The Nation Newspaper

Tag: PRESIDENCY

  • Senate makes U-turn on nominees’ confirmation

    Senate makes U-turn on nominees’ confirmation

    …Screens 12 INEC nominees

    Two weeks after the Senate resolved to suspend consideration of the Presidency requests for confirmation of nominees, the upper chamber on Wednesday received the report of its Committee on Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on the screening of 12 Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs).

    The Senate, on July 4 resolved to suspend all confirmation requests from the Presidency until Acting President Yemi Osinbajo withdraws a statement credited to him that the Senate does not need to confirm nominees from the executive arm of government.

    The Senate also asked the Presidency to sack the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Ibrahim Magu, in line with its resolution.

    The Senate took the resolution to suspend confirmation of presidential nominees when Senate President, Bukola Saraki, read Osinbajo‘s letter, urging the upper chamber to confirm the nomination of Lanre Gbajabiamila as Director-General of the National Lottery Commission (NLC).

    Senator Ahmed Sani Yerima (Zamfara West) noted that since the acting President had already concluded that the Senate lacks the powers to confirm nominees, there was no need to acknowledge any letter from the executive on confirmation of nominees.

    However, the Senate after over one hour closed session reversed itself by receiving the report of the RECs screening.

    The resolution suspending confirmation requests reportedly featured prominently at the closed session.

    The 12 RECs whose screening reports were received were – Mrs. Asmanu Sani Maikudi (Katsina), Sam Olugbadebo Olumekun (Ondo), Mahmud Isah ( Kebbi), Rufus Oloruntoyin Akeju (Lagos) and Riskuwa Shehu (Sokoto).

    Others are – Kassim Gana Geidam (Yobe), Jibrin Ibrahim Zarewa (Kano), Abdulganiyu Olayinka Raji (Oyo), Samuel Egwu (Kogi), Mike Igini (Delta), Mustapha Zubairu( Niger) and Ahmad Bello Mahmud (Zamfara).

    No date was fixed for their confirmation.

     

     

  • Presidency to Nigerians: ignore Dasuki’s claim on Boko Haram

    Presidency to Nigerians: ignore Dasuki’s claim on Boko Haram

    The Presidency yesterday denied claims by former National Security Adviser, Colonel Sambo Dasuki (rtd), which maintained that the Goodluck Jonathan administration cleared the Northeast of Boko Haram terrorists to make elections possible in 2015.

    A statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, said the remark was untrue and should be dismissed.

    According to him, the claim was another attempt to rewrite the history of Nigeria.

    He said: “The superlative claims by the former National Security Adviser, Colonel Sambo Dasuki that the Goodluck Jonathan administration cleared the Northeast of Boko Haram terrorists to make elections possible in 2015 is untrue and should be dismissed as an attempt to deceive Nigerians with blatant lies.

    “The claim as contained in a new book by a journalist is just another unfortunate attempt by inglorious Nigerians to rewrite the history of our country in such a way as to cover the sins of the past.

    “We will have to read the entire text to offer a full and adequate response.

    “As a public relations goon for the former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, the author did not surprise anyone by dismissing the acclaimed success of the Muhammadu Buhari administration in the fight against Boko Haram, claiming that this government simply took the glory for the achievements of the previous government in the war against terrorism.”

    Shehu said: “For those interested in the facts, as at the time elections were held in March 2015, a number of local government areas in Northeast were completely under the control of Boko Haram – to the extent that elections in those areas had to be moved to safe areas. The residents of areas, such as Gwoza, Banki, Kukawa, Monguno, Bulumba, Baga, Gamboru Ngala, Dikwa, Mafa, etc., were able to vote, not in their hometowns but in refugee camps in other parts of Borno State, under special arrangements made by INEC.”

    He explained that many residents of the Northeast have returned to their homes as Boko Haram was eradicated from their areas since the Buhari administration came into power.

    According to him, institutions such as schools, police stations, markets and courts have been re-established or in the process of being re-established in many of the areas.

    The presidential aide said despite Dasuki’s attempt to rewrite history, Nigerians could not have forgotten the embarrassing stories of failed weapons that plagued Nigeria’s military during the previous administration.

    He noted that under the previous administration, there were cases of unserviceable weapons, expired ammunition and fake armoured vehicles, which caused untold grief to valiant armed forces on the battlefield, with arms exploding willy-nilly and guns failing to fire.

    “It is for trespasses like these that the Buhari administration is determined to get to the bottom of the $2.1 billion arms procurement scandal and ensure that no single one of the culprits goes scot-free,” he stated.

