misuse of force by security agencies have been reported. Even though there are denials for most of these allegations of high-handed and vindictive policing, the recurrence of similar incidents prove that bad decisions are being made at some level and it is reflecting badly on the government in power, no matter where responsibility lies.

    Abuse of power is an unfortunate feature of Nigerian politics. Our politicians focus more on the force of power and authority and use it as a weapon where it serves their interests. There is no room for real politicking, where compromises are made and common ground is found. This is why impeachment is on the lips of federal and state legislators at the slightest sign of trouble. There have been many ‘attempted impeachments’ in the history of Nigerian politics, rushed into by angry legislators who, blinded by their vindictive appetites, pay no mind to the law, stability or amicable settlement. The recent impeachment of Eze Madumere, Imo State deputy governor, may yet be added to the list of failed attempts if the courts overturn the 17 members of the Imo State House of Assembly.

    The senate president’s defection from the APC to the PDP has also added fuel to the already raging fire in Nigerian politics in recent weeks. Although it has been a long time coming, the actual act has caused predictable ripples at high levels. Not surprisingly, there is talk of impeachment of the senate president for crossing over to the opposition. The debate now raging in the senate is as to which of the two leading political parties holds a majority. With uncertainty about exactly who has defected to where, the nation waits patiently for the senate to return from recess to see how this situation unfolds.

    In the meantime, rumour is still afloat about reverse defections and the role of threats in those defections. Akwa-Ibom’s strongman, Godswill Akpabio, is reportedly in the process of defecting to the APC. Akpabio was a key member of PDP in the last dispensation who went silent on the floor of the senate in this administration after the anti-graft authorities called him in. He is believed by some to have been involved in extensive corruption during his time as Akwa-Ibom State governor and an EFCC dossier on his activities is now being used as leverage against him.

    If the APC takes in Akpabio, it will be a validation of the popular belief that the APC and PDP are birds of the same feather and that the authorities adopt selective prosecution as a tool for maintaining power and putting the opposition in check. One wonders how many of our serving legislators and other officials have similar files that have been kept in the store for them or whether indeed there exists any politician or serving official without a dossier of corruption.

    These types of political drama always happen very close to elections and caution is thrown to the wind in most cases. Many are of the opinion that the occurrences are necessary for the growth of our young democracy. In truth, there is absolutely no need for our democracy to pass through the rigours of maturing that old established systems went through centuries ago. If we are a young country as they say, we have the years of experience and examples from matured democracies to learn from, instead of stumbling through the same obstacles.

    The law has also not kept up with our growing democracy. One would have expected that the issue of defection and its consequence should be a matter of settled law. Also, because of the rash of unlawful impeachments and the propensity of legislators to abuse the process, the appraisal and endorsement of a superior court, or a tribunal made of senior members of the judiciary should be a more prominent part of the impeachment process. This may forestall hasty and faulty impeachments and the waste of judicial time in contesting the process.

    There may be no fool-proof way for preventing the misuse of power by a person in authority, but there may be a way to ensure that the consequences of abuse of power are suffered by the culprits instead of letting the matter drag on until it can be weaponised as an instrument of blackmail or for a political agenda. This should be the focus of political reforms in coming years.

  • What can save us from this unending comedy of errors?

    Generally, I leave the subject of politics to others who are more politically masochistic to observe and give us reports on it, while I generally occupy myself with the issues of life, to observe and give you reports on it. This is why I talk mostly about things like life rules, yeah, and maybe kitchen rules.

    However, sometimes, I am forced to break my rule and talk about politics when the din from that arena becomes really deafening, like now. The political noise is right now threatening to drown us all out unless good sense returns. The aphorism that says that the more we see, the less we understand is more true now than ever. There is so much going on right now that just makes me want to shout out, ‘Come on, Seriously?!’

    Everyone takes his or her life seriously but the politicians that run this country do not. Oh yes, they take their own lives seriously enough, but I think they think that the rest of the people exist to lay down their lives for them. This explains why they have refused to take the country seriously.

    From what we can see and what we have heard, the class we call politicians seems to enjoy breaking rules. Since this latest democratic experiment began, we have been hearing all kinds of stories. They have been placed in the press for record purposes. It is good that these things be placed on record or else the people forget.

    We have heard stories about how this bright crop have entered (literally) the treasury and helped themselves to raw cash openly. We have heard stories about how governors literally establish state institutions in their own names and make the state pay for them. We have heard stories about how radio jingles are made to sing these governors’ names unendingly for merely filling street potholes. There are so many stories but what is the point blocking your ears with them? One would end up sounding like those jingles.

    I must however mention some other stories. We have heard how it is quite possible that, contrary to the law, there are sitting uncertificated assembly members right now. There are whispers that there are transmutations of assembly posts. We have heard of people occupying the revered positions of senators whose major preoccupations are either singing senseless songs, giving pantomimic performances, jesting around to no particular end, criss-crossing carpets, or simply dancing useless dances. These are their only contributions to nation building.

