Monday, 2 July 2012

LAMIDO SANUSI WRITES ON NASIR ELRUFAI. INTERESTING READ

  

20120117-194722.jpg
By Sanusi Lamido Sanusi
I have one request to make and Allah is my helper. Any attack on Nasir el Rufai or on Nuhu Ribadu is an attack on me. Nasir is to my mind is one of the greatest and most patriotic Nigerians to have served in public office and he is by far the best FCT minister we have ever had. Like all of us he is not perfect.
In my AIT interview I said I agreed with 90% of what he said a day before our interview and the two bits I didn’t agree with I stated: I don’t agree that there is no subsidy and I believe Nasir was quoting contributions from tHrusted experts which have been flying around recently including Prof Tam David West.
And we have debated this issue of accounting and economic concepts in this forum. I also do not agree that it is easy in the short-term to have massive fiscal retrenchment without a huge political backlash-indeed the fuel subsidy is one such case and retrenchment for instance would also bring people out.
But Nasir is one person for whom I have always had the highest level of personal respect. His integrity is beyond reproach-of course, people will say anything but after years of trying no one is yet able to show any evidence backing up allegations. Intellectually, I am yet to know anyone who can match him and this has been the case since the 1970s. Femi Fani-Kayode has written in Nasir’s defence but these are not Nasir’s words and if you knew Femi well you would not be surprised or bothered by his peculiar choice of language. I have seen Femi transit from a rabid ethnic chauvinist and christian fanatic who thought Obasanjo was a stooge of the backward Muslim north, to a minister in Obasanjo’s cabinet preaching national unity, and now to some freelance activist and public commentator.
This is just a stage he is going through but I like to think he means well. When AIT requested me to speak they never said it was to respond to Nasir and when we started and they played their clip we told them we didn’t want to personalise this. Nasir and I were friends and brothers as teenagers. We have remained friends and brothers and will remain
friends after office.
We don’t have to agree 100%. He also understands that so long as I am in government I have 100% loyalty to the president. If I feel I cannot be loyal I should step down. This does not mean supporting every policy but it means standing up to play my part in doing what is good for the economy.
I, therefore, request please that no one defending me should attack his person. And only those who don’t know Nasir will even think I am his intellectual match- he is just exceptional in his brilliance.

