Tag: Umaru Yar’Adua

  • 2015: Atiku’s new calculations

    2015: Atiku’s new calculations

    Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC). Will he revive his presidential ambition on the new platform? Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU writes on the prospects and constraints of his struggle for the Presidency.

    He is a big catch for the main opposition party, the All Progressives Congress (APC). He is not new to the platform, having worked variously with many of its national leaders, either as the Vice President, presidential candidate of the defunct Action Congress (AC) and automatic member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Board of Trustees (BoT). However, it is believed that his defection may change the permutation in the party, especially as the opposition leaders search for a credible presidential candidate.

    The odds weighed heavily against the Turaki Adamawa in the PDP. In the ruling party, he had a slim chance of survival. History is repeating itself. In 2007, he had defected to the defunct AC and emerged as its presidential flag bearer. But, he was defeated at the poll by the late President Umaru Yar’Adua. Shortly after the poll, he retraced his steps to the PDP. He attempted to mend fences with his former boss, former President Olusegun Obasanjo. But, even as the consensus candidate of the Northern establishment in the 2011 presidential elections, he could not defeat President Goodluck Jonathan.

    After the election, Atiku was sidelined by the PDP leadership. Since he has not dumped his presidential ambition, he was perceived as a threat to Dr. Jonathan. Many pro-Jonathan crusaders have branded him as the politician on the prowl, stressing that he may likely emerge as the beneficiary of the push for power shift to the North.

    The Adamawa-born politician also had a running battle with the former PDP National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, and Governor Muritala Nyako over the running of the state chapter. He had chided the former chairman for high handedness and overbearing attitude. He said Tuku’s leadership traits are offensive to democracy.

    Atiku complained that he was never carried along in the running of the party, despite the privileges conferred on him as a former Vice President by the PDP constitution. An attempt was even made to exclude his name from the list of delegates to the last national convention of the party in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FTC). His right was restored, following a formal complaint by him to the national secretariat. However, he parted ways with the mainstream PDP at the convention when he emerged as one of the arrowheads of the New PDP.

    The former Vice President has remained a major factor in national politics since he joined the fray in the Third Republic. He has been a consummate politician, great mobiliser, master strategist and crowd puller. In the PDP, it was believed that he was gathering forces, ahead of 2015. His associates have confided that he will renew his bid for federal power in the APC.

    Atiku’s ambition to rule the country had hit the rock four times. In the aborted Third Republic, he was projected by his mentor, the late General Sheu Yar’Adua, the founder of the Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM). That was when the military leader, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, excluded him and other key politicians from the race. At the Jos convention of the proscribed Social Democratic Party (SDP), he stepped down for the late Chief Moshood Abiola, who emerged as the flag bearer.

    He had the chance in 2003. But, as his former associate, former Governor Orji Kalu of Abia State recalled, the former Vice President bungled it. That year, many governors were ready to serve as campaign managers for Atiku. They believed that, if he contested, he would beat his boss, Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo, thereby saving them from persistent persecution. But the former Vice President failed to seize the moment. At midnight, he directed his supporters, who were in the majority, to endorse Obasanjo.

    In 2007, he was not as strong as he was in 2003. Although he was more determined, the power of incumbency wielded by Obasanjo was so overwhelming. Yet, he was undeterred. In 2011, Atiku picked up the gantlet. He was on the firing line. He successfully mobilised the Northern leaders to select him as the regional candidate. But the regional support collapsed at Eagles Squares, Abuja, during the subsequent presidential primaries.

    Atiku is back in the ring at a critical point in national history. Ahead of 2015, the debate on good governance is on the front burner. The North also is intensifying its agitating for power shift, based on an inexplicable agreement on presidential zoning between President Jonathan and Northern leaders. The ruling party is in turmoil, torn apart by acrimony and intrigues.

    However, analysts contend that Atiku’s defection to the APC is not motivated by any ideological drive. Neither was the civil war in the PDP an ideological war. But, his argument is solid and convincing. “The country is in crisis and every effort must be made to rescue Nigeria”, he told reporters in Lagos. He explained that he was on tour of the six geo-political zones for consultation on the way forward. During the consultations, the options were weighed. Some of his supporters persuaded him to stay on in the PDP. But, their argument was countered by other associates who pointed out that there will be no level playing ground for ambitious party chieftains at the primaries. They reasoned that the primaries will be designed for the endorsement of President Jonathan.