    There are stories (please note that I merely repeat them; I don’t make them) of a government so silent over so many killings in the land that it is quite easy to believe there is a silent nod to the perpetrators. We have also heard stories of how the victims have been blamed for excessive retaliation by both the government and the killers and have been punished some more. These are stories we hear which have not been rebutted by anyone. So, we go on believing.

    When these comedies of absurdities hinged on absolute reversals of realities occur, there is nothing to do but to duck. I mean, when assembly members who should be knowledgeable about everything decide to know only dancing or singing or jesting or carpet-crossing or political brigandage, what can you do but duck? When an entire assembly is taken over by a few, then the government is just a sitting duck; the country is but a land of occupation in waiting. It is at this point we need to ask the pertinent question: what is going to save us from these comedies of errors?

    Please note that I did not say ‘who’ but ‘what’. I think I gave up on the ‘who’ a long time ago. Nigerians have a knack of disappointing. See how the whole country rooted for the present government in 2015. Now, many recessions later, many naira devaluations later, many herdsmen killings later, many promises of more killings later, many of us are now questioning our romantic ideals: should we have taken so many glasses of Pina Colada before going to do an important thing like voting?

    So, no, I am not looking for ‘who’, just ‘what’. I am looking for that Deus Ex Machina, that stroke of luck, that serendipitous master stroke, that god of provision, that will just bring in the individual who will lead the drive for nation building in this land. It happened in Rwanda after the war; it can happen here.

    We have talked about nation building on this column many times; and since I’m never tired of talking about it, it is clearly my pet subject. I have complained to the point of irritating your ears and eyes, dear reader, that with all these ‘BROTHER ACTS’ going on, the nation is not being built. Our infrastructures are still decaying by the minute, there is no reformation going on in the housing sector, schools are being destroyed by nature, time, armed skirmishes, or human acts of carelessness, the nation’s health sector barometer is reading ‘CODE RED’ because of decaying facilities and brain flight, and food is becoming more and more of a mirage for many people and many families. Need I say more?

    The political class is supposed to lead the way forward to solving these problems. What is our class doing however? Singing, dancing, jesting, self-promoting, self-gratifying, changing political parties, political high jinks … in short, everything is to the self, not the nation. I think Nigeria has been very unlucky, if you will permit my descent into the unclear waters of the supernatural. From its inception, a political class with a clear vision for leading the country was never groomed. I maintain that what we are seeing today is what was planted in the early years of Nigeria’s history. In those early years, our ancestors planted political chaos, we are now reaping national destruction.

    That said, we can still pull back from the brink of this disaster. We must set out to find the ‘what’ that will save us. Firstly, I think people owe themselves the responsibility to learn about democratic ideals for their own good. They should learn these ideals in order to be able to ask about their entitlements from those people who purport to represent them in these governmental matters.

    IT IS CLEAR TO ME (FROM MORE STORIES OF COURSE) THAT WHAT SUSTAINS THE TOMFOOLERY WE HAVE BEEN SEEING IN OUR SO-CALLED LEADERS STEMS FROM THE FACT THAT MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAIL AND SUPPORT THEM. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE CLEARLY NOT ASKING FOR MUCH, PERHAPS A PLATE OF AMALA PER DAY (THEIR IDEA OF MUCH), WHEN THEY ARE ENTITLED TO SO MUCH, MUCH MORE. BUT, THEY WON’T KNOW UNLESS THEY SEEK.

    Secondly, we the people should really do something about the excessive emoluments going to assembly members. There have been many cries and noises made over this, yet nothing has resulted. We still have a situation where many are overpaid for an average work schedule, while many are not paid nearly enough for the work they do.

    Thirdly, I think that the time has come for us all to take the decision, by general agreement, that assembly membership, or political involvement, should be on a part-time basis. The reason is simple. We do not have a nation yet that we can call home. In reality, therefore, we cannot afford all these comedies of errors on our national menu.

    For now, we all should join hands to work at building the nation first. In time, we may be able to afford full-time politicians.

  • Our brand of politics

    Every political system, as every nation, has its uniqueness and its idiosyncrasies. While we have dancing senators and crying governors, others can boast of lying presidents. Our deficit of ideology and surplus of personality cults is legendary. But others have managed to carry ideology to its craziest extremes such having ideological litmus test for judges. What happens to the symbol of blindness as a mark of judicial fairness? We worry whether we will ever develop to a First World status. But some that already attain that status are daily craving our Third World status. How else to understand our desire for and appreciation of democratic norms vis-à-vis their attraction to the dictators of our era?

    If comparing ourselves existentially with others in these ways make us happy, let us please ourselves. God is not done with us yet, despite our desperate efforts for him to abandon us. However, it makes better sense to take a deep breath and address a few fundamental questions: Who are we? What do we really want in our union? Will we ever develop politically, economically, and morally?

