The Nation Newspaper

Tag: selective

  • Selective supremacy

    Perhaps only Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, the All Progressives Congress (APC) National Chairman, and those who think like him, understood what he meant when he boasted that the party had succeeded in re-establishing its supremacy, despite the activities of challengers of party primacy.  He was quoted as saying: “What is important is that it has finally happened. What is important is that the APC Caucus in the Senate is now a one united body. The APC Caucus in the Senate will now take full charge, full control and full dominance as the governing party and the majority party in the Senate.”

    Odigie-Oyegun continued: “What is right is what is right and it is now clear that the authority and the supremacy of the party have finally been recognised, which is a critical ingredient to the smooth-functioning of the apparatus of governance. Today, we can stand up and tell the whole world with full confidence that these things they used to refer to as crises within the APC are now on the way to fully and permanently put behind us. Today, we have a united party, a united Senate, and a Senate that is firmly under the control of the APC.”

    Perhaps he was just speaking like a politician, meaning he was playing to the gallery. He spoke when the new leadership of the APC Senate Caucus visited the party’s National Working Committee. The background: Senator Mohammed Ali Ndume of the APC who represents Borno South Senatorial District was removed as  Senate Leader and Senator Ahmed Lawan (Yobe North) replaced him in dramatic circumstances on January 10. Ndume’s removal was plotted and perfected by the APC Senate Caucus which communicated the development to Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki in a two-paragraph letter entitled “Notice of change of leadership.”

    Ndume’s reaction: “This is a parliamentary coup because many of my colleagues said they were not aware of any Caucus meeting. But so be it. God gave me that position and if that is His wish that I should leave, I have left everything to God. Had it been that I was found wanting of any allegation, I will not be surprised. All I know is that God will fight back for me.”

    Ndume added: “I did no wrong, except the issue of the confirmation of the Acting EFCC chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, which brought up some issues. There was a disagreement on Magu beginning with my fight with Sen. Dino Melaye. Based on legislative procedure, I said Magu had not been rejected by the Senate. Shortly after that, there were rumours of collection of signatures to remove me. Even at that, we met at the Senate leadership level on Monday; there was no complaint against me. I was not aware that the leadership was not happy with me. There was no allegation against me at all. Certainly, it is a coup.”

    When a democratically elected legislator says he lost his leadership position in the legislature as a result of a coup against him, his choice of words deserves attention. When did legislators in a democracy begin to plan and carry out coups?

    Certainly, it did not begin with Ndume’s ouster. Indeed, Ndume himself benefited from what may be called a coup when he was installed as Senate Leader in a move that defied the directive of his party’s leadership. A June 23, 2015, letter to Saraki by Odigie-Oyegun had named Lawan for the position of Majority Leader among the “names of principal officers approved by the party” for the 8th Senate. At the time Ndume emerged as Senate Leader contrary to his party’s position, he did not see it as a coup against the party. It is said that what goes around comes around.

    It is curious that Odigie-Oyegun interpreted the APC Senate Caucus leadership change simplistically.  It is a misinterpretation of reality to suggest that Ndume’s removal means that the APC has achieved party unity and party supremacy.

    The reality is that as long as Saraki remains at the helm of the Senate, it does a great disservice to the idea of party supremacy. This is a legislative commander that emerged in an ethically inappropriate manner, and whose emergence was coloured by a colourless subversion of his party’s position. Only a dysfunctional decoding of the concept of party supremacy can accommodate an ascendancy he actualised through an unapologetic defiance of his party’s desire and decision. A functional interpretation of party supremacy must be informed by the logic of supremacy. Supremacy is supreme.

    It is noteworthy that the same warped twist resulted in a queer combination and cohabitation at the helm of the Senate. With Saraki of the ruling APC, a party elected to power on the premise of progressivism, and Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu of the unprogressive Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the 8th Senate has a leadership that is ambiguous and confusing.   Saraki made matters worse by rubbishing his party’s list for Senate leadership posts, which is how Ndume became Senate Leader in the first place.   Additionally, the allegation that Saraki and Ekweremadu benefited from forged Senate rules remains a blot on their positions.

