Nigeria: Firing of Anti-Corruption Czar Won't Fix Agency Broad Reforms Needed To Make Commission Credible.

By Human Rights Watch (Lagos, November 23, 2011) – The sudden dismissal of Nigeria’s controversial anti-corruption chairman will not fix the troubled agency she led, Human Rights Watch said today. The government should carry out broad institutional reforms if Nigeria is to make real progress against corruption. On November 23, 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan dismissed Farida Waziri, chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). The commission’s record in fighting high-level corruption has been consistently disappointing under both Waziri and her well-regarded predecessor, Nuhu Ribadu, Human Rights Watch said. Partly due to the commission’s own failures, it has been largely unable to secure convictions against senior government officials charged with corruption. As Human Rights Watch showed in a recent report on the institution’s problems, broader institutional failures – such as executive interference and judiciary inefficiency – will need to be addressed if the commission is to improve its anti-corruption record, Human Rights Watch said. “The EFCC’s mandate is to fight corruption that the political system actually rewards, and to accomplish that by working through institutions that are either broken or compromised,” said Daniel Bekele, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “That’s an almost impossible job no matter who is in charge.” The commission, established in 2003, is the only government institution that has publicly challenged the longtime impunity of Nigeria’s ruling elite. It has arraigned 35 nationally prominent political figures on corruption charges, including 19 former state governors. But many of those cases have made little progress in the courts, and not a single politician is currently serving prison time for any of these alleged crimes. The commission has secured four convictions of senior political officials since 2003, but they have faced relatively little or no prison time. The Jonathan administration should present legislative amendments granting tenure security to the commission chairman, Human Rights Watch said. The institution can never be truly independent if the president can dismiss its chairman at will. The government should also bolster Nigeria’s other key anti-corruption institutions, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission and the Code of Conduct Bureau. Nigeria’s weak and overburdened judiciary has also been an obstacle to effective prosecutions. Most of the corruption cases against high-level political figures have been stalled in the courts for years, with their trials not even begun. In early November, Nigeria’s new Supreme Court chief justice, Dahiru Musdapher, took a long overdue initiative by instructing judges to expedite corruption cases, giving them a six-month deadline to complete these cases. The government should build on this promising initiative by beginning the long-term process of repairing the battered federal court system, reforming federal criminal procedure, and examining ways consistent with due process rights to establish special courts or designating specific judges to hear only corruption cases, Human Rights Watch said. Human Rights Watch has also called on Jonathan to pledge publicly not to interfere in the EFCC’s work and to support aggressive efforts to fight corruption no matter who is implicated. Past governments have openly interfered in key anti-corruption cases, discouraging the commission from acting as aggressively as it otherwise might. “One of the EFCC’s greatest weaknesses has been its lack of independence and susceptibility to political pressure,” Bekele said. “President Jonathan’s sudden firing of Farida Waziri will only make that problem worse unless the government pushes through reforms to bolster both the EFCC and the other institutions it depends on.” Waziri was appointed in 2008 in controversial circumstances after Nuhu Ribadu was forced from office in apparent reprisal for his attempted prosecution of a powerful former governor, James Ibori. Waziri has been widely criticized as ineffective and politically beholden, but in the months leading up to her sudden ouster she initiated a flurry of prosecutions against senior political figures. In October the commission arraigned four former state governors and a serving senator on corruption charges, and in June the agency filed corruption charges against the former speaker and deputy speaker of the House of Representatives – all of them members of the ruling People’s Democratic Party. During Waziri’s three-and-a-half years in office, the agency arraigned 21 senior political figures on corruption charges but only secured two convictions in these cases. Her four-year term in office was due to expire in May 2012. Endemic corruption at all levels has kept Nigerians mired in poverty despite the country’s considerable oil wealth. Human Rights Watch research has documented how political corruption in Nigeria fuels violence, police abuse and denial of basic health and education services.