    In one of his most insightful comments on the imperative for African development, Nwalimu Julius Nyerere submitted that “we must run while they walk.” In other words, we cannot afford to compare ourselves with those who have achieved First World status. They can indulge themselves. They can afford to slow down. However, if not for them, the development clock is ticking for us. In the beginning of their national journey, they had ensured that the politics that drives the engine of development was well-positioned for the task, with a constitution that was designed to unleash the forces of production in every part of the nation.

    The important point from the above is that nations that make it developmentally got their politics right. Yes, every now and then, they may appear to backslide. But the system is resilient enough to auto-correct. From the beginning, their focus was the good of the nation. Take the case of the United States of America, the nation whose constitution we claim to adopt. The founding fathers insisted on a federal constitution even when there were no clearly discernible differences in tongue and tribe. The mere fact of geographical differences between the various states recommended federalism for them. Then they ensured that there were justiciable checks and balances between the various branches of government.

    Most importantly, the founding fathers came up with strong laws and statutes that ensured that no one is ever above the law. And the good of the entire nation is the purpose of politics and government. This understanding inspired the most patriotic zeal which bolstered development in every area of national life. It paid that in the early twentieth century, a rival political system, the Soviet Union, challenged the US and thus unleashed a period of economic and military competition that eventually led to the downfall of the former. This strengthened the confidence of the US in its system of government and economics.

    What is the ground zero of our national existence? What motivates us as a people? Do we even see ourselves as a people and do we believe in the nation? These are questions that we have not really settled. It appears that at every turn in our checkered history, answers to these questions get determined by whoever is at the helm. We have been consumed with ethnic mistrust and religious bigotry at the expense of national advancement. We have promoted personality cults above national interest. And most importantly, we have elevated materialism and individual interest above everything else. The result is the paralysis in governance and development to the detriment of the poor masses who are forced to massage the ego of depraved politicians for crumbs.

    With the question of an adequate constitutional framework unsettled, or settled only with the whim of the strongmen, there is an avoidable absence of a united force of all the peoples for any enduring development agenda for the nation. A federal executive council can decide what it likes based on its understanding of the needs of the nation. How does that get translated into a broad national consensus?

    We have seen how that works in the present political setup with the chasm between the National Assembly and the Presidency when infrastructural and federal road projects are debated by the former from the prism of sectional interests. In the case of the insecurity generated by the killer herdsmen across the nation, which has given the Buhari administration a black eye, we see unhealthy interjection of ethnic and religious considerations into what is clearly an economic policy matter.

    What is surprising is that everyone knows that this system is not working. Political leaders are aware of the immense growing resentment among the populace. Yet they soldier on with the mindset of a conqueror who cannot be bothered by the complaints of the conquered.

    Thus far, this strategy has worked to the delight of those who benefit from it and to the mortification of those who know that the nation can profit from a different approach for various reason. The most fundamental of these reasons, the foundational cause of the curse of the nation thus far, is the influence of money in our politics. On this, other reasons for the failure of our brand of politics to advance the national agenda take their cue.

    Money is the root of political evil. While it is an essential lubricant for the political wheel to run smoothly, it could also be a wedge in the smooth running of the wheel. The political system that successfully identifies the intersection between the useful grease and the handicapping logjam effectively achieves desired outcomes for the people.

    In what positive ways does money grease political machine? In a well-ordered system, where there is congruence among the various constituents in the matter of national unity and the advancement of national interest, in which political parties are well-attuned to the advancement of the national interest, and they compete for votes to advance same, money could play a useful role.

    First, political parties need money for a strong organizational setup at national and state levels. Second, they need money for informational purposes. They need to reach out to the voting public about their programs for the nation. Advertisements on radio and television as well as social media platforms are useful investments for parties to reach the electorate. Political parties also could help the national cause by investing in the political education of their members, including those who desire political offices, as well as the electorates.

    In what ways does money clog the wheel of politics negatively? To answer this question adequately, we must go beyond politicians to influence peddlers in general. For the latter are as guilty as the politicians they try to influence. Incidentally this is not unique to our system. The big wealthy men and women who throw their monetary weight behind legislations and policies that benefit them at the expense of the masses are deadly viruses in the organ of the political system.  Unfortunately, there is reason for their existence and their effectiveness.

    As suggested above, parties need money to organize and to inform. In the absence of an active and paid membership, they depend on big donors who see their contributions as investments which must bring profit sooner or later. When return is not forthcoming after elections, they become irritable and could turn against their beneficiaries. We are not strangers to this. Public funding of parties and candidates plus active and committed membership could help resolve this problem.

