Saturday, 25 August 2012

Police Special Fraud Unit Investigating N832m Oil Subsidy Scam.

By SaharaReporters, New York
The Special Fraud Unit (SFU) of the Nigeria Police says it is investigating a scam by oil subsidy racketeers involving 7,000MT of PMS valued at N832m which was fraudulently diverted with forged documents and then submitted to the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) Abuja for subsidy payment.

According to a press bulletin issued yesterday, a petition by the United Bank for Africa Plc (UBA) to the Commissioner of Police, Special Fraud Unit (SFU) alleged that a facility for the sum of N1b was granted to Ngozi Ofodum of Menol Oil & Gas Ltd in June 2011 to finance the importation of the 7,000MT of PMS for supply to acceptable off-takers.

The facility was to be secured with a Sovereign Debt Bond Note (SDBN) from the PPPRA to the order of UBA Plc/Menol Oil & Gas Ltd upon the submission of relevant documentation by the off-takers for verification and confirmation by PPPRA.

Towards that end, the 1st suspect, Ngozi Ofodum of Menol Oil & Gas Ltd contacted one Cynthia Gboneme of Faiceck Petroleum Ltd who accepted to off-take the imported products. The product was successfully supplied to Faiceck Petroleum and they were expected to return the evidence for the discharge of the products at a designated tank farm in Nigeria to enable Menol Oil & Gas Ltd collect the SDNB from PPPRA to liquidate the facility.

At that point, said the SFU, Faiceck Petroleum Ltd, whose directors are Cynthia Gboneme, Frank Gboneme and Ikechukwu Gboneme conspired with their logistics manager, one Ladi Utieyione and handed forged documents to Ms. Ofodum of Menol Oil & Gas Ltd.  Those documents were rejected by PPPRA.

The SFU said that when the 7,000MT of PMS arrived in Nigeria, Ms. Ofodum entrusted the consignment to Ms. Gboneme and Faiceck Petroleum Ltd to handle.

While the product was supposed to have been discharged at Integrated Oil & Gas Depot, Lagos it was diverted to an unknown destination by Faiceck Petroleum Ltd.  Ms. Ofodum further stated that when she confronted Faiceck Petroleum to ascertain how the products had disappeared, they lied that they had discharged it at the approved location, and presented her with some forged documents.

Ms. Gboneme confirmed the statement by Ms Ofodum that she accepted to be an off-taker of the product but that she handed the transaction to one Ladi Utieyione of Oversea Marine Ltd and that 4,512MT of PMS was discharged at Deep Water Tanker Marine Ltd due to lack of space at Integrated Oil & Gas Ltd, while the remaining 2,500MT was confiscated by the vessel owner as demurrage.

The other suspect, Mr. Utieyione corroborated Cynthia’s statement that only 4,512MT of PMS was discharged, while the remainder was seized by the vessel owner.  He equally denied the allegation of forged documents and maintained that the documents submitted to PPPRA covered only 4,512MT which is awaiting subsidy payment.

“However, investigation so far revealed that the petitioner, UBA financed the importation of 7,000MT of PMS by the 1st suspect, Menol Oil & Gas Ltd which transaction was off-taken by the 2nd suspect’s company, Faiceck Petroleum Ltd,” said SFU.

It added that the transaction ran into troubled waters ostensibly through some sharp practices in the upstream sector of the petroleum industry orchestrated by some oil marketing companies, and that the suspects are now in Police custody assisting in the investigation.

“The Commissioner of Police in-charge of the Unit, CP Tunde Ogunsakin in his continuous pledge to eradicate fraud in the country has vowed to unveil the identities of the perpetrators of this fraudulent act at the conclusion of Police discreet investigation,” the statement concluded, adding, “No stone will be left unturned.”

Doyin Okupe And The Forty Contracts By Pius Adesanmi.