SUBSIDY MADE SIMPLE



SUBSIDY MADE SIMPLE aka SMS): Pastor 'Tunde Bakare delivered this expose on Fuel Subsidy at The Latter Rain Assembly a few hours ago. Please read, digest, and share with as many people as you can. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! 1) DEFINITION To subsidise is to sell a product below the cost of production. Since the federal government has been secretive about the state of our refineries and their production capacity, we will focus on importation rather than production. So, in essence, within the Nigerian Fuel Subsidy context, to subsidise is to sell petrol below the cost of importation. 2) THE UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT The Nigerian government claims that Nigerians consume 34 million litres of petrol per day. The government has also said publicly that N141 per litre is the unsubsidised pump price of petrol imported into Nigeria. (N131.70 kobo being the landing price and N9.30 kobo being profit.) 3) ANNUAL COST OF IMPORTATION Daily Fuel Consumption: 34 million litres Cost at Pump: N141.00 No. of days in a regular year: 365 days Total cost of all petrol imported yearly into Nigeria: Litres Naira Days 34m x 141 x 365 = N1.75 trillion 4) COST BORNE BY THE CONSUMERS Nigerians have been paying N65 per litre for fuel, haven’t we? Therefore, cost borne by the consumers = Litres Naira Days 34m x 65 x 365 = N807 billion 5) COST OF SUBSIDY BORNE BY THE GOVERNMENT In 2011 alone, government claimed to have spent N1.3 trillion by October – the bill for the full year, assuming a constant rate of consumption is N1.56 trillion. Consequently, the true cost of subsidy borne by the government is: Total cost of importation minus total borne by consumers, i.e. N1.75 trillion minus N807 billion = N943 billion. Unexplainable difference: N617 billion The federal government of Nigeria cannot explain the difference between the amount actually disbursed for subsidy and the cost borne by Nigerians (N1.56 trillion minus N943 billion = N617 billion). 6) BOGUS CLAIM BY THE GOVERNMENT A government official has claimed that the shortfall of N617 billion is what goes to subsidising our neighbours through smuggling. This is pathetic. But let us assume (assumption being the lowest level of knowledge) that the government is unable to protect our borders and checkmate the brisk smuggling going on. Even then, the figures still don’t add up. This is because even if 50% of the petrol consumed in each of our neighbouring countries is illegally exported from Nigeria, the figures are still inaccurate. Why? WORLD BANK’S FIGURES: POPULATIONS OF WEST AFRICAN COUNTRIES NIGERIA: 158.4 million BENIN: 8.8 million TOGO: 6 million CAMEROUN: 19.2 million NIGER: 15.5 million CHAD: 11.2 million GHANA: 24.4 million The total population of all our six (6) neighbours is 85.5 million. Let’s do some more arithmetic: a) Rate of Petrol Consumption in Nigeria: Total consumed divided by total population: 34 million litres divided by 158.8 million people = 0.21 litres per person per day. b) Rate of Petrol Consumption in all our 6 neighbouring countries, assumed to be the same as Nigeria: 0.2 litres x 85.5 million people = 18.35 million litres per day Now, if we assume that 50% of the petrol consumed in all the six neighbouring countries comes from Nigeria, this value come to 9.18 million litres per day. 7) PATHETIC ABSURDITY There are two illogicalities flowing from this smuggling saga. a) If 9.18 million litres of petrol is truly smuggled out of our borders per day, then ours is the most porous nation in the word. This is why: The biggest fuel tankers in Nigeria have a capacity of about 36,000 litres. To smuggle 9.18 million litres of fuel, you need 254 trucks. What our government is telling us is that 254 huge tankers pass through our borders every day and they cannot do anything about it. This is not just acute incompetence, but also a serious security challenge. For if the government cannot stop 254 tanker trailers from crossing the border daily, how can they stop importation of weapons or even invasion by a foreign country? b) 2nd illogicality: Even if we believe the government and assume that about 9.18 million litres is actually taken to our neighbours by way of smuggling every day, and all this is subsidised by the Nigerian government, the figures being touted as subsidy still don’t add up. This is why: Difference between pump price before and after subsidy removal = N141.00 – N65.00 = N76.00 Total spent on subsidizing petrol to our neighbours annually = N76.00 x 9.18 million litres x 365 days = N255 billion If you take the N255 billion away from the N617 billion shortfall that the government cannot explain, there is still a shortfall of N362 billion. The government still needs to tell us what/who is eating up this N362 billion ($2.26 billion USD). ILLOGICAL ASSUMPTIONS i) We have assumed that there are no working refineries in Nigeria and so no local petrol production whatsoever – yet, there is, even if the refineries are working below capacity. ii) Nigeria actually consumes 34 million litres of petrol per day. Most experts disagree and give a figure between 20 and 25 million litres per day. Yet there is still an unexplainable shortfall even if we use the exaggerated figure of the government. iii) Ghana, Togo, Benin, Cameroun, Niger, and Chad all consume the same rate as Nigeria and get 50% of their petrol illegally from Nigeria through smuggling. These figures simply show the incompetence and insincerity of our government officials. This is pure banditry. 9) FACT 9: The simplest part of the fuel subsidy arithmetic will reveal one startling fact: That the government does not need to subsidise our petrol at all if we reject corruption and sleaze as a way of life. Check this out: a) NNPC crude oil allocation for local consumption = 400,000 barrels per day (from a total of 2.450 million barrels per day). b) If our refineries work at just 30%, 280,000 barrels can be sold on the international market, leaving the rest for local production. c) Money accruing to the federal government through NNPC on the sale, using $80/bbl – a conservative figure as against the current price of $100/bbl – would be $22.4m per day. Annually this translates to $8.176bn or N1.3 trillion. d) The government does not need to subsidise our petrol imports - at least not from the Federation Account. The same crude that should have been refined by NNPC is simply sold on the international market (since our refineries barely work) and the money is used to buy petrol. The 400,000 barrels per day given to NNPC for local consumption can either be refined by NNPC or sold to pay for imports. This absurdity called subsidy should be funded with this money, not the regular FGN budget. If the FGN uses it regular budget for subsidising petrol, then what happens to the crude oil given to NNPC for local refining that gets sold on the international market? 10) TACTICAL BLUNDER The federal government is making the deregulation issue a revenue problem. Nigerians are not against deregulation. We have seen deregulation in the telecom sector and Nigerians are better for it, as even the poor have access to telephones now right before the eyes of those who think it is not for them. What is happening presently is not deregulation but an all-time high fuel pump increase, unprecedented in the history of our nation by a government that has gone broke due to excessive and reckless spending largely on themselves. If the excesses of all the three tiers of government are seriously curbed, that would free enough money for infrastructural development without unduly punishing the poor citizens of this country. Let me just cite, in closing, the example of National Assembly excesses and misplaced spending as contained in the 2012 budget proposal: 1.Number of Senators 109 2.Number of Members of the House of Representatives 360 3.Total Number of Legislators 469 4.2012 Budget Proposal for the National Assembly N150 billion 5.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member N320 million 6.Average Cost of Maintaining Each Member in USD $2.1 million/year Time has come for the citizens of this country to hold the government accountable and demand the prosecution of those bleeding our nation to death. Until this government downsizes, cuts down its profligacy and leads by example in modesty and moderation, the poor people of this country will not and must not subsidise the excesses of the oil sector fat cats and the immorality precipitate fiscal scandal of the self-centred and indulgent lifestyles of those in government. Here is a hidden treasure of wisdom for those in power while there is still time to make amends: PROVERBS 21:6&7 “Getting treasures by a lying tongue is the fleeting fantasy of those who seek death. The violence of the wicked will destroy them because they refuse to do just.” A word of counsel for those who voted for such soulishly indulgent leadership: “Never trust a man who once had no shoes, or you may end up losing your legs.” This is the conclusion of the matter on subsidy removal: i) “If a ruler pays attention to lies, all his servants become wicked.” (Proverbs 29:12) ii) “The Righteous God wisely considers the house of the wicked, overthrowing the wicked for their wickedness. Whoever shuts his ears to the cry of the poor will also cry himself and will not be heard.” (Proverbs 21:12&13) Thanks for your attention. God bless you all. Pastor ‘Tunde Bakare i'm still applying all scenarios possible .we never had a SUBSIDY!!!

JONATHAN MISLED THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY


20120118-013950.jpg
Jeffrey Sachs, special advisor to U.N. Secy General Ban-ki Moon, says he was misled about the now-controversial lifting of petrol subsidies at a meeting with the Nigerian President.
After a recent session with President Jonathan, Sachs was reported to have praised the removal of fuel subsidy as a good move. He called the removal “a bold and correct policy” and used the word “innovative.”
But after a deluge of tweets on Twitter and other venues from outraged Nigerians, Sachs backed off of his earlier remarks.
Writing on his twitter handle @ JeffDSachs, the professor of economics confessed: “I do my homework very carefully in general, for 30 years, but not on this one. A mistake I regret…I see better that I don’t know the specific details on the subsidy to be accurate.
“ I’m listening and learning. Most important thing I could say is government must build trust with civil society based on anti-corruption, fairness, accountability.”
On whether he knew about the level of corruption in Nigeria before endorsing removal of subsidy, Sachs said: “They didn’t have to tell me. I’m very heartened to see civil society rising against corruption. Yes, I walked out of a meeting and into a sound bite! Not good. The situation is complex and deep reforms are needed…
“I’m sorry that I’ve been misinterpreted. It’s hard to be heard accurately in this noisy world!”
He assured those bombarding him with questions that he understood what they are going through in Nigeria. “I’ve noticed how the politicians barely care about the universities. Sad and costly for Nigeria!” he said.
The Professor of Economics said he had no idea about the subsidy removal until it happened, as he was “not in regular contact on macro policy.”

Is the Opposition Really Serious?