    There is a more sinister negativity in the choking function of money. Money that buys votes is a foundational curse. A politician that spends fortunes to buy votes is a calculating politician who only invests with a view to a future dividend or profit. The bigger the investment, the bigger the expected anticipated profit. A wise investor in political business knows what offices return what dividends and he or she goes for the most rewarding. Many of our politicians belong to this class of foundational corruption.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Democracy, security and politics: how far have things changed?

    First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Communist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me.-Martin Niemoller

    Whatever took place in Ado-Ekiti last Wednesday, a day after the display of positive power by  movers and shakers of All Progressives Congress and current governance of the country, it will be important for the growth of democracy for citizens to know what exactly took place: why and to what effect. So far, the conflicting claims include that Fayose did not get police permission to lead a rally on that day and Fayose’s supporters claimed that permission was secured to use the pavilion.  The police said that its men tried to prevent a clash between Fayose’s party and Fayemi’s party. But Fayose’s supporters claimed that the police dispersed his men and women with teargas, making Fayose to sustain an injury that took him to the hospital. It is never an easy task to get to the root of most things about partisan politics in our society, but this is what a commission of inquiry can do.

    Citizens who were excited in 2015 when transition from one civilian government to another went without violations of human rights must be alarmed by the regression now in vogue in Ado-Ekiti.  In 2015, this column joined many others in celebrating the advent of electoral democracy that the country had not experienced for a very long time since June 12, 1993 presidential elections. For the event of last Wednesday in Ekiti not to bring back sad memories about the practice of partisan politics in the country, there is need for the federal government to investigate police officers who used teargas when the deputy inspector did not “tell them to do so.” Such intervention from security can give the impression of partiality on the part of the police.

    Not many citizens between the age of 15 and 45 may know that repression of opposition parties has been part of the culture of electioneering in the country from the beginning of its electoral history. In 1959, it was hard and impossible in many parts of Northern Region for members of the Action Group to campaign freely.  In 1964 and 65 in Western Region, forces of Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP) harassed members of the Action group before, during, and after regional and federal elections. Candidates were incriminated by government agents. Some candidates were charged for stealing goats and put in prison to prevent them from taking part in campaigns. Similarly, in 1979 and 1983, many journalists from Western Region were intimidated and harassed out of many parts of the North before election days by security forces in support of National Party of Nigeria. It was overcoming such moments of darkness that inspired democrats to resist annulment of Abiola’s election. It was also the free atmosphere for citizens to choose their rulers that made many Nigerians to celebrat in 2015 when the election that brought President Buhari into power was without intimidation and repression of members of opposition parties. Overzealous security agents must be prevented from taking the country back to the dark age of our electoral politics.

    What could have been the reason to turn Ekiti which enjoyed the peace and excitement of a festival on Tuesday during the campaign of APC into a space of weeping by PDP members barely 24 hours later?  It is only the security forces deployed to Ekiti that can tell the nation why the sudden descent into such primitive and barbaric acts at a time that citizens believe that politicians have accepted to work in compliance with the rule of law. Fayose may not be the most civil politician, but he is not in the wrong to want to campaign for his candidate on Wednesday for an election that is to hold on Saturday. If he had tried to campaign on Friday, he would have been at fault, but certainly not on Wednesday. Why would he be denied the right to hold a rally in support of his own candidate 24 hours after the opposing party had its own dance toward power in the same state?  So civil was APC’s campaign on Tuesday that some of the leaders of the party even tried to campaign for Fayose. Why would the police get so enthusiastic about preventing a breakdown of law and order that it would destroy the gains of several years in the country’s political culture? Why would people deployed to keep peace be the source of crisis?

    The space given to our police for errors seems to be too large. Fayose could have been killed by a stampede and that could throw Ekiti into chaos or anarchy. Does our country need such a problem at a time that the country is virtually at war with itself – Boko Haram, herdsmen’s killings, killing by cattle rustlers, etc?  Security agents ought to be reminded of the proverb, ‘Discretion is a greater part of valour.’ It is noteworthy that a relatively senior police officer has finally acknowledged that something was wrong in the handling of PDP’s proposed rally by the police. But it is premature for the Deputy Inspector to promise to avoid a repeat of a violation that has not been fully acknowledged. Thus, the latest response from Deputy Inspector Habilal Joshak: “What I said was that those massing for the rally should be asked to leave because it is not good going by the mood of the state now to hold rally or street procession. I didn’t say they should use force. This is an election and electioneering is a civil matter anywhere across the globe, so police as security agents can’t use force on the people. But I want to assure the good people of Ekiti State that such mistake will never repeat itself,” is certainly more civil than what is usual with the Nigeria Police Force. However, this statement is not enough to put this unprovoked attack on democracy behind us. The attack on Fayose and his supporters, and by extension, on tolerance of opposition that democracy requires deserves a more robust acknowledgement that the police had been out of order in its overreaction in Ekiti last Wednesday.

