The Nation Newspaper

Tag: service chiefs

  • Service chiefs and ethnic champions

    Buhari appointees to head the nation’s security agencies provide substantial material for analysts to sink their teeth into. Two of them – Chief of Army Staff, Major-General Tukur Buratai and National Security Adviser, Major-General Babagana Monguno (rtd) – hail from Borno State.

    The new Chief of Air Staff, Air Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar, is from Bauchi State. This means that of the five senior positions, three went to officers from the North-East, one each to the South-South and South-West.

    The underlying assumption appears to be that by selecting majorly those with direct connections to the hotbed of the Boko Haram insurgency we might see greater commitment in the war against the terrorists.

    So far no one has raised questions as to the competence of the appointees, but plenty has been said about their ethnicity. Some have interpreted the fact that none of the officers is of Igbo extraction to mean a new dawn of South-East marginalisation. Newspaper editorials have even been written about the ‘snub.’ Those who make these arguments need to take a deep breath and calm down.

    While their groups may be the largest, Nigeria isn’t just about Igbos, Yoruba or Hausa-Fulani. It is extreme arrogance to carry on as though beyond the big three other ethnic groups don’t count. Indeed, there are hundreds of them and we all have equal constitutional rights as those who can’t see beyond the interests of their clans.

    When Lt. Gen. Azubuike Ihejirika was Chief of Army Staff there were scores of other ethnic groups that were not accommodated in the leadership of the security forces. We didn’t hear them moaning about some perceived injustice.

    In the last administration, at a point heads of three pivotal security agencies were from the South-South zone: Ekpeyong Ita, Director-General of DSS, Lt. General Kenneth Minimah, Army Chief and Solomon Arase, Inspector-General of Police.

    To be fair, recent Nigerian presidents have gone out of their way to promote inclusiveness in appointing leaders of the armed forces. The point should also be made that this country doesn’t have enough service chief positions to go round every ethnic group.

    Those who think they are promoting the interests of their people by pushing these primordial arguments are actually hurting them as they end up cementing unhelpful prejudices and perceptions about them.

  • Service Chiefs as window into Buhari’s mind

    Service Chiefs as window into Buhari’s mind

    Whether anyone objects or not, two things are evident from President Muhammadu Buhari’s appointment of new service chiefs. One, it is at least a vague indication of how his mind is working, and many people are not going to be comfortable with the workings of that mind. Two, there is yet no visible or consistent framework of how his presidency is to be viewed. The Buhari presidency is, as far as can be made out, still formless. On Monday, the president had sacked the service chiefs and two other sensitive security appointees he inherited from his predecessor, Goodluck Jonathan, an action that was thought to be long overdue. They were replaced by Maj.-Gen. Abayomi Olonishakin (Chief of Defence Staff), Maj.-Gen. Tukur Buratai (Chief of Army Staff), Rear Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (Chief of Naval Staff), Air Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar (Chief of Air Staff), Air Vice Marshal Monday Riku Morgan (Chief of Defence Intelligence), and Maj.-Gen.Babagana Monguno, retd. (National Security Adviser).

    It takes an inscrutable and independent mind to make such appointments. In making the appointments, the president explained that, except for Gen Buratai whom he met only recently in Chad, all the other service chiefs were unknown to him, and all five Chiefs were appointed strictly based on their records. But as expected, the Southeast, which is yet to be represented in any significant Buhari appointment, has expressed grave reservations over what it described as the lack of fairness and federal character representation of the exercise. Weeks before, some commentators had wondered why of the first 10 or 11 or so appointments made by the president, only one came from the Southwest, indeed the entire South.

    Even though he did not allude to these appointments, and only spoke particularly of the National Assembly (NASS) crisis, former interim national chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Bisi Akande, had suggested controversially that there was a conspiracy by a section of the northern elite to emasculate the Yoruba in the new government in strict disregard of the huge role the latter played in birthing the APC and enthroning the Buhari presidency. Tony Nyiam, a retired colonel who played a leading role in the 1990 Gideon Orkar coup, also wondered in a recent interview whether, all things considered, President Buhari was not in the process of being caged by certain powerful interests from the North. Presidential adviser, Femi Adesina, denied that the president had been or was about to be caged. Notwithstanding these observations, the president had gone ahead to make the new security appointments.

    It is undeniable that President Buhari is bold and courageous. What is not clear, either from his recent or last few weeks appointments, is whether he is reckless or wise. His appointments so far have, however, provided analysts a window into the inscrutable mind of this laconic former army general. Of the major security architecture he is assembling, which the president referred to in passing during one of his Ramadan breaking of fast, four of the six service chiefs are of northern origin. They are: Director-General of the Department of State Services, who is of Daura extraction like the president, Army chief (Borno), Air Force chief (Bauchi), and Defence Intelligence chief (Benue). The president’s Chief Security Officer (CSO) and Aide de Camp (ADC) are also from the North.