    The question is: How can the APC reassert itself and its supremacy in the circumstances? It is clear that Saraki wants his controversial emergence as Senate President to be treated as a fait accompli. As he approaches his second anniversary in the saddle, it looks like he might get away with the disruptive behaviour by which he got the position. If that happens, it would amount to a big disgrace to party supremacy.

    To put it directly: Saraki must not be allowed to get away with what may well be described as a coup against his party.  APC supremos must save party supremacy, and they must find their own way of doing so.   The conflict over party supremacy in the APC is nothing short of a domestic war, and the war cannot end with Ndume’s removal. There is no doubt that Saraki’s matter is a more complicated complication. However, it must not be regarded as a complication beyond correction.

    Party supremacy should not be selective, meaning the APC can ill afford to believe it has resolved the burning issue by putting Ndume’s case on the front burner while Saraki’s case remains on the back burner. Restoring party supremacy based on party discipline, party cohesion and party integrity must not be done selectively; it must be done inclusively.

  • Is Buhari’s anti-corruption war selective?

    Is Buhari’s anti-corruption war selective?

    The complexity of human nature has made the lot of a leader in a democratic society unenviable. By sheer ambiance of his position, President Muhammadu Buhari has to contend with a welter of interests. Buhari, who heads the one year-old administration of the All Progressives Congress (APC), was voted into power to give the country a new direction and so a lot of meanings are read into his action or inaction. Deputy Political Editor RAYMOND MORDI looks at his anti-corruption war, saying that it has become the butt of people’s adulation or admonition.   

    Nigerians wake up nowadays to hear the latest in the ongoing anti-corruption crusade of President Muhammadu Buhari. Humongous figures are bandied in the media daily, as what politicians and others allegedly looted from the treasury during the immediate past administration led by Dr. Goodluck Jonathan. Shock, disbelief and outrage was the initial reaction greeted the revelations. In the last one year, such revelations have become a regular fare, to the extent that even opponents of the Buhari administration have now been compelled to admit that the scale of corruption in the administration was monumental.

    The present war against corruption is one of the areas where the Buhari-led administration was able to hit the ground running. This is understandable; given the President’s anti-corruption antecedents and pledges he made during the electioneering campaign. The last time Nigerians witnessed a major probe of an administration by a succeeding one was in 1984, after the fall of the Second Republic, when a Buhari-led military regime arrested and put to trial, key actors in that dispensation.

    Indeed, his anti-corruption stance was the magic wand that secured Buhari the electoral victory of March 28, 2015. During the campaign, it was easy to see how corruption was established as Nigeria’s most intractable problem. Hence, the then opposition party, the All Progressive Congress (APC) vowed to deal with it head-long, if voted into office.

    Since his inauguration on May 29, 2015, Buhari has taken a number of bold steps aimed at fighting corruption. They include setting up of a Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, headed by professor of law and human rights activist, Prof. Itse Sagay; and the sacking of some purportedly corrupt heads of some government agencies such as Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency, Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation, among others.

    It also includes his decision to immediately enforce the Treasury Single Account (TSA) initiated by his immediate predecessor in office. President Buhari has also been junketing across the globe seeking help and signing bilateral and multilateral agreements with some countries for the repatriation of the country’s stolen wealth; one of such is the Mutual Legal Assistance on Criminal and Commercial Matters Treaty signed with the United Arabs Emirate (UAE) in January.

     

    A can of worms

    The Buhari administration’s anti-corruption war has opened a can of worms. It was through the four-member committee set up in June last year to scrutinise the accounts of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and Excess Crude Account (ECA) under the last administration that Nigerians first heard that the $2.1 billion meant for the purchase of arms to fight the Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East was misappropriated by the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki.