  • ‘Magu’s rejection more of politics than legal’

    ‘Magu’s rejection more of politics than legal’

    •CJN’s ruling boosts confidence

    The row over the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr. Ibrahim Magu, assumed a new dimension yesterday, with the Presidency insisting that his nomination does not require the confirmation of the Senate.

    It based its decision on an advisory prepared by judicial and legal experts on Section 171 of the 1999 Constitution.

    The advisory unearthed a ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter where the Chief Justice of the Nigeria (CJN), before his elevation as CJN, had ruled in line with the view of the Presidency on the matter.

    The CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen, had ruled that the Constitution overrides any provision of an Act /Statute.

    But the Presidency said it will await the judicial review of Section 171 for the final say on Magu.

    The details of the advisory were obtained last night by our correspondent.

    The legal advisory asked the Presidency to await a judicial pronouncement on Section 171.

    The source said: “In fact, the conclusion of the legal advisory on the matter is very clear that a judicial pronouncement preferably by the Supreme Court is what will settle the matter.”

    Some extracts from the legal advisory states: “The divergent positions being held by the Executive and the Legislature on the subject of confirmation …is one that requires timely and ultimate resolution.

    “Such resolution could only be reached through the judicial process…Such interpretation would lay to rest the lingering crises between the two arms.”

    Concerning the issue of the Acting EFCC Chairman, the legal advisory concluded that “the rumblings in the discourse on the confirmation of the EFCC Chairman have more to do with politics than with the law.

    “It is trite that, by the rule of ejusdem generis, any office to which Section 171 or other Sections of the Constitution do not confer on the Senate the power of confirmation of appointment to such office cannot be imported and accorded equal footing as the mentioned offices.”

    The advisory affirmed the powers of the President to appoint in acting capacity into positions such as the EFCC chairmanship.

    It also clarified that “in the recent past, the ministerial nomination of late Prof. Abraham Babalola Borishade (Ekiti State) by President Olusegun Obasanjo was rejected repeatedly by the Senate.”

    “In fact, it would be recalled that this particular nomination was presented four times in 18 months before it was eventually confirmed by the Senate.

    “This position is because of the long established and entrenched principle of law that any legislation that is inconsistent with the provision of the Constitution is null and void and of no effect whatsoever to the extent of such inconsistency. (See the Supreme Court cases of DR. OLUBUKOLA ABUBAKAR SARAKI v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2016) LPELR-40013 (SC) and CHIEF ISAAC EGBUCHU v. CONTINENTAL MERCHANT BANK PLC & ORS (2016) LPELR-40053 (SC).”

  • Presidency, Senate faceoff

    Presidency, Senate faceoff

    Crises are never far away from our country. And in many cases, they are needless and self inflicted by our political leaders. This regrettable trend makes the country inherently unstable politically. In the last few weeks, a serious constitutional imbroglio has emerged between the Presidency and the Senate over the federal budget, and the refusal of the Senate to confirm the appointment, two years ago, of Mr. Magu as the Chairman of the EFCC. In the case of the crisis over 2017 budget, the Presidency has complained that the appropriation bill submitted to the NASS for consideration and approval had been significantly altered in several respects. Specifically, the acting President, Professor Oshinbajo, publicly expressed his concerns that some of the critical items on capital expenditure on infrastructure had been deleted, or reduced, and replaced by items that are not really of any national significance, such as local boreholes and health clinics. In the case of the renewed rejection by the Senate of Mr. Magu’s long standing nomination as the Chairman of the EFCC, the acting President has said that the federal government will not change its mind about Mr. Magu’s nomination and that, despite his rejection by the Senate, Mr. Magu will continue in office in an acting capacity. The NASS is divided over this issue with the House of Representatives wisely dissociating itself from the Senate.

    Now, this open disagreement between the Presidency and the Senate raises some fundamental constitutional questions which need to be resolved, if necessary, by the Supreme Court. Can the Presidency reject a decision by the Senate regarding both the budget and appointments? Ordinarily, one should say ‘no’. The NASS has both legislative and watch dog functions that are necessary both for good governance and as a check on the Executive. That is the essence of the Whitehouse presidential system of government, with its ‘checks and balances’. The NASS must enjoy and maintain the right to check any political excesses on the part of the Executive. One should expect a robust interaction and engagement between the executive and legislative branches of the government. That is the true essence of responsible government. But the power enjoyed bt the legislature places on it an enormous responsibility which it should exercise wisely collectively, and with a lot of circumspection and discretion. It should not be used to obstruct the executive needlessly. This implies that its decisions on matters of national importance should not be taken capriciously, or in a brazenly partisan and selfish manner. Whatever decisions it takes must be seen to be in the national interest, and not in the interest of only a few members of the Senate.