Nigeria’s new government Groping forward One and a half cheers for the economy. None for security Thank goodness it’s not an electric blanket PRESIDENT GOODLUCK JONATHAN recently invited a group of businessmen to a cattle ranch for a retreat to discuss how to generate faster economic growth. At one point he handed the assembled notables unmarked brown envelopes. Raised eyebrows rippled around the room. The president often castigates corruption. Yet he motioned for the tycoons to open the envelopes. Inside they found not cash but blank pieces of paper, on which he asked them each to write the names of three rent-seeking officials hurting their businesses, promising to investigate. It is the sort of story Nigerians like to hear about their president, following his re-election in April. He spent several months in purdah, putting together a cabinet. He lured Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the World Bank’s managing-director, back home from Washington to act as a super-minister for finance and the economy. Olusegun Aganga, her predecessor at the ministry who was once a Goldman Sachs banker, swallowed his pride and stayed on as trade and investment minister. The central bank’s outspoken governor, Lamido Sanussi, completes what some call a dream team, others a “scream team”. Rivalries among the triumvirate were inevitable; turf boundaries are unclear. But after three months in operation they are generating a new sense of momentum in Nigeria’s capital, Abuja. On October 18th they set up the country’s first sovereign-wealth fund, hoping to curb the perpetual plunder of oil revenues. They seem willing to pull out the stops to create jobs and raise incomes. Despite global woes, the economy keeps growing by around 7% a year. The Standard Bank predicted on October 17th that it will overtake South Africa’s by 2015 as Africa’s largest. All the same, the high expectations that came with the president’s re-election may not be met. His signature policy, a plan to liberalise the electricity industry, has plainly fallen behind schedule. The start of privatisation has slipped from this year to next. Most Nigerians have no more than a few hours of mains supply a day—the economy’s single biggest bottleneck. Africa’s most populous nation gets as much grid power as a mid-size European city. If power reform fails, the country’s hopes of becoming a G-20 economy in the next decade will remain fanciful, despite its vast size, plentiful resources and undoubted entrepreneurial spirit. Warning lights are flashing. The unemployment rate in the formal economy has reached a new high of 21%. Inflation has spiked. The currency, the naira, has fallen out of the exchange-rate bracket set by the central bank, which in turn has raised interest rates to a growth-slowing 12%. A proposed phasing out of fuel subsidies is making people tense. The plan is sound in theory. The government spends billions of dollars every year on refined fuel it buys on international markets and retails for only 60 cents a litre at home. Smugglers take some of it to neighbouring countries for resale at full value. Better to spend money on roads and power stations, says the government. Yet poor Nigerians fear that corrupt officials will pocket the savings. The subsidies at least benefit us a bit, they say. Demonstrations and strikes loom. The economy apart, the outlook is no better. Public security has sharply worsened. Boko Haram, an Islamist extremist group, was once a nuisance confined to the far north-east. It has now extended its reach across the country. In September it blew up Abuja’s main UN building, killing 23. In October it assassinated a member of parliament. On November 4th it killed more than 100 people in a series of bombings. The American government later warned of attacks against big hotels in the capital. Boko Haram has dominated Mr Jonathan’s second term. Its attacks bear witness to growing ambition and sophistication. Foreign and Nigerian officials believe it has linked with al-Qaeda’s north-African wing. During his election campaign the president talked of improving relations between the country’s Muslim north and Christian south. Instead the gulf is deepening. A former president, Olusegun Obasanjo, a notorious back-seat driver, says he would hold direct talks with the group if he were still in charge. The president is not sitting on his hands. Road-blocks have gone up around Abuja and some parts of the city are blocked off. But co-ordination is poor. The checkpoint at the airport’s entrance has turned into a toll-booth where women collect fees but armed guards are absent. Ministers argue that economics is a higher priority than security. The central-bank governor says extremists mostly want economic growth and that Nigerian Islamists differ from Arab ones, though they say they want most of all to impose sharia law. “The problem will fade if we create jobs,” he says. Alas, creating employment in the poor north is a distant prospect. Government reforms will mainly benefit pockets of development in the south, where investors want to go. There is no sign that the machinery of government will soon be able to bring improvements across the rest of country. Still, many Nigerians remain optimistic. They are used to bad news, and there is still a bit of the good sort. Millions are being lifted out of poverty every year, though at a slower rate than in some other booming African countries. The president has also had some foreign-policy successes. Unlike his South African counterpart, he backed the winners in Côte d’Ivoire and Libya. But Mr Jonathan still needs to switch on the lights. Apart from his dream team, he has attracted few bright new minds. And he still seems bent on repaying election favours to a rapacious old guard. He should hand out a lot more brown envelopes.

How Jonathan Got His GCFR-Reuben Abati Reuben Abati By Rueben Abati Whoever came up with that explanation about how President Goodluck Jonathan got his GCFR – the highest national honour in the land a few days ago must be thoroughly disingenuous. It is as follows. The setting was the last meeting of the Council of State. Someone had proposed that the President should take the GCFR title. He already has the GCON. He reportedly demurred citing an extant law (possibly the National Honours Act No. 5 of 1964) which says only a sitting President can confer the title of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic or Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger on another. A former Chief Justice of the Federation, Alfa Belgore then advised that his was a special case in the sense that he, Jonathan, took over from a dead President. But so did Obasanjo in 1976.  