    On the surface, President Buhari gives the impression he is both dispassionate and patriotic. Undoubtedly, his fundamental character is such that he can be relied upon, like the Ottoman emperor, Suleyman the Magnificent, to be just — one who is inured to the shenanigans of using or deploying right and wrong interchangeably. President Buhari, as a general in the army and head of state in the 80s, had a reputation for being blind to tribe or religion. During the war, he also demonstrated that his patriotism and his fundamental make-up are both anchored on a superior understanding of the human essence — the god in us.

    If, despite these lofty attributes, he went ahead to make the kind of skewed appointments credited to him in the past few weeks, it may lead analysts to search for other explanations to understand what has happened. One explanation is that his appointments have just begun, and until they are completed, it may be hasty and unfair to form a total picture of him or suggest skewness or otherwise. A second explanation suggests that the appointments probably represent innocent parochialism, a by-product of the findings and headhunting of a group of insular aides. And a third explanation infers that in his desperation to achieve set goals, he would seize on any solution, no matter how insensitive, sectional or irrational some may deem them to be.

    Governor Kashim Shettima of Borno State may not have realised it, but when he enthused over the president’s appointment of two Borno-born officers (Army chief, NSA) into his security architecture, he was drawing attention to the inexplicability of entrusting so much into the hands of one state out of 36 states. The president talked of merit as an explanation in his appointments, but it is still notable that other competent and suitable officers cannot be found in other states. The president knows that Nigeria’s complex and suspicion-ridden cultural milieu places a huge burden on its leaders to juggle the mix of public policies delicately to accommodate its diverse population. It is unlikely that the intransigence of the Boko Haram revolt and the frustrations felt by the government in tackling it have led the president into resignedly agreeing with the logic that the malaise is best tackled by officers who hail from the epicenter of the revolt.

    What is obviously not apparent from the appointments, especially of the service chiefs, is the salutary fact that the president can call his soul his own. How he calls his soul, and whether his ability to command his soul is good for the country, will become obvious in the coming months. President Buhari is known to possess an iron will, and is sometimes inflexible, is a stickler for rules and regulations once they are set, and a passionate leader. These attributes have started to reflect in the president’s policies and appointments. He will, it seems, continue to acknowledge his friends and those who helped him to win the presidency, and also sometimes defer to them and seek their counsel. But in the end, he will make up his mind, often independently and sometimes incomprehensibly, and courageously stick to his decisions.

    From his appointments so far, the president will find it tough going to persuade everyone or even a majority that he had acted wisely or prudently, but there is no doubting the fact that he had acted very boldly. He knew there would be flak, for it is implausible that he did not recognise the downside of the appointments. He must also appreciate that those who question his motives do so legitimately and with the best of intentions. But given his nature, he will not be discouraged from standing his ground in this and other matters.

    It may, therefore, take a little longer to understand the structure and direction of the Buhari presidency. While his appointments so far give reasons for some disquiet and even unhappiness, as the Southeast is already expressing, he cannot yet be judged on whether he is providing fair and equitable leadership for the entire country until nearly all his appointments have been made. What is a little worrisome, however, is whether he himself understands the nuanced — or perhaps sublime — direction his presidency should be heading. That direction will be determined by the structure of his presidency, not by its organogram and departmental arrangements; and in turn that structure will be influenced by the appointments he makes. He will have to do enormously better in those appointments, and begin brilliantly to enunciate and communicate the philosophy of his government far beyond the pragmatism he projects.

    The president may be able to curb corruption, implement reforms and make life more comfortable and dignified for Nigerians. But the real success of his government will be determined not by these tangibles, but by the more complex and sometimes indecipherable intangibles only ambitious countries are familiar with. The Buhari presidency will have to find a way to conceptualise and implement these intangibles. With a fractious National Assembly leadership and legislative majority antagonistic to the discipline and instruction of the ruling party, and a presidency yet to exhibit the indispensable broadmindedness required for a great society and noble future, President Buhari’s path seems paved with thorns.

  • Service chiefs, others get suggestions on insecurity

    The newly appointed Service chiefs have been urged to approach their assignments with utmost commitment to justify their choice as managers of the country’s security agencies.

    National Commandant, Peace Corps of Nigeria (PCN), Dickson Akoh, who gave this advice in Abuja yesterday, hailed President Muhammadu Buhari for the changes in the leadership of the Armed Forces and other security agencies.