    In the current faceoff between the Presidency and the Senate over the federal budget and the confirmation of Mr. Magu’s appointment as the Chairman of the EFCC, it cannot be said with any conviction that the Senate has acted in the national or public interest. In both cases the public perception has been that the Senate acted only in the interest of a few, and that its decisions were politically motivated. In the case of changes made to the federal budget appropriations bill, the Senate has argued that it acted within its constitutional powers by altering the budget. Technically, this may be right. But the manner in which its power over budget appropriation was used in this case leaves a lot to be desired. It has not only replaced critical items of capital expenditure with mundane items, but has also increased the total budget by nearly a third. This increase in budget appropriations by the Senate is both unrealistic and impractical, in view of the nation’s current difficult financial situation. The federal government is responsible for revenue collection. Its budget proposals are based on its revenue estimates, in which the Senate or NASS are not involved. It is in a far better position to know or determine what budget is financially feasible The 2017 federal budget is a deficit budget. About a third of the budget, nearly N3tr, will have to be borrowed both locally and abroad. In view of the poor state of global finances, this will prove to be a difficult challenge. It may not in fact meet its budget target. In the circumstances, how then can the Senate justify its decision to increase the budget when all indications are that even the revenue target for 2017 may not be met? In view of the considerable delay in the passage of the 2017 budget, what should be of even greater concern to the NASS is how much of the budget can be implemented in the limited time left in the 2017 fiscal year. To be blunt, it is unlikely that the federal government can implement more than 40 per cent of the overall budget this year. This means that the much expected stabilization and recovery from the current recession will prove to be even more difficult to achieve.

    In the case of the deletion or reduction by the Senate of vital items of capital expenditure, replacing them with items of only local significance, this is completely wrong and unacceptable. In its budget proposals the federal government is expected to take a holistic or national view of its capital expenditure, with a view to improving the woeful infrastructure in our country that has for decades retarded our economic development. With a good infrastructure, Nigeria’s growth prospects will be far better. To replace this national approach and perspective with items such as bore holes and clinics that are better handled by the state governments and local governments cannot be said to reflect what is in the national interest. Of course, Senators can be expected to show some interest in what goes to their various constituencies in the budget. But this should not override due consideration of what is in the national interest. After all, when vital roads and bridges are built right across the country, everyone benefits from them. And all these critical infrastructure capital expenditure items were cleared by the Executive with the Senate at the Committee stage when the budget proposals were being considered in the Senate.

    The federal government will be right in ignoring items ‘smuggled’ into the budget by the Senate. It has primary responsibility for the execution and implementation of the budget in the best interest of our nation. There is no compelling constitutional reason for accepting the changes introduced to the budget by the Senate. The Presidency is right in insisting that it cannot accept the changes by the Senate in the 2017 budget. The Senate will grumble, but it will be unwise of it to seek to impeach the government or the President on a crucial matter such as this on which it has little or no public support. It will fail and throw the nation into an unnecessary constitutional crisis. Both the Presidency and the Senate must seek an amicable settlement of this regrettable imbroglio in the interest of the nation.

    With regard to the Senate’s refusal to approve Mr. Magu’s appointment as the Chairman of the EFCC, the Senate is even on a weaker wicket. The reason or reasons it has advanced for doing so are even more spurious than those of the budget. The fact of the matter is that Mr. Magu, and the EFCC, are believed by the Nigerian public as doing a good job. The Presidency considers Mr. Magu the best man for the job. Under his leadership, the battle against public corruption has gathered momentum. Many public figures, including state governors, federal ministers, and other public officials, are either under investigation, or being charged with fraud. In fact, the general public complaint is that many more public officials should be in the EFCC drag net, and that the prosecution of those being charged for corruption is not diligent enough. Because of this lack of diligence by the EFCC some of those being charged, including some high Court judges, have escaped conviction through legal loop holes.

    Why then is the Senate demanding the removal of Mr. Magu? The obvious reason is that there are so many members of the Senate, including its President, Senator Saraki, who fear that they are targets of EFCC investigation. They want to obstruct the ongoing investigation of these Senators. But they cannot be above the law. They cannot claim any immunity for financial crimes against our nation. The fight against public corruption is fully supported by the public. It will fail if the Senate is seen as fighting against the tide. It will further discredit the Senate in the eyes of the public.