Pius Adesanmi

Nigerian jokes always go too far. Such is the case with President Olusegun Obasanjo’s creation of the character of the pottymouth as presidential spokesperson. If Obasanjo was brash, crude, and obstreperous, he needed characters who took each of those adjectives to superlative levels to abuse the Nigerian people, intimidate imagined enemies of his administration, and reduce public discourse to a curse-fest. Thus it was that Obasanjo went into his foundry and manufactured Doyin Okupe and, later, Femi Fani Kayode in the best tradition of presidential pottymouthing. Tragically for us, both pottymouths have outlived the purposes for which their maker invented and unleashed them on our public sphere. In their enduring rôles as national pottymouths, both men are a typical Nigerian joke gone too far. No surprise therefore that Femi Fani Kayode rushed to town with a ringing endorsement of Doyin Okupe’s second coming as presidential pottymouth. One thief had sniffed the footprints of another on a rock and smelled blood: the blood of the Nigerian public.

The return of Doyin Okupe to Aso Rock had all the trappings of a huge joke. Because it was a Nigerian joke, it was just a matter of time before it went too far. I was determined to enjoy the comedy even as I prepared for the inevitability of things going awry. Where to start the delectation of comedy? How about the idea of a raving, hysteric First Lady, ruing Reuben Abati’s incompetence and wishing the Villa would find someone with Sango’s fury to manage her husband’s image and bring down the roof on the Nigerian public? How about the manner in which the two career pottymouths invented by Obasanjo were said to have been initially considered for the job of sharpening Abati’s blunt cutlass before the older of the two got the Villa’s nod?
When I heard that sixty year-old Okupe was returning to his old beat as attack dog for his younger brother and sister, I was in stitches. An old Sunny Ade tune came to mind: “ijekuje m’agbalagba dobale f’omo kekere” (it is gluttony that makes an elder prostrate for a youth). Femi Fani Kayode’s silly self-injection into the matter added to my mirth. Then came the pitiful attempt by Okupe and Reuben Abati to convince the Nigerian people that their duties do not overlap. Enjoying the comedy, I released this statement on my Facebook Wall: “after reading what the two men had to say about their respective job descriptions, I now agree that there is no overlap or duplication of duties. Dr Doyin Okupe's job is to pour water in garri while Dr Reuben Abati's job is to pour garri in water.”

Then, the joke went too far and the laughter dried up in my throat. News of Doyin Okupe’s contract scams began to filter to the public. From the ilos of Abakaliki to the lungus of Zungeru via the ojutametas of Abeokuta, if characters exist with visible warts on their moral tableau, President Jonathan has the spectacular talent of fishing them out and insisting that only such characters are to be deployed in the service of the Nigerian people. The more question marks on a CV, the less moral rectitude on a career path, the more allegations and accusations of corruption and other uncatholic behaviour, the better for President Jonathan. If he does not appoint scurrilous characters, he clings to the ones he inherits, no matter the level of national outrage. Witness his clinging to Diezani Alison Madueke, despite the enormous work done by the defunct NEXT newspapers and Premium Times to reveal the level of the woman’s rottenness. Witness his clinging to Arunmah Oteh even when the letter written to reinstate her by his own Secretary to the Government of the Federation grudgingly admitted her incompetence. Witness his clinging to Alhaji Abdullahi Inde Dikko, the ethically-dented and morally-damaged certificate forger who heads the Nigerian customs service. Indeed, corrupt and ethically challenged aides and political appointees are a key part of the décor of President Jonathan’s natural habitat.

More than his genius in the pottymouth business, therefore, the moral and ethical warts on Doyin Okupe’s CV must have recommended him highly to a President irrationally attracted to such turpitudes in the profile of his employees. For it would seem that after being ditched by President Obasanjo, our friend, Okupe did not particularly relish the idea of grabbing his stethoscope and returning to the hospital to make an honest day’s pay. You don’t do such things in Nigeria’s political circles. Making an honest day’s pay is incompatible with that environment. You hustle for continuous access to your own share of the “national cake”. The easiest way for these folks is to register phony or bogus companies with the CAC and go hunting and swindling. That is precisely what Okupe did. He went hunting and eventually hammered. He secured a contract worth N1.512 billion in Imo state and another worth N2.303 billion in Benue state, collected handsome mobilization fees on both contracts, and returned to his base singing “maga don pay, shout alleluia”. How he managed to avoid Abeokuta and go all the way to mugu them in Owerri and Makurdi is something we will have to ask veteran yahoo-yahoo boys.