    He said the changes were overdue and that Nigerians anticipated the development, considering the increase in Boko Haram attacks, robbery, kidnapping and other security challenges.

    Akoh said the new Service chiefs deserve their appointment.

    “We are optimistic that these appointments will spur them to bring their wealth of experience and expertise to bear in tackling the current security challenges facing the country.

    “My advice is that they study and conduct an in-depth analysis of the factors that contributed to the inability of their predecessors to address the insurgency.

    “With new leaders at the helm of affairs, it is our view that there is urgent need for a holistic overhaul of the security architecture and a change in their operational strategies.

    “They should avoid inter-agency rivalry but form an effective synergy with relevant security establishments for effective performance.

    “The exchange of intelligence among the security operatives, to a large extent, could help in arresting the terrorists. Of importance is the need to acquire necessary equipment,” Akoh said.

  • ‘Senate’s approval for Service chiefs wrong’

    ‘Senate’s approval for Service chiefs wrong’

    THE decision of a Federal High Court stripping the President of the sole power to appoint Service chiefs has been faulted by a former Provost Marshal of the Nigerian Army, Brig.-Gen. Don Idada Ikponmwen (rtd).

    He expressed dismay at the verdict, saying it would not stand.

    The decision, he said, would politicise the Armed Forces and threaten the nation’s security.

    Ikponmwen stated: “I was completely dismayed with such a declaration because it tends to turn the constitution upside down. It was even more shocking that the court agreed with the argument that the Armed Forces Act, which was first enacted during the military administration of Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar and was a replica of the 1993 Armed Forces Decree, was declared to be a law not in the category of the existing laws in Nigeria.

    “I think these are shocking declarations, and the least I can say is that I found it very disappointing and the decision cannot stand. I don’t think we have seen the end of the matter.

    “My worry is that many people, especially those who would not take the pain to read the constitution in all its ramifications may just get the impression that it is the position of our constitution.”

  • Can Senate screen Service Chiefs?

    It was one of the things many Nigerians expected President Muhammadu Buhari to do immediately he assumed office on May 29. By the evening of his inauguration, they were waiting to hear that he has sacked the Service Chiefs. There was no such news until last Monday when Buhari gave the Service Chiefs the boot. Also sacked were the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Air Chief Marshal Alex Badeh, and National Security Adviser (NSA) Sabo Dasuki. The public was so much interested in the military chiefs’ fate because it believes that they were partisan under former President Goodluck Jonathan.

    Indeed, Dasuki and Badeh, who were sacked along with Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Lt Gen Kenneth Minimah, Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) Vice Admiral Usman Jubrin and Chief  of Air Staff Air Marshal Adesola Amosu had unwittingly played into politicians’ hands with the way they discharged their duties. The military is known to be a non-political institution, which primary duty is to protect the nation’s territorial integrity. It has to be above political fray to discharge its constitutional responsibility.

    It can only be above the fray by not straying into political matters, which are better left in the hands of politicians. But at a stage, the military or better still its leadership, allowed itself to be used by politicians. The military leadership kowtowed to the immediate past Jonathan administration in everything for what many believe to be filthy lucre. But, why it did what it did is best known to it. Without any qualms, the military took sides with the ruling party in elections without regard for its operational rules, which state that it should distance itself from such matters. At best, it could only help the police in maintaining law and order.

    It was under the guise of maintaining security during elections that the military helped then ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to rig the Ekiti State Governorship Election on June 21, last year. Till today, some military personnel are still aggrieved with what happened in Ekiti. One of such officers is Captain Sagir Koli, who spilled the beans on how the military rigged the Ekiti poll for PDP. To save his life, Koli fled the country.

    There is a lesson to be learnt in all this by the new security topshots – Maj Gen Babagana Monguno, NSA,  Maj Gen Abayomi Olonishakin, CDS, Maj Gen T.Y.Buratai, COAS, Rear Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, CNS and Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar, CAS. They should strive to ensure that they are not used to fight political fights that do not concern them. They should leave politicians to their wily ways and concentrate on how to save the nation from Boko Haram’s stranglehold. If they cannot defeat Boko Haram and rescue the Chibok girls the change of guards would have been in vain. The sack of their predecessors will only have meaning if, in the discharge of their duties, they meet the people’s expectations.