    It has even been suggested that the Senate’s refusal to confirm the appointment of Mr. Magu as the Chairman of the EFCC is part of a wider plot by the Senate and a Camarilla (cabal) in the Presidency to bring down the government. If this is true, then it is irresponsible of the Senate and all those involved in the plan. It will lead nowhere as the public will be totally opposed to such a despicable ploy. The Senate is not held in high esteem by the public because of its massive failure to act responsibly, and in the national interest. The Senate will not, in present circumstances, defeat the Presidency in a constitutional battle. It should sheathe its sword for the greater battles ahead as the defender of the rights of the people. By its seeking to obstruct the work of the EFCC, it will be seen as setting itself up against the public interest and the massive discontent with public corruption in our country.

    Our nation is presently facing a lot of challenges, including its survival. These ought to engage the serious attention of those in authority, particularly the NASS. For the Senators to engage themselves in a despicable ploy to impeach the government over issues that can be so easily reconciled could be the last straw that could imperil our very existence as a nation. It could lead to a public revolt against the National Assembly. Many are now calling for it to be occupied by the public. Let wiser counsels prevail.

  • Ex-lawmaker seeks smooth Presidency, lawmakers’ relationship

    A former member of the House of Representatives, Bamidel Faparusi, yesterday said Acting President Yemi Osinbajo has not committed any infraction to warrant threats of impeachment by the Senate.

    The former lawmaker from Ekiti State advised the Senate to embrace political solution to whatever it was aggrieved about.

    In a statement yesterday, Faparusi supported the position that Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Acting Chairman Ibrahim Magu needed no confirmation from the Senate to retain his position.

    The former lawmaker noted that the action did not constitute a gross misconduct that could warrant the resort to Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution.

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) stalwart said the lingering crisis between the Presidency and the National Assembly could only abate if the two arms understood the doctrine of mutual respect and the principle of Separation of Powers.

    Also, he described the victory of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) senatorial candidate for Osun West in last Saturday’s by-election, Ademola Adeleke, as a signal that the APC must allow the people to always have inputs in the election of candidates.

    In a statement yesterday in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State capital, the governorship regretted that APC’s control over the National Assembly had waned, despite having overwhelming majority in the two chambers.

    The former Federal lawmaker argued that as much as he believed the Presidency must show respect for the National Assembly to sustain the country’s democracy, he said the power of impeachment should be sparingly used.

    He said such cannot be deployed against anyone for merely expressing his opinion on a matter.

    Faparusi said: “The constitution gives the power to appoint on the Executive arm. The retention of Magu as Acting Chairman of EFCC didn’t negate the constitution. The Presidency and perhaps Acting President Osinbajo could be deemed to have trampled on the law, if he asked Magu to continue in substantive status.

    “What I expect the two arms to do in the interest of our dear nation is to imbibe the principle of mutual respect. Nigerians expected much from President Muhammadu Buhari’s APC-led Federal Government in terms of the delivery of the dividends of democracy. Impeachment is not popular now on their minds.

    “The Senate, as an institution, shouldn’t be oblivious of the cacophony of threats caused by agitations among Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the Niger Delta militants and the Boko Haram insurgents. All these are enough crises that are heating up the system. The issue of imbroglio between the two arms is only adding to the sufferings of the masses.

    “In ending this crisis, I expect the two arms to exhibit mutual respect and think more of the people rather than reducing the crisis to personality clash.”

    On the just concluded Osun Senatorial poll, Faparusi said: “That was an eye-opener for APC, particularly in preparations for the governorship election in Osun and Ekiti states.

    “We must allow the people to always dictate the tune. We must play all-inclusive politics by being tolerant and by listening to all shades of opinion.

    “In deciding who to fly the party’s flags, interests of some powerful leaders can be defeated because of the people, this is the hallmark of politics and such should be allowed to thrive for the survival of APC,” he said.

     

     

  • PROJECT ACT: PRESIDENCY MUST WARN KEMI ADEOSUN

    I am worried that out of the N3 billion Federal Government grant under the Project Act Nollywood scheme, N150 million may have just been frittered…,” I said on April 26, 2014, aiming to warn managers of the World Bank-assisted intervention fund for Nigerian filmmakers.

    The N150 million was expended on a batch of 23 filmmakers, who were considered to be members of the Directors Guild of Nigeria (DGN), for training at the University of Colorado, United States.