    Other associates advised him to explore the possibility of nurturing the PDM. But, it was discovered that those handling the PDM project have never attempted to project the party to all the regions. Therefore, it lacks taproots across the zones. This is at variance with Atiku’s posturing as a man who has built networks across the country. Also, old PDM members are ready to discredit the platform. Last year, one of the founders, Chief Tony Anenih, the PDP BoT Chairman, said that Atiku did not have the mandate to revive the group without consultation with the surviving members. He said the former Vice President cannot single handedly transform the political group into a political party without their collective support.

    Sources close to Atiku revealed that the only option was the APC. Many APC leaders are his associates. “Having endorsed the push for democratic change in 2015, the former Vice President is not interested in polarising the rank of the opposition, whose cause he has identified with. He is putting the country first before any ambition”, added the source.

    If Atiku enters the presidential race, he will be eyeing the elusive office for the fourth time. In his first attempt, he was prompted by the late Gen. Yar’Adua. From the onset, he was an integral member of the PDM kitchen cabinet, a dependable ally of the Tafida Katsina and confidant at the birth of the Peoples Front of Nigeria (PFN). He was not in the dark when it was resolved that the political machinery should join the defunct Social Democratic Party (SDP), one of the two parties decreed into existence by former military President Babangida.

    When Yar’Adua was being edged out of the presidential race, he decided to groom Atiku, his loyal associate, for the number one job. Atiku became the third SDP presidential aspirant, along with Alhaji Baba Gana Kingibe and Abiola at the Jos Convention. In those days, embattled politicians were involved in a lot of horse trading. To defeat Kingibe, Atiku was asked to step down for Abiola at the shadow poll. But a deep gulf later ensued between the Yar’Adua and Abiola. The bone of contention was Abiola’s refusal to accept Atiku as his running mate, contrary to Yar’Adua’s calculation. The 14 SDP state chairmen made it impossible by throwing their weight behind Kingibe. The loss of the two slots-Presidency and Vice Presidency was painful to Yar’Adua. The only option left for him was to gain the control of the party. He installed Anenih as the SDP national chairman. It is an irony of political life that both Anenih and Atiku, who harmoniously defended the PDM’s interest at that time, are now divided by the power games of the post-Yar’Adua period.

    After the annulment of the historic 1993 presidential election, politicians were in disarray. Yar’Adua wanted to bounce back. Atiku was part of that scramble for power as a member of the PDM in the 1994 constitutional conference set up by the late Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha. Along with Yar’Adua, he pursued the goal of setting a disengagement day for the military. Yar’Adua later died in mysterious circumstances in the prison, following his conviction over a phantom coup. After his demise, the bereaved PDM members started to look up to Atiku, the successor to the vacant stool of his mentor.

    When the former Head of State, Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, set up a transition programme, PDM became the engine room and most formidable caucus in the PDP. Atiku worked with other members, including the late Chief Sunday Afolabi, Chief Anenih, Prof. Ango Abdullahi, Senator Jibril Martins-Kuye, Alhaji Lawal kaita, Chief Dapo Sarunmi, Chief Olorunfunmi Basorun, Chief Yomi Edu, Senator Rashidi Ladoja, Senator Tony Adefuye, Mrs. Onikepo Oshodi, Mrs. Titilayo Ajanaku, and Alhaji Abubakar Rimi, to install Obasanjo as the President in 1999.

    In 1999, Atiku dumped his presidential ambition. He returned to Adamawa State and emerged as the governor-elect. Obasanjo, the President-elect, was just floating in the PDP. He had no root. He emerged based on three factors. The North had reluctantly conceded the Presidency to the Southwest. Some Northern elements believed that, when he was the military Head of State, he did not work against the interest of the region. Also, the military wanted to remain as a factor and power broker. No other Yoruba man could be trusted, since Chief Olu Falae refused to join the PDP.

    Obasanjo did not have any blue-print. PDM members-Atiku, Afolabi, Sarunmi and Edu-were part of the numerous delegations asking him to return to power. Obasanjo had a nightmare selecting a running mate. Four names were presented to him-Rimi, Bamanga Tukur, Prof. Abdullahi and Atiku. He settled for Atiku because of the PDM’s influence.