    But the billion naira question is, is their appointment subject to the Senate’s approval? The answer is capital NO. The Constitution does not confer such power on the Senate. Although, Justice Adamu Bello of the Federal High Court in Abuja on July 1, 2013, in his verdict in a suit filed by activist lawyer Festus Keyamo, held that the appointment of Service Chiefs is subject to the Senate’s approval, he may not have attuned his mind to the provision of the Constitution in arriving at that decision. His verdict was based on Section 18 (1) of the Armed Forces Act, Cap A20, Laws of the Federation, which states :

    The president, may, upon consultation with the Chief of Defence Staff and subject to confirmation by the National Assembly, appoint such officers (in this Act referred to as ‘’Service Chiefs’’) as he thinks fit in whom the command of the Army, Navy and Air Force, as the case may be, and their Reserves shall be vested. Was the judge right to have used this provision without recourse to the constitutional provision, which grants the president power to appoint his Service Chiefs without seeking the National Assembly’s approval? Again, in my layman’s view, the answer is no and in support of my submission, I cite Section 218 (2) of the Constitution, which reads :

    The powers conferred on the president by subsection (1) of this section shall include power to appoint the Chief of Defence Staff, the Chief of Army Staff, the Chief of Naval Staff, the Chief of Air Staff and heads of any other branches of the armed forces of the Federation as may be established by an Act of the National Assembly. From the foregoing, we can see that there is a conflict in both provisions. The Armed Forces Act says that the president may consult the CDS and subject to the National Assembly’s confirmation, appoint the Service Chiefs.

    But the Constitution states that the president will appoint the CDS and the Service Chiefs without recourse to any other authority. Service Chiefs are not ministers, who the Constitution, in Section 147 (2) says can only be appointed by the president subject to the Senate’s confirmation. Being the nation’s supreme law, what lawyers call the grundnorm, the Constitution supersedes any other legislation. Where there is a conflict, the constitutional provision prevails. And in this instance, it cannot be different. The Senate is not constitutionally empowered to confirm Service Chiefs.

    We cannot blame former President Jonathan for sending the names of the immediate past Service Chiefs to the Senate for confirmation based on Justice Adamu’s verdict. He acted in accordance with the exigency of that time. But we can save Buhari from making the same mistake two years after that verdict or we will continue to live a lie – that the Senate is empowered to confirm Service Chiefs, while the president is duty bound to send the names of Service Chiefs to the National Assembly.

    It is in our collective interest for the Attorney-General of the Federation, whenever he is appointed, to challenge Justice Bello’s contentious judgement at the Court of Appeal and if need be, the Supreme Court. We will be expanding the law, rather than allowing this contentious verdict to remain the law, if the attorney-general, who was a party in the Keyamo suit, takes this matter ‘’upstairs’’ as lawyers would say. Otherwise, the Senate will continue to exercise the power it does not have, while the president will continue to act contrary to the Constitution.

  • Nigerians set agenda for Service chiefs

    Nigerians set agenda for Service chiefs

    •Falana, Alli, others: loyalty must
    be to State, not individual

    Senior lawyers and security experts yesterday warned the new Service chiefs against partisanship. They said the commanders’ loyalty should be to the country and not to the President, or the ruling party.

    Lagos lawyer Femi Falana, Mallam Yusuf Ali (both senior advocates) and Dr. Chima Nnaji bared their minds on the appointments of military commanders by President Muhammadu Buhari.

    They all urged the Service chiefs to bring their experiences to bear and inject fresh ideas into the war against terror and urged them to strengthen the armed forces as a professional institution.

    Falana recounted how the former National Security Adviser (NSA) Col Dasuki Sambo (rtd), usurped the functions of the former Defence Minister, Lt. Gen. Aliyu (rtd), a development the lawyer noted, brewed disaffected in the system.

    He said: “The NSA usurped the functions of the defence minister.  The office was linked with currency trafficking, hiring of mercenaries and purchase of unserviceable military hardware.

    “Without arms and ammunitions, military officers and soldiers were forced to fight the well-armed terrorists. The encounter culminated in humiliating defeat for the nation’s armed forces.

    “Hundreds of soldiers were massacred while those who refused to commit suicide were put on trial before court martial.”

    In his remarks, Ali said: “My expectations are that they should be able to assist us to battle and extinguish, if possible, insurgency and terrorism; and position our armed forces as a professional fighting force that can be ranked as one of the very best if not in the world at least in Africa. They should ensure that they promote the ethics of subjugating the military to civilian authority.”

    According to him, the military chiefs should feel obligated to the country and not the person who appointed them.

    He said: “Our problem is that we don’t have strong institutions. Anybody who gets appointed to an office believes that he owes obligation and loyalty to the appointer, whereas it should be that anybody who is appointed into the public service in any capacity should have loyalty to Nigeria.