    Several other groups got money for different film courses in Nigeria, India, London etcetera, but my take is that it is difficult to achieve 10 per cent skill upgrade from the army of filmmakers that were supposedly trained in 2014. This has confirmed the fear of critics that the Capacity Building Fund (CBF) segment of the grant merely took the form of the derogatory national cake feast; an unpatriotic feast that every so-called filmmaker must partake.

    Some fine Nollywood films have been released since 2014 when the CBF was implemented; I am yet to come across any filmmaker who has attributed the greatness of any of the works to knowledge acquired from the CBF. I consider that segment of the fund of N300 million as a subtle scam.

    Understandably, the fund was doled out at the dawn of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s re-election bid, thus, it was unnecessary to probe eligibility of beneficiaries, let alone insist on result assessment mechanism.

    While I felt more comfortable with the Film Production Fund (FPF), a N700 million instrument of that scheme that eventually climbed to N800 million, the question of transparency and accountability still bedevil the scheme.

    A total of N642, 500,000 was said to have been committed to 92 applicants, representing 93 percent of total budget. Where are the films? The scanty and stale web portal of the grant did not indicate. Since 2014, we have yet to see 10 of the funded films in cinema, DVD, VOD, or on Pay TV. If the managers are business-minded, we should have a clear picture by now, of at least the 12 films already in post-production as at the time of disbursement. Since this appears difficult, what do we say of the 13 films already in production or the 68 in pre-production at that time?

    To show how inept the current Ministry of Finance is, in handling this project, the Project ACT-Nollywood portal was last updated in 2015, while disbursements have been carried out twice on the third instrument called the Innovative Distribution Fund (IDF).

    My argument has always been that the IDF should have been the first to be implemented, being the segment that is most auditable and able to determine Return on Investment (ROI). As if that error was not enough, the Kemi Adeosun-led Ministry appears to be bungling the process further with serious problem of priority and transparency.

    Why are the managers of this fund not being transparent with how the IDF has been disbursed so far?  This is the most sensitive and driving force of the other segments and the public needs to know who the beneficiaries are.

    The industry may do with some ‘expired’ filmmakers who scavenged for training abroad but will never make any film of it – same for some beneficiaries of the FPF who are yet to forward update on performance of production as stipulated, because they might have spent the money on other interests. But as far as the IDF is concerned, the effort of the few serious filmmakers will be jeopardised if it is not properly implemented. Hence, we shall continue to hold Adeosun accountable.

    This is a World Bank project, and the Federal Government has a duty to discharge it with all sense of responsibility if it must be sustained.

    What really is the problem here? Has the Ministry ‘dashed’ the money to those who have no business with distribution of films? Has Adeosun been arm-twisted by star power, and has given money to non-deserving stakeholders of the film industry? How much research was carried out on the national, regional or community spread of the distributors who got the grant? In the absence of the much-canvassed Motion Picture Practitioners Council of Nigeria (MOPICON), was the leadership of the Nigerian Film Corporation (NFC) that should be able to determine the true membership of the guilds and associations involved? What about the National Film and Video Censors Board (NFVCB) which granted licenses to the distributors?

    It is not enough to feed the public lies through some lousy press releases that speak big sums and try to impress us about the worth of Nollywood to the country’s economy. The essence of this project lies in its scientific calculations and projected values that are believable.

    Today, the only practical bail-out for Nollywood as an investment is in exhibition/distribution. We want to know how many community cinemas, at the least, will emerge from the IDF, and within how many years. This is what the potential investors need. This is what the next filmmaker planning to loan money from Bank of Industry would want to know.

    Who were the people given money for online distribution? What is their pedigree? What is innovative about what they want to do?

    How are the managers of this fund working in hand with the Nigerian Copyright Commission and relevant agencies on the need to minimise piracy? Of what need is N1.9 or N2billion distribution fund if the means of protecting right owners are not put in place before disbursing the fund?

    Who is fooling who? The Presidency must warn Kemi Adeosun, because her first strides on this project appear wobbled. From what is left of the fund, the Minister must present a blue print that will increase the sectors attractiveness from an investment standpoint and encourage future capital flows towards the sector, as the scheme has professed.

    For goodness sake this is Muhammadu Buhari’s administration and the ‘Change’ mantra must reflect in every dealings of the Federal Government.

    In this entire travesty, the sensitivity of the fund managers must be sanitized to ensure the actual development of Nollywood, not for showmanship, but for showbiz.