0101 SK-backpagex.jpg - 0101 SK-backpagex.jpg
Simon Kolawole Live!: Email: simon.kolawole@thisdaylive.com

Would there be a better time for the Nigeria opposition to take power than in 2015? I don’t think so. I have my reasons.  I’ll start with the issue of “change for change sake”. It just so happens that in many political climates across the world, voters always want something new at a particular point in time, especially when they believe they are not getting the best from the ruling party. The election becomes a case of “anyone but the ruling party”. It happens so frequently in the US and the UK—even in nearby Ghana and Benin. I think this could be a factor in 2015, except President Goodluck Jonathan pulls a spectacular miracle of solving the key issues around power supply, refineries, subsidies, roads and hospitals. Now, that’s a tall order! Even if Jonathan turns water to wine, he would find it difficult persuading Nigerians to drink it.
My second reason is that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is perpetually in crisis and a well-organised opposition should be able to take them to the cleaners. The zoning/rotation crisis is still there. If Jonathan decides not to run because of the pressure from the pro-rotation group in the party, he will have the power of incumbency to work against his own party at the election. But if he decides to run, he should expect a terrible backlash from the pro-rotation group who may wish to make the country “ungovernable” for him. The key PDP stalwarts could break away to work for the opposition—or may even choose to stay back in the party and work against Jonathan’s aspiration. No matter the decision Jonathan takes, there is bound to be some ripple effects that should favour the opposition.
But is the opposition serious? That, to me, is the real question. The most confounding breed of politicians since the advent of this era in 1999 is the opposition. One thing I have noticed about them, consistently, is that they love to shout and scream, but when it comes to the nitty-gritty of strategising to take power, they crumble like biscuits trapped in the mouth. They are their own worst enemies. I have concluded many times that some opposition politicians are only interested in relevance. The best way to be noticed and appeased, it seems, is to be in the opposition. I also know that the PDP has infiltrated their ranks, such that some so-called opposition figures are actually working for the party in power. Also, some politicians are in politics for bread and butter and it is very easy to lure them into the party where there is a steady gush of milk and honey.
In 1999, the PDP won 21 states; the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) won nine; and the Alliance for Democracy (AD, technically now Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN), won six. That gave the opposition 15 states. That was something to build on, ahead of the 2003 elections. But what happened? The ANPP chairman, Alhaji Mahmud Waziri (now of blessed memory), was appointed special adviser by President Olusegun Obasanjo and he gladly accepted! How can you, being the chairman of a party controlling nine states, agree to be a presidential aide? What was that about? The case of AD chairman, Alhaji Ahmed Abdulkadir, was even more pathetic: he became Obasanjo’s special assistant without cabinet status. By the 2003 elections, the opposition was in disarray. The AD, playing a purely ethnic game, chose to support Obasanjo in the presidential election. It backfired; the old fox, Obasanjo, captured five of the six AD states for the PDP in governorship election. AD became a one-state party, while the ANPP was reduced to seven states.
By now, the opposition would have been stronger. They would have been in a very good stead to flush out the PDP in 2015 if they had played the game with cohesion and strategic thinking. The Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) won 12 states in the presidential election last year. But for the violence and infighting that gave an easy ride to manipulation in the governorship election that followed, CPC would probably boast of 12 governors, instead of one, today. ACN has six states. All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) has two. The Labour Party (LP) has one. ANPP has three. That would have given the opposition parties 24 states to PDP’s 12. But the CPC bottled it with the post-election violence and infighting. Party supporters, obsessed with the idea that it was Gen. Muhammadu Buhari for president or nothing else, tore up their voter cards or simply refused to vote again. CPC could not take advantage of the Buhari build-up. It simply fizzled out. So PDP gained control of 23 states while the opposition controls a mere 13. I’m aware, of course, that LP and APGA are pro-PDP, but a stronger CPC, combined with ACN, would pose a credible challenge to the PDP any day.
The laziest excuse of the opposition is that the PDP always rigs the elections. Of course, PDP rigs. But other parties rig too. Let’s be honest with ourselves. Finance and logistics play a key role in winning elections in Nigeria. PDP had a head start over other parties in 1999 because the military establishment backed them with the needed “logistics”. However, if the opposition had been thinking strategically, they too would have built their own “logistics” by now, 13 years after! The more states you control, the deeper your pocket and the wider your logistical coverage. All it takes is consistency and commitment to the cause. I would love to sing the populist song that PDP is a party of riggers, but I cannot do that in good conscience. It takes more than rigging to win elections in Nigeria. In fact, you must be in a good position to rig. (For goodness sake, I’m not endorsing rigging; just making a point.)
If the opposition continues to scream “rigging, rigging, rigging” rather than develop a strategy to win power, I’m afraid the lamentation will continue till eternity.


And Four Other Things...

Jonathan under Fire
President Goodluck Jonathan has come under fire over his trip to Brazil and his refusal to make public his asset declaration. Some believe he should not have gone to Brazil while Yobe and Kaduna were on fire. Many also argue that by failing to make his assets public, he has failed a basic moral test, even if the law did not make it compulsory. Although the president has tried to defend himself, what I enjoy most in this is that the public is showing more than a passing interest in the activities of the president. You see, it is not all about elections and policies. I love it.
Dasuki’s Task
The new National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, is an unusual choice, having not been a core intelligence person. But long ago, it had been suggested that we needed a Northerner to quench the Boko Haram fire; he is more likely to secure the co-operation of the security complex, which we inherited from the military establishment. Dasuki immediately went to meet with political and community leaders in Borno and Yobe. They received him warmly. That means a lot. The former NSA, Gen. Owoye Azazi, could not have achieved that. My next worry: if we tame Boko Haram and the Niger Delta militants regroup, who would rein them in? Another “Southern” NSA? I think we’re in trouble.
Diezani and PIB
Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Alison-Madueke, has raised our hopes again. The all-important Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), she said, has been submitted to the president. It should be with the National Assembly in two weeks. We don’t know the contents of the “revised version” yet but we still assume the PIB is intended to change the way things are done in the oil industry. It must run like real business, like banking and telecoms. Nigeria and Nigerians must benefit more from these resources legitimately. Put simply, Alison-Madueke must push these reforms through. We’re watching…
Brotherhood Indeed
Mohammed Mursi was yesterday sworn in as Egypt’s first civilian, democratically elected president. His party, Muslim Brotherhood—which had been at the receiving end of state persecution for decades—won the popular election after the fall of Hosni Mubarak, former president of the world’s biggest Arab nation. With an Islamic party in charge of the country now, should Egypt’s 8 million Christians be afraid? No, says Mursi—who has, in fact, promised to appoint a woman and a Coptic Christian as his vice-presidents. Now that is the spirit, brother!