In 1983, Buhari deposed a sitting President. And so did Babangida in 1985. Abdulsalami Abubakar also succeeded a dead President. But everyone at the meeting, particularly the state Governors felt persuaded that Jonathan should take the GCFR. They then started begging the man. “Please Your Excellency”; “Please Sir, GCON is too small for you.” They begged. Oh, how they begged! Imagine all those big men begging one man to become a GCFR; and so, Dr. Jonathan, ever-so-humble, capitulated. How could the President taking a GCFR title have created so much drama at a meeting of the Council of State? Why couldn’t such trifle wait?  All of a sudden, President Jonathan who in 30 days had clearly demonstrated that he is in charge and in power was no longer in charge. His award of a GCFR was signed by all former Heads of State, with General Gowon saying: “we signed it”. Under what authority was he and his colleagues acting? They have no such powers. And how many more actions would the President be persuaded to take due to overwhelming pressure, or expediency, but more because of his failure to obey his own moral intuition? The President is the highest authority in the Council of state and so, all that contrived histrionics notwithstanding, the truth is that President Jonathan after only 30 days in office has conferred upon himself the highest honour in the land. The Council of State is, in a strict sense, an advisory body. It is a creation of the Third Schedule Part 1, Sections 5 and 6 of the 1999 Constitution. Section 6(a)(iii) defines the role of that Council in relation to the “award of national honour,” and nowhere is it stated that former Heads of state can constitute themselves into a superior authority conferring National Honours on a sitting President. Whatever General Gowon and co may have signed is therefore inappropriate, if not illegal. Arthur Schopenhauer is right: “Honour is on its objective side, other people’s opinion of what we are worth; on its subjective side, it is the respect we pay to this opinion.” (Position, 1851).This raises an inevitable moral question: should President Jonatahn award himself the highest honour in the land? The honour that he should seek is not an additional suffixation to his name but such general opinion which by the end of his tenure would advertise his deeds and achievements in office as truly deserving of honour and celebration and a place in the people’s hearts and memory. General Sani Abacha also had a GCFR. Does anyone today think that he truly deserved it? Every Inspector General of Police in recent times has had a National Honour while in office. If anyone is looking for a list of those who have damaged Nigeria in the last 50 years, the place to begin the search is the National Honours List. This is perhaps why most Nigerians are indifferent about the National Honours system. It does not change anyone’s opinion about the character of the title-holder. It does not attract a salary or a lifetime pension. It probably allows access to the VIP lounge at the country’s airports. But anyone with a couple of thousand Nairas can also use the VIP lounge. And what manner of man or woman is that who rather than pay a token sum for an hour of comfort, waiting to catch a flight, would insist on waving a medal? Still, we should not make light of it. The concept of honour is at the heart of society. Men from time immemorial have craved it. They would kill for it, if possible, go to war, and risk all. Honour is an intangible asset; it is about prestige and self-worth. But that prestige must be seen to have been earned, to have been worked for, such that it inspires the admiration of the community. Like Akintola Williams, CBE; I.K. Dairo, MBE. Each year when the Queen’s Honours’ List is announced in Great Britain, the award is taken seriously; it is an advertisement of the British value system: merit, achievement, international diplomacy. It is not every British Prime Minister that is on the Queen’s Honours list. It is not an entitlement list reserved for anyone and everyone in public position. Here lies an instructive difference: the Nigerian National Honours list is driven by an entitlement mentality. The day Namadi Sambo became Vice President, he was automatically decorated with a GCON, the second highest honour. As soon as Senator David Mark became Senate President, he also got one of the country’s high honours. Every year, state Governors nominate their friends, family, contractors who donated money to their political campaigns, and traditional rulers who helped to deliver the votes. A few persons of substance show up on the list, but you really have to scratch your head to figure out why certain names have been considered worthy. Because of the emphasis on entitlement and patronage, the award ceremony is ever so bland; the citations say nothing significant. A review of the National Honours Act and system is overdue. Nigeria must be probably the only country where people are given national honours for work not done, or in anticipation of what they would achieve. National honours should be reserved for those who through hardwork and extraordinary achievement have helped to raise the Nigerian profile and its place in the world. If this be the case, the highest honours in the land should be reserved for the Wole Soyinkas, the Kayode Esos, the Chinua Achebes, the Chukwudifu Oputas, the Dick Tigers, the Fela Kutis, the Margaret Ekpos, inventors, entrepreneurs, great promoters of the Nigerian dream, including the honest average Nigerian, but not politicians and their sponsors, not every civil servant who manages to get to a certain position, not coup plotters, not traditional rulers, not government contractors and certainly not similar rent collectors. President Jonathan missed a good opportunity to raise the standard on the award of national honours by quickly promoting himself to the GCFR rank. This is reminiscent of the military era and the vaingloriousness of the political elite. When the late President Umaru Yar’Adua was decorated with the same GCFR on the day he assumed office, by the then outgoing President Olusegun Obasanjo,  he had remarked that he would have preferred getting such high honour after his tour of duty as President. It was a useful point. Once more, President Jonathan has failed to eschew the business-as-usual syndrome. I should not be surprised if in due course, the Council of Traditional Rulers unleash all kinds of chieftaincy title offers on him, including that notorious, eponymous one in Yorubaland: OTUNBA. He would of course, demur. But the Council of chiefs from this or that community will beg him. And beg him. And of course, he will accept. The moment may also soon arrive when some Nigerians will beg the President to run for office in 2011. And they will beg and beg. And of course, he will accept. That after all, is the story of how Jonathan got his GCFR. Reuben Abati was the Guardian newspaper editorial board chair when he wrote this last year