    He was in charge of coordinating the war against Boko Haram terrorists during the last administration. The probe was meant to unravel the allegation that N3.8 trillion was not remitted to the Federation Account by the NNPC between 2012 and May 2015, as well as the $2.1 billion said to have been deducted from the Excess Crude Account (ECA) without approval. Members of the panel were Governors Adams Oshiomhole (Edo), Ibrahim Dankwanbo (Gombe) Nasir el-Rufai (Kaduna) and Udom Emmanuel (Akwa Ibom).

    Though the names of the corrupt officials from whom the assets were recovered were not disclosed, as the President had promised to do, the administration gave the details of looted funds recovered so far as: N78.325 billion, $185.119 million, £3.508 million and €11, 250 between May 29, 2015 and May 25, 2016. It also stated that a combination of cash and assets amounting to the following sum were recovered under interim forfeiture during the same period: N126.563 billion, $9.09 billion, £2.484 million and €303,399.

    The revelations so far have raised a lot of dust. Some critics say the anti-corruption war is selective and that it is a media trial that is designed to cow the opposition. There are also allegations of impunity and the abuse of human rights in the course of the fight.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Onueze Okocha, believes the anti-corruption war is selective. His words: “It is very obvious. So far, those that have been accused, arrested and arraigned for corruption-related offences are members of the PDP. We have not lost sight of the fact that many of the party’s members defected to the APC. The former PDP members have been accused of wrongdoing, but they are untouched. I think the war is lopsided and not waged with an altruistic motive.”

    But, another legal practitioner, Chief Anthony Idigbe (SAN), said achieving objectivity in an anti-corruption war of this nature is difficult to achieve, “since it is a public policy issue, which is often influenced by some factors”.

    He said: “If several people commit a crime, the state could make a decision that it wants to prosecute the mastermind and some other people who also participated in the crime, while leaving others. The state may choose somebody for prosecution for the purpose of deterrence. This is a public policy issue. So, it always comes up as to whether the government makes the right public policy choice in those they prosecute.

    “I can only respond to as a lawyer. So, it is the public, which controls the government through election process that can help set agenda as to which public policy objective the government should pursue. But, generally, there is no doubt that there is a discretion power, which is given to the state to select who it wants to prosecute.

    “The criminal process is inherently selective because the state has to make a public policy choice. It cannot prosecute everybody. This is because the Federal Government does not have enough resources to prosecute everybody. So, they have to select who they will prosecute and that selection will be guided by certain public policy considerations. There are always disputes as to how they arrived at those considerations. It is not unusual; it happens everywhere in the world.”

     

    Different strokes

    The consensus of observers is that while the call for the anti-corruption war to be fought with the rule of law in mind makes a lot of sense, because of occasional show of exuberance by security operatives, there is a big question mark on the allegation of selective prosecution.

    Lawyer and human rights activist, Fred Agbaje, those complaining of being victimised are just whipping up sentiments. He said: “It’s time for the accused to stop putting up an alibi for the crimes they committed. If someone has been accused of corruptly enriching himself, he should go to court and defend himself, rather than putting up excuses. It is not right to whip up sentiments. I don’t buy it.

    “Why did the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) not come after me? Why is it that the EFCC is going after Gov. Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State, Musliu Obanikoro and the rest? Something must have warranted that. But, you can’t sit in your house and concoct excuses. The anti-graft agencies won’t go after the innocent people.”

    Members of the opposition now being prosecuted were the powerful men in the last administration who were said to have received some money from the $2.1 billion arms fund being probed. The Buhari administration has not even started probing other sectors of the economy.

    This is why some observers have criticised the ongoing crusade, saying it is limited to recovery of looted funds and cannot be described as anti-corruption. For instance, newspaper columnist, Idowu Akinlotan, sees the anti-corruption war as “a battle against the symptoms of corruption, not a systemic attempt to tackle the malaise from its very roots.” In his column on July 3, 2016, titled ‘Buhari Presidency needs fresh thinking’, he said: “Had it been a well-structured battle, one that is underpinned by an uplifting, coherent and structured philosophy, the collateral damage being witnessed would have been feeble and short-lived. Had that structured philosophy been identified and enunciated, it would have led to a wider and more encompassing campaign to remake the country and put it on a sound, stable, peaceful and solid footing to compete with other nations in the 21st century.