The Days of the Cabal (II)


Given that the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua showed me much affection and trust, it was natural that I would feel for him at his most trying moments, especially during the crisis that followed his last trip to Saudi Arabia. At that critical period, there was no doubt in my mind that the correct thing to do was to send a letter of notification to the National Assembly so that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan could assume the presidency in acting capacity as specified by the Constitution. I did all I possibly could to make those who were in a position to influence such decision see reason but I failed.
With this situation, towards the end of 2009, I began to weigh all my options. By then also, there were people calling on me to resign from government. I can categorise them into two: the first comprised my friends and well wishers who argued that I couldn’t possibly justify being spokesman to a president with whom Nigerians had lost contact. I agreed with the position of this group but nonetheless felt that it was better for me to wait for the arrival of the president before taking any such decision.
I had my reason: At that point, I had nothing to lose by resigning since I had my exit plan already mapped out but the question I asked myself was: how would Yar’Adua feel whenever he recovered and he heard that I had jumped ship just because he was sick? He definitely didn’t deserve that from me. Incidentally, there was a second group that also wanted me to resign but was not thinking of my interest or for that matter that of the nation. By that period, there were already cold calculations towards the recently concluded 2011 general elections and different politicians were making their projections. Owing to the strategic position I held, there were those who felt that a public announcement of my resignation would weaken Yar’Adua’s hold on power and they wanted to use me to achieve that end.
By going into public service, I was under no illusion that everybody would like the choices I would make but at every point in the course of my stewardship, I tried to stay true to the values I espoused as a commentator on public affairs. Did I make mistakes? Yes I did. But my decision at every point was based on the evaluation of the information I had and what I considered to be the best approach in the circumstance I found myself at the time. It is possible that others might react differently given the same situation but I made my choices and I take responsibility for them. Quite naturally, the illness of Yar’Adua and the power struggle it unwittingly fuelled led to all manner of speculations, the most ludicrous of which was the myth of a cabal that had hijacked power in Aso Rock and for which I was fronting.
While I never placed much premium on the “cabal” theory, a conversation on the day Architect Namadi Sambo was sworn-in as VP put the issue in its real perspective. As Governor of Kaduna State, anytime Sambo came to the villa, he always visited my office after seeing his childhood friend, then State Chief of Protocol (SCOP), Ambassador Ghali Umar and with that we became quite close. So when he was nominated to the position of VP, I decided to visit him the moment it was confirmed by the National Assembly. I met him at his new Akinola Aguda official residence but as I made to leave, he requested that I witness his inauguration. I joined the vehicle of Mr Isaiah Balat, (erstwhile Minister of State for Works and Housing under President Olusegun Obasanjo) where there were other important personalities. On the way to the villa, Balat asked: “Segun, this Cabal thing, were you really a member?”
Before I could respond, Mr. Nasir el-Rufai (the big masquerade behind the Save Nigeria Group which played a prominent role in the media and civil society campaign that eventually culminated in the National Assembly making Jonathan the acting president) interjected: “There was no cabal, we created the myth to neutralise Turai”.
While Balat and other people in the vehicle appeared shocked, I was not. The former FCT Minister explained how the idea of ‘cabal’ came into being as well as his understanding of the role played by former First Lady, Hajia Turai Yar’Adua and the different people whose names were frequently mentioned as being members. El-Rufai was right only to the extent that the myth of a ‘cabal’ capturing power at a time Jonathan was effectively in charge was mere propaganda. The fact is that whatever may be her faults, Mrs Yar’Adua never interfered with government as being reported by a section of the media, she simply prevented people from seeing her husband. But the presence in the villa of a president Nigerians were not exactly sure as to whether he was dead or alive indeed engendered a situation in which the federal government had broken into several ‘cabals’ of vested interests all desperate either to retain their powers and privileges under a Yar’Adua they could not see; or to seize control under the presidency of Jonathan whose legendary ‘good luck’ (derived from his first name) some ministers made song and dance about within the Federal Executive Council. It was a terrible period for the nation. It was also a most difficult period for me.
The account of the unfortunate health saga of President Yar’Adua, including how he was brought back to the country from Saudi Arabia under the cover of darkness, will be told but it is convenient for my critics to ignore the fact that between November 23, 2009 when he travelled to Saudi Arabia and his controversial return 93 days later, I spoke only five times. The first, to announce on the day he travelled that he was going on medicals; the second, four days later, to say that diagnosis revealed he had pericarditis (which I had a challenge pronouncing); the third, to say on January 10, 2010 from Angola (where I had gone to watch the Cup of Nations) that the president was not dead as a reaction to the rumour fuelled by a story in NEXT; the fourth, to announce on February 24, 2010 that he was back to the country (where then acting President Jonathan was addressed as VP: explanation will come another day) and the fifth, 24 hours later, to clarify that Jonathan remained acting president!
It is usually the lot of people like me who had the privilege of reporting events and analyzing same to be exposed to cynicism whenever we cross the line but I remain indebted to the late Yar’Adua for giving me the opportunity to experience governance at the highest level in my country. The job that I did is basically media work, dealing with the same constituency and I have no doubt been enriched by the privilege of seeing both sides of the coin. The late Mr. Tony Snow, Spokesman for President George W. Bush (whom I met in the White House on his last day in office in the course of the International Visitors Program for which I was invited by the US State Department in July 2007) had written shortly after taking the job “for somebody like me who's been a pundit for many years, you become part of something that's very rare...”
By the end of 2009, however, it was glaring the health of the president had become an issue that would not go away. I therefore came to the inescapable conclusion that I had to leave government. But mindful of several factors, including ethnicity and religion, I resolved I would have to do it with tact. I recall that when I was appointed, there were some people from the Northern part of the country who felt that Yar’Adua had not made a wise political choice. The argument was that his predecessor, President Olusegun Obasanjo, a Yorubaman and Christian, picked three kinsmen of his (and of the same faith) in succession and so by the same logic, Yar’Adua ought to have picked a Hausa Fulani Muslim. At a period ethnicity and religion had crept into the issue of his illness, I didn’t want to give those who criticized my appointment an opportunity to say “we warned him”. He didn’t deserve that from me. But I had my plan.
Through the help of my friend, the Consul General of the Chinese Embassy in Nigeria, Mr. Guo Kun, I had secured a very generous Chinese scholarship for a special one-year MPA programme at Beijing University that included going to China with my family. My plan therefore was that whenever the president came back, I would inform him that I had secured admission which would then mean I could disengage from government. That way, there would be no question of disloyalty as the reason for my resignation would be clear. But the circumstances of his arrival back to the country in late February did not make such discussion possible. So, I kept things to myself.
Even though it was a very difficult period for me, I just could not abandon my boss at his hour of trial, especially when I knew the state he was in as one of the very few people granted access to see him. Incidentally, even his Katsina loyalists whose names were touted in the media as ‘cabal’ members never saw Yar’Adua from the time he was in Saudi Arabia to when he died at the villa but I did. I recall having a conference call with THISDAY Editors who told me to resign until I confirmed to them I had seen the president. I also explained my exit plan to them given my Beijing University admission.
By a stroke of fortune, however, on April 14, 2010, a friend sent me an internet link to the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, the largest international research center within Harvard University’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Without bothering to examine the requirements, I simply applied and sent my resume to the program director, Dr. Kathleen Molony. Less than an hour later, I got a response from her. She wrote that application had closed two months earlier on February 25 and participants had been taken. She however added that given that she found my application quite compelling, she would discuss it with the selection board to see if they could make exceptions to accommodate me. That began an exchange of correspondences with Harvard University and on May 4, 2010, I finally got the offer of appointment. Choosing between Beijing and Harvard was not an easy decision given my desire for my children to speak Mandarin but they preferred going to US. By 5pm the next day I was with acting President Jonathan to show him the letter from Harvard and to submit my letter of resignation from government. He was evidently happy for me and I must have spent about 30 minutes with him as we reviewed the state of the nation. Less than four hours later, President Yar’Adua died.