For the attention of General Buhari – By Reuben Abati

Friday, April 22nd, 2011

Leadership is what will make Nigeria, it is also what will break it; leadership failure is precisely what is responsible for the crisis that the country is now witnessing after a Presidential election that was adjudged successful by local and international observers and which has received high praise from the United States, Germany, France, Britain, Cote D’Ivoire (!) and France. Since April 16, there has been an outbreak of violence in the Northern parts of the country, with 59 persons dead, thousands injured, many churches, homes and mosques destroyed.  It is leadership that can save the country at this very moment, and prevent the fulfillment of the apocalyptic prediction that the present electoral process will result in an implosion of the country. And one man on whom history beckons to play the role of statesman and sportsman, is General Muhammadu Buhari, the Presidential candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), former Nigerian Head of State and three-time Presidential candidate since 1999.
Buhari’s CPC came second in the Presidential election of April 16, with 25% of the votes in 16 states (all in the North), and a total of 12.2 million votes out of a total valid votes cast of 39. 5 million. But since the announcement of the results which recognized incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan as the winner of the election with 25% of the total valid votes cast in 31 states and 22. 4 million votes, Buhari’s supporters in the Northern states have been on rampage. Mostly young, poor and unemployed, they are united by the anger that a Southern Christian, an unbeliever in their reckoning, and a product/promoter of Western education is now president-elect. A geographical picture of the voting pattern in the Presidential election has indicated how that election threw up primordial ethnic, religious and identity questions, the same questions that have been responsible for the inability to create a truly united nation out of Nigeria. Buhari got sectarian votes in 16 Northern states: they voted for him because he is Muslim and Fulani, Jonathan received high votes in the South South, the South East, and the South West and captured the Christian votes plus PDP votes in the North, an indication that his Southerner kinsmen were not willing to forsake him either. Nuhu Ribadu who got 25% of the votes in four Yoruba states did so because he was candidate of a largely Yoruba party. If anything, Jonathan’s victory would seem to prove the point suggested in Section 134 of the Nigerian Constitution to the effect that whoever wants to be President of the country must receive the people’s votes across the country. Buhari failed that test.
Still, General Muhammadu Buhari and his CPC have rejected the results of the April 16 Presidential election. The only other party which is protesting loudly is the FRESH Party led by Pastor Okotie. Okotie’s party scored 34, 331 votes and did not win the required 25% in any state of the Federation. The pastor wants the results of the election to be rejected and an interim government instituted to review the “entire democratic process.” The ACN also refused to sign the results sheets of the Presidential election, but that party’s protest has been half-hearted. It is Buhari’s CPC that has literally been on the offensive.  There is no iota of doubt whatsoever that the angry youths who have made a section of the country ungovernable believe that they are acting on behalf of the CPC. They have been chanting: “mu ke so, ba muso hanni” (It is Buhari we want, we don’t want an unbeliever”). General Buhari has been quoted in the media saying that he deplores the violence, he has also spoken on BBC Hausa service, and he has issued two statements in English language to that effect. General Buhari has to do much more than that. His responses to the electoral process and his party’s have been at best contradictory and mischievous.
It will be recalled that in the first week of March 2011, General Buhari advised his supporters to “lynch” anybody who tries to rig the April polls. In his words: “you should never leave polling centres until votes are counted and the winner declared and you should lynch anybody  that tries to tinker with the votes.” Subsequently, with his supporters having been so incited, General Buhari disclosed that he did not intend to go to court as a person, but that his party could do so, in the event of his not winning the election. In the same month of March 2011, Buhari’s running mate, Pastor Tunde Bakare also allegedly declared that there would be a “wild wild North” if the elections were rigged. Buhari and Bakare were strongly criticized for this, with pointed insinuations by a group called “Coalition for Transparency and Integrity” that the CPC duo did not have the right temperament for the job that they sought. On April 16, General Buhari after voting complained about unusual aircraft movement and the distribution of ballot papers that had already been thumb-printed: “Buhari said that it was the responsibility of young people as major stakeholders to ensure that the elections were free and fair. If they allow the ruling party to mess them up, it is they who will suffer for the next 40 years.” (The Punch, April 17, at page 14).  There has been a lot of lynching in the North since then! Today, we also have on our hands, a “wild wild North”. So, what exactly does General Buhari want? And what should he do?
I think he should place national interest above personal ambition. If indeed he does not believe in the violence that has erupted in the North, he needs to go on radio, and on television and advise his supporters to stop fighting now and to allow the next elections on April 26 to hold peacefully.  He must say so pointedly, and unequivocally. This is a message he cannot afford to bury in the midst of complaints about electoral malpractices. And he must convey that message in his own voice and repeatedly in Hausa and Fulfude, the languages that the rioters are more likely to understand and appreciate. He must in doing this, enlist the support of the same emirs that his supporters are denigrating, and the imams and ulamas. Today being Friday, the sermon in all mosques in the North should be a sermon of peace, the angry youths must be told that there is nothing gained by the CPC, the North or the “believers” through the slaughtering of youth corps members and other innocent Nigerians. General Buhari is obviously a folk hero among his supporters. But he must realize that the whole of Nigeria is his heritage having served once as the Head of State of this country. He must not allow himself to end up as the man who would be remembered as the catalyst for a third implosion of the country, a possibility that is signposted by the reference in the President’s speech on the crisis to the Civil war of 1967-70, and June 12, 1993. Today is Good Friday, a day that symbolizes sacrifice. The meaning of Good Friday needs not be explained to either Buhari or Bakare, except that both men are at that same crossroads where they are required to make sacrifice for their country: a sacrifice for unity, peace and stability.
I have read the statement issued by General Buhari titled “Message of Peace and Hope.” There is very little about hope in that message.  A speech in which the General writes off the entire election as fraudulent and Jega as insincere, and shows no sign of reconciliation with the opposition says nothing about hope, rather it says everything about the likely dangers ahead. General Buhari should realise that it is precisely this kind of attitude that led to the current crisis in Cote D’Ivoire. In the US Presidential election in 2000, Al Gore could have put his feet down over Florida: the margin between him and George Bush Jnr was so close, but in the end, he conceded defeat so America could move on. In 1979, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who commanded like Buhari, a cult-like following chose to go to court to contest the results of the Presidential election in part, his disciples insist, in order to prevent violent protest in the South West, and the occurrence of another “wild wild West phenomenon.” It is such statesman-like conduct that is required from Buhari at this moment.
The Congress for Progressive Change has declared its intention to go to court. While it is doing that, the party should also help to educate its angry and violent supporters in the North about the meaning and nature of democracy.  In a democracy, the minority may be right and wise, but it may lose to the majority, and once it does so, the majority is allowed to have its way. On April 16, the majority of Nigerians spoke in unison across 31 states and gave victory in the Presidential election to Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP. It is only the tribunal or the courts that can upturn that result, not the mob, relying on self-help. Clearly, voter education remains a problem in our emerging democracy. The CPC did not help matters by arguing that it approached INEC and asked that Professor Jega should not go ahead with the announcement of the Presidential election results without addressing the party’s complaints. Didn’t the CPC big men know that no political party has such powers to order the abortion of an electoral process mid-way?
The CPC has every right to go to court. But they should stop telling us that it is the party going to court, not General Buhari. In my view, there is no difference. The CPC is General Buhari’s special purpose vehicle. He set up the party in 2010, after disagreeing with his former colleagues in the ANPP. He deserves credit for building up a new political party into a formidable force in less than ten months. In terms of performance, the CPC in fact did well, capturing 12.2 million votes. It lost the big prize due to its special handicaps: it lacked a strong structure as well as financial resources; it also adopted on a strategy that relied on Northern demographics, and third, the party failed to take advantage of the proposed merger/alliance with the ACN which could have been a game-changer in the Presidential election.
Now weeping uncontrollably before and after the election, the CPC alleges that there were malpractices in the South South and the South East and a total of 23 states across the country. The party alleges that its polling agents were chased away from collation centres and that the Excel software used by INEC was deliberately configured to sabotage the CPC. Ironically, the same CPC had earlier praised the National Assembly elections of April 9 as “free and fair.” The party is talking about malpractices, but it has not said that it won the election or that Jonathan did not win. Even if the elections in the South South and the South East were cancelled, and a re-run ordered, Jonathan will still win in those states. If CPC’s ambition is to defend the credibility of the process, then why is it not protesting the large turn-out of under-age voters in all the states where it won its 25% in the North?