    There are many matters arising from the sudden use of police power in Ekiti.  One such matter is the claim that it is only a central police force that can be depended on not to abuse police power. With a state police in Ekiti State, the chances are high that many of the police in such a homogenous state may be relations or neighbours. Would such people have acted with such venom as was displayed last Wednesday? Given the readiness of Fayemi’s opponents before the primary to solidarise with him immediately after the primary, there is no doubt that Ekiti people are politically mature people. Why would the police ignite an unnecessary crisis a few days to the election? Couldn’t the police have imagined that such intolerance of Fayose and his party supporters could have tarnished the candidacy of Fayemi? They ought to have given this scenario a thought if they were prepared to use discretion. Police attack on Fayose and PDP members when they acted within their rights can lead to post-election hostility among such a closely-knit state as Ekiti. Many of us from other states were thrilled when Fayose came out to support the nomination of Fayemi for ministerial appointment in 2016, calling him a worthy son of Ekiti.

    What kind of federalism leaves state governors without a security system loyal to him or her as the symbol of the state, as the federal police is expected to be loyal to the president? The deficit in the country’s federal democracy has been underlined by the poor political literacy of the police in Ekiti.  Could any state governor in the United States, Canada, or Belgium have been disrespected the way Fayose was, regardless of Fayose’s love of histrionics or theatrics?

    The civilised international community which praised Nigeria in 2015 for peaceful conduct before and during the elections is being made by the excesses of the police on Wednesday to see the experience of 2015 as a fluke. A way out of this embarrassing situation is for the police to apologise for what Deputy Inspector Joshak has acknowledged as a mistake or be probed to determine why such mistake was made.

  • Politics as a dirty business

    IT is perhaps the biggest gathering of politicians in recent times. They came from far and near. There had been hints of the great spectacle when a group of angry – obviously not hungry as being insinuated in some quarters – All Progressives Congress (APC) members, who were the arrowheads of the New Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP), formed the Reformed APC (R–APC).

    It was a mixed crowd of political giants, pranksters and jesters. What do you expect? After all, it is the season of politics. The general elections are just a few months away.

    As I got set to write this column, I stumbled on a Times of London article by Rachel Sylvester. “Tory plotting turning politics into farce” lashes Theresa May’s cabinet, which has been hit by a string of resignations over Brexit. To the writer, just when Britain “needs grown-ups in charge, May’s cabinet of curiosities are behaving like selfish amateurs”.

    She quotes Cicero telling Tiro in “Imperium”, an adaptation of Robert Harry’s novels recounting the fall of the Roman republic: “Politics is a dirty business.” The play is about power and ambition in the ancient world, Rachel Sylvester writes, with an extraordinarily modern touch. “Pompey has a Trump-like head of hair, Cicero is condemned as ‘an enemy of the people’ and when Brutus admits, after the assassination of Caesar that ‘there is no plan’, it is impossible not to think of Brexit.”

    Pardon my digression dear reader.   The article, aforementioned, is a vivid flashback to the Abuja proclamation of the R–APC. The drama is clear: deploy populism, whip up sentiments and rouse the mob to action to pave the way for your principals to take over the reins of power. After that, dismantle all the seeming gains of the moment. Tell the public that you are fighting to save them from heartless herdsmen; in your mind the fight is all about enthroning hard men and bringing back the laissez faire of the past.

    As I said, it was a gathering of big names in politics. Atiku Abubakar, the exceptionally ambitious former vice president, who is ready to cross the sea for a presidential ticket: Chief Tom Ikimi – jolly good fellow; he has never been this far from mainstream politics and all its goodies – who many believe is still galled by his failure to get the APC chairman’s seat; and Olu Falae, the Ilu- Abo, Ondo State chief, former Finance minister and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, who was kidnapped by gunmen who invaded his farm. His abductors, you may wish to recall, were seized, tried and sentenced to the death.

    Former Oyo State Governor Rashidi Ladoja, who is nursing the dream of returning to the Government House, took time off his consultations with his lawyers, who are battling to get him off the legal hook in an EFFC case, to be there. So was Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu, the lucky politician who bagged the plum job despite the fact that his party is in the minority and has amassed a global property portfolio that Donald Trump can only envy.There was also Dino Melaye, who took time off his numerous legal battles and political buffoonery – to attend.

    David Bonaventure Mark, the former Senate president, was said to have sacrificed an entire day of golfing – he is reputed to own some golf courses overseas – for the meeting.

    Also, there were some presidential aspirants, such as Sule Lamido, the former Jigawa State governor, former Special Duties Minister Tanimu Turaki and former Kano Governor Ibrahim Shekarau, who is also a former minister in the Dr Goodluck Jonathan administration.

    Alhaji Buba Galadima, the R-APC national chairman, was railing against the Buhari administration, after announcing that Senate President Bukola Saraki and House Speaker Yakubu Dogara are members of the group. He named also Rabiu Kwankwaso, the former Kano State governor, as a member of the group. There was also PDP Chair Uche Secondus.