    “We don’t have that in this country. We haven’t gotten it right at all. This is an area that quite a lot has to be done. That is what is missing in our national life. Until public officers believe that their first loyalty is to the nation itself, then the problem of partisanship will remain.”

    Dr. Nnaji said the military chiefs must show passion for the tasks ahead and learn to deploy modern technology, urging President Buhari to always consider national interest first when exercising his prerogative to make such appointments, especially on the professional competence of those being appointed.

     

     

  • • Firing of Service Chiefs, NSA too late in coming

    • Firing of Service Chiefs, NSA too late in coming

    President Muhammadu Buhari’s removal of the Service Chiefs and the National Security Adviser (NSA) on Monday must have come as sweet music in the ears of many Nigerians. Left to the average Nigerian, the military officers ought not to have lasted a day in office beyond May 29 when President Buhari was sworn in. Those sacked are: Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Air Vice Marshal Alex Badeh, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Lt-Gen Kenneth Minimah, Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) Vice Admiral  Usman Jubrin, Chief of Air Staff (CAS) Air Marshal Adesola Amosun and NSA, Col. Sambo Dasuki. (rtd).

    They were replaced with Major-General Abayomi Gabriel Olonishakin (CDS), Major-General T.Y. Buratai (COAS), Rear Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas (CNS), Air Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar (CAS), Air Vice Marshal Monday Riku Morgan, Chief of Defence Intelligence (CDI) and retired major-General Babagana Monguno (NSA).

    It is heart-warming that President Buhari did the needful on the former military chiefs at last. Of course Nigerians who had been clamouring for their removal have genuine cause to so do. Like most of our national institutions, the military had become a shadow of what it was years back. One of the most prominent of its problems was its blatant politicisation by politicians of the erstwhile ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) who used the military’s monopoly of coercive force to unlawfully affect electoral outcomes.

    Soldiers were used to protect election-riggers, harass and intimidate political opponents, and empower favoured candidates, especially during the last governorship elections in Ekiti and Osun states. It is a surprise that Lt.-Gen. Minimah chose not to investigate the outrageous perversion of military values in spite of its very disturbing implications for the polity, until his sack on Monday.

    But it is not enough to sack public officials; they must be made to account for their stewardship. The military, especially in the last four years, enjoyed robust budgetary allocations. In fiscal 2012, 2013 and 2014, defence got N921 billion, N1.055 trillion and N968.127 billion, respectively, yet much of the anti-insurgency campaign has been characterised by widespread complaints by soldiers about poor pay and the lack of arms, ammunition and equipment. In encounter after encounter, the military was forced to retreat by apparently better-armed Boko Haram insurgents.

    In March this year, some soldiers protested the failure of the Federal Government to pay their wages in full. Instead of the promised N150,000 per month for anti-insurgency troops, they were allegedly paid only N30,000 per month. Soldiers returning from peace-keeping operations abroad have protested the unauthorised reduction or non-payment of their entitlements, only to be arrested and court-martialed for their troubles. Members of the Ex-servicemen Welfare Association regularly protest the non-payment of their pension arrears. Nigerians are interested in how the defence budgets were spent.

    Rather than comprehensively investigate the financial anomalies which were causing so many heart-breaking battlefield reversals, the military hierarchy focused solely on court-martialing soldiers. Over 500 military personnel have faced charges of insubordination, cowardice and mutiny, and have been sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment. Some have received the death penalty.

    Ironically, the military surge which began in February has shown that a properly-equipped and motivated armed forces is more than a match for Boko Haram. Clearly, issues of pay, equipment and competent leadership are far more important to success as opposed to the isolated emphasis on discipline.

    The new military helmsmen must address the deep-rooted problems that have persistently weakened morale, crippled effectiveness and consequently engendered fear in the face of the enemy. They should revisit the recent military trials and punishments. If the army is to come to equity, it must do so with clean hands. It makes no sense to arraign soldiers for acts of indiscipline and cowardice while doing nothing about partisan manipulation of the military and rampant corruption within the military hierarchy.

    Above all, the new military chiefs must ensure that Boko Haram is defeated as soon as possible. And that can only be done if the military shreds its political toga for its core professional role. Time is of the essence.

    ‘It is heart-warming that President Buhari did the needful on the former military chiefs at last. Of course Nigerians who had been clamouring for their removal have genuine cause to so do. Like most of our national institutions, the military had become a shadow of what it was years back’

     

  • Big questions as Buhari sacks Service Chiefs, NSA

    Big questions as Buhari sacks Service Chiefs, NSA

    The new men: Olonishakin, Ibas, Buratai, Monguno, Abubakar

    Morgan is Chief of Defence Intelligence

    Many questions were raised yesterday as President Muhammadu Buhari sacked the Service Chiefs.