    As the Vice President, Atiku was the de facto President. He was the Controlling Minister of the Economy. To get things done, politicians and others must pass through Atiku route. The former Vice President was also popular among the governors. Thus, in 2003, many of them urged him to displace Obasanjo. The President was sweating profusely at the primaries. He prostrated before Atiku before earning re-nomination. At that point too, Atiku ceased to be the apple of Obasanjo’s eye.

    Henceforth, the former Vice President was under security watch. He was accused of corruption and disloyalty. He became a nominal figure in the government with no duties to perform. The government even made frantic efforts to cripple him politically. But Atiku ran to the court for security and survival. The former Vice President enjoyed tremendous goodwill as the AC presidential candidate. However, after the election, he returned to the PDP. The move embarrassed the AC leadership. Other PDP defectors and associates of Atiku, including Kaita and Ghali Umar Naa’ba, fired salvos at the party, saying that it was not different from the PDP. But Atiku also took other steps. He ran to Abeokuta to make peace with his estranged boss, Obasanjo. It was to be a secret fence-mending meeting. But, coming out of the meeting, an embarrassed Atiku was accosted by many reporters. The former President yelled at his visitor. Irked by the turn of events, former Abia State Governor Kalu chided Atiku for the wrong step. The reconciliation was not fruitful. It did not lead to any renewal of contact. When the former Vice President indicated unfolded his plan to contest for the Presidency in 2011, Obasanjo laughed mischievously. “I dey laugh o”, he said. It was loaded with meanings. Indeed, Obasanjo joined forces with President Jonathan to abort Atiku’s dream. When Atiku was tearing the record of the President at the primaries, Obasanjo stood up and whispered some words into the President’s ears. Atiku lost.

    Last year, at a public lecture at Ibadan, Oyo State capital, Obasanjo castigated Atiku. He said he refused to hand over to him because he could not vouch for him.

    Now that Atiku is back to the progressive fold, what are his chances? A source said that he needs to reconcile with former AC leaders in the APC, who may be weary of his style. Many of them have described him as an inconsistent politician, who jumped the ship after losing the presidential election.

    With the defection of the former Vice President, APC now has six presidential aspirants. They are Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, Senator Bukola Saraki, Kano State Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, and Sam Nda-Isaiah.s

     

  • Airways’ ex-workers seek payment of N70b benefits

    Airways’ ex-workers seek payment of N70b benefits

    Former workers of the liquidated national carrier, Nigeria Airways Limited, yesterday urged the Federal Government to pay their 20 years’ severance benefits.

    They said their colleagues in other countries had received their benefits nine years ago.

    The workers gathered for prayers at the secretariat of the Air Transport Services Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (ATSSSAN) at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport Road, Ikeja, under the aegis of the Aviation Union Grand Alliance (AUGA).

    They mandated the Trade Union Congress (TUC) and other unions to write President Goodluck Jonathan on their plight.

    One of the union leaders, Comrade Ibrahim Husseini, said the government would need about N70 billion to offset the severance benefits of the former workers and pensioners, which had been pending in the last nine years.

    Husseini described the attitude of the government to the plight of the former workers and its refusal to pay them their dues as gross insensitivity.

    He said many had died because they did not have money for their health care.

    According to him, many of the retirees beg to feed themselves.

    The union leader described as discriminatory the payment of full benefits to some former workers of the liquidated airline outside Nigeria.

    Husseini named some of such stations as New York, London, Rome and Cote D’Ivoire.

    He stressed that after the payment of five years’ severance benefits from the 25 years being owed the retirees by the late Umaru Yar’Adua administration, there had not been a positive response from the government to the requests of the retirees.

    The TUC, the ATSSSAN and the National Union of Air Transport Employees (NUATE) yesterday wrote to Jonathan to revisit their matter in the interest of peace in the Aviation sector.

    The letter, by Comrade Aba Ocheme, the secretary general of NAAPE, urged the President to intervene in the matter.

    The letter, titled: Delay in the Settlement of Terminal Benefits of ex-Nigeria Airways workers – Appeal for Mr President’s Intervention, reads: “May we also emphasise the determination and resolve of Aviation unions towards a wholesome resolution of the issue.

    “This is an irresolute duty we owe them, considering that their toil and contributions did sustain our union in their days…”

  • Cleric urges insurgents on peace

    The Baba Adini of Somolu, in Lagos State, Alahji Samsondeen Labinjo, has described the killings in the northern part of the country as political and called on the members of the Boko Haram to embrace peace.

    Speaking at a post Ramadan prayer held at Somolu, he said the issue of Boko Haram came up because they believe that power should be held by Muslims.