The Days of the ‘Cabal’…(I)


Olusegun-Adeniyi-Back-Page.jpg-Olusegun-Adeniyi-Back-Page.jpg
The Verdict According To Olusegun Adeniyi. Email, olusegun.adeniyi@thisdaylive.com
On the night of December 16, 2006, I got a call from Alhaji Aliko Dangote who sought to know whether I was in Abuja. When I answered in the affirmative, he requested that I joined him and a few other people he would not name at the residence of Senator Andy Uba, then a Senior Special Assistant on Domestic Affairs to President Olusegun Obasanjo. This was on the day the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was holding its National Convention to pick the presidential candidate for the April 2007 general elections.
When I arrived at Uba’s residence, I met Dangote and Uba as well as four others: then EFCC Chairman, Mr. Nuhu Ribadu; former Delta State governor, Chief James Ibori; his Kwara State counterpart, Dr Bukola Saraki; and Zenon Oil Chairman, Mr. Femi Otedola. Since my arrival did not change the tone of discussion, it was easy for me to keep abreast of what the issue was: then Rivers State governor, Dr. Peter Odili, had been selected by President Olusegun Obasanjo as running mate to his anointed PDP presidential candidate, Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. Odili’s name had even been written into the acceptance speech to be read by Yar’Adua after what would have been no more than a hollow ritual at the Eagle Square. The essence of the gathering was to stop Odili from becoming Yar’Adua’s running mate on grounds of alleged corruption.
When I asked why I was invited to the meeting, they said they had an “exclusive story” for THISDAY which would highlight allegations of corruption against Odili but with a caveat: it had to be published in next morning’s edition of the newspaper. The evidence was to be supplied by Ribadu who held a file containing the documents. While I considered the proposition somewhat ridiculous, I also wondered how a THISDAY publication could affect the decision to make Odili the running mate. It was then they explained what was going on.
Earlier that day, they had held a meeting with Obasanjo about their misgivings on the choice of Odili but he had dismissed the allegations against the Rivers State governor whom he insisted would be Yar’Adua’s running mate. What they therefore resolved was that since the primaries was likely to run till next morning, and given that THISDAY comes out early in Abuja by virtue of simultaneous printing, if the newspaper ran the story and Obasanjo’s attention was drawn to it, he would have no choice but to stop Odili from being Yar’Adua’s running mate.
Knowing what I was expected to do, I pointed out why it could not be done. First, I explained that what was being asked of me was not journalism but politics because there was no way I could publish such a story without getting Odili’s response which, given the circumstances of that night, was impossible. I also explained that my powers as editor of THISDAY were highly exaggerated in that even if I had all the facts, including Odili’s response, such a politically sensitive story could not go without the approval of my chairman and editor-in-chief, Mr Nduka Obaigbena, who I noted was a friend to all of them gathered in the room. I told Dangote to call Obaigbena and he did. They took turns to speak with Obaigbena who afterwards sent me a text message asking me to call him after leaving the meeting. When I did, he was displeased that I could bring him into such a discussion when, as editor, I should know the right thing to do.
Meanwhile, I advised the gathering it was better Ribadu confronted Obasanjo with the allegations against Odili. They all laughed, saying that was what they had spent all day doing. They were obviously very frustrated. Eventually it was agreed that Ribadu should make a last ditch effort so he called Obasanjo’s ADC, Col. Chris Jemitola, that he needed to see the president urgently and alone. Within five minutes, the ADC got back to Ribadu that the president would meet him at a secure location within the Eagle Square. Armed with what all of them at the meeting described as a ‘bombshell’ from the diplomatic mission of a Western country in Nigeria, it was Ribadu who got Obasanjo to knock Odili’s name out of Yar’Adua’s speech and ultimately from the ticket. A few months later, President Yar’Adua himself would confirm most of what I already knew when he recounted the dramatic story of how Odili lost out as his running mate. But from his tone, by wielding such enormous political powers, Ribadu’s days in office as EFCC Chairman were clearly numbered.
Back to the meeting in Uba’s house that fateful December 2006 night: Out of curiousity, I asked them who they had in mind as a likely replacement for Odili in the event that their plan succeeded. Two names came up in an instant: Dr. Goodluck Jonathan and Lt. General Andrew Azazi. It was easy to rationalize Jonathan’s choice being at that time the governor of Bayelsa State ; but Azazi was not a politician. He was at that period the Chief of Army Staff. Why Azazi, I quipped and someone responded: He is Ijaw. From the discussion, it was evident they had explored all options and had already taken certain decisions. If the idea was to pick a running mate from Niger Delta, I asked, “why not Donald Duke?”
Andy Uba responded: “That is one name Baba (President Obasanjo) does not want to hear.” Having always assumed that Obasanjo and then Cross River State Governor were very close, this was shocking to me, but coming from Uba I couldn’t doubt it. I also sought to know what Yar’Adua felt about the choice of Odili and why he couldn’t tell Obasanjo about his misgivings if he had any. It was Andy Uba again who responded: “Yar’Adua tell baba he doesn’t want Odili?”, he asked laughing.
This was very worrying for me. The impression I got from the interactions was that we were going to have a puppet president who would not only be manipulated to power but would be at the mercy of his scheming predecessor as well. It was therefore quite natural that the events of that night would resonate in my mind on April 24, 2007 when, a few days after the presidential election, my guardian and then Communications Minister, Chief Cornelius Adebayo, called that he had been contacted to approach me to be spokesman to Yar’Adua. He said he had 24 hours to report back whether I was interested or not. It didn’t take me that long to turn down the offer.
Apart from the fact that public office held no attraction for me as I was enjoying my job as THISDAY editor and commentator on public affairs, I also had my doubts about whether Yar’Adua, given the circumstances of his accession, would ever find his own voice. I found out much later that after Yar’Adua had decided he wanted me to be his spokesman, it was Dr. Aliyu Modibbo who suggested that the offer be made through my guardian who was his colleague in the Obasanjo cabinet. Modibbo, who had for long been a big brother, later invited me to Abuja to see whether he could persuade me to change my mind but when he realized my resolve on the matter, he asked that I nominate some credible senior journalists and I actually suggested some names. But as it turned out, that was not the end of the story.
At the instance of Obaigbena, I spent three days in Katsina in the first week of May 2007 observing and chatting with president-elect Yar’Adua for a cover story that I would later write for a THISDAY special edition. But at that period, I no longer thought about the offer, which I assumed must have been made to someone else. Incidentally, Yar’Adua also did not broach the issue throughout my encounter with him in Katsina. Unknown to me, however, Obaigbena, who initially expressed anger that attempts were made to “poach” his editor without his clearance, had been discussing with Yar’Adua and had given a condition on which he would make me accept the offer: only if the office was elevated to cabinet rank in which case I would be a Special Adviser and not Senior Special Assistant as my predecessors were. I had no inkling about all these until much later.
When Yar’Adua therefore assumed office on May 29, 2007 without announcing a spokesman, I assumed that he was still searching until the afternoon of May 30 – a day after inauguration – when I got a call from Obaigbena who was in Abuja . He began with a preamble that bordered on how he would never do anything against my interest and that if what he was going to tell me was not good for me, he would not have ventured. Even though he had always related to me more like a brother than a boss, and I was considered one of his favourite editors, I found his sermon somewhat unusual before he now added: “The president still wants you to be his spokesman and I told him that the editor of THISDAY cannot accept any job that is not of cabinet level. He has agreed to elevate the office to Special Adviser on Communication and I have accepted the offer on your behalf. Now wait for the president.”
Before I could say anything, Obaigbena had given the phone to Yar’Adua who also pleaded with me to see the offer as a call to national service. Although I was a bit dumbfounded, I knew at that point that my resistance was over. I said: “Mr. President, at this point, it is no longer a request, it is a command.”
•To be concluded next week.
Simply Overwhelmed
I have been overwhelmed by the outpouring of goodwill since my return to THISDAY and this page was announced on Monday. But I am not naïve. There are also many people out there who feel a sense of betrayal, either that I joined government at all or that I didn’t conform to expectations at a certain period. That I also understand. As I told some of my friends during those crazy ‘cabal’ days, if I was still writing this column and some other person were in the position I held, I would be highly critical of an Olusegun Adeniyi. But then I would not have all the facts. For me, the last one year at Harvard has been a period for serious reflection about my country and amidst my other commitments, I managed to complete a book on the Yar’Adua Years, half of which is on his illness and death. It should be out hopefully within the next three months.
One thing I will say for now is that all factors considered, I served a very good man. Notwithstanding his health challenge, which unfortunately was evident from his first day in office, President Yar’Adua also initiated some fundamental policies which will stand Nigeria well, if they are not subverted. Already, there are disturbing signals that his greatest legacy, the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), might have been hijacked by some vested interests in the oil and gas industry. On a personal note, I will always cherish Yar’Adua’s memory. Always!