    A commentator described the gathering as “a conclave of renegades, human grenades and brigands” who are power-hungry. He says the group never spoke about its ideology and wondered if it had any. “It is all about not getting enough patronage or not getting at all; all about self and self,” he said. He concluded that it was all a PDP show.

    The R–APC is an amalgamation of the PDP and 38 other parties, some of which are largely unknown. They have agreed to field one presidential candidate who they hope will wrest power from President Buhari next year.

    The alliance is named Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP). The jury is not yet out on the fate of this coalition, but it has been the subject of derisive jokes and blistering attacks. “Buhari has caged looters in one single box called Coalition of United Potential Prisoners (CUPP),” one nameless person posted on the Internet.

    As the coalition’s leading lights were grinning in Abuja, a cheeky fellow who watched on television said: “I know how to disperse this gathering. Let somebody just rush in there, panting and screaming, ‘Magu!’ ‘Magu!’ ‘Magu!’. The hall will be empty in seconds.” Magu, I am sure you know, is the Acting Chair of the EFCC, the agency leading the anti-corruption battle.

    Another simply reframed the acronym CUPP as “Clueless United People’s Party,  a flashback to the description of the Jonathan administration before the 2015 election. Yet, there are people who do not care whether the APC is “reformed, deformed and defamed”.

    Some associates of the legal giant and frontline rights advocate, Chief Gani Fawehinmi of exciting memories, have kicked against the inclusion of his National Conscience Party (NCP) in the coalition.

    To former Kaduna State Governor Balarabe Musa, the coalition is “just an electoral gang”. So think many people, who insist that it is not about democracy or good governance.

    It all depends on how the CUPP plays its card. Soon, it may begin to receive endorsements from all manner of groups – Association of Witches and Wizards of Nigeria (AWWN), Association of Veteran Politicians (AVP) and Retired Party Chairmen (RPC), Council of Traditional Rulers and Dealers and others who are pushing for the return of what they call the good old days.

    The Coalition also agreed to field a slate of candidates for all elective positions. The common man does not seem to feature in this elaborate plan. The whole thing is about sharing booty. Our politicians should show responsibility and the sobriety that this time calls for – or quit the stage for the army of youths yearning to seize the initiative to save Nigeria. As a colleague observed the other day, “the coalition or collusion may eventually cause a huge commotion, which will send its architects to a political Siberia”.

    The political class should wake up.

     

    Death in a boyfriend’s home

    MAJOR calamity has befallen the family of former Ondo State Deputy Governor Lasisi Oluboyo. His daughter Khadijat’s decomposing body was found in the home of her boyfriend six days after she went missing. She was 20.

    Her boyfriend, Adeyemi Alao, who is said to be an Internet fraudster, otherwise known as Yahoo, Yahoo,  is accused of killing her for money ritual. He dug a shallow grave in his room to bury the university student’s body. The police are investigating the murder, which Alao has denied.

    Why will a young man be involved in such a devilish enterprise? Where is the herbalist – accomplice in this murder? Who are Alao’s friends? Are

    Police parade Ex-Ondo Deputy Governor Daughter's killer
    The late Khadijat

    they also internet fraudsters? Can we ascribe this to the failure of parenting? But Alao is an adult who is responsible for his actions.

     

    The suspect’s father said he handed him over to the police after his younger brother discovered the body and told him of his shock finding.

    This tragedy is a reflection of the moral degeneration that has struck our society. Our values have been shredded on the altar of greed for money so much so that human life matters no more. Nothing is sacred.

    We are yet to find an answer to the damage that codeine and tramadol as well as other drugs are doing to our youths. Now we have to save our young ones, who are neck-deep in cultism, from cutting corners by doing rituals.

    The love of money is destroying our society. A massive reorientation is needed to curb this insane tendency.

  • ‘Politics, not funding, delaying Trains 7&8’

    Nigerian Liquefied and Natural Gas (NLNG) Limited former Managing Director Mr. Godswill Sunday Ihetu has explained why Trains 7&8 have not been constructed.

    In an interview with The Nation, he said political intrigues were the cause of the delay. He dismissed the allegation of inadequate funding against NLNG management by some stakeholders.

    According to him, NLNG executed Trains 1-6 projects, which  recorded huge dividends, adding that NLNG could fund Trains 7&8.

    Ihetu queried the views of some Nigerians that the project might have been delayed because NLNG did not have enough money to fund it. NLNG is the only indigenous multi-billion dollar company with about 85 per cent local content, he said.

    He wondered why the government would refuse to assist NLNG to obtain Final Investment Decision (FID) or provide it with some concessions on how to raise funds, among others.

    Ihetu said the delay in constructing the Trains 7&8 was caused by the government.

    His words: “NLNG realises billions of dollars as revenue yearly, of which it pays taxes into the government coffers, and budgeted billions of naira for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) projects in the Niger Delta region.