Re: Abati: For The Attention Of General Buhari Posted: April 23, 2011 - 19:50 By Ayo Phillips Mr. Abati, to say that leadership failure is the reason for the post-election crisis might not be far from the truth but to omit the awakening of a down trodden people who have long been victims of their faith will make any thesis fail in the court of conscience. Yes, there have been commendations of which I have read that from the US and I am sure I read strong wordings asking INEC to investigate the allegations of irregularities. I have also read some comments from local observers raising several questions about the conduct of the elections. For Dr. Abati to arrive at a resolution that all observers considered the election successful without any conditioning raises questions of objectivity. Yes, I would agree that history beckons on GMB at this moment but in greater measure to Mr. GEJ and co; GEJ being the sitting president and the purported elected president for the next term. It’s really unfortunate that a Dr. Abati would descend into the dictionary of the PDP to find words to characterize the angry youths as being “united by the anger that a Southern Christian, an unbeliever in their reckoning, and a product/promoter of Western education is now president-elect “. Dr. Abati, this is shameful; I am drawn to tears as I write this because you are one public commentator I have held in very high esteem. This is not only a lie in the first instance but a clear indication that you have surrendered your conscience to serve the course of lesser mortals. The youths protesting in the north were the same who protected the election of Shekarau, Yuguda etc from being stolen by PDP in 2007 and are now revolting the same characters for trying to subvert their will in favour of the PDP.  This is the first time in my life time that the North will rise against their so called leaders, even before the elections, Sambo was booed in public as he rightly deserves. Such a leader would get nothing better from any civilized society. It is unfortunate that the protests took a different turn with regrettable results and many commentators have fingered the PDP in that outturn. In my opinion, the outturn is in part a result of the fact that these folks had never known another way to demonstrate their grievance in any situation. The so called leaders (most of them members of the PDP) had over the years sponsored religious and ethnic crisis to seek political ends and now we have a citizenry in the north; men of my generation who do have any idea of better way to express disapproval. This is the failure of leadership that has led to the unfortunate incidents in the North. In the southwest they burn houses; in recent times maybe tires, in the south south, they throw bombs and kidnap children and the elderly, In the north they draw the sword. Nothing in GMB’s history and style of leadership has supported these but since the unfortunate advent of the PDP it been madness and mayhem in the land. To summarily condemn men for carrying out acts to which their facilitated civilization and the castration of their better passions disposes them without a choice is in itself an injustice; not in a country where others get amnesty and government largesse. Dr. Abati is so concerned about the North, but has failed to propose a solution to the unending carnage in Plateau state under Mr. GEJ and the PDP government in the state. Is he really concerned about the people or just trying to put in a word for some sponsors to blackmail GMB into accepting injustice? Dr. Abati appears to be so sure of the validity of the election results as reflecting the wishes of the people that it is worrisome. Why will there be crisis in Kaduna for instance where the PDP purportedly made a decent showing, has the VP and the sitting governor. Where are all the PDP supporters? Dr. Abati rightly alludes to “Section 134 of the Nigerian Constitution to the effect that whoever wants to be President of the country must receive the people’s votes across the country” so if in indeed GEJ received the peoples vote in the north there should be no crisis, but where the votes are stolen and the will of the people subverted we come to the situation where the people revolt. It was clear that the CPC had an uphill task winning at the first ballot but pushing the process into a run-off was surely not off target in the absence of PDP’s trademark rigging. We must not discountenance here how long it took the INEC to register CPC which in itself was a subversion of the process to give undue advantage to the PDP. Dr. Abati, did you listen to the NTA in the days leading to the elections, did you observe how the government used the national broadcaster as a vehicle for brewing the venom of ethnic division in a bid to sell GEJ as the candidate of the Old eastern region? Guess you didn’t; PHCN must have been holding power. NTA has scored very low in the past, but I think this time they scored even lower than the days of Abacha. While GMB made efforts to distance himself from the zoning issue, the government used NTA to wage a war against the strivings of the people for social cohesion but I didn’t see you raising the yellow card at least. All of a sudden even Lagos was divided into association of Igbos leaving in Agege, Ijaws leaving in AJ city and all sorts and that in your opinion was not a pointer to the crisis to come. DOCTOR ABATI…, pls help me here; I am not sure how the Hausa you quoted here “mu ke so, ba muso hanni”   translates literally to “It is Buhari we want, we don’t want an unbeliever”. I do not speak Hausa, but I clearly cannot see “Buhari” in the Hausa text you are translating, taking such liberty in translating quoted text by an intellectual of your calibre is disturbing if one does not take into account malicious intent to defame. In any case, let us thank the people’s General who in spite of all and for love of country rallied himself to make several calls for peace. What about your principal dear Dr and his Vice who speaks the local lingua, how many times has he gone on BBC hausa or VON to speak to the conscience of the people? Does this not suggest to you that these men – left to themselves, do not consider themselves to be the leaders of the people? How do you consider the spirit of section 134 in this light? Dr. Abati, we have heard this lame argument for “national interest” since the advent of the PDP and it’s obvious what it has produced except it seems the veil of ethnic bigotry seems to have beclouded the vision of some. We cannot continue to have leaders that elect themselves and plunder the people and call that peace. Is there peace when women die violently because the funds that should provide health care have been plundered? Is there peace when the young of the nation go to school but return as ignorant illiterate with no future aspiration but to be area boys? Is there peace when every night robbers slaughter hardworking decent citizen to take their widows’ mite? Is there peace when the roads across the nation have become weapons of mass destruction? Dr. Abati claims that the CPC judged the April 9 elections as “free and fair” but I recall watching a live TV programme on Channels just before the presidential (I must emphasize the reason I stopped to watch was that I caught a glimpse of you) where Mr. Odumakin took time to correct that impression in saying some party members might have commented but the CPC had withheld judgement and was studying the situation. Why will Doctor Abati discountenance that and still go on asserting his false position; does he mean to inform or to misinform? Dr. Abati made suggestions on what needed to be done and I thank him for affirming the credibility of the people’s General in placing the burden for direction on him. However, as the good Dr. unavoidably discountenanced the responsibility of the sitting government I will try to set that right. What should be done? 1.    Mr. President (Saint) Jonathan should live up to the spirit of his promises to the nation and sponsor steps to dispel the clouds surrounding the elections as follows (I am assuming as Dr. Abati seems to believe that he won the popular vote in spite of irregularities): a.    INEC to immediately commence investigation into all allegations of malpractices with support from all agencies of government b.    Step should be taken to immediately commence forensic verification of the votes cast in the elections c.    Mr. Jonathan to state unequivocally his commitment to abide by the outcome of the investigations 2.    Mr. Jonathan to address the nation and distance himself from all activities to stir up ethnic divisions in the run-up to the elections, including; a.    Institute independent investigation into the activities of the NTA and Ministers with a commitment to take action against any abuse b.    Mr. Jonathan to come out publicly and distance himself from any illegalities perpetrated by PDP governors or leaders in the north and assure the public of redress 3.    Mr. Jonathan to commit to initiate a TRUTH and RESTITUTION commission if finally declared rightful winner to address the years of misrule with the following terms amongst others: a.    Declare willingness to offer GMB or Dr. TB the chairmanship of such commission with autonomy b.    Commit to submitting himself to the commission c.    To empower the commission to use government agency to ensure restitution with the power to offer forgiveness on behalf for the people. I could say more, but I bet you Mr. Abati, if Mr. Jonathan would take my advice or at least make an honest attempt to, you will see the crisis replaced by jubilation on the street of Nigeria, not only in the north but from coast to coast. It is unfair Mr. Abati, to take the most sacred duty of government away from them and place on a fellow citizen who is suffering the scourge of injustice. Mr. Jonathan is the President and he needs to man-up and be presidential for once at least. In spite of all, history still beckons to GEj and I hope he will rise up and etch his name in the minds of the people. If GEJ stands up for the people, I am sure he will get the vote of GMB and TB. If the President can stop the crisis and usher in a new dawn if he will open his arms, embrace and serve the people.