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

Why Jonathan is scared– Tony Momoh


By WILLY EYA
Tony Momoh
Photo: Sun Publishing
More Stories on This Section
In Nigeria, there is no gainsaying that many are now scared of the future. If it is not from the fear of the dreaded Islamist sect, Boko Haram, it is the pain following the removal of oil subsidy. And as it appears, every day comes with fresh challenges.

However, despite uncertainty in the land, one man who is not surprised with the development is national chairman of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and former Minister of Information, Prince Tony Momoh. In this interview, he speaks on a wide range of issues. Excerpts…
With the state of the nation today, how do you feel as a Nigerian?
I feel fulfilled as a Nigerian looking at the chaos surrounding us today and this is what many people foresaw. That was why we said we needed change, which has to do with the mindset. Change here includes the political structures that we have. We also talked about change in the politics we were doing.

We needed a change in mindset by looking at issues from a principled angle of putting God first. That would make you understand that whatever you are doing is registered for you to answer to God. That one would also make you accept that there is a conscience and that conscience is always knocking on your heart when you do anything. That is change of mindset. You would say who is my judge? My conscience is my judge. God almighty is my judge but the mindset we have is manipulate the people. But the manipulation of the people would only be some of the time and not all the time. So, the change in mindset was one.

Then the change in politics in Nigeria brought Attahiru Jega, chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). We thought he could effect the change within the arrangement we have; having an electoral law, a man of integrity. I can assure you as chairman of Congress for Progressive Change that we really celebrated the coming of Jega. But in spite of what everybody says now, Jega, Nigerians, their conscience and God almighty that they serve know that what we called election was not an election. We all know that what we are still doing with elections is manipulation of votes; win at all costs and celebrate that winning without remembering our conscience, God almighty and that you can only manipulate the people some of the time and not all the time.

Then the other one is structure. We must restructure Nigeria because Nigeria cannot work as it is. The earlier we come to that, the better. So, when you say you want to change the Constitution, you are wasting your time because you are looking at the people who are changing the Constitution and who are not willing and can never agree to undermine themselves by robbing themselves of what they are enjoying. So, if you really talk of restructure, though we are talking of such fundamental restructuring that would make us look at what it is that we have today; 36 states of the federation, all of them are enjoying the same structural adjustment as the three regions were doing in 1960.