Okupe’s fraud is a sad metaphor, a telling window into how we run the mad place called Nigeria and why we are where we find ourselves today. The Nigerian condition is no rocket science. It would defy logic and reason if we ran a country the way we run Nigeria and did not end up a sorry statement on the African continent and black humanity. A medical doctor, whose sole contribution to humanity in the last three decades – after abandoning the stethoscope – is political jobbing of the vilest kind, cobbles together a company and somehow persuades two state governments in Nigeria to award him road construction contracts worth billions! No questions asked about his pedigree; no questions asked about who he is in the construction world, etc.

I am a teacher of literature and culture. Yet, with the right connections and an appropriate degree of sycophancy to the authorities, it is possible for me to register a company in Nigeria, appoint two invisible Americans and two Isreali hustlers on my board, and win the contract to build the space shuttle that would take Nigerian astronauts to space in 2015. After all, our delusional Minister of Science and Technology recently assured us that we would be in space in 2015. A professor of literature could win the contract to build that space shuttle if Tompolo and Mujahid Dokubo Asari haven’t already won the said contract as part of President Jonathan’s national cake reallocation agenda. The Governors who awarded those contracts to Okupe ought to be tied to the stakes and publicly shot by the peoples of Benue and Imo states – after they have been made to refund their respective percentage cuts from Okupe’s mobilization fees.

No Nigerian public official caught with his hands in the cookie jar would be deemed worthy of membership of our political establishment if they didn’t go ahead and insult us to boot. Okupe is already busy insulting the intelligence of the Nigerian people by claiming that we need to acknowledge the huge difference between six and half a dozen. Our friend is now pottymouthing his way to explain that there is a difference between the person, Doyin Okupe, and the company he used to mugu them in Imo and Benue states.

Why then does President Jonathan attract these kinds of characters and clings to them no matter the degree of national opprobrium they attract? The answer is simple. There is a purposed agenda to these hirings. There is deliberateness to it all. A weak and underperforming President does not love compromised political appointees for no reason. Doyin Okupe, Diezani Alison Madueke, Arunmah Oteh, Inde Dikko, etc, do not owe the Nigerian people anything. They owe President Jonathan everything. Their loyalty to him is total, unalloyed. Although they are corrupt and ethically-challenged, the President stands by them while thumbing his nose at the Nigerian people. A weak president needs even weaker and compromised aides and political appointees in order to make them sycophants plenipotentiary. By keeping a harem of corrupt personal aides and political appointees, President Jonathan is deftly throwing dice in a game of Ludo and his dice are showing six-six and pecking the Nigerian people.

Thursday, 23 August 2012

Gulak To Obasanjo: Stop Dabbling Into Jonathan’s Political Future.


Special Adviser on Political Matters to the President, Mr. Ahmed Gulak, has advised former President Olusegun Obasanjo, to desist from dabbling into the political future of President Goodluck Jonathan.
This was just as he said that there was need for the ex-president to ensure that Jonathan was not distracted from delivering his electoral promises to Nigerians.
Gulak stated this, yesterday, during   an interview with LEADERSHIP in Abuja while reacting to media reports that Obasanjo had endorsed Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido  and his  Rivers State counterpart , Mr.  Rotimi Amaechi as presidential and vice presidential candidates for 2015 on the platform of the PDP
According to him,  Obasanjo, as a statesman should play a father figure role and not dabble into the political future of Jonathan.
Amaechi had reportedly denied that he was running with Lamido just as 27 Local Government Chairmen   in Jigawa State had backed Lamido’s candidacy.
But Gulak said that it was unfortunate that Obasanjo could allegedly endorsed a Lamido/Amaechi ticket , when Jonathan was still serving as president  and leader of the party.
He, however, said that he if it was  true that Obasanjo was fronting for Lamido/ Amaechi for 2015, then the ex-president was not fair to the country .
He said, “But the question is in what capacity is Obasanjo endorsing some governors for 2015?  Is it as the father of the nation or the President of Nigeria or what? First, Obasanjo is not the president of Nigeria and secondly, although he is one of our leaders, nobody has arrogated the monopoly of anointing candidates to him.
“Having said that, if it is true that Obasanjo has done what has been credited to him, then it is safe to say that he is not fair to this country and I believe that what this country needs to do is to deliver on the promises made to the electorate in 2011.
“Obasanjo was part of the system from 1976 to 1979 and then from 1999 to 2007. Obasanjo should play the role of a father-figure, to advise and not to keep on pock- nosing into the affairs of the nation by choosing people who should run and who should not.
“He had played his role, everybody gave him their support. One good turn deserves another. It is therefore incumbent on him to support President Jonathan to deliver on his electoral promises to the people and not ryle the system unnecessarily.
“When we reach the bridge we shall cross it. But we are only in 2012, just one year after the last election. Are we therefore telling Nigerians that everything is just about election? Why are we relegating to the background our promises to the nation?” the presidential queried.

