Tag: referendum

  • ‘Election will be a referendum on Buhari’

    The National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Kola Ologbondiyan spoke with reporters in Lagos on the Buhari administration, the presidential aspiration of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, preparations for next month’s election and factors that will shape the exercise. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU was there.

    What is the chance of your party in the general elections?

    As a party, we are worried by the level of hunger in Nigeria today. We are worried  by the level of starvation across the land. We are also troubled at the level of division, insecurity and bloodletting across the nation.  We have taken on the APC and President Buhari on three key promises they made to Nigerians during the last election. They promised to revive the economy but the losses of jobs that we have experienced and the cost of living that has gone up astronomically has demonstrated to all of us that President Buhari has not fulfill his promise about reviving the economy. Two, he promised to fight corruption  and he is seen as Mr Integrity but it is very worrisome that  President Buhari is not fighting corruption but busy fighting perceived enemies  and possible opponents in the 2019 elections.

    We in the PDP believe that while we were in government,  we have situations where senators, Reps members, governors and even a Senate President was not only investigated and subjected to trial, we even have an instance where a sibling of a former president was arrested.  But, what do we find in the current circumstance? The Chief of Staff who is the closest person in terms of administration to Mr  President was accused of collecting bribes as we speak today, he has not been investigated or subjected to trial. The former SGF, Babachir Lawal was accused of cutting grass with over N200m in the North East where our fellow Nigerians were victims of insurgency; the same insurgency that President Buhari promised to come and fight. As we speak today, they are just playing games, no arraignment and no trials.

    Just recently, the House of Reps indicted the Vice- President in its report on corruption in NEMA and yet they are talking to us about fighting corruption.  We have challenged the National Assembly to open all the books in the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and what they will find there, we will discover that in the history of our nation, no administration has been as corrupt as this government.

    The President also promised that he will fight insurgency but the worst of it is that under his watch, insurgents now attack our military base killing our soldiers. Yes, insurgency started when PDP was in government but the insurgents were attacking soft spots where we have civilians but now it is worrisome that the insurgents have become so emboldened that they now go to military formations and attacks our soldiers.

    The worst part of it was that the President’s wife, Aisha Buhari came out publicly and declare to Nigerians that only two persons are running the affairs of governance. I don’t there can be any other testimony against this APC government than that.  This definitely tells us the fact that we all know that the President is not in charge. So, is it those two people that we are going to vote for in 2019?

    Why do you think your candidate is the best man for the job?

    We believe that we need a president who has got the experience, a candidate who understands our nuances as a people and as a nation. A president who in the past when he had the opportunity has demonstrated capacity as a job provider and a good manager of the economy and even after he left office, he has continued to create wealth and we believe strongly that that is the kind of president that our nation truly needs today and that is what our presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar represents

    What is the difference between the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and All Progressives Congress (APC) as those that left APC went to the PDP?

    The difference between the PDP and APC is very manifest. The PDP believes in democracy and its tenets,; we stand by the rule of law, social justice and respect for constitutionalism. We also believe in creating an enabling environment that will allow private enterprises to thrive. As such, we encourage private investors to create jobs, so that life can be better for the people. But, I must confess to you that the APC, unfortunately is just an amalgam of people contended with the existence of governance. They have no ideology and have nothing to offer Nigerians. They are power mongers looking for power and they chased out the PDP government through propaganda, through lies and through deception. They do not have any plan whatsoever in any form to govern and to govern in a particular direction. That is why we have challenged them to name one idea they conceived, planned and implemented. There is none. Where is the ‘Change begins with me’ they promised? They do not have ideas for governance and without ideas, you cannot rule, you cannot govern. In terms of ideology, they disrespect the court. We all know in Nigeria when they woke up one night and went round residences of judges. You know the number of times former National Security Adviser (NSA), Colonel Sambo Dasuki (rdt) has been granted bail, but they did not release him inspite of court orders. They have no respect for court orders; they have no respect for constitutionalism. So, when you talk of ideology, I believe that the PDP has ideology and because it is a democratic party, it follows the tenets of democracy, but I don’t know the ideology of the APC.

    One of the issues on the front burner  the economy. How will your party fix the economy if it gets to power?

    The PDP believes that the only way to revive the economy is to allow the economy to be private driven and the job of governance is to create an enabling environment that will allow businesses to thrive. We have experimented government running businesses and we have experimented a situation where private investors are given an enabling environment to thrive and we have seen where it has taken us. NITEL was running the telecommunications sector, but GSM operators were allowed to run the sector and we have seen where it has taken us.

    There are feelers that all is not well within the PDP, especially in the South-South and South-East. Is there a problem in the party and what effort is being made to address it? Again, there is also insinuation that some governors in the South-East are secretly planning to work for President Muhammadu Buhari in the 2019 elections. How do you react to that?