So, we have a governor, a House of Assembly and then you have the civil service structure. It was three at independence, four in 1963 when the Mid-West was created; 12, then 19, 21, 30 and now 36. And it is the same structure. The abuse of that structure was reflected when the old Bendel State was split into two - Edo and Delta. They had 18 permanent secretaries when it was Bendel and when they split it into two, obviously, it ought to be nine permanent secretaries but Edo alone had 32 permanent secretaries.

And each permanent secretary in Nigeria earns the same as his colleague anywhere in the country when we do not have a unitary civil service structure. We need change. But what I say now is that Muhammadu Buhari cried and a lot of people started saying he was shedding crocodile tears. But Buhari knew the corruption in this system. He knew the fraud and indiscipline in this system and he cried. That is manifesting now with what we have after removing oil subsidy.

I would like to talk on the fuel subsidy, which everybody is compromised or ignorant of. But then I wish Nigeria happy New Year. Whatever happens is that Nigeria cannot be fixed by God. It is Nigerians that will fix Nigeria. Nigeria is a country to be fixed by people and these people have been endowed by God as human spirits to make or mar Nigeria. What we have been doing is marring Nigeria. But since God is the creator and must restore order through the law of sowing and reaping, we would reap what we have sowed.

You said you are fulfilled because what you predicted about the state of affairs in Nigeria is coming to pass but are you not scared that the nation may even break up?
I am fulfilled because what we have always stood for is blaring us in the face now. But Nigeria will not break up and it should not break up. Two hours after the New Year, I sent out a message to my countrymen through the Nigeria world forum and of course, it would reach about two million people and I said that the heavens have not fallen. People say the heavens would fall and I said the heavens would never fall.

The heavens have never fallen and the heavens would never fall. The heavens are permanent. Even the earth would never fall. The earth has a lifespan and the clock is ticking and when it comes to the end of its life, the clock would stop. Nigeria would never make the earth fall. Nigerians are the ones to fall or rise through what they do with the power God gave them as human beings to cleanse and affect their environment. We have refused to add value to our environment. Instead of doing things to grow the environment, we are doing things to deny growth to the environment. In the constitution, we chose to work on two legs since 1999-democracy and social justice.

That’s in fact what we have been doing since 1979. Now, the thing is we have only one resource, a particular volume of money to grow democracy and social justice. It is for those who are in charge to know whether they would grow democracy at the expense of social justice or to grow social justice at the expense of democracy or hold them in such proportion to ensure there is growth. But what have we been doing? We have been growing democracy at the expense of social justice.

And that is why you would say according to what the clerk of the National Assembly was quoted to have told the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on the arraigning of former Speaker, Dimeji Bankole, that the senators take home about N360 million per annum. They are entitled to take home N11 million maximum but through all sorts of arrangement. That N360 million is given to each senator who empowers his people by buying shovels, wheel barrows, sowing machines, bales of cloth and, of course, buying motorcycles for thugs among others. After all that, he would say, I empowered my people.

That N360 million is obviously for democracy. For instance, you could say, you people should work part time because in the First Republic, it was part time. Why can’t we work part time now and make more laws like we were doing in the First Republic unlike now that we are working full time? We could say instead of giving them N11 million like we are officially doing now, let us give them not more than N3 million. Today, a senator takes home N360 million per annum and works full time as a senator and also works full time in his private business. He uses his senatorial contacts to help his private business.

You see the abuses. We are funding democracy. If you put that N360 million in a senatorial district, you would have four hundred boreholes and everybody would have water to drink. That is the choice we are making. If you grow social justice, that is reflected in the welfare and security of the citizens, you create jobs, build schools, hospitals and so on and so forth. And the government is there because of security and welfare of the people. That being the case, why not put money into education and other social services?

Now, the choice is clear that we must restructure Nigeria so that you have social justice or you have an agreement where you put more money in social justice and have less available for growing democracy. In Nigeria, we have democracy before development. It does not happen anywhere in the world. There is no place where you fund democracy more than social justice. A councilor is in full time making law for the council, House of Assembly is full time and National Assembly is also full time.

All these people are earning big money. The president, governors and chairmen of councils all have security votes. The governor has about four to five billion naira for security vote that nobody can audit. What are you securing when as a governor you do not even have power to secure the state even though you are the chief security officer of the state. This is because the police are responsible to the President, Inspector General of Police and Minister of Police Affairs.
What type of country is this that is growing democracy? But the fact is if you want to take that quantum of democracy that would grow Nigeria, you cancel the executive governor position and have parliamentary legislature with part-time legislation.

The party with the majority would pick a premier or whatever you call him and then the ministers or commissioners would come from House of Assembly elected. Now, what you have is that the people who are commissioners are those compensated for failing primaries. It does not make sense. And they owe no allegiance to anybody. Those people worry more than the elected people. They hear all kinds of complaints - my children want to go back to school, my wife put to bed. They also go to the elected people and you know they do not get more than the money allocated to them. They go to ministers and commissioners who were appointed because they lost primaries to beg for contracts. So, what is wrong with us? I am fulfilled because I have been speaking about these things over the years and nobody is listening.
On fuel, why I am fulfilled and laughing and Buhari should be fulfilled and laughing and CPC people should be laughing is that we said there is nothing like subsidy.

The amount of money we are paying for fuel is the amount that is paid by a country that does not produce fuel or petroleum resources at all. How much does it take to bring one barrel of oil and then refine it in Nigeria? This is so that when you refine it, you would have so much volume of premium motor spirit, kerosene, diesel and so on and so forth and even the residue that is used for heavy industries. All these would give you employment. How much employment have we created in using the old refineries to access those kind of resources? We give the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation 445,000 barrels a day.

They know how they distribute it for refining abroad and they send it to us to buy at a rate as if we did not send oil to anybody for refining and as if we have no oil at all, and as if we have no refineries. Even at that, it costs N34 to land a litre of fuel. We sell for N65. So, who is subsidizing who? But because of the Petroleum Products Pricing and Regulatory Agency and PPMC, we have found ourselves doing more arithmetic than looking at the facts on the face. Every month, PPPRA would just tell us how much they have used for subsidy and then the rest is given to be shared and there is not enough to be shared.