Oshiomhole aide’s murder suspects: SSS, police clash.


By .
The suspected killers of Oyerinde on parade again in Abuja...yesterday The suspected killers of Oyerinde on parade again in Abuja...yesterday
THERE seems to be no end to the crisis of confidence between the police and the State Security Service (SSS) over the probe of Comrade Olaitan Oyerinde’s murder.
The two agencies, once again, went public yesterday with contradictory claims in respect of suspects arrested in the murder of Oyerinde, the Principal Secretary to Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomhole.
 Oyerinde was murdered in his GRA, Benin home on May 4. The SSS returned a robbery verdict, but the police insist it was a case of sponsored killing. 
 The SSS yesterday presented before the media  the six suspects it paraded on August 1,  maintaining its position that three of the suspects participated directly in the crime. The remaining three were receivers of stolen items from Oyerinde’s home, the agency said.
 The police, through Deputy Force spokesman Frank Mba, listed seven principal suspects and several other persons as suspects in the crime. They are those who the police believe are the mastermind, sponsor and abetter of the crime. No suspect was paraded at the police briefing in Abuja.
 Mba insisted that police investigation had fingered rights activist Rev. David Ugolor as the sponsor of the murder. Asked if the police have established any clue as to Ugolor’s likely motive – if they are convinced he knew about the murder - Mba said investigators were still working on the possibility of establishing such motives.
 “We are still working on the possibility of establishing the motives behind the killing. But, for security reasons and for the purposes of protecting the integrity of our investigation, we are not going to divulge certain information at this point,” Mba said.
 According to him, one Garuba Usman Maisamari assembled the suspects, allegedly on request by Rev. Ugolor, to assassinate Oyerinde. He added that Ugolor was identified by some of the suspects during an identification parade in Benin on May 27.
 The police said one of the suspects, Moses Asamah Okoro, confessed that Maisamari promised to pay them N20 million to kill Oyerinde, but that they were given N200,000 advance payment, allegedly by Maisamari.
 Okoro was said to have also confessed that he, alongside Danjuma Musa and Abubakar Usman, killed the governor’s aide.
 Other suspects named by the police in the case are: Danjuma Musa; Murtala Usman, Auta Umaru Ali, Moses Asama Okoro (a.k.a. Moses Auchi), Usman Adamu (a.k.a. Duna), who allegedly provided two motorcycles for the operation, Idris Abdulhamid and Hassan Aliyu.
 Mba said two other suspects - Bashir and Abubakar Lawal - who the police described as receivers of stolen goods, were in the custody of the SSS. Bashir Ibrahim is one of the suspects in the custody of the SSS. Abubakar Lawal cannot be accounted for.   
  The six suspects re-paraded by the SSS in respect of the Oyerinde murder are: Mohammed Ibrahim Abdullahi, Raymond Onajite Origbo, Chikezie Edeh, Saidu Yakubu (a.k.a. Imam), Sani Abdullahi Abubakar and Hassan Bashiru.
 The SSS took exception to the misgivings among the public on the similarities in the shirts donned by some of the suspects in the Oyeride case and the ones worn by three terror suspects it paraded on March 14, in respect of the kidnap and killing of Christopher Mc Manus and Franco Lamolinara, two expatriate workers of a construction firm in Sokoto by insurgents.
 Reacting to insinuations that the SSS recycled suspects in the two cases, the service’s spokesperson, Ms. Marilyn Ogar, paraded the two sets of suspects side-by-side in the same shirts in which they were earlier paraded on March 14 and August 1.
 Journalists at the briefing  established the differences in the ages and faces of the two sets of suspects, though the shirts they wore were similar in colours and designs. 
The SSS restated the names of the three suspects in the expatriates’ kidnap and killing as Bashir Ibrahim (a.k.a. Adda’u), Ibrahim A. Habibu and Gambo Maiborodi. 
 “For the avoidance of doubt, both groups have no link whatsoever as they were apprehended for different offences at separate locations and at different times. Also, the suspects arrested in connection with the kidnap of the expatriates were between the ages of 19 and 20 years, while those apprehended over Comrade Oyerinde’s killing are between the ages of 26 and 46 years,” Ms Ogar said.
 Ogar appealed to members of the public to be wary of deliberate machinations of people she described as mischievous elements who delight in spreading falsehood. 
 Shortly after the briefing, the SSS handed the six suspects over to the Special Anti Robbery Squad, Force Headquarters, Abuja for prosecution.