    I find it strange that any member of the PDP will pledge a particular percentage of votes for President Buhari. If that is true, it confirms our fears that there are plans to rig the 2019 elections by writing figures. You cannot determine a percentage of votes that will go in any direction in a free, fair and credible election. You do not know the mindset of every voter. All I know is that the governors on the platform of the PDP are supporting our candidate. That is a known fact. Why should our governors vote for President Buhari? What will be the reason? Is it that the people, who are members of our party, are not Nigerians?

    Why do you think that any member of our party will not work for the President?

    You see, it is a game of the ruling party, they know that they have been abandoned by Nigerians. They know that the lies and contraptions they used in 2015 are no longer working for them because Nigerians have seen through them. So, they are looking for help because they know that they are a drowning party. They will say anything just to create disaffection and seek to cause crisis within our party and with our candidate. We can see clearly that Nigerians are rallying round our candidate.

    Your party’s national chairman recently alleged that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is being used to witch-hunt PDP governors…

    Our governors in the last three and a half years have suffered untoward embarrassment from this administration. They have been harassed, they have been intimidated, but I want you to know that they cannot be intimidated to do such things. The PDP governors are determined and they will continue to support the party.

    How do you respond to INEC’s decision to conduct elections in Internally Dispaced Camps (IDPs) and what is your take on the commission’s preparation for the elections?

    We have made our position on the IDPs very clear. We are opposed to any situation that will grant INEC the powers to create new polling units under the guise of creating them for IDPs. Nigeria, as a country has been delineated to 120,000 polling units and as such, any area in this country has its own polling unit. So, what we are seeing is this, if there are IDPs in Ikeja for instance, what they need do is to allow the IDPs to transfer to the area where they are currently staying. There is no need to create an additional 30,000 polling units because it will amount to rigging. We have also said that we are aware that the contraption, which took place in Osun State during the governorship election, was done in INEC’s situation room, where it was clear that in the transmitted results, PDP won, but they decided to manipulate the process. We have credible information and we have given it to our party in respect of this.What we are saying is that since President has refused to sign the amended Electoral Act, which provided for transmission of results electronically, INEC should allow observers to participate or monitor the results in the situation room. So, speaking generally, what we have said and insisting on is that we will not allow rigging in the 2019 general elections. We will burst every rigging plan of the APC and the President. It is manifestly evident that Buhari cannot win the 2019 election because Nigerians have resolved, wholesomely that they will not vote for him and that they will not vote for the APC. So, on account of that, we will check INEC and ensure that they guarantee an election that will be free, fair, credible and transparent, and as well accepted by the majority of Nigerians.

  • Re: The Yoruba Assembly demands Referendum on Nigerian unity

    Apart from obviously aping Kanu’s IPOB, and putting the cart before the horse, this is one occasion when the Yoruba Assembly should profit from history

    Circumstances have again ensured that I shall not be able to run readers’ comments on the Afenifere article which appeared on this column some three Sundays ago today. Like a bolt from the blues, and quite unlike Yoruba’s well known preference for wide ranging consultation amongst stakeholders, news broke this past week that The Yoruba Assembly, an umbrella platform for all socio-political groups in the South-west,  has  joined Ndigbo  in asking  for  a referendum  on  Nigerian  unity.  Unfortunately,   they took this position completely in contrast to their claim that:  ”As it is our culture, the Yoruba Assembly will begin a consultative process with all Yoruba people including conducting an internal referendum and their decision will determine the next steps.”  So from whence came this demand?  Apart from obviously aping Kanu’s IPOB, and putting the cart before the horse, this is one occasion when the Yoruba Assembly should profit from history.

    At its meeting of 30th August, 2013 in Ibadan the Assembly took decisions they are now standing right on the head. To insist on this demand, therefore, they will have to tell us what invalidated those well distilled decisions (in particular, no. 8 below).

    Attended by delegates from every strata of the Yoruba nation, including Kwara, Kogi, our Itsekiri kith and kin from Delta state and the Republic of Benin, the following is the abridged COMMUNIQUE of the meeting.  I happened to have been a member of the communiqué committee.

    It reads:

    “At the end of robust deliberations on pertinent issues, the following decisions were adopted as resolutions:

    1. Noted that Nigeria is, once again, at a critical crossroad. After more than 50 years of Independence and less than 2 years shot of 100 years after the 1914 amalgamation, deep structural issues and Nationality Questions, such as Federalism, Fair and Equitable Revenue Allocation, Security, Free and Fair Elections, State Police and inter-relationship amongst the different Nationalities remain unresolved! Indeed, the need for a National Dialogue to resolve the issues has never been more pressing. The general state of the Nigerian federation is disturbingly unhealthy. There is general insecurity in the land, there is growing decay of infrastructure, and there is increasing tension in the polity, exacerbated by mounting unemployment all over the country.
    2. Observed further that the failure of the Nigerian Federation to meet the challenge of building a modern multi-ethnic democratic state can be traced to several factors which include: absence of a negotiated constitution by citizens, corruption and the menace of religious and cultural intolerance.
    3. Noted in particular, the 1999 Constitution, on the basis of which the country is governed today, is seen as a source of tension between federating units. The constitution imposes a unitary model of government on a country with diverse cultural and religious orientations and values, thereby putting most of the powers and resources to develop the federation in the hands of the government at the centre.
    4. Noted that the growth of the Yoruba region has been stalled by the imposition of a unitary form of government that denies states the right and benefit of fiscal federalism, a corner stone of federalism worldwide. In this respect education, health, transportation, and social welfare of citizens have declined so sharply in Yoruba land that the quality of life of the average citizen today is lower than it was in 1970.
    5. Observed that sustainable unity and development of the country cannot flow from over concentration of power and resources at the centre. For example, we note that lack of effective law enforcement and assurance of security and safety for citizens is traceable to the over concentration of powers in the central government
    6. Noted that on the basis of the evidence that the failure of governance in the country has grown with the transfer of powers from federating units to the central government, we affirm the urgency to restructure the polity at a national conference of federating units, which will produce a new constitution to be ratified through a national referendum.
    7. Agreed that the process of restructuring should start with federating units, which must in their own space first discuss and determine the type of relationship they want between their region and the central government and relationship between states and the region in which they are located. For we, the Yoruba, the country Nigeria, is a forced marriage of diverse ethno-national groups, struggling to find form and shape, and limiting promises and possibilities.
    8. Re-affirmed the commitment of the Southwest to the territorial unity of the country and resolved to work for enhancement of the country’s unity by cooperating with other regions to resolve peacefully the conflict and tension thrown up by the current unitary constitution that limits the control of federating units over their affairs and development.
    9. Recognized that the best way to sustain unity in a culturally diverse polity and society is to organise its politics and economy on the basis of a federal system of government. Culturally diverse countries which are able to sustain peace and development have done so through a federal constitution. Nigeria’s cultural diversity is too pronounced for the political elite to pretend that a unitary constitution can be substituted for a federal constitution that is generally designed to respond to diversity and optimise the benefits of diversity for peace and development.
    10. Resolved to set up the Southwest Constitutional Commission (SCC) for the purpose of coordinating memoranda from citizens and groups in the Southwest towards a federal constitution for the country and of producing a constitutional framework for the region as unit of the Nigerian federation.
    11. A new Nigeria consisting of a federal government and six regional governments (based on the current six geo-political zones) operating federal and regional constitutions, respectively.
    • A single legislative list which will be the Exclusive Legislative List consisting only those functions ceded to the Central Government.
    • The adoption of the Westminster model of parliamentary government.
    • A Regional and State Police force structure.
    • The establishment of a Constitutional Court with jurisdiction over inter-governmental cases and petitions from elections to the national Assembly
    • The Conference fully supports the on-going Regional integration in the South West.
    • That all public officers who currently enjoy immunity be made amenable to court processes on charges bordering on commission of crimes.
    • That an informal role for traditional rulers in the political structure be recognised.

    The conference further decided as follows:

    • The adoption of Open-Secret ballot system for voting at elections.
    • Total condemnation of Boko Haram’s indiscriminate violence in killing people, including Yoruba in the North.
    • The setting up by the South West States of vigilante groups to protect them against the re-insurgence of crimes and violence perpetrated by nomadic tendencies or motivated by faith or otherwise. In this respect, each State House of Assembly in the region should pass appropriate laws.
    • That the Yoruba as an ethnic group should design and produce a common flag and anthem. This is without prejudice to the anthems and flags of each state”.

    Reason for the new demand they wrote:  ”lies in the altruistic effort to establish a development-oriented and sustainable governance structure for Nigeria on the one hand and on the other hand, the objectionable attempt at sustaining Nigeria’s unitary constitution by the ruling clique that desire to permanently control the leverage of power in Nigeria for egoistic reasons.”It affirmed that the modern concept of sustainable development is a process that must begin with the active consultation and participation of the people – therefore the need for a referendum is imminent.”

    Whoever understands that should please educate me. And if one was considerate enough to assume their intent, how are Nigeria’s present circumstances, exacerbated  as it is by the Kanu cacophony, different from the circumstances thoroughly interrogated at  the Ibadan meeting?

    If the Assembly was influenced by Afenifere’s chummy political relations with Ndigbo, I have news for them – thanks to my good friend, R.O Okunmuyide.  While Afenifere remains rooted to its Southern Solidarity credo, a more profound Ohaneze, under the lead of a suave Nnia Nwodo, has decided on a much more pragmatic route.  Seeing the futility of the IPOB/MASSOB mob approach to achieve their political objective, Igbos have designed a skilful master plan to repeat what Catalonia and Bavaria did respectively in Spain and Germany when their bids for separation failed in those countries which will transform the Southeast to Nigeria’s economic powerhouse and change it completely from being a region of economic migrants!

    It is in view of the above I would plead that we put on our thinking caps. Fifty years post Biafra, Igbos have not stopped accusing Awo, albeit wrongly, of betrayal.