Then we go and borrow from excess crude account. If there is no excess crude account today, Nigeria would collapse. So, instead of attending to the fraud and corruption in the sector that generates funds for us; in the Nigeria Customs Service they tell you that they generate N70 billion every month and we start congratulating them, when as a matter of fact they make a N100 billion and share N30 billion. Then you go to Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) where they give you a lot of wrong figures because there are banks abroad that are supposed to be collecting money for us and are collecting money outside what they are entitled to. Or you go to NNPC that is supposed to have 445,000 barrels a day, refine some, distribute some and they are not accounting for what comes in the area of the byproducts from petroleum. Nobody knows what is happening there.

Everywhere that money is generated in this country, there are entrenched abuses, corruption and fraud. President Jonathan knows this and in fairness to him, all these people helped to run his election. But now, what are they doing? They want to recoup and this man cannot stop the fraud and he knows that. In fact, Nigeria is broke. But what does Jonathan do? Instead of attending to the problem and dealing with people who are doing it around him, the only way out is stop PPMC giving out to anybody. Having done that, he now leaves all the money that they have been paying, which is part of the fraud and corruption, he now puts it on Nigerians through the pumps. But the fact is, where is the money going?

Where is the difference between N65 and N150 going? Do you know that many people like you think that the money would go to government for the Kolade committee and other people to use in growing the alternatives? It is not so. These monies go directly to the marketers and not into the coffers of the government. The only thing government may be gaining are the NNPC mega stations. What they generate in this rip-off would go to government and nothing else. So, all these things they say would be done like rail and so on, where is the money going to come from? The money must come from supplementary appropriation because the 2012 budget is already here where you have over N900 billion for security and you spend N3 billion on security, including Saturday and Sunday. What are you securing? We have not had much problem of security since the Nigerian civil war as we have now. We have not deployed armed forces as much as we are doing now since civil war. So, security as far I am concerned is part of the problem.

I think they generate fear for Jonathan who said is not a General when in fact he is a Field Marshal being the President and Commander-in-Chief. Unfortunately, Jonathan does not have the mindset of even a Sergeant. He does not have any military mindset. Being the President of Nigeria, he is the Commander of the Armed Forces but he is easily frightened by what is happening. When Obasanjo came in 1999, the National Security Adviser told him the security implication of his traveling but Obasanjo threw away the security report and traveled. He spent a total of one year traveling in the four years he was here.

We are always frightened by all these security reports and these are the reports frightening Jonathan everyday that he is now taking cover in Aso Rock and celebrating independence in Aso Rock. What type of country is this where the President, who people should look up to, is frightened and he takes cover? All the gates to Aso Rock, only one is open. Our president should be all over the place. The Madalla explosion, he got there after about a week or so. After the United Nations building explosion, he did not go. He said on Facebook that he was sorry, he did not want to go and disturb people who were working there. What type of country is this? The police headquarters bombing, he went there and was smiling. He shook the IG’s hands and said they were after him (Jonathan) and not after him (IG). What kind of country is this where the leader of the country puts his safety first? So, we are the ones laughing now.

Like I said, the money from fuel subsidy is not coming from anywhere. If they had put the subsidy money in the budget, you would say that the money would be diverted to these areas. So, I am emphasizing it now that the difference between N65 and the N150 per litre we are paying now will not go to government but to private pockets of those who are selling the fuel. I say it that the President is not able to deal with the ‘strong men’ in the business of oil. Someone said that the government is dealing with the poor men because it is not able to deal with the rich man.

From your vantage position, how do you feel about activities of Boko Haram?
I laugh too because I celebrate our innocence. If CPC had been formed before Boko Haram, people would say that Boko Haram is the military arm of CPC. In spite of the fact that Boko Haram was there, doing its thing before CPC was formed and before CPC became active after January 2011, people still associate Boko Haram and CPC. I am the national chairman of CPC; in other words, the executive chairman of CPC and I can assure you that we have nothing to do with Boko Haram.

We would have nothing to do with any religious organization or anybody that wants to address injustice his own way. We would address injustice in our own way as a political party by confronting injustice. They say if you cannot beat them, join them. We stand on a pedestal where we know injustice is and we will confront injustice and we will not join the unjust. People confront injustice in different way. For instance, the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) is confronting injustice to the South East, the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) confronted injustice, Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) confronted injustice in the Niger Delta and whether you know it or not, Boko Haram is confronting injustice. But the fact is that they have always said what they are doing and that what people say they are doing is not what they are doing.

They say that they have killed their leader. Those people who killed their leader must be brought to book. They say they will target Police, Army, other security agencies and government institutions. They said they would target their own governors who are Muslims and refuse to rule according to Islamic law - Sharia. They say their governors are corrupt and that they would target them. It was there on their video and they even published the full report where their leader was sitting down with two people holding AK-47 rifles sitting by them. It was published in the Blueprint newspaper. The new newspaper, they seem to have faith in it and they tell them their own angle. They said they have never bombed any church. So, if you hear a church has been bombed, it is not them.

They said they have never robbed any bank because they have money to carry out their operations. But they did not say where the money comes from. If you go to Taraba, Bauchi, Yobe, Maiduguri and see what they do, you would be shocked and you cannot put them in the papers. How many can you report? The thing is that late President Umaru Yar’Adua went to the Niger Delta and after discussions he started empowering the Niger Delta youths. They are all over the world today. Let Jonathan also empower the youths and all those involved in Boko Haram. Let him reach out to them and if possibly grant them amnesty. Let him start adding value to the youths in the North. Today, I think the World Bank has said that the poorest group of people in the world today are youths in the North.

The Supreme Court recently confirmed President Jonathan’s victory in last year’s general election, what’s your take on that?
Well, the Supreme Court is the last court in the land and is the last person to speak on issues of law. We accept but we do not agree. Anything you say about that judgment becomes intellectual exercise, which can only help to illuminate issues but it is to no effect. For instance, we do not agree because at least we had 12 appeals from the rulings of the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court did not look at them. If they were time bared for no fault of ours, why did the Supreme Court not refer to those matters.

They could have said even if they are time bared, there are issues raised therein. You cannot prove that INEC conducted election unless you have access to the material. We were denied access to that material. Justice Salami agreed access to that material with the cooperation of the INEC lawyer, the PDP lawyer, President’s lawyer and Sambo’s lawyer. All of them agreed that the request of the CPC should be granted. They granted it and it became a judgment of the court. When they saw what was going on, they removed Salami. They had no right to remove Salami. The only body that can remove Salami is the Senate.