    According to him, if power is given to Muslim brother from the Southeast, there would be peace in the country because they deserve to rule the country.

    He said: “I have addressed Boko Haram issue in the past, Boko Haram is a political thing. Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was the head of state for eight years and left. A northern and a Muslim took over but did not last due to death, I mean the late Umaru Yar’Adua.

    “The administration was taken over by a Christian who completed the remaining two years and contested again and won the election. At the moment, he is planning to come back again. The Muslim community will not be happy at this development.

    “But I want to use this medium to call for the support of an Igbo man for the next president and should be a Muslim. If you think the Southeast don’t have Muslims, go on pilgrimage to Mecca, you will find different tents with six different states from the Southeast, Abia, Imo, Anambra, Ebonyin and Enugu states at Mecca, well expressed there.”

    Explaining further, he said: “This shows clearly that you can find good and competent Muslims in the Southeast who can provide leadership at the Presidency. If this is done I can assure you Boko Haram will vanish”.

     

  • 20 years after June 12: Noise without deliberation

    20 years after June 12: Noise without deliberation

    Twenty years after annulment of the presidential election of June 12, 1993 and the struggle for democratization that raged for four years against the dictatorship of Sani Abacha, the country has not made substantial progress in terms of responding to demands for democracy of and for nationalities in the country. But in terms of electoral democracy, the country has made some strides in the direction of de-militarization of the polity. Beyond conducting elections at intervals and electing officers to conduct the business of government at the federal and state levels, one crucial element of the struggle against military rule has been left unattended: the demand for restructuring of the polity.

    Since the coming of civil rule in 1999, there have been media and political debates on the topic of re-structuring without sincere efforts to really address the problem with the hope of solving it. In the fashion of the proverbial Nigeria factor, debates on the issue of re-federalizing the country have been so cacophonous and suggestive of efforts to debate in order to prevent proper debate and deliberation. The process started with General Olusegun Obasanjo. During his first term, he referred to those asking for sovereign national conference as individuals that wanted the country to break. In his second term, he organized what he called Political Reform Conference. At the end of the conference, nothing substantial was achieved. This again induced fresh calls for people’s constitution.

    President Umaru Yar’Adua did not have time to worry about addressing calls for restructuring, if he at all paid attention to them. But he succeeded in setting up a police reforms committee. The committee recommended that the central police system should be funded from the federation account, without giving any space of authority to the states which along with the central government own the federation account. As one area considered by federalists to be crucial to restructuring, those calling for a people’s constitution came back to the podium to drum up their demands.

    Then President Goodluck Jonathan emerged. He too was quick to pontificate that Nigeria’s current constitution has no serious problem and that the structure of the polity is in order. Shortly after saying that, he formed a special committee to look at the 1999 Constitution and make recommendations on how to improve the country’s union charter. Knowing that the recommendations of the Belgore Committee did not address the issues raised by committed federalists about the current constitution, citizens continued to make the same demands that include calls for a people’s constitution to be determined at a sovereign national conference or a constitutional conference.

    On its own part, the National Assembly expressed readiness to amend the constitution. Over sanguine federalists took this to mean that federal lawmakers would make recommendations to make the current constitution more federal. The process has been on for almost two years without any promise about when it will end. But from information released by lawmakers, the constitution, after amendment, is more likely to look more unitary, as we observed in this column last week. The purpose of the short historical journey since 1999 is to inform our readers about the failure of the country’s post-military political class to embark on de-militarizing and re-federalizing the polity. All efforts to make civilian rulers realize that continuing to govern the country with a constitution and a governance architecture that have no input from citizens is dangerous have not led to proper deliberation, even though they have generated a lot of noise.

    Efforts by federal legislators to amend the constitution notwithstanding, two types of discourse have emerged and have been raging for the past one year: Unity discourse and Diversity discourse. Those who control the unity discourse insist that the current constitution is perfect. To them, what is wrong with the constitution is the quality of those who use or supervise the use of the charter. The core of the unity discourse is that if Nigeria is able to get good leaders, all its problems regarding managing its diversity optimally would be over. This school of thought also affirms that devolving more powers to the states is capable of causing disintegration of the country and that recognizing the county’s nationalities in the constitution as Ethiopia has done successfully is capable of breaking Nigeria. Centralists are quick to affirm that should Nigerians insist on electing a man or woman of higher quality than we have had since independence, constitutional problems that militate against peace and progress will disappear. In other words, the problem is lack of benevolent leadership.