  • Unity: Ijaw monarch seeks referendum

    The  monarch of Seinbiri Kingdom, Burutu council area of Delta state, Pere Ayemi Botu, has called for referendum to address Nigeria’s challenges.

    He spoke while receiving members of the United States Consulate General in his Warri palace yesterday.

    The Ijaw monarch said: “Niger Delta is the hub and the life wire of Nigeria because if not for the oil, Nigeria wouldn’t have been as an entity. The oil is the unifying factor of Nigeria and also the economic life wire of this country.

    “Icons like Professor Wole Soyinka, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, have all been calling for restructuring, to restructure the country in the sense that we will see ourselves to live as human beings that are being fairly treated, where truth, Justice and fairness to all, in a federation.

    “What constitution did Lord Frederick Lugard use to amalgamate Nigeria? That brings us to a recent comment by the Nigerian Acting President, a legal luminary, a clergy. The Nigeria constitution that was crafted by the last military junta, which had no impute from the silent majority of Nigerians.

    “This man said Article 2 of Nigerian 1999 Constitution says that Nigeria is indivisible and indissoluble and it becomes illegal and unlawful to agitate. Mr Acting President goofed for making that statement and with every respect to his position, I disagree with him because constitution is very dynamic. What is permanent in life is change.

    “Under the circumstance, the peaceful way to go is restructuring and the best tool to achieve that is referendum. That is why we call on the US and the developed West to prevail on federal government to allow referendum for people to fairly determine where they want to be.”

  • IPOB glad over North’s call for referendum

    The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has expressed appreciation to Arewa Elders Forum (AEF), Arewa youths and Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) for seeing sense in its (IPOB’s) call for a referendum in Nigeria.

    The group said the referendum will help the people to decide the fate of the various ethnic nationalities lumped together by the British in the 1914 amalgamation.

    In a statement by its Media and Publicity Secretary Emma Powerful, IPOB said it was a good omen that what it had been looking for – the creation of Republic of Biafra – had been given to Ndigbo by Arewa youths.

    The statement reads: “Biafrans wish to thank these vocal Northerners for at least having the courtesy to issue advance warning, this time, before embarking on their routine massacre of the Igbo and other Biafrans in North.

    “This was unlike what their fathers did in 1966 when death, destruction and mayhem were unleashed upon unsuspecting innocent civilian populations from the South, comprising of mostly Igbo men, women, children and non-Igbo living in their midst.

    “Igbo massacres in Northern Nigeria have occurred so many times that they have almost become an annual sporting activity for blood-thirsty Northern youths. That is why we are particularly grateful to Arewa Youths and Elders for having the decency to give us a prior notice before the slaughter commences.

    “We promise to adhere to your warning to leave Northern Nigeria because a word is enough for the wise. Biafrans and other Southerner should start packing their properties to come down to the South.

    “We also advise Northern youths and their elders to keep it on because all they have done is exercise their right to free speech, which is not a crime under any law known to man. We are, therefore, against those calling for the arrest of these Arewa youths and their elders.

    “It is evident from the genocidal statements coming from certain influential segments of Northern Nigeria that the British socio-political experimentation and economic fraud we know today as Nigeria should not have been created in the first place.

  • Northern youths demand referendum for Igbo to go

    Leaders of the northern youth groups that  issued a three months ultimatum to Igbo yesterday called for the conduct of a referendum by the Federal government to enable Nigerians take a decision on whether the Igbo should be allowed to secede as being requested by separatist groups.

    The group spoke from hiding following Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai’s call for its members’ arrest.

    In the statement, the group lambasted the Chairman of the Northern States Governors Forum, Borno State Governor Kashim Shettima and El-Rufai for condemning their controversial statement and ordering the arrest of its signatories.

    Yesterday’s statement signed by Abdul-Azeez Suleiman, who signed the earlier statement, urged the Federal Government to urgently initiate the process for a peaceful referendum to allow the Igbo to go.

    The group however denied calling for violence in its initial quit notice.

    The statement said: “At the end, we came up with a position paper which we presented as the Kaduna Declaration in which we primarily called on the authorities and the international community to step in to formerlise the actualisation of the dream of a people who say in words and in action, and the whole nation appears to concur, that they are Biafrans, not Nigerians.

    “We further urged those Biafran nationales to relocate from the North to their newfound country in order to allow other people have peace. We are today compelled to make this further statement to clarify our stand on some issues that trailed the Kaduna Declaration made on Tuesday June 6, 2017.

    “After meeting to review the fallout of that Tuesday’s Declaration, our groups have noted hat some elements have for reasons best known to them, mischievously distorted the intent of our original script by alluding such words as ‘violence, ‘ ‘threat, ‘ ‘war’ and ‘mass action’ to it.

    “We find this mischievous because as cultured thoroughbred Northerners we have never anywhere and at anytime, under whatever circumstances, called anybody to violence as a means of conflict resolution.

    “In strict observance of that tradition we never employ violence as a means of pursuing our interest and, at every opportunity, we opt for peaceful engagements and implore people to eschew violence in all its ramifications.