    Also gone is the National Security Adviser (NSA).

    President Buhari named their replacements. He also appointed a new Chief of Defence Intelligence (CDI).

    Relieved of their duties are Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Air Chief Marshal Alex Badeh, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) Lt.-Gen. Kenneth Minimah, Chief of Naval Staff (CNS) Vice Admiral Usman Jubrin, Chief of Air Staff (CAS) Air Marshal Adesola Amosun and NSA Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd).

    The President, in a statement by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, named the new helmsmen. They are: Major-General Abayomi Gabriel Olonishakin (CDS), Major-General T.Y. Buratai (COAS), Rear Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas (CNS), Air Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar (CAS), Air Vice Marshal Monday Riku Morgan, Chief of Defence Intelligence (CDI) and retired Maj-Gen Babagana Monguno (NSA).

    Among the questions being asked yesterday are:

    •Will there be a probe to establish how the multi-billion cash voted yearly for defence has been spent?

    •Buhari has said he would like to examine why the military, which earned accolades on many international assignments became so weakened it could not crush the Boko Haram insurgency;

    •Will the various courts martial go on, considering the fact that soldiers and officers on trial complained that they were not well armed to fight?

    •Will the re-organisation permeate the rank and file?

    The new CDS, who hails from Ekiti State, until his appointment, was the Head, Nigerian Army Training and Doctrine Command in Minna, Niger State.

    The new CAS, from Borno State, was the Commander of the Multinational Joint Task Force, which has its headquarters in Ndjamena, Chad, until his appointment.

    Gen. Buratai is former Commander of the Nigerian Army 2 Brigade in Port Harcourt, Rivers State and Commander of the Nigerian Army School of Infantry in Jaji, Kaduna State.

    The new CNS, from Cross River State, enlisted into the Nigerian Defence Academy as a member of the 26th Regular Course in 1979 and was commissioned as a Sub-Lieutenant in 1983.

    His previous appointments include: Naval Provost Marshal, Chief Staff Officer, Naval Training Command, Chief of Administration, Naval Headquarters, Flag Officer Commanding Western Naval Command and Chief of Logistics, Naval Headquarters.

    Until his appointment as CNS, he was the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Navy Holdings Limited.

    Air Vice Marshal Abubakar (NAF/1433), who is from Bauchi State, a former  Chief of Standards and Evaluation, NAF Headquarters; served as Chief of Defence Communications and Air Officer Commanding, NAF Training Command before he was named the CAS yesterday.

    Air Vice Marshal Abubakar was the Chief of Administration, NAF Headquarters.

    The CDI, Air Vice Marshal Morgan, hails from Benue State. He was commissioned into the Nigerian Air Force as a Pilot Officer in June, 1982.

    His previous appointments include Air Officer Commanding, NAF Logistics Command.

    The new NSA, who was a member of the Nigerian Defence Academy’s 21st Regular Course, before his retirement from the Army, held several command and staff appointments, including: Commander, Guards Brigade, Deputy Commandant, National Defence College, Chief of Defence Intelligence, Chief of Defence Logistics and Commander, Training and Doctrine Command.

    The Service chiefs will hold their appointments in an acting capacity until confirmed by the Senate.

    “President Buhari thanked the outgoing Service Chiefs and NSA for their services to the nation and wished them well in their future endeavours,” said the statement.

    The new Service chiefs and the NSA, who were at the Presidency yesterday, declined comment on the appointments.

     Falana: they should be held to account

    The sack of the Service Chiefs was long overdue, rights activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) said yesterday.

    He said: “They abandoned professionalism for politics and exposed the armed forces to unprecedented ridicule and odium. The bulk of the over N4 trillion earmarked for defence in the last five years was diverted. Hence the armed forces were unable to confront the rag tag army of the satanic Boko Haram sect.  

    Falana praised Buhari for sacking the Service Chiefs and the NSA. In his view, the President should go further to make the officers account for “the huge funds collected under the pretext of prosecuting the war on terror”.

    “We call on the new Service Chiefs to reorganise and motivate the highly demoralised troops, set aside the questionable verdicts of courts martial and stop the ongoing diversionary trials of officers and troops who were not equipped to fight the terrorists,” Falan said. 

    To a former Governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Balarabe Musa, the change was normal.

    But he was quick to advise the new Service Chiefs to support Buhari to address the the insurgency, which has crippled the Northeast. 

    He said: “This change is normal. Every new regime wants to effect change in line with its agenda. I think it is not a controversial thing, provided it is within the powers of the president

    “Let the new Service Chiefs give full support to the President so that the insurgency can be solved.”