    But Diversity discourse focuses on the role of cultural plurality in the politics and economy of a multiethnic state. They ask for constitutional intervention in the management of the country’s diversity. Leaders calling for recognition of diversity insist that culture has a significant role in political and economic development and that cultural differences in the country are not likely to disappear and are also not injurious to the country’s unity, if well managed. Federalists insist that Nigeria may have bad luck that prevents it from having good and benevolent leaders, especially at the federal level. But they affirm that lack of benevolent leadership is not as impactful as lack of benevolent governance structure and institutions. They argue that many countries that have similar multiethnic character have created peace for the purpose of progress by adopting federal arrangements: Argentina, Austria, Brazil, Belgium, Canada, Ethiopia, Spain, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States of America, to name a few. Some federalists are even saying that the problems of Boko Haram partially result from failure to address the national question in the design of the country’s governance structure. In short, federalists believe that the problem of the country is not one of benevolent leadership versus benevolent structure; rather it is a combination of both. They also think that a humanist approach to governance suggests that it is easier to work at benevolent structure than to create benevolent leadership. Political systems are not about creating personalities that can create political miracles; they are about creating institutions that are conducive to enriching the performance of average political leaders in office.

    The challenge as we begin the third decade after June 12 must continue to include wishing the heroes who died while struggling for democracy in the country: MKO Abiola, Alfred Rewane, Kudirat Abiola, and many others to rest in perfect peace. It must also include finding ways to elevate the discourse of federalism that is almost being drowned by the thinking that says an imposed constitution is not as much of a problem as finding supermen to rule Nigeria.

  • Nigeria’s fault lines threaten Jonathan’s presidency

    Nigeria’s fault lines threaten Jonathan’s presidency

    Nigeria’s Goodluck Jonathan became acting president in February 2010 following the incapacitation of his predecessor Umaru Yar’Adua. Elected in his own right in April 2011, Jonathan now stands near the midpoint of his first full term in office. His People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which has won every election since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999, dominates the executive and legislative branches of the federal government and governs 23 of Nigeria’s 36 states.

    The advantages of incumbency and party dominance will likely assure Jonathan another term when Nigeria votes again in 2015. Yet insecurity, corruption and stalled policy implementation have provoked broad criticism of his performance, and the remainder of his term is likely to be characterized by high levels of political tension.

    Jonathan’s difficulty in reducing violence was on display last month in the northeastern city of Maiduguri, Borno State, which Jonathan visited for the first time as president on March 8. Maiduguri is the nerve center of the Muslim militant group Boko Haram, whose name is a Hausa phrase that connotes opposition to Western education and culture. Boko Haram previously launched uprisings in 2003-2004 and 2009, before Jonathan became president. Since September 2010 the group has attacked numerous government, Christian and infrastructural targets and has become a central challenge for Jonathan’s administration. Along with its splinter group Ansar al-Muslimin (Arabic for “The Defenders of Muslims”), Boko Haram has kidnapped foreigners, including a French family seized last month in Cameroon. The Nigerian military’s Joint Task Force has occupied Maiduguri since June 2011, and has repeatedly claimed success in the fight against terrorism. But its repressive tactics themselves have partly fueled Boko Haram’s grievances.

    Within hours of Jonathan’s departure from Maiduguri, seven bombs exploded. Days later, two PDP officials were killed in Borno. As a result, Jonathan’s trip, rather than inspiring confidence in his ability to manage the crisis, drew criticism from local residents and media commentators. Jonathan remains unpopular in the north, where he received less than 20 percent of the vote in many states, including Borno, in 2011. The trip heightened the contrast between Jonathan and an emerging coalition of opposition politicians, the All Progressive Congress, who held their own meeting — without violence — in Maiduguri on Feb. 28. Boko Haram thus threatens not only Nigeria’s security but also the president’s political fortunes.

    Persistent corruption, both at the highest levels of government and in ordinary people’s daily lives, has also sapped confidence in Jonathan, though it is a problem that predates his presidency. Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index showed Nigeria occupying roughly the same rank in 2009 – 130th out of 180 countries – as in 2012 — 139th out of 176 countries. Yet many Nigerians and outside observers believe that corruption is the core problem underlying the country’s other challenges, from poverty to security, and many have seen Jonathan’s failure to reduce corruption as a broader political failure.