People may begin to stone govt officials if…- Zakari Mohammed
On November 27, 2011 ·

INTERVIEW IN BRIEF

Hon. Zakari Mohammed, the Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Media and Publicity, says the morally correct thing government should do is to check the activities of those diverting subsidy and not pass the burden to Nigerians.  On Boko Haram, he says we can not stop them by mounting road blocks. Excerpts

The impression many Nigerians have is that the House of Representatives has not carried on as it is expected to because of the circumstances of the emergence of its presiding officers. What has been your experience in the last five months or so?

I will actually say that the experience has been heart-warming. We believe that we are covering a new realm especially in the process of law making. We believe that the legislature, which is an arm of government, has the basic responsibility of making laws for the good governance of the people of Nigeria.

That is exactly what we are doing. People are wont to say that what are those things that make us different from the last House? I believe that even the emergence of the presiding officers of the House was through a process that was seen as the resolve of the seventh session of the House of Representatives, to break away from the trend of the past, to assert the independence of members in terms of their thinking and contribution to project Nigeria.

The question people ask is: What have we achieved?

Zakari Mohammed: There is so much area to cover in this security challenge

I want to say that in terms of motions and bills, in the last six months, we have passed about 87 motions on issues that are key to our healthy living.

People have argued that the very nature of the emergence of the presiding officers of the House has weakened the House because of the tendency of the presiding officers to be over cautious to issues that they should have tackled more aggressively; and to be over courteous to the leadership of their party?

I disagree with this assertion.

The leadership derives its powers from the members.

The leadership is the creation of the members.

You will find out that the turnover from the sixth assembly was high in terms of new members.

Six months is too short to be able to determine how far we have fared.

But we are on course.

What we do in the National Assembly is no other than making laws and carrying out our oversight functions. Why we are different from the other House is that when we came in, we said we needed to be guided. That explains why we came out with the Legislative Agenda. We are strictly adhering to this Agenda as our guiding principles for the next four years. Steadily, we will get there.

The presiding officers emerged through a democratic process and they are very wary of the pitfalls of the past. The presiding officers cannot just carry on without feeling the pulse of those they are leading. To that extent, the speaker and the deputy speaker have fared well in the last six months. They have tried to carry members along in all aspects. That is why even when Standing Committees were constituted; the usual hue and cry that follows such exercise was not heard. This is why, for the first time, the House remained united after the constitution of the committees.  The leadership has tried as much as possible to be plain and just. We may have our own moments of disagreement on a few issues, but we have always found a way to resolve our problems. Because we do not attack ourselves physically, some people think we are not working. But I want to assure you that we are all committed to making a difference by writing our names on the sands of times.

To what extent have the problems inherited from the sixth assembly (especially the N10billion borrowed by the last House) affected the running of the present assembly?

The sixth assembly had its challenges and it found ways that may not look conventional in solving them. However, we are learning from the past and that is why the seventh assembly is quite different. We believe that if we have problems, we have to face such problems holistically rather than using short term measures.

We have learnt from the mistakes of the sixth assembly in terms of managing the affairs of the House and its finances. That is why it appears as if the leadership is very cautious. Yes, it is cautious so that they will learn to do things in a more transparent, just and equitable manner.

Some people have said that because of the repayment of loans, the committees of the House of Representatives are cash strapped such that their oversight functions are being affected.

I disagree.. When we came in, we said we were cutting down our running costs by 64%. We have prioritised our activities in such a way that we’re operating according to our areas of needs. That is why some people are interpreting that to mean that we are having financial difficulties.

As I talk to you now, most committees have their running costs that can run basic committee activities. The issue is that there is just no money that you can continue to blow for the sake of blowing. We said in our Legislative Agenda that we want to ensure fiscal conservatism.

We want to cut down on the cost of governance. That is exactly what we are doing. What we are asking for now is for the other arms of government to do so, so that the excess can be deployed to other useful areas.

Zakari Mohammed

We cannot continue with the trend whereby the recurrent expenditure will blow our budget year in year out.

Despite the persuasion of the president on the need for the removal of subsidy on petroleum products, members of the House of Representatives have remained adamant in their opposition to its removal. Is it not curious that majority of members who are from the president’s party would oppose one of his key policies?

We need to get it right.

As elected representatives of the people, we are on oath to make laws that would ensure good governance and ameliorate the sufferings of the Nigerian people. The legislature is the most vulnerable arm of government. Judges move around with armed police escort; ministers move around with armed security escort but we don’t. We are closest to the people. We know what the people are facing. Our position is that, if you are not subsidizing oil, what other thing are you subsidizing? World over, oil producing countries subsidize the prices of oil products.