    A former Military Governor in one of the Northcentral states, who preferred not to be named, said: “I don’t want to talk now to avoid being misunderstood. I am watching the nature of change being planned by the President.”

     

  • Exit of the ‘partisan’ Service Chiefs

    Exit of the ‘partisan’ Service Chiefs

    President Muhammadu Buhari yesterday appointed new service chiefs. For many, this marked the exit of ‘partisan’ service chiefs, writes GBADE OGUNWALE

    At last, President Muhammadu Buhari sacked the service chiefs. Many had expected the President to have relieved them of their appointments shortly after he was sworn-in on May 29. But for reasons known to the Commander-in-Chief, their ouster was delayed till yesterday.

    The affected military chiefs are the Chief of Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Alexander Badeh; the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Kenneth Minimah; the Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Adesola Amosun; and the Chief of Naval Staff, Rear Admiral Commodore Usman Jibrin. Also affected was the National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd). Replacements for the sacked service chiefs have since been announced. They are Major-Gen. Gabriel Abayomi Olonisakin (Chief of Defence Staff); Major Gen. Tukur Yakubu Buratai (Chief of Army Staff); Rear Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas (Chief of Naval Staff); Air Vice Marshal Sadique Abubakar (Chief of Air Staff); Air Vice Marshal Monday Riku Morgan (Chief of Defence Intelligence); and retired Major-Gen. Babagana Mongunu (National Security Adviser).

    Appointed by former President Goodluck Jonathan on January 16, 2014, the erstwhile service chiefs failed to draw a line between loyalty to the Nigerian nation and protecting the political interest of the former President that appointed them. There was so much hoopla in the polity then over the alleged partisan role, or fear of complicity of the nation’s Armed Forces in the run the up to the general elections. This peeled the skin off the nose of political watchers, particularly the then opposition camp of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    The then service chiefs were soon to confirm such fears when they started donning partisan garb, fashioned by the then ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). This took the sleep off the brow of the opposition and other well meaning sections of the public. Damning the consequences of such misadventure, the erstwhile service chiefs sacrificed their personal reputation and the integrity of the Armed Forces for political stakes.

    They failed to understand that first and foremost, the loyalty of the military under their watch was to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. That loyalty to their Commander-In-Chief ought to come next. In the first place, the C-In-C derives his powers and legitimacy from the Constitution. Put differently, the Constitution is the source of the powers and legitimacy bestowed on the President and the Commander-In-Chief. In a layman’s language, the Constitution ought to be the father, while the President and Commander-In-Chief is the son. The Badeh and his subordinates however, failed to appreciate the fact that the father takes precedence over the son and not the other way round. That is the line of command.

    The erstwhile Service Chiefs also failed to acknowledge the tradition in democratic setting that the interest of the Commander-In-Chief must not be at variance with that of the Constitution, which is the source of his powers and legitimacy. By the foregoing, the sacked military chiefs failed to realise that they were bound by their oath of allegiance to take sides with the Constitution. In a professionalsed military, such officers ought to have known that it would not amount to disloyalty if they subordinated their loyalty to the C-In-C to that of the Constitution. To do otherwise is to diminish the source where the C-in-C derived his authority in the first place. In democratic tradition, refusal to carry out unconstitutional order from the C-In-C does not necessarily amount disobedience to the spirit of the Constitution.

     

    Partisanship of the Forces

     

    The perceived partisanship of the then service chiefs led to a situation where former President Olusegun Obasanjo accused Jonathan of trying to use them to frustrate the 2015 general elections and elongate his tenure. The military authorities had responded by describing Obasanjo, also a former military head of state, as “an embarrassment to the military”.

    Shortly before that encounter, the military authorities had descended on a section of the media intercepting and confiscating publications of newspaper houses perceived to be antagonising the Jonathan administration. Distribution vans and vendors were also arrested and detained for days by soldiers acting on “orders from above”. It was done under the guise of searching for “explosive materials” in the distribution vans and in the underpants of newspaper distributors and vendors.

    Perhaps the most unbridled partisanship on the part of the then military chiefs was the controversy surrounding the West African School Leaving Certificate of President Buhari. The military authorities, after having admitted that the certificate was intact in the records of the Military Board, had turned around to deny having it at all. This national embarrassment was primarily meant to provided ammunition for Jonathan and his PDP to ridicule the credibility of the then candidate Muhammadu Buhari of the APC.