    “This informs why, a majority of discerning Nigerians, not necessarily northerners alone, understood and identified with our express call for the Biafrans to be allowed to actualise their long-held secessionist aspiration.

    “We restate that we have never called anybody to violence and that people should discountenance the elements of fear and threat introduced by the distortions of merchants of mischief. We wholeheartedly endorse the moves made variously by our leaders to allay those fears and urge people to be peaceful and law-abiding while at the same time resolutely insisting on having the right thing done by allowing the Igbo to have and move to their dream country in accordance with the universal fundamental right to self-determination.

    “We restate our determination and commitment to ensuring that the North will never partake in any contrived arrangement that would still have the Biafran Igbo as a component. We reiterate our call on Nigerian authorities and recognized international bodies such as the ECOWAS, AU and UN to hasten the initiation of the process for the final actualization of the Biafran nation and with it the excision of the Igbos out of the present federation”.

  • Buhari hails Turkey over successful referendum

    Buhari hails Turkey over successful referendum

    President Muhammadu Buhari has felicitated with the people and government of Turkey on the successful conclusion of the country’s referendum on Monday.

    Buhari, in a statement by the Special Adviser on media and publicity, Femi Adesina, congratulated Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, for the foresight and maturity of leading his people to the polls to decide on the future of leadership for the country that will further deepen peace and stability.

    He believed the referendum showcased the democratic credentials of the country and reflected a willingness of the Turkish people to live together and jointly pursue a better future.

  • Referendum for new LCDAs

    Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun has said his administration would conduct a referendum before May 29 for the establishment of Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs).

    The governor spoke when he hosted members of the Egba Traditional Council, led by the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Gbadebo, who paid him a congratulatory visit on his re-election.

    According to him, the LCDA would further bring the benefits of governance to the people.

    Amosun said his second term would be a new beginning of turn around development in all facets, adding that the only way to show appreciation for his victory was through greater performance.

    “We will work for all and sundry without any form of segregation. My appreciation to our people for re-electing me could better be shown through the kind of work we are going to do. Activities would soon begin on our light rail which would be extended to Agbara Industrial axis.”

     

  • A referendum on the Jonathan years

    A referendum on the Jonathan years

    It is great that  terrorists have been pushed out of Baga, Bama and others but how does that translate into electoral advantage for Jonathan in places like Chibok where hundreds of families are still grieving over their missing daughters? How does it help him with families across Adamawa, Yobe, Borno, Gombe and Kano who lost husbands, wives and children as the insurgents rampaged unchecked over the last four years?

    Six weeks have evaporated like a puff in the wind and the postponed day of reckoning is finally upon us. Voters would pass judgment on All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, General Muhammadu Buhari’s, past and present and decide whether they want to go on an adventure with him and his party.

    Crucially, the March 28 election is even more about President Goodluck Jonathan and his Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) being placed on a scale by the people they have ‘served’ over the last four years.

    The polls are not about Prof. Attahiru Jega and his performance as chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Neither are they about the alleged sins of former Lagos State Governor, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) campaign has devoted countless millions producing negative advertising and hate documentaries against the two men you would be forgiven for thinking Jonathan was running against them instead of Buhari.

    If the president had sat out this election, next Saturday’s contest would have been defined in a different way. But he’s on the ballot seeking four more years in office: that automatically transforms the polls into a referendum on his tenure.

    In seeking a revalidation of his contract with Nigeria he will face the same parameters used to judge people who want a renewal. First there has to be a review of what has been done in the initial term and a decision made as to whether the individual who has put himself forward is the man to lead the organisation going forward.

    So what has Jonathan made of the four-year mandate he received in 2011? Has he done enough to earn a fresh contract? Will Nigeria be a safer, respected and more prosperous country if left in his care for another four years?

    Granted that most voting decisions are neither objective nor rational, I still believe that a sizeable number of voters – especially the undecided – should be asking these questions as they make up their minds whether to return him to the presidency.

    Jonathan took office with overwhelming goodwill. Riding on the back of the national need for healing following the unscripted demise of Umaru Yar’Adua, he brushed aside Buhari’s 2011 challenge. People wanted him to succeed and expectations were high because he and his late boss were Nigeria’s first university-educated executive presidents.

    It was refreshing that he was from the Ijaw minority in the South-South zone – breaking the usual three-cornered Hausa-Igbo-Yoruba power struggles. His grass-to-grace story was attractive and romantic – offering the possibility of a fresh start  under a humble head of state after a succession of arrogant and autocratic leaders.

    That goodwill translated into him getting 10 million votes more than Buhari. Although many still dispute those figures as rigged, they are the ones recorded by INEC for posterity. They are also the ones upheld by the courts.

    Usually, incumbents face very testing elections when they seek a second term. The margin of victory often contracts when compared to the first time around. However, it takes some special talent to blow away 10 million votes such that, today, Jonathan stands on the verge of making history as the first incumbent president in Nigeria to lose his reelection bid. How did things get this bad for him?