    Jonathan’s recent pardon of Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, a former governor and Jonathan’s political mentor who was convicted of corruption charges in 2007, sparked outrage and further undermined his anti-corruption credentials. Alamieyeseigha governed Bayelsa state from 1999 to 2005, with Jonathan as his deputy. In 2005, when Alamieyeseigha was arrested in London on money laundering charges and subsequently impeached, Jonathan became governor — a turning point in the current president’s political ascent. Some observers read in Jonathan’s pardon of Alamieyeseigha a willingness to prioritize political relationships over accountability.

    Bayelsa’s location in the Niger Delta, the heart of Nigeria’s oil production, highlights the gap between rich and poor in Nigeria. While politicians like Alamieyeseigha accumulate fortunes, many delta residents confront environmental degradation and grinding poverty. Militants there, demanding a greater share of oil profits for local communities, rebelled against the federal government from 2006 to 2009, when Yar’Adua extended amnesty to the rebels. Jonathan has continued the program, but it is scheduled to end in 2015, and oil theft by disaffected residents and former militants who complain that amnesty has failed to provide jobs is rising.

    Meanwhile, despite international praise for his economic team – especially Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a former World Bank official – Jonathan has also struggled, and at times failed, to implement his economic agenda, which has been dogged by controversy. The administration advocates budgetary reform, even if it means economic pain for ordinary Nigerians.

    Critics charge that privatization initiatives and austerity measures will shrink the meager benefits citizens receive from the state while expanding opportunities for politicians to steal public money. In January 2012, Jonathan abolished subsidies on fuel, leading Lagos, Kano and other cities to erupt in protest. The administration partly reinstated the subsidies, but the debate remains unsettled.

    Similarly, a bill meant to reform the oil industry has met countless delays. Many observers still expect it to pass. But as one Nigerian journalist wrote, recent debate in the Senate over the bill “further exposed our delicate [regional] fault lines” – the same fault lines that Jonathan has encountered in other domains, from his own election to the security crisis in the north.

    The more Jonathan flounders, the more opposition he will face from within his party. Some northern PDP members resent him for disrupting an internal party agreement to rotate the presidency between the north and the south. Some southwestern members feel that Jonathan has excluded them as well, and that he favors members of his ethnic Ijaw group. The opposition’s attempts at coalition-building give the PDP an incentive to preserve party unity, but regional rivalries and a multiplicity of big personalities within the PDP may produce a bruising nomination fight in 2015.

    With two years left before Nigerians return to the polls, Jonathan faces an array of challenges, a host of critics and a list of unkept promises. In 2010 and 2011, Jonathan defied predictions of his political demise during his tumultuous journey from vice president to acting president to president. The PDP’s structural dominance may ensure his victory in 2015. Yet security threats, corruption issues and a stalled legislative agenda will continue to consume much of his energy and limit his effectiveness.

     

    · Courtesy: World Politics Review

  • External reserves didn’t exceed $67b under Yar’Adua – Sanusi

    External reserves didn’t exceed $67b under Yar’Adua – Sanusi

    The Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria, Malam Lamido Sanusi, has said the country’s external reserves never overshot the $67 billion mark during late President Umaru Yar’Adua’s administration.

    Sanusi said this on Tuesday in Lagos while speaking as guest speaker at the Metropolitan Club’s forum.

    He said the highest external reserves recorded during Yar’Adua’s regime was $62 billion, adding that the controversy surrounding the matter was unnecessary.

    The CBN governor added that the decline in the nation’s reserves was as a result of exigencies, stressing that governments worldwide spend part of their reserves whenever the need arose.

    “You save money when prices of oil are high and you spend when prices are low.

    “It is part of the excess crude account that we used to finance the oil subsidy,’’ the News Agency of Nigeria quoted Sanusi as saying at the forum.

    He said the spending of external reserves by the government was transparent and could be accounted for.

    He also said CBN was working with the Ministry of Finance to block all leakages in the system, and identified corruption as one of the major problems facing the country.

    The CBN governor explained that the reform agenda in all sectors would resort to sound economy in future.

    He urged Nigerians to join hands to fight corruption in all areas of the economy, saying this was the cause of distortion and destruction to the economy.

    ‘’We fought it in the banking sector and we can all see the positive results.

    ‘’However, it is not only banks that we have thieves. They are everywhere. So, other sectors should follow the CBN example,” he said.