    “The anti-corruption war, which is virtually the only serious campaign being waged by the Buhari presidency, would have been just a subset of the whole, organised and executed brilliantly, perhaps more effectively and without distractions and fanfare.

    Be that as it may, the allegation against the Chief of Army Staff, Lt-Gen. Tukur Buratai, appears to be the biggest credibility test for Buhari’s fledgling anti-corruption war. Buratai is alleged to have bought two houses in Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), at a cost of $1.5 million. Observers say Buratai’s defence that the revelation is a smear campaign by some groups that are not comfortable with the military’s successes against Boko Haram extremists in the Northeast evades the issue.

    Human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has urged President Buhari to sack the Buratai, if the army chief fails to voluntarily resign. Falana said despite Buratai’s commendable feat of leading the army to defeat Boko Haram in the Northeast, the war on corruption was also a must-win for the Buhari administration. The lawyer  described as a “cock and bull story” the explanation by the army authorities that Buratai paid for the properties in instalments through his personal savings.

    While he condemned the involvement of the Nigerian Army in defending Buratai, he said no one had yet to explain to Nigerians how an army General could manage to save $1.5m. He added, “In view of the ban on the opening and operation of foreign accounts by public officers, the Code of Conduct Bureau should be involved in the investigation. If the Chief of Army Staff does not deem it fit to resign forthwith President Buhari should not hesitate to remove him in the interest of national morality.”

     

    Challenges

    Nevertheless, Nigerians are looking forward to seeing those who looted the treasury being punished this time around, to serve as a deterrent to others. So far, no one has been convicted and the cases in court are likely to drag on for some time, as defence lawyers try to manoeuvre to get their principals off the hook.

    Indeed, President Buhari has expressed fears that the nation’s judiciary may become his major headache in achieving the objective of ensuring that the country punishes bad behaviour. Speaking at a town hall meeting with Nigerians living in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopian capital, at the beginning of the year, Buhari said his travails in courts during his failed bid for the nation’s Presidency on three occasions, had convinced him that the judiciary needed urgent reforms.

    Insufficient funds to prosecute the numerous cases of corruption may also constitute an obstacle in realising the objective. For instance, the Chairman, Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Mr. Nta Ekpo, was reported to have cried out that the anti-graft agency had been unable to successfully carry out its statutory responsibility of fighting corruption due to insufficient funds. Nta stated this in January when he hosted members of the Senate Committee on Anti-Corruption and Financial Crimes, headed by Senator Chukwuka Utazi in his office.

    The ICPC boss reportedly told his visitors that the yearly budget of his agency was insufficient to carry out its responsibilities and fight corruption. He said: “In 2015, the commission proposed N9.5 billion, but N4.9 billion was appropriated, while N4.2 billion was released. Note the differentials between the amount budgeted and actual release. If the anti-corruption agencies of government are starved of funds, how can this administration win the war against the monster?”

  • Love for selective amnesia

    SIR: “Maybe they were saying chains when we thought it was change”, blurted a certain social media senator, who has made the cyberspace his default “chamber”. And before you could say Jack Robinson, a hashtag, #ChangeToChains, emerged on twitter with various irascible characters jumping on the bandwagon with little or no understanding of what they were saying. Worse still, they could not muster concise and intelligent reason(s) for their anger aside the fact that they just want to be seen as angry.

    What seems to be the cause of their anger in the first instance? Some said there were fuel queues; others said the economy was in comatose etc. Most of the folks pouring expletives actually have conveniently forgotten so soon where we were coming from. As at middle of May 2015, most of the telecommunication companies were sending emails and text messages to their customers appealing to their understanding on why they should expect serious disruption in services due to the twin problems of power failure and lack of petroleum products to run their offsite generators.