    Although expectations were high, the new president raised the bar even further by promising ‘transformation’. But instead of a landscape transformed, what we have after four years is a country devastated on many fronts.

    Jonathan apologists have printed reams of glossy paper itemising his supposed great achievements. They churn out statistics to open our eyes to the transformation we cannot readily appreciate. The things I always remember are that he established 12 federal universities, built almajiri schools and Nigeria’s economy became Africa’s largest under his watch.

    This list might impress party hacks but that’s as far as it goes. There was a time where opening universities was a big deal. Not anymore. Private individuals are establishing them all over the place.

    As for the size of the economy, the tag is just a salve for our egos and not much more. Nigeria’s economy might be the biggest on the continent but that honour is vitiated by one of the iconic images of the Jonathan era: the National Stadium, Abuja packed full of the unemployed who had gathered for an ultimately fatal Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) recruitment exercise last year.

    Ours is the largest economy in Africa at a time when our currency is lying prostrate against major currencies of the world. It would have been a boon if were exporting goods, but because we are enslaved to imported petrol this massive economy is headed farther and farther into the woods.

    In any event, I cannot imagine that Jonathan and his team – with a straight face – would claim that the ‘magic’ they performed in the last four years was what shot the country atop the continental economic rankings.

    The problem with Jonathan’s ‘achievements’ is captured by a link that his online supporters keep retweeting. It says something like ‘If you are from Ogun State please click here to see how GEJ has transformed your state’! If I live in a community and cannot see this so-called transformation then it is just fiction – or whatever has been achieved is being oversold as transformative.

    If Jonathan’s positives are not resonating, it is because his negatives are so overwhelming. Every regime has its fair share of scandals but this one seems to have a manufacturing plant that spews out sleaze. Over the last four years it has staggered from tales of billions of dollars allegedly missing from the NNPC, to flamboyant ministers blowing millions on armoured limousines to bungled arms purchase runs leading to embarrassing seizure of millions of dollars traced to the government in far away South Africa.

    Just as the image of the president was taking a battering internally, the country was not doing better externally.  The phantom phone call scandal involving Morocco left the president in the ridiculous position of having to deny something that his government officials had been vehemently insisting happened. It is not without reason that the administration’s critics call it ‘clueless.’

    Another defining character of the last four years has been the subversion of the rule of law and the destruction of institutions. It’s as if from day one the scheming for a second term took hold of the president. In order for that ambition to be realised, key national institutions have been virtually destroyed and compromised. The police, DSS and armed forces have at various times been pressed into partisan political assignments on behalf of the president and PDP in ways that are just nauseating.

    But ultimately the institution mostly badly affected by Jonathan’s desperate craving for another term is the ruling party. The PDP is going into elections in its worst shape since 1999. Under the incumbent, distinguished members have been deserting in droves as ambitions and interests clashed. Each time this happened, Aso Rock court jesters would dismiss the departed as paperweights who the ruling party could do without.

    Governors Rotimi Amaechi, Rabiu Kwankwaso, Magatarkarda Wamakko, Abdulfatah Ahmed and Murtala Nyako were casually allowed to go without the political implications of losing five states to the opposition sinking in. Former national chairmen like Barnabas Gemade, Audu Ogbeh and Kawu Baraje left. House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal and one of his predecessors Ghali Umar Na’Abba have jumped ship. So also have numerous senators, representatives and ex-ministers.

    Add to that list of heavyweights former Vice President Atiku Abubakar who was humiliated out of the party because his continued presence was an obstacle to Jonathan’s second term bid. After dismissing him and calling him names, guess who came calling under the cover of darkness at the former VP’s Yola home a few days ago begging for support? Candidate Jonathan!

    Even former President Olusegun Obasanjo who always swore he was PDP for life ended up tearing his party card in a farcical ceremony at his Abeokuta ward. His departure was celebrated too. Much as PDP would want to pretend that those who left weren’t politically relevant, these departures are akin to losing blood or limbs – the organism invariably becomes weaker.

    One of the challenges that came to define the Jonathan years is the insurgency in the North-East. Several months after they carved out a caliphate on Nigerian soil, an African multinational force in collaboration with the Nigerian military has driven Boko Haram out of most towns they occupied.

    A few days ago, Jonathan was quoted as boasting that the sect would be defeated within a month. There’s no question that the president and ruling party expect an electoral boost from the victories of the military.

    But such unrealistic expectations come from a profound misunderstanding of the dynamics at play here. It is great that  terrorists have been pushed out of Baga, Bama and others but how does that translate into electoral advantage for Jonathan in places like Chibok where hundreds of families are still grieving over their missing daughters? How does it help him with families across Adamawa, Yobe, Borno, Gombe and Kano who lost husbands, wives and children as the insurgents rampaged unchecked over the last four years?