An Essay in honour of MIDWEST HISTORY MONTH 1999.

by
O. Igho Natufe, Ph.D

INTRODUCTION
 
This essay is in honour of the MIDWEST HISTORY MONTH 1999. Before dealing with the subject matter, I would like to thank Dr. Nowa Omoigui for his foresight in initiating this event. In my reply to him on July 30, 1999, when he invited Midwesterners to participate in this historical milestone, I thanked him "for reminding us of our being". Too many of us have either forgotten or do not care about our history. To Midwesterners, and to Nigerians in general, the creation of the Midwest State on August 9, 1963, will for ever remain a key factor in determining the future of federalism in Nigeria. As a student and teacher of comparative federalism, I have always supported the federalist movement in Nigeria. In one of my weekly columns in the Observer Group of Newspapers, the Sunday Observer, (Benin City, August 7, 1988, p. 12), entitled "On Nigerian Federalism" I wrote: "While Bendelites are celebrating the Silver Jubilee of the creation of their state this month, 567 Nigerians are continuing their assigned debate in Abuja to rewrite the Nigerian Constitution." In that same piece I argued as follows:
"As Nigerians, we assume we are operating a federal state when in fact we are not. ....Nigerian federalism ensures that the central government dictates to the governments of the federating units, thus negating a key aspect of federalism ...It may not be necessary for each state to have its own constitution, provided the agreed division of powers underlining the independence of each state is written in the Federal Constitution. It is obvious that Nigerians do not want unitarism, but where they elect to adopt federalism then they should be prepared to pay the price of federalism. The Constituent Assembly members should give Nigerians a Federal Constitution that is truly Fedral in all aspects. "
Eleven years later, we are still addressing the same concerns I articulated on the Silver Jubilee of the Midwest State. The purpose of this anniversary piece is to underline the significance of the creation of Midwest State in Nigeria’s federal polity. We will also invite other concerned Nigerians to (re)examine the federal structure of Nigeria in such a way that recognizes the independence of the federating units.