    “For a firm that has contributed to the growth of natural gas and its by-product, which include but not limited to the Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) that ordinarily could have been flared, it is difficult to conclude that such enterprises lacked money.

    ‘’Even if NLNG as a limited liability company with 49 per cent government holdings does not have the money to undertake a big project like Trains 7&8, it has the goodwill to get the money required for the project.”

    He said NLNG has been pushing for proper funding of projects, without relying on local financiers.

    “At worst, NLNG can borrow money from international creditors to finance a big-ticket investment for the growth of the country. The firm has said it on several occasions that it could do it; so, why the allegations that the firm does not have the money for such projects. Why the fuss about poor funding?

    Ihetu, who is also the chairman, Energy Equity Resources, said Trains 7&8 have many benefits, urging stakeholders to do something to encourage the success of the project.

    He said the projects would add between 50 to 60 per cent revenue to the economy.

  • Politics, legality of June 12 declaration

    The legality of President Muhammadu Buhari’s recent declaration of June 12 as the new Democracy Day in Nigeria and conferment of GCFR, the country’s highest honour, on the late Chief MKO Abiola have become subjects of controversy. Associate Editor, Sam Egburonu, Assistant Editor, Dare Odufowokan, Sunday Oguntola and Abdulgafar Alabelewe, spoke to some legal minds and leaders and report

    ALTHOUGH many Nigerians have praised President Muhammadu Buhari over his recent declaration of June 12 as Nigeria’s new Democracy Day and his decision to honour the heroes of the political struggle, including the late Chief MKO Abiola, there has been heated debate over the legality of the actions. Also, some observers, including Buhari’s opponents have alleged political motive, arguing that the timing could only be informed by a scheme to achieve some political mileage ahead 2019 Presidential Election.

    Professor Ango Abdullahi, a prominent voice from the North and one time Vice Chancellor of Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria, for example, said Buhari’s action is “political opportunism,” even as he insisted the honour was belated.

    “If the President’s declaration is intended to honour Chief MKO Abiola, I think, it is belated.

    “So, I consider it to be a political opportunism. If there is any democracy day Nigerians should worry about, it should be 1st of October, which marks our Independence Day.

    “So, I think it is political opportunism because it is belated. If not, why didn’t Obasanjo do it, why didn’t Yar’adua do it or even Jonathan?

    “We have had three regimes since MKO’s death and nobody had the right thinking cap to remember the man or to honour him or remember the circumstances of his death until now? That is why I said it is first of all belated and in my own thinking a political opportunism.” He said.

    He also posited that even May 29 ought not to be Nigeria’s Democracy Day.

    According to him, “why was May 29 Democracy Day in the first place? It was creation of Obasanjo. Because that was the day power was handed over to him. But, must that be Democracy Day, when we already have October 1st? But, because Nigerians always like to go on holiday, that is why they accepted Obasanjo’s May 29, which as far as I am concerned is the marking of his own history in the political development of Nigeria.”

    His response did not however tally fully with the reaction of Arewa Consultative Assembly, which supported the president’s action.

    However, in their reaction, Northern Leaders and Stakeholders Assembly, (NLSA), said Buhari’s declaration of June 12 as the new date for Democracy Day in honour of Abiola has political undertones.

    But a lecturer in the Department of Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG), Barrister Wahab Shittu, told The Nation that the declaration of June 12 as Democracy Day and conferment of posthumous honours on Abiola and Gani Fawehinmi were in order.

    According to him: “Both actions are legal because the Honour Acts and Holiday Acts say the President has the prerogative to declare any day as public holiday and give national honours to whoever he deems fit.

    “The honourees can also send representations to receive the awards on their behalves. The declaration of June 12 as Democracy Day is a result of popular clamour over the years. It is consistent with people’s yearnings and agitation for years.

    “We all know Abiola made huge sacrifices for the democracy we all enjoy today and is a fitting awardee. I think we should all commend the administration for taking the measures, which are clearly in order.”

    On whether the moves could have been politically-motivated, he said: “Whatever motivation is inconsequential and immaterial because people will always read emotives to whatever action one takes.

    “What is important is to find it the actions were in response to public agitations and in the interest of all. Once that has been proven, whatever motivation people want to read into it is immaterial.”

    Can the dead get GCFR?

    Meanwhile, as mixed reactions continue to trail the announcements by Buhari, a new twist has been introduced into the debate over whether it was appropriate for the federal government to honor the late Abiola with Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR) when some observers, including Dino Melaye, the senator representing Kogi West Senatorial District in the National Assembly, said a dead man cannot be bestowed with the highest honour in the land.

    Citing Chapter 43(2) of the National Honours Act on Thursday, however, Melaye had argued that the Act does not allow for conferment of the honours on non-Nigerians. He pointed out that Abiola is dead and that that automatically “makes him not to be a Nigerian.” He also said, “I am a democrat, I believe very sincerely that Chief M.K.O Abiola deserves even more than the president has pronounced because he is a true patriot, philanthropist and should be so decorated.