  • Ekiti 2018: Presidency has not anointed anybody, says Bamisile

    Ekiti 2018: Presidency has not anointed anybody, says Bamisile

    All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship aspirant in Ekiti State Hon. Femi Bamisile has said that neither the presidency nor the party’s National Working Committee (NWC) has anointed any candidate for next year’s election.

    Bamisile said the party will conduct a free and fair primary to pick its candidate to foster cohesion within the party.

    The former Speaker of the House of Assembly spoke in Ado Ekiti, while hosting some Muslims for the Eid-el-Fitr festival.

    He said he will not marginalize Muslims  in elective and appointive positions, if elected.

    Bamisile said some aspirants were spreading rumours that the candidate will be imposed from Abuja, adding that the rumour has been creating panic and disillusionment among the delegates.

    An Islamic Cleric, Dr Ahmad Aminullah , in his sermon tagged: ‘a virtuous leader’, urged the people of to look beyond partisanship in electing a good leader in 2018, adding the  contestants should be thoroughly scrutinized for the electorate to make the right choice.

    The Islamic scholar added that the state has been making mistakes in electing their governors, predicating this on deep hatred and politics of acrimony among gladiators.

    Bamisile said: “Let me tell you this. Nobody has been picked in Abuja. Our party did primaries in Ondo, Osun senatorial election, Edo, Kogi governorship elections held recently, so Ekiti can’t be different.

    “Some of the aspirants have been spreading the rumour just to deceive the delegates and this will never happen.

    “As an aspirant, I relied only on the delegates, even when some are relying on godfathers. But, how can an aspirant be relying on godfather when you know that the delegates will vote?

    He added: “This shows that they don’t have respect for  you  even as party members and that is the main reason why you have to vote for the right person that won’t have any godfather elsewhere”, he stated.

    On the complaint by Muslims that they were being neglected in governance in Ekiti, Bamisile said: “I am a Christian, but I love Muslims and I hate people who believe in religious bigotry because we are all one.”

    We originated from the same parent which was Adam, so why must be killing ourselves on the basis of religion.

    “If I am elected governor, I will not destroy mosques built in the state the way the present government is doing.  I won’t neglect you if I a elected, because you are so relevant and important to us.

    “The last population census showed vividly that Muslims accounted for 39.1 of the state population and with this, it shows that nothing wrong if the Deputy Governorship position is ceded to you as you have in Lagos, Oyo and Osun States.”

     

     

  • Presidency’s unforced errors

    Presidency’s unforced errors

    OF the two most recent controversies the Muhammadu Buhari presidency got itself entangled in, none was answered to the public’s satisfaction. Responding to social media accounts of wastage and poor judgement involved in parking a presidential jet in London awaiting the president’s recovery and return, presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu, suggested there was nothing untoward in keeping the jet idle. In his view, “The presidency is constrained to decry criticisms, mostly on social media, on the retention in London of the presidential aircraft, NAF 001, as mostly informed by lack of understanding of protocol around foreign trips by heads of state all over the world. It is important to state that for reasons of protocol, national security, diplomacy and prestige, there is no world leader who travels abroad and is left without plans for immediate return or possible evacuation. From the operational point of view, this country’s armed forces as represented by the Nigerian air force are not to abandon their commander-in-chief in whichever circumstance he is. This is a standard operating procedure.”

    Not yet done, Mallam Shehu continues: “We have also read claims about outrageous fees allegedly paid by Nigeria. The published amounts are totally untrue. Aircraft conveying heads of state all over the world usually enjoy waivers even where payments for parking are differentiated by aircraft categories…For the avoidance of doubt, this president is not the first to have a presidential aircraft standing by for him, as he will certainly not be the last. All past heads of this country have had this privilege. We appeal to Nigerians to ignore opposition campaign aimed at derailing this administration’s big plans for the country.”

    Mallam Shehu mixes issues. Except he is happily indifferent to the concept of opportunity cost in Economics, there is no way he can justify keeping the plane idle in London. It could be put to some good use elsewhere. Can he satisfy himself that that idleness will not constitute some engineering problem for a jet parked for indeterminate period? He speaks of presidential planes retained by leaders during their foreign trips. The devil is in the detail. Do those foreign trips stretch on endlessly, as President Buhari’s medical trip presupposes? Even if it is assumed that former presidents like military dictator Ibrahim Babangida and ex-president Umaru Yar’Adua enjoyed that privilege during their medical trips, does it preclude anyone, in this day and age, and in this era of austerity, from pointing out the needless waste in parking a jet for weeks on end? Indeed, if an emergency should arise, it is uncertain that the president would be evacuated from his sick bed to another hospital in anything but an air ambulance.