    Yes, Nigeria is not yet an Eldorado, sadly so, but while we are not where we ought to be, the truth is that we are not where we used to be. For those screaming economic downturn, I am won’t to ask what economy? We have been a country with no economy aside being the dumping ground of finished goods from China and other countries. While the Asian Tigers are competing on how to be the best in terms of production, privileged elites in Nigeria are competing to outdo one another on consumerism.

    Our shame as a nation reached abysmal levels when we became the butt of jokes of others as it relates to a product that we used to be its sixth largest producer. Petroleum was our major, if not the only product, yet we unashamedly sold it in its raw form, and then spent our hard-earned foreign exchange to import the same product in its refined form, thereby costing us not just several by products but millions of primary and secondary employment.

    Make no mistake about it, the Nigeria that President Buhari inherited was almost a broken entity characterised by dwindling revenue due to the plummeting international crude oil prices, mounting domestic and foreign debt, tumbling foreign reserves and a wicked gang up of supposed leaders who were doing nothing but stealing and looting the country with reckless abandon.

    Recall that when this administration took over, 27 states owed between 5-12 month arrears of salaries of civil servants. Yet, I hear people wailing that the President Buhari has done nothing? Bombs were exploding all over the country like firecrackers, but today we have relative peace and people still think the president is sleeping? Military chiefs saddled with security of our lives and properties are today singing like canaries and confessing to how much they stole individually and collectively, and I still hear some trumpeting that Buhari has done nothing? Over N3 trillion which would have been stolen by have been saved due to strict adherence to TSA yet some say Buhari isn’t doing anything?

    Agreed that Nigeria deserves more than it is getting, but who can build without a foundation? President Buhari is uniquely placed to rebuild Nigeria from the shambolic country he met. But to make Nigeria work for Nigerians, the one they fondly call Mai Gaskiya needs the unalloyed support of the long suffering masses because as John Kenneth Galbraith posits “People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage. Intellectual myopia, often called stupidity, is no doubt a reason”.

    • Ayobami Oyalowo,

    Abuja.

  • Buhari’s anti-graft war selective, says PDP

    Buhari’s anti-graft war selective, says PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has accused President Muhammadu Buhari of pursuing a selective anti-corruption agenda, with its chieftains as targets.

    In a statement yesterday by its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh, the party said “we are completely against any one-sided public trial and mob conviction of accused persons without following the agelong and worldwide legal process wherein accused persons were presumed innocent until the contrary is lawfully proved.

    “We do not believe that mere investigation confers a guilt verdict on those concerned and the government should stop the brutal mob and public conviction of individuals and the transfer of the burden of proof of people being investigated”.

    The party challenged the Federal Government to set up a National Truth Commission “where politicians and other Nigerians publicly discuss the true meaning of corrupt practice in our land”.

    According to the PDP, the “commission” would also provide a platform for a proper public inquisition into the mind-boggling wealth of some Nigerians in public office.

    The party observed that the corruption investigation was targeted at only those opposed to President Buhari and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

    “In fact, until top officials of the former government open up on the exact source of the funding, it remains premature to be accusing our party members of corrupt practices”, the statement added.

    The party said if indeed the government’s investigation included the expenditure of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s security votes from 2011, then the investigation should be extended to 1984.

    According the PDP, the investigation should be extended to the security votes of past Presidents and Heads of State from 1984; the award of contracts by the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) from 1993 to 1999.

    The party called for investigation into expenditure of military purchases and expenditure during the Bakassi wars; the fight against militancy in the Niger Delta; military interventions in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Somalia, Rwanda, among others.

    The PDP also demanded investigation into sources of funding for its 2015 presidential campaigns and that of the APC.

  • JUSUN slams AGF’s selective obedience

    JUSUN slams AGF’s selective obedience

    •Seeks implementation of  ruling on judicial autonomy

    The Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) has criticised the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Bello Adoke (SAN), for allegedly being unfair in his constitutional duties.

    JUSUN President Marwan Adamu said the union’s criticism followed the AGF’s prompt obedience of the October 8 ruling, which sacked Adamawa State Acting Governor Ahmadu Fintiri.