    The military authorities have remained silent on the whereabouts of the certificate even after Buhari had won the election. And when it became apparent that the then ruling PDP was going to be trounced in the 2015 general elections, the lot fell on the military chiefs, led by the then NSA Dasuki, to announce to a befuddled nation that security of election materials and personnel in certain local governments in the Northeastern part could not be guaranteed.

     

    Postponed elections

     

    On their prompting, the elections were shifted for six weeks, from February-March to March-April ostensibly for the military to rid the region of the menace of the Boko Haram insurgents before the poll. The drama in that shift in poll date, aimed at shoring up the electoral fortunes of the PDP, was claims by former President Jonathan that he was not in the know of the plans to shift the election dates.

    “I was not informed. In any case, they did not have to inform me,” Jonathan had stated on national television. Not a few were alarmed by the former President’s claims that the security chiefs unilaterally shifted the  election dates without his input. This underlined the unholy collaboration between Jonathan and his service chiefs in their failed attempts to undermine the electoral process. By pandering to the whims of the then President, the service chiefs left no one in doubt that they were ready to float or sink with their Commander-in-Chief in blind loyalty. Military analysts had argued that the security chiefs ought to have protected the apolitical nature of the military under their watch and that the Armed Forces by preventing the military from being pushed into the fatalistic fancies of the former President.

    “The military chiefs ought to have demonstrated to the world their understanding of the power, authority and the will of the people. In this case, a democratically constituted authority is a trust in which the Commander-In-Chief is a holder of this trust with the Nigerian people (electorate) being the trustees. By implication, the trustees (the people) can decide to withdraw the trust (authority) from the holder of the trust (the President) and give it to whoever they may choose through the ballot. Any attempt to block or hinder this transfer of trust through the ballot amount to a subversion of the constitution”, the analyst said. Commendably, the military was able to push the insurgents down the fringe during the six-week shift in election dates with determined onslaught on the insurgents’ enclaves. Curiously however, Boko Haram had intensified its bloody campaign shortly after the poll, leaving many to wonder where the cord snapped. Under the watch of the sacked military chiefs, the insurgents became more daring with suicide bombing and armed attacks on vulnerable targets in parts of the Northeast. The bloody campaign is gradually spreading to other parts of the country, particularly in the neighbouring towns and cities in the Northwest. There were also reports that the Jonathan administration had to rely on mercenaries in the counter insurgency campaign ahead of the 2015 general elections.

     

    The botched arms deal

     

    The case of an illegal arms deal involving about $9 million is still pending between the Nigerian government and the South African authorities. Till date, the last administration has failed to provide sensible explanations about the botched deal while the money is still being trapped in South Africa.

    A private aircraft belonging to the chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Pastor Ayo Oritsajeafor was used in ferrying the raw cash to South Africa. The cleric turned political has not been able to offer any convincing explanation regarding his involvement in that obviously untidy affair. Military analysts are of the view that the Armed Forces suffered untold credibility crisis under the watch of the sacked service chiefs. According to them, the ex military chiefs dragged the Armed Forces deep down the morass of dirty politicking.

    But what could have prompted an otherwise sacred institution of the military into delving so deep in partisan politics? Observers said the military chiefs could not have done otherwise under the circumstances in which they found themselves. Defence budgets under their watch can hardly be reasonably accounted for, hence it was in their enlightened self interest to ensure the return of their paymaster, for obvious reasons. Unfortunately, they are leaving behind a highly demoralised military owing to extreme politicisation of that highly respected institution.

    This, analysts observed, must have accounted for the poor operational coordination and lack of commitment on the part of troops in the ongoing counter insurgency campaign. The incoming helmsmen would have an arduous task re-inventing the military and instilling discipline which has been eroded by political gladiators in starched military uniform. dent Muhammadu Buhari yesterday appointed new service chiefs. For many, this marked the exit of ‘partisan’ service chiefs, writes GBADE OGUNWALE 

     

  • Rebuild Armed Forces reputation, Buhari urges new Chiefs

    President Muhammadu Buhari on Monday urged the newly appointed Service Chiefs to rebuild the reputation of the Armed Forces and the nation.

    Addressing them shortly after their appointments, Buhari also called on them to show utmost commitment to their new duties.

    According to a statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, the President said: “All of you, including the National Security Adviser, were chosen on merit. Your records gave you the job.”

    “Save for the new Chief of Army Staff whom I briefly met at his Command at the Multi-National Joint Task Force, in Chad, I don’t know any of you. Your records recommended you.

    “Legally, you are in acting capacity until the National Assembly accepts you. It is only then that you will take the oath of office. Thereafter, we will sit down and talk in more detail,” President Buhari told the new service chiefs.

    He assured them that their nominations will be sent to the National Assembly this week for confirmation.