Last year, we spent close to N500billion in subsidizing petroleum products. This year, we have spent close to N1.2trillion. By the end of this year, we may have spent N1.5trillion in subsidizing fuel.

The question is: where is the money going to? This is one of the questions that we want answer to. We believe that money spent on subsidy is sustainable. If it is sustainable, government should do it. If they are saying there is a cartel anywhere, the president has all the powers to go after the cartel. Every Nigerian is under the command of the Commander-in-Chief. Let him go after members of the cartel and label them economic saboteurs.

They cannot be greater than Nigeria. We believe that the president and the security agencies can go after them so that we can put this behind us once and for all. We cannot because of failure of institutions transfer the consequences on Nigerians. If you remove subsidy and a litre of fuel goes for N150, there are some parts of Nigeria that the litre would go for N250. It will affect food, medical delivery and all aspects of our living. The question is, what role are we playing as a government?

We don’t want the situation in the country to deteriorate to the point that when you are identified as a government official, people will stone you on the street. That is why we are saying the president should address the issue of saboteurs and those stealing huge sums of money because of their not being transparent in dealing with government. We believe that if these issues are looked into, it will be discovered that the figures being paraded as petroleum subsidy are bloated. Although majority of members of the House are from the same political party, we are talking about the Nigerian people.  Posterity will hold us responsible if we see this and we refuse to comment. We need to handle the issue of subsidy fairly and with the interest of Nigerian masses at heart.

What is your view about the planned re-introduction of toll gates on Nigerian roads?

My reaction is two-folds. In some parts of the world, roads are concessioned. The Federal Government can say we will leave two lanes for instance to the public while concessioning other lanes to a company that can collect tax to maintain the road. If the toll gates are managed via concessions and done in such a way that our roads are better, then no problems.

For instance, from Abuja to Lokoja, if you concession it to a private concern and allows him to collect tolls while maintaining the road, I think it will afford government the opportunity to use money that would have ordinarily been used to maintain this road to be deployed to other areas. If it is going to be done via concession, then I am for it.

We should move from the era of government spending so heavily on infrastructure that will end up as a private concern. There is no way a private investor will put his money and allow it to waste.

Do you think that the security challenge in the country is being handled appropriately by government?

One of the issues the president briefed us about when we met with him was how the security challenges in the country are being handled.

To some of us, we believe that there is so much more to be done. On the face of it, with the explanation he gave to us, we believe they are the right steps in the right direction. There is so much area to cover in this security challenge. My advice is that more money should be spent on intelligence gathering and our intelligence officers should be able to melt into the society so that they can have more credible information. If that happens, we would be able to know their sponsors and government would be able to check this challenge.

We cannot achieve this by mounting road blocks. Not by stop and search. Our security agencies should change their intelligence gathering technique. If they know that their ring leaders are being caught, they would change.

The president should declare a state of emergency on security in the country and task all our service chiefs to order. They must get cracking. A government that cannot provide security has no business being in power.