    Adamu noted that the AGF had been reluctant to comply with a judgment delivered on January 13, granting fiscal autonomy to the Judiciary.

    Both judgments were delivered by Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    The union leader urged Adoke to direct the accountant-general of the federation to comply with the January 13 judgment in the manner he directed the suspension of the Adamawa State governorship by-election and the swearing-in of James Ngilari.

    He said the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) Anyim Pius Anyim; Labour Minister Emeka Wogu; the Minister of State Finance, Bashir Yuguda (who is also the chairman of the Federation Account Allocation Commissioners (FAAC) and other stakeholders, had directed JUSUN members to shelve their planned resumption of the suspended strike on the Executive’s alleged unwillingness to comply with the January 13 judgment.

    Adamu said: “We appreciate the directive by the attorney-general of the federation and minister of Justice to the Chief Judge of Adamawa State, instructing him to comply with the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    “We also want to say that since the Minister of Justice, as the chief law officer, has just woken up to his constitutional responsibility now on the Adamawa governorship crisis, he should also replicate same on the judgment of the same judge in JUSUN’s case against the governors on the financial autonomy of the Judiciary, by directing the accountant-general of the federation to comply with the court judgment.

    “We are hoping that he instruct him (the accountant-general) to that effect as soon as possible because since January 13 the accountant-general of the federation is yet to comply with that judgment, especially on the provision of Section 162(9) of the Constitution.”

    He said the union was committed to ensuring the independence and financial autonomy of the Judiciary.

    The union leader added that JUSUN would resume the suspended strike, if it noticed that the Executive was unwilling to keep to its words.

  • Tinubu: amnesty should be selective

    Tinubu: amnesty should be selective

    Action Congress National (ACN) National Leader Asiwaju Bola Tinubu has urged the Federal Government to apply wisdom in working out amnesty to Boko Haram.

    He said the proposed amnesty for the sect should not be given without moderation; it should be extended to a select group of the dissidents.

    The former governor of Lagos State warned that granting a “blanket and unrestricted amnesty will be both unjustifiable and counterproductive”.

    Tinubu observed that notwithstanding the hype that greeted the government’s proposal, the handling of the package will determine its eventual success or failure.

    Tinubu spoke in Ado-Ekiti, the Ekiti State capital when he visited Governor Kayode Fayemi over the death of his deputy, Mrs Funmilayo Olayinka.

    Tinubu, who also spoke on the All Progressives Alliance (APC), suggested that the planned amnesty should be offered to only those “fighting for justice and not those perpetrating evils against the country for no just cause”.

    He said: “The amnesty must bring about justice and should be selective, not just a blanket approach. Those venting anger on Nigeria because there is no justice in the system should be offer amnesty. But those fomenting trouble under another guise should be prosecuted and sent to jail.”

    According to him, it is wishful for anybody to contemplate turning Nigeria into an Islamic state.

    “No one religion can eliminate the other in Nigeria. Nigeria is a secular state. The Constitution recognises us as people and not as Muslims or Christians. So, we should be able to apply a holistic approach to settle our problems,” he counselled.

    Tinubu blamed President Goodluck Jonathan for allowing Boko Haram to linger until the loss of hundreds of innocent lives.

    He said: “President Goodluck Jonathan and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have failed in terms of security. Security is the engine-room of industrial development. No country would partner with you when you are not secured. The attacks on Nigeria and its resources have caused a lot of inflation and retardation in the economy.

    “If a President is clueless about security at a time he is about to celebrate the centenary of Nigeria’s existence and 53 years of Independence, he can’t by now track and identify the root cause of terrorism, it means he has nothing to offer the country.”

    Tinubu, however, noted that the amnesty remains a valid and justifiable means to stop bombings and killings in the North, saying the move would equally offer avenues for the compensation of those still alive among the victims.

    On the formation of the APC, Tinubu said all the leaders of the ACN, the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) would do everything possible to assure success.

    Recalling the historic convention staged in Lagos last Thursday to seal the merger, Tinubu described it as “a watershed for the formation of a roadmap for the progress of the country in all facets”.