    The social media which dwelled on the subject may be prompted by impure motives, but the issues they raise are germane and should be addressed frankly and without emotions. It is injurious to democracy when government spokesmen continuously take refuge in emotions and demonise the opposition. There is nothing to suggest that the opposition is behind the disclosures on the parked jet, or the inaccuracies about how much the Nigerian government might have spent on parking fees. The social media, as everyone can attest, is undiscriminating in attacking both the ruling party and the opposition. Indeed, no one is safe from social media, not even its denizens.

    Contrary to Mallam Shehu’s position, there is really no justification to keep the jet parked in London waiting for the president whose departure date is uncertain. Unfortunately, neither the acting president nor anyone else will broach the topic of moving the plane back home. The Nigerian government, as its many dysfunctional institutions indicate, does not function seamlessly or dispassionately.

    The second unforced error strikes at the root of the Buhari presidency’s culture, especially its fundamental orientation and disarticulation. The president’s audio message in Hausa language to mark Sallah and admonish the people about peaceful coexistence devoid of hate speeches may have addressed the speculation about his supposed speech impairment, but it raised more worrisome questions about his obviously futile effort to cut the figure of a nationalist as against the fear of many others that he is at bottom a sectionalist and irredentist. It is not known how the president and his advisers came upon the solution of reading his Sallah message in Hausa to a multi-ethnic society like Nigeria where a very significant number neither speak nor understand Hausa. But whatever prompted the president to accent to that tactic was doubtless ill-advised and counterproductive.

    Thankfully, other than releasing the president’s audio message to the public, his advisers and spokesmen have not tried to defend that tactless language gaffe. It is really indefensible. Can he make amends for it when he returns? It is not his custom to apologise for anything. Given his many gaffes in the past, some of them unable to disguise ethnic and sectarian connotations, he probably won’t. But what is even more frightening is that sending the message to Nigerians in Hausa may actually be a Freudian slip indicating the president’s fundamental disposition to ethnic and sectarian relations — his obsessions so to speak. The president’s worldview appears in fact to have been so sculpted as to admit of no other worlds but the one he grew up in. There is no other way to explain what he did on Sallah.

  • A case for collegiate presidency

    UNTIL recently, I numbered myself among those who dismiss as sublime fallacy the saying that there is good in evil and evil in good. But the turn of events since June 6 when a coalition of northern youths issued a 90-day ultimatum to the Igbo in their midst to quit the region has changed my opinion considerably. The age-old aphorism is making more and more sense with the angry reactions that trailed the ultimatum and the concomitant calls for the nation’s restructuring. Tagged the Kaduna Declaration, the quit notice had sparked public outrage across the country. Individuals and groups described it variously as reckless, irresponsible and an open invitation to anarchy. But the barrage of condemnations is giving way to a silver lining. The declaration appears to have jolted everyone to the realisation that Nigeria, as presently constituted, is nothing but a union of virtually incompatible principalities.

    The best that can be done in the circumstance is to yield to them reasonable amounts of self-control, hence the calls for the nation’s restructuring, even from quarters once considered improbable. Not a few Nigerians were shocked during the week at the news that former military President, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, whose stranglehold on power robbed the country the chance to swear in Bashorun MKO Abiola, the acclaimed winner of the presidential election of June 12, 1993. Like a bolt from the blue, the self-proclaimed evil genius, reputed for foisting on Nigeria one of her biggest political crises, is canvassing the devolution of power to states as well as the adoption of state police. Babangida, whose military cohort, including former Senate President David Mark, were said to have vowed that Abiola would only be sworn in over their dead bodies, has now reasoned from his hilltop mansion in Minna, Niger State that the drumbeats of war championed by Arewa youths, pro-Biafra groups, Niger Delta militants and other militant groups across the country are consequences of a political structure that concentrates power at the centre.

    The former head of state’s call for restructuring came a few days after a similar call was made by governors elected on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC). In an eightpage document containing the governors’ position on the challenges to Nigeria’s unity, they reasoned that recent agitations by some ethnic groups around the country were a reflection of weak governance, economy and law enforcement. They therefore demanded that the federal system be adjusted in order to meet the demands for political restructuring and true federalism. The fact that Nigeria is overdue for restructuring can hardly be contested. But also incontestable is the fact that mutual suspicion among the numerous tribal and ethnic groups that make up the country is at the heart of the political crises that have dogged its history, including the civil war that rocked the nation for three years between 1967 and 1970. What Nigeria requires in the circumstance is not just a system that devolves power to states, but one that also gives each of the more than 250 ethnic groups in the country a sense of belonging with regard to governance at the centre.