THE CREATION OF MIDWEST STATE
After more than two decades of selfless struggles by the representatives of the peoples of the region, the Midwest State was created on August 9, 1963. The creation of the Midwest State is significant for the following reasons:
  1. It was the first state to be created in Nigeria.
  2. It remains the only Nigerian state to be created by constitutional means, and not by a military fiat.
  3. Its creation facilitated a stronger voice for the articulation of minority rights in Nigerian Politics.
But the journey to August 9, 1963 was not an easy one. We. Midwesterners, must remain eternally grateful to those who fought for the creation of the state. Prominent among those was the Oba of Benin, Akenzua II, without whose personal intervention and guidance the state may not have been created in 1963. The others whose names must be recognized were Dennis Osadebay, Jereton Marierie, and James Otobo. It is instructive to note that Otobo was the only prominent member of the Action Group (AG) from the region who fought publicly for the creation of the Midwest State. As we celebrate the 33rd anniversary of the Midwest State, I am sad to declare that we have not done anything to immortalize the lives of those four freedom fighters.
In constitutional debates, many may argue that Midwest State was a product of the series of commissions of inquiries that called for the creation of states for Nigerian minority groups. It would be a gross oversimplification to do so, because the inquiries by themselves did not create the Midwest State. While the results of those inquiries were powerful arguments in favour of the proponents of state creation, the contour of pre-1963 Nigerian politics denied state creation for any minority groups. Let me explain.
The Richards’ three regional structure of 1947 rendered moribund the Lugardian north-south amalgamation that gave birth to "modern" Nigeria in 1914. The event of 1947 coincided with the formation of the three main political parties that eventually governed the respective regions. We all accept that Nigeria is a creation of British imperial rule. The hitherto independent kingdoms of present day Nigeria were colonized, "united" and christened "Nigeria" by Britain. When these disparate kingdoms regained their independence on October 1, 1960, it was not as separate independent entities which they were, but as a political community called NIGERIA. They were brought together by Britain to experiment with the art of governing a multi-ethnic and multi-lingual polity. Since 1960 Nigerians have been grappling with this experiment. Of the three major political parties that defined the landscape of contemporary Nigerian social and political history, only the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) was established as a national political party. Both the AG, a creation of Egbe Omo Oduduwa, and the Northern Peoples’ Congress (NPC), were founded to promote Yoruba and Hausa-Fulani interests respectively. That the NCNC later became to be perceived as an ‘Igbo’ party was not entirely the design of Igbo political elites, but rather the machinations of some powerful Yoruba nationalists who did not cherish the notion of an Igbo, Nnamdi Azikiwe, becoming the premier of Western Nigeria.
As the leader of the NCNC, Azikiwe was to be the first premier of Western Nigeria following the elections of 1951, with Obafemi Awolowo, a Yoruba, the leader of the AG, as the leader of the opposition in the House of Assembly. It should be recalled, with profound sadness, that prominent Yoruba traditional leaders and political elites exerted pressure on a number of Yorubas elected on the NCNC platform to "cross carpet" in the House and join the AG, in order to deny Azikiwe the premiership in favour of Awolowo. The concept of "carpet crossing" was thus introduced into Nigerian political discourse. Azikiwe had assumed the leadership of the NCNC following the death of Herbert Macaulay, a Yoruba. There would have been no basis for "carpet crossing" if Macaulay, and not Azikiwe, were elected premier of the West on the NCNC platform in 1951.
As a result of this blatant injection of ethnicism into Nigerian politics, Azikiwe was compelled to "return home" to the East where he became the premier of the government. It is safe to postulate that, were it not for this event, the post 1951 development of Nigerian politics could have been spared much of the instability and crisis the country has experienced. This was a vital turning point in the political history of contemporary Nigeria. It helped to influence most Igbos to seek political shelter in the NCNC, just as the AG became privatized by most Yorubas, and the Hausa-Fulani political elites sought comfort in the NPC.
Following the 1959 federal elections, the NPC, with Abubakar Tafawa Balewa as the prime minister, formed a coalition government with the NCNC. Obafemi Awolowo, the leader of the AG, became the leader of the official opposition in the Federal House of Representatives. Samuel Akintola replaced Awolowo as the premier of Western Nigeria, while Michael Okpara replaced Azikiwe as the premier of Eastern Nigeria. Ahmadu Bello, the leader of the NPC, remained as premier of Northern Nigeria. As part of the NPC-NCNC coalition, Azikiwe became the governor general, and subsequently the first (ceremonial) president of Nigeria, when Nigeria became a republic on October 1, 1963.
It was against the above background that the debate for state creation took place. The movement for a Midwest State was the most topical. For the past 50 years the political development of Nigeria has been viewed, rightly or wrongly, as a power struggle for hegemony by the three dominant ethnic groups: Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo. Scholars later used the appellation, "Hausa-Fulani" to depict the symbiotic relationship between the Hausa and the Fulani as a result of the strong Islamic ties that bind the two dominant ethnic groups in the northern part of Nigeria. Before August 9, 1963, when Nigeria had three constituent parts, the Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo political elites exercised hegemonistic powers in the North, West, and East respectively. It is interesting to note that while none of them wanted a separate state created in their region, they supported the agitation for state creation in the opposing regions. This position was identical to the concept of preventive imperialism of 19th century European imperialism in Africa. I refer to the Hausa/Igbo/Yoruba hegemony as a tripodal conspiracy to subjugate the minorities of Nigeria. We will return to this issue later.