Why Are Nigerian Leaders So Mean? 26 Nov 2011 DeleMomodu@thisdaylive.com Fellow Nigerians, I often wonder why our leaders always copy bad manners, and fail to learn from the pitfalls of their predecessors. Every Nigerian leader, at the beginning, often looks meeker than a priest until you give him political power. As soon as he begins to settle into office, he starts to exhibit the symptoms of schizophrenia, and we are forced to ask if this was the same taciturn fellow we used to know before attaining high office. Within a twinkle of an eye, the transfiguration is absolute and irreversible. I will illustrate my thesis with a few straight-forward examples. Once upon a time, the then Governor of Bayelsa State, Chief Diepreye Solomon Peter Alamieyeseigha, was the Governor of Governors. His influence was so awesome that he was awarded the special appellation of the Governor-General. His tentacles, as varied as that of an octopus, stretched beyond Bayelsa. And everyone courted his friendship. His most visible mentor was the then President Olusegun Obasanjo. The rambunctious President never shied away from praising the Governor-General to high-heavens at every opportunity. It was as if Alams, as his admirers liked to shorten his name, could do no wrong. Everything appeared rosy-rosy between them in their first term in office (from 1999 to 2003). But the chicken would come home to roost as soon as a once mutual friend, the then Vice President, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, who incidentally celebrated his 65th birthday yesterday, began to show more than a cursory interest in the presidential office. Abubakar had failed to check the political radar. If he did, he would have realised that his boss was not yet ready to quit the powerful office ensconced within the rocks of Abuja. The implacable man was already afflicted with what would popularly be known as the third term agenda. And if Abubakar knew this reality, he pretended not to know, or just decided to do things his own way. That was a fatal error that would haunt him for the rest of his political career, in a country where an incumbent President is next to God. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar instantly became a marked man. And so was anyone remotely connected to him. Everyone who was suspected to be closely linked would, sooner than later, suffer some collateral damages! This would include genuine, and innocent, entrepreneurs who tended their business and had nothing to do with politics. The ruthless fangs of the law would soon be unleashed on them through the well-oiled machinery of a government agency that was apparently assembled to punish any recalcitrant rebel. Alams did not realise his name was already in the black book. Or if he knew, he must have considered himself untouchable. That was going to be a very expensive mistake. Unknown to him, all was fair in war, a truism he should have memorised when he was in the Nigerian Air force. His vindictive enemies knew it was impossible for a sitting Governor to be arrested under the laws of Nigeria except on a foreign soil where he could easily be disowned and turned into an orphan. And that was exactly what happened. Since the vulture is always a patient bird, the birds waited quietly for him. They knew his propensity for frequent foreign travels, and perched without hurry. Alams would soon walk into their trap as he flew out to Europe to keep a cosmetic surgery appointment. The fresh blood from the delicate operation had not dried up when he returned to London, and he was apprehended, the way monkeys are captured in Brazil. It must have been a bad dream for Alams who before then was a powerful generalissimo. Every novice knew the British authorities were acting on a tip-off from an impeccable source in Nigeria. Curiously, the powers-that-be promptly stripped him of his immunity despite flying abroad on a diplomatic passport. Our laws could always be manipulated to suit any weather and atmospheric condition. Some of us cried foul that we should not set fire to a whole village in order to catch a few rats, but we were in the minority. Our fellow citizens, most of who had endured untold hardship in the hands of these politicians, were willing and ready accomplices in the kangaroo justice being deployed, as long as the government of the day could pretend, grandstand, and dramatize its pretentious resolve to fight corruption. In a country with a population of over 150 million people, minimum of 36 Governors at any given time, equal number of Deputy Governors, Secretaries to Federal and State governments, Permanent Secretaries at Federal and State levels, Heads of Service, dozens of ministers, countless legislators at Federal and State levels, thousands of super civil servants, several service chiefs, heads and members of juicy parastatals, Ambassadors and diplomatic staff, Vice Chancellors, Pro-Chancellors, Chancellors, Judges and Magistrates, Captains of Industries, and so on, ad infinitum, it was most unlikely that jailing Alams, Joshua Dariye, James Ibori, Peter Fayose, and Saminu Turaki, Olabode George, and a few bad guys, would drive the fear of God into a rabidly corrupt society. To cut a long story short, the Governor-General had fallen from grace to disgrace. He was touted as a corrupt man who had bled his state dry. All manner of salacious tales began to fly, spreading marathonly like bush fire in harmattan.  The Governor-General was now a general Governor who was being kicked in the dust, not because of what he did but because of what he did not do. Such is the way of our people. They spin all manner all tales against you on your bad day.  And move on effortlessly to worship at the altar of the new gods. In our clime, the man who’s caught is the only thief. The free-roaming robbers have nothing to fear, as long as they remain in the good books of he who must be obeyed. In a Mafia country, the godfathers can never be in short demand. And the godsons understand the game better than Mario Puzo. The tales of how Alams left London and found his way back into Nigeria would remain in the realm of fables, or even magic, for a long time to come. Reality was the man landed in Yenogoa, perhaps on the wings of a rarefied African spacecraft, and attempted to force his way back to power. His jittery deputy then was a man called Dr Goodluck Jonathan who seemed not to be interested in his boss’ job. Not many Nigerians knew his name at that time. His spin doctors would later smuggle Ebele and Azikiwe into his names for political gains, especially, in a country where the citizens love to hug primordial sentiments. That would be another story for another day. At first Dr Jonathan portrayed a man who was not power hungry. It is a strategy that is as old as mankind. That, in fact, made him a perfect candidate for the godfathers. They love those who can keep butter in the mouth without melting. That was how Dr Jonathan secured his first plum job on a platter of gold. The luckiest man in Nigeria completed his assignment and, before you could say Don Jazzy again, a bigger job was waiting for him, from those who wanted a weak President and a weaker Vice President. The over-all interests of ordinary Nigerians were never considered. What was important was their own hold on power by proxy. The duo of Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua and Dr Goodluck Jonathan was thus fostered on us. It is unfortunate that ill-health did not allow us witness full-time the drama of the Yar’Adua Presidency. In his last days on earth, his government was hijacked by a few people known then as the cabal. Again, Dr Jonathan kept mute while some of us risked our lives on the streets of Abuja to ask that he be allowed to take over power in the permanent absence of his boss. I’m re-emphasising this fact to make a valid point; that those who come to power by divine intervention often end up as demi-gods. Our dear President has done two things in the past week to shock Nigerians out of their wits. The first was the invasion of his home state of Bayelsa with an army of occupation ostensibly to get rid of his supposed enemy in the Bayelsa State House and to forcibly enthrone his anointed crony. This has brought Bayelsa into big news again. Decency should have dictated that every interested candidate should have been allowed to run the race. A country where a Ben Bruce, for example, cannot be allowed to contest for political office, on account of holding dual nationalities, is a doomed nation. A country where an incumbent Governor can be flagrantly terrorised and restricted by the use of brutal force, by some agents of the Federal Government, is very prone to disaster. An educated man like Jonathan should have known the tragic implications of this executive recklessness. History would record that he climbed down from the Olympian heights where God has placed him to cause mayhem in his home state. He should have allowed the people of Bayelsa to voluntarily sack their Governor if that indeed is their wish. He could even have borrowed a leaf from the Obasanjo era when a few legislators were forced to impeach Governors in hotel rooms. What haven’t we seen before in this land? I will encourage the Governor and the other disqualified aspirants to fight all the way for their rights. I have been to Bayelsa State a couple of times, and I’m yet to see what Jonathan has done for that State since he has held all the important offices in the past 12 years. Forcing a candidate on that under-developed State would never improve the living conditions of the people. The second surprise is the manner President Jonathan sacked Mrs Farida Waziri ignominiously from the Chairmanship of the EFCC without due process. If the woman had betrayed the trust of her office, she should have been made to face the music without walking away freely as if nothing serious ever happened. And if the President found no evidence of wrong-doing against her, he should have allowed her to go into retirement without this subtle and indecent blackmail that is building around her. I pray that Mrs Farida Waziri would fight to clear her name, or she should be ready to rot in jail. There are speculations that she had stepped on powerful toes that never really cared about fighting corruption. She has the chance to speak up today and damn it all. Those who are telling her to go away quietly are the enemies of Nigeria. None of us expected her to be a Saint but the era where some people are sacked to shore up the image of an incompetent government should be over. Nigerians really want to know what happened. In case she doesn’t know, her enemies are very busy spreading ugly tales of her shady deals across the newsrooms. And the regular haters are lapping it all up. She owes it to posterity to respond in kind against the cheap blackmailers that litter our political terrain. If she behaves like chicken, she would only end up in a pot of pepper-soup. The choice is hers. They did it to Nuhu Ribadu. He had to run away like a common criminal. Now, it is Mrs Waziri’s turn. Who’s next?