    “But Mr. President, we are governed in the country by the constitution and extant laws. No matter how beautiful a situation is, the law of the land remains the law of the land.” Subsection 2 of the Act, he said, says a person shall be eligible for appointment to any rank or holder unless he is a citizen of Nigeria. A dead man is not a citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. We should not be emotional about this. The law remains the law,” he said.

    However, Melaye’s interpretation has been faulted by some Nigerians. Some analysts cautioned him against introducing a strange argument not known to have a precedent in any law court. But the Senator insists that the Act provides that such honour be conferred on the recipient in person and since Abiola is dead, he cannot receive the award. According to him, a dead man cannot be so honuored.

    The Nation therefore sought the views of prominent lawyers to explain the legality or otherwise of the posthumous awards and presidential declaration on Democracy Day. For example, Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), in a chat with The Nation, faulted Melaye’s argument and insisted that no known law of the country was broken by the President with the national honor conferred on Abiola and others. The pro-democracy activists even added that the President has the constitutional right to make the declarations he made on Abiola and June 12 without seeking the consent of the National Assembly.

    “No part of the National Honours Act prohibits or restricts the President from exercising the powers to confer national honours on deserving Nigerians, whether they are dead or still alive. It is correct that paragraph 2 of the Honours Warrant made pursuant to the National Honours Act provides that ‘a person shall be appointed to a particular rank of an order when he receives from the president in person, at an investiture held for the purpose.

    “But in the same warrant, paragraph 3 thereof has given the president the unqualified discretion ‘to dispense with the requirement of paragraph 2 in such manner as may be specified in the direction. Therefore, if the national award conferred on Chief Abiola cannot be received by him in person for obvious reason, the President is empowered to permit his family members to receive same on their behalf,” he said.

    However, towing Melaye’s path, contrary to Falana’s argument, is former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Alfa Belgore. The highly respected jurist, in his own argument had said that the award of Nigeria’s highest national honour on late Moshood Abiola is illegal. Belgore, who was CJN from 2006 to 2007, said the national honours cannot be awarded posthumously, let alone the GCFR, which is the highest honour in the land. “It is not done. It is for people living. The only thing they could do is to name a place after him, but national honours award, no.”

    Osun State Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, in his reaction disagrees with both Melaye and Belgore. According to Aregbesola, history will be kind to Buhari for recognising June 12 as Democracy Day and honoring Abiola, though dead. He said the President’s action is commendable and will always be cited in history as a patriotic and courageous effort to heal a serious wound.

    “We are glad therefore that President Buhari has taken this bold step and set the record straight. History will be kind to him for this. I commend him for this uncommon courage and demonstration of leadership. President Buhari has secured for himself an incomparable position in history for surmounting the courage to take this historic step of recognising June 13 as ‘Democracy Day’ and honouring Chief Moshood Abiola posthumously.

    “It is most regrettable that the election was annulled and Chief Abiola clamped in illegal detention where he later died. Successive administrations had suppressed the significance of June 12 and resisted every admonition to recognise the date and honour Chief Abiola. On that day, Nigerians in their heterogeneity overwhelmingly voted for a candidate whose very essence was in defiance of religious, ethnic and regional categorization,” he said.

    But Dr. Soni Ajala, a legal practitioner based in Abuja, in his reaction warned that “the politics of the issue of the posthumous award of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR) must not be muddled up with the core legal issue of the politics of the award.” He told The Nation that “much as all patriotic Nigerians applaud Mr. President, Muhammadu Buhari, for the bold step of recognising the supreme sacrifice of Chief MKO Abiola as the acclaimed winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, there are landmine legal puzzle that cannot even be cured by administrative publication in the Federal Government Gazette by the Hon. Attorney General of the Federation as directed by President Buhari.”

    Ajala maintained that for the action of Mr. President to acquire what may be described as legal security, there would be need to first de-annul the annulled June 12 election. As he puts it: ‘Can something be placed on nothing and it’ll be expected to stand?

    By lexical and legal connotations, the word ‘annulment means void, completely erased and never existed. By necessary implication of the subsisting decree of the National Defence and Security Council (NDSC) promulgated in 1993, de jure, there is no valid basis for the actions/gestures of Mr. President as what is/was annulled remains annulled until de-annulled.”

    Going beyond the issue of legality, Professor Ango Abdullahi, a prominent voice from the North and one time Vice Chancellor of Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Zaria, in his reaction, said Buhari’s action is ‘political opportunism,’ adding that the honour was belated.

    Abdullahi said “if the President’s declaration is intended to honour Chief MKO Abiola, I think, it is belated.

    “So, I consider it to be a political opportunism. If there is any democracy day Nigerians should worry about, it should be 1st of October, which marks our Independence Day,” he said.