    While it is good to have a governing structure that devolves power to the nation’s federating units, it is more pertinent to have one that will make it possible for all the federating units to be in control of state apparatus at every point in time. Assuming that the existing six geo-political regions constitute the federating units in a restructured Nigeria, rather than ask each of the six geopolitical zones to take turns to produce the president, the nation can adopt a six-man Council of Presidents where each of the federating units (geo-political zones) will have an elected representative.

    Since the Council is made up of six members, its tenure will also be six years during which members will rotate its chairmanship for one year each. The arrangement would sound strange, but it is one that could go a long way in solving our peculiar political problems as a highly heterogeneous society in which the different tribes have lost trust in one another after the civil war. The arrangement also has the ability to reduce the fear of marginalisation and the mutual suspicions that have been the bane of our political development since independence. With this arrangement, the nation can avoid such bitterness as was generated by the decision of former President Goodluck Jonathan to contest the 2011 presidential election, against the widespread belief that the North was yet to serve out its term since former President Umaru Yar’Adua died midway into his first four-year tenure.

    Even now, there are fears in some quarters that the nation is inching towards another political crisis because President Muhammadu Buhari may not be able to serve two terms and the North could feel short-changed the second time if the seat is occupied by someone from another zone in 2019. Of course, there will be rough patches to be smoothened out, like the need to re-adjust the number of geo-political zones from six to an odd number so that it will be easy to break deadlocks in situations where Council members have to resolve issues by voting.

    It may also be difficult to smoothen out such rough patches because of the resistance that could be mounted by vested interests. For instance, with the Council in place, there may be need to abolish the burdensome duplication called the Senate; a move that is bound to be resisted by many senators who believe that their survival depends on their stay in the upper chamber.

    I make no claim to any expert knowledge in political engineering because I am not a political scientist. Yet something tells me that collegiate presidency is an option that can be explored to solve our myriad of political problems. It is a novel political arrangement, but one that would make it possible for all the regions that make up Nigeria to be in power at the same time. It is not the first time I would canvass the idea either, having done so in a piece I wrote in the now rested National Concord in 1998. There are no words to express the sense of vindication I felt when former Rivers State governor, Chief Melford Okilo, expressed similar sentiments about two years later.

  • Presidential aircraft only gulping £1,000, says Presidency

    Presidential aircraft only gulping £1,000, says Presidency

    The Presidency on Thursday denied the media reports claiming that President Muhammadu Buhari’s aircraft in London was gulping £4,000 daily.

    Buhari had left Nigeria on May 7th for consultation with his doctors in the United Kingdom.

    A statement by the Senior Special Adviser on media and publicity, Garba Shehu, said that the aircraft is gulping less than £1,000 daily.

    The statement reads “The Presidency is constrained to decry criticisms, mostly on social media, on the retention in London of the Presidential Aircraft, NAF 001 as mostly informed by lack of understanding of protocol around foreign trips by Heads of State all over the world.

    “It is important to state that for reasons of protocol, national security, diplomacy and prestige, there is no world leader who travels abroad and is left without plans for immediate return or possible evacuation.

    “From operational point of view, this country’s Armed Forces as represented by the Nigeria Air Force are not to abandon their Commander-In-Chief in whichever circumstance he is. This is a standard operating procedure.

    “We have also read claims about outrageous fees allegedly paid by Nigeria. The published amounts are totally untrue. Aircraft conveying heads of state all over the world usually enjoy waivers even where payments for parking are differentiated by aircraft categories.

    “We been assured that where the waiver is not granted, payment will not exceed £1,000, which is a quarter of the amount being peddled.

    “For the avoidance of doubt, this President is not the first to have a presidential aircraft standing by for him, as he will certainly not be the last.  All past Heads of this country have had this privilege, and the part that surprises the most is that leaders who in the past travelled with three Nigerian aircraft did not suffer this trenchant criticism.

    “We appeal to Nigerians to ignore opposition campaign aimed at derailing this administration’s big plans for the country.

    “This is a government that is constructing the Second Niger Bridge, the Mambila Power Plant, the East-West and the North-South standard gauge railway lines.

    “We are a government that has saved this country an annual loss of two trillion Naira from fraudulent petroleum subsidy schemes by influential citizens and their children, and rid the public service of about 50,000 ghost workers.

    “The Buhari administration certainly deserves a chance,” it stated.