    Where there has been transformation it was of the undesirable sort. I, like many faceless millions, voted for Jonathan in 2011. Back then we used to say we were voting for him and not PDP. The result was the creation of a pan-Nigerian mandate that swept him into office. Today, a president who emerged as a unique Nigerian creation has ended up the hostage of Ijaw clan chiefs and ex-militants.

    A Nigerian president has been reduced to manipulating ethnic militias like the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) and the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) whose agendas are largely separatist in his desperate bid to cling on to power.

    Jonathan has been executing a cross-country dash from pillar to palace to pulpit – bowing before strange gods and demi-gods as he struggles to stave off a defeat that is increasingly looking inevitable.

    And it was all so unnecessary. Imagine what the political landscape would have looked like today had the ‘New PDP’ faction not broken away from the ruling party? Perhaps there were too many interests to appease and none would ever have been satisfied with any form of compromise.

    Unfortunately, the ambitions of the president deepened the fault lines. The upshot is that in a few days we all would cast votes that could radically alter the political landscape. If his party is kicked out of power Jonathan would then have truly delivered ‘transformation!’

  • Lessons from Scottish referendum

    he recently conducted referendum by the people of Scotland to decide their future has come and gone. About 1.8 million Scots (55%) cast a decisive “NO” vote for independence as against about 1.5 million (45%) who voted for independence from the United Kingdom. Scotland, a country with a projected population of about six million people and occupying a territory of approximately 79,000 square kilometres joined the United Kingdom of Great Britain more than 300 years ago through the act of Union in 1707.

    The referendum took the entire world by storm going by fact that the Union had actually endured for more than three centuries thus the prospect of its dissolution at this time and age would have had far-reaching and unimaginable consequences for many nations of the world with contrived or lopsided union.

    The conclusion by many political observers throughout the intense campaign period was that if the people of Scotland after more than 300 years in the United Kingdom would now agitate for independence, then obviously the act of the Union ab initio was inherently defective. The result of the referendum has further polarized the Scottish people going by the closeness of the result – 55% for the “NO” vote as against 45% for the “YES” vote.

    At the commencement of the campaigns,  it became obvious that the Scottish people had extremely a raw deal in the United Kingdom of Great Britain hence the initial opinion polls which had predicted a comfortable lead by the campaigners for “YES” vote.  This scenario of imminent victory continued until the bigwigs at Westminster led by the Prime Minister, David Cameron and the immediate past Labour Party, Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, himself is a Scot, desperately rushed to Scotland and with last minute passionate appeals to the undecided voters not to vote “YES” for independence while adopting all manners of political gimmicks including naked blackmail and outright intimidation as well as the belated token or half-hearted promises to the Scottish people for them to remain in the United Kingdom.

    This was the last trump card that dramatically changed the tide of opinion in favour of the “NO” vote on the eve of the historic referendum.

    For the 1.5million people that voted “YES”, Scotland will never be the same again, hence the spirit of nationalism and identity already ignited by the referendum will certainly remain with the people for generations yet to come. It had been proved time and time again that gross or naked injustice, inequality, and lack of fairness tend to breed mass discontentment, distrust and perpetual fear of domination by one group of people over others. The consequences are separatist tendencies and agitations for autonomy or self determination by the perceived marginalized segment as was the case with the people of Scotland.

    In Africa, the erstwhile colonial powers particularly the British lumped together people of diverse ethnic, socio-cultural and religious backgrounds and orientation as one country and eventually granted them independence as one nation.

    Cases abound in Africa where this situation has continued to fuel endless crisis, armed conflicts and socio-political instability in those countries due to the forced union and incompatibility among the diverse groups that make up the countries. The recent independence of the people of South Sudan from Sudan is a typical case in point where the southern Sudanese felt that they could no longer peacefully co-exist with their northern “brothers” as a result of deep-rooted animosity engendered by ethno-religious and irreconcilable differences between the mainly Moslem north and mainly Christian south. This situation was further aggravated when the Sudanese government officially adopted Islam as a state religion to the detriment of the mainly Christian south. This ugly situation consequently degenerated into armed conflicts between the two divided sections of Sudan.

    There are many other volatile parts of the world or flash points where people still harbour strong separatist tendencies as a result of not having a fair deal. Some of these include the French speaking people of Quebec in Canada; the people of Eastern Ukraine of the former Soviet Union who with the strong support of Russia are currently fighting for self determination or independence from Ukraine. Only recently the people of “Catalonia” in Spain staged a huge demonstration in that country calling for the independence of Catalonia from Spain ostensibly taking a cue from the Scots.

    However, in the African context, it was the erstwhile colonial powers that forcibly brought together strange bedfellows with incompatible and irreconcilable ethno-religious, and socio-cultural backgrounds to form a union or country without their consent purely for their selfish economic interest. A case in point was the defunct Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland then ruled by the British under Sir Roy Welensky.  During the long agitation for independence which later culminated in the armed struggle by the nationalist forces led by the indefatigable and foremost freedom fighter, Robert Mugabe, along with other freedom fighters such as Joshua Nkomo, Ndabaningi Sithole, Abel Muzorewa and many others, the British in their wisdom and legendary act of diplomacy quickly realised that the people of Rhodesia and Nyasaland could never peacefully co-exist as one nation and as such, proceeded to grant independence separately first to Northern Rhodesia now Zambia, followed by Nyasalnd, now Malawi, and lastly, Southern Rhodesia now Zimbabwe after a long and bitter armed struggle by the African liberation forces. The white minority settlers in Southern Rhodesia then led by racist Prime Minister Ian Smith had wanted to entrench white minority government modelled on the obnoxious former apartheid system in South Africa. Ian Smith in obvious self delusion had dared the British authorities when he unilaterally declared independence for Rhodesia (UDI) in 1965 and that led to the intensification of the armed struggle by the nationalist forces which eventually crushed the resistance of Ian Smith and his white minority racist regime paving the way for the independence of Zimbabwe from Britain in 1980.

    In the same vein, the British granted independence separately to India and Pakistan in the Indian sub-continent in 1947 due to the simple fact that India with a huge population of predominantly Hindu religion could never peacefully co-exist with Pakistan also with a huge population of predominantly Muslim religion as one nation. Again, the Republic of Bangladesh which was part of Pakistan later broke away after a long and bitter civil war and gained her independence in 1971.

    There are many similar instances throughout the world where people decided to leave the union or country they had voluntarily joined due to certain factors that were inimical to their collective interest and destiny such as the cases already mentioned.

    It is an obvious truism that unity is strength, thus people of diverse ethnic, socio-cultural and religious backgrounds could freely come together to form a union or a country. However, justice, equity, fairness, mutual respect and trust between and among the people must be the guiding principle for the union to survive.

    It is a sad commentary that in the case of our dear country Nigeria, the erstwhile British colonial powers after the infamous and forced amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectorates in 1914 proceeded to grant independence to Nigeria as one nation despite all the available empirical indices which pointed to the fact that the diverse ethnic, socio-cultural, cum religious groups could not peacefully co-exist as one nation. The Nigerian nation has continued to pay very dearly for this forced amalgamation up till date.

    The only solution to the current endemic multifarious challenges confronting the nation is for Nigeria to quickly return to the regional structure of government with full and undiluted fiscal autonomy, where the present six geo-political zones would possibly be increased to eight zones with their separate constitutions, police force and regional army. Any further delay to the restructuring of the Nigerian polity in line with the above recommendations might spell doom to the corporate existence of the country as one nation or entity. The country should take a cue from other volatile parts of the world where the nationalist or separatist movements are daily gathering momentum and attracting global attention. It is said that a stitch in time saves nine and therefore, the Nigerian authorities should quickly read the handwriting on the wall and take the bull by the horn by facing the stark realities of the current desperate situation and act decisively to save the nation from the looming catastrophe.

    • Akabogu (JP) wrote from Enugwu-Ukwu, Anambra State.
  • Ekiti Assembly directs SIEC to conduct referendum on LCDAs’ creation

    Ekiti State House of Assembly has directed the State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) to conduct a referendum on the creation of 18 Local Council Development Areas (LCDAs).

    At its plenary in Ado-Ekiti, it also sent the bill on the creation of the councils to its ad-hoc committee for further legislative action.

    The motion was moved by the House Majority Leader Churchill Adedipe and seconded by Ogundele Folorunso.

    Adedipe said the move to subject the LCDAs’ creation to a referendum was to be fair to all sides.

    Ajibola Samuel, the only Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) member in the House representing Ekiti East Constituency II, raised an objection to further discussion on the Councils’ creation because the matter was before the courts, citing Order 54 section 5 of the House Standing Order.

    Deputy Speaker Orisalade Adetunji and Hon Ayodeji Odu said the House was unaware of any court case on the issue. The Speaker, Dr Adewale Omirin, agreed with the submissions of the two lawmakers and the motion was unanimously approved by members of the House.

    The people of Igogo-Ekiti in Moba Local Government Area of Ekiti State were at the Assembly yesterday to oppose campaigns to  move the headquarters of the proposed Ero Local Council Development Area (LCDA) from the town.

    The delegation led by the monarch of the town, Oba Sunday Adewumi, met with the Speaker.

    According to the community, the government committee on LCDAs’ creation led by Justice Akin Ajakaye was right for choosing the town as the Ero headquarters.

    The people of Ikun and Erinmope last week opposed the location of the headquartres in Igogo, saying the town did not request for the creation of Ero Local Government. With Onigogo at the parley were the Obasaoye of Isaoye, Oba Moses Bamisaye and Alaaye of Aaye Oja, Oba Samuel Olatoye, who also  supported the choice of Igogo as the headquarters of the proposed LCDA.

    Oba Adewumi said the position of Oba James Aina, the Obaleo of Erinmope, that his town was the better choice being traditionally superior to Igogo and that the town had a first class traditional ruler was not a part of the conditions for the LCDAs’ creation Committee.