We identify three premises of Nigerian federalism. These are (1) the equality of the federating units; (2) the Hausa/Igbo/Yoruba tripodal conspiracy; and (3) the question of minority rights. If Nigeria were a normal political entity, we would expect the first premise to be dominant in the polity. The fact that the Hausa/Igbo/Yoruba tripodal conspiracy determines the form and content of Nigerian federalism is reflected in the way the political leaders of those three ethnic groups viewed the minority areas within their provinces as their respective colonial possessions, just as European colonial powers regarded their African colonies. It was a scramble for Nigeria by the Hausa, Igbo, and Yoruba to maintain their power over the minority areas located in the regions that they controlled. (See Table I below) It was against this background that the battle for the creation of the Midwest State was fought and won.




TABLE I: VIEWS OF THE GOVERNING PARTIES TOWARD STATE CREATION
REGION
PARTY IN POWER
STATE CREATION IN THE REGIONS


EAST
NORTH
WEST
East
NCNC
Oppose
Support
Support
North
NPC
Support
Oppose
Support
West
AG
Support
Support
Oppose



As shown in the above table, the demand for state creation in any particular region enjoyed the support of the opposing political parties in that region. For example, while the NCNC opposed the agitation for a COR State (Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers) in the East, they strongly supported the agitation for a Midwest State in the West and a Middle Belt state in the North. Thus, for the Midwesterners, the AG was the "enemy" party on the issue of a Midwest State. The debate over state creation in the various regional houses of assembly was dictated by the ideological prism of the ruling political parties. With Awolowo, Anthony Enahoro and other prominent members of the AG facing charges of treasonable felony, the AG opposition to the creation of the Midwest State gradually became insignificant. The AG crisis that began in May 1962, following the party’s convention in Jos, fundamentally altered the alliance construct of Nigerian political parties in the 1962-1965 period. This provided an ideal constitutional framework for the Midwest State movement. The crisis also offered the NPC -NCNC coalition government a golden opportunity to crush the AG.
Meanwhile, deserters from the AG, led by Akintola and Ayo Rosiji, established a new political party - the United Peoples’ Party (UPP) - which in mid 1964 was renamed the Nigerian National Democratic Party (UNDP). As premier of the West, Akintola emerged as the leader of the party. In the Federal House of Representatives, Rosiji led the pack of former members of the AG to "cross carpets" to swell the cell of the NPC. The disarray of the AG, and the impact of the treasonable felony trial against Awolowo, Enahoro and other leaders of the party, created ideal situations for the NPC. The NPC no longer seem to need its alliance with the NCNC, and thus became politically arrogant towards its coalition partner. Akintola, who as the premier of the AG-led government of the West had opposed the creation of a Midwest State, now began to view the creation of the state through the same ideological prism of the NPC, a party with which his UNDP was now aligned. Thus, the governing parties of the East (NCNC), the North (NPC), and the West (UNDP) now all agreed on the creation of the Midwest State. The houses of assembly of the respective regions had little difficulty passing the required resolutions in support of the proposal to create the Midwest
State. Irrespective of its growing schism with its coalition partner at the federal level, the NCNC voted with the NPC and the UNDP at the Federal House of Representatives in favour of the creation of the Midwest State. With the above scenario, the subsequent plebiscite of August 9, 1963, became a mere formality as Midwesterners overwhelmingly voted for the creation of their STATE. Midwest thus became the first STATE of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.



WHY NATIONS FEDERATE
Simply put, nations decide to federate for one or a combination of the following reasons:-

1 socio-economic;

  1. political; and

  1. security.
A nation decides to federate for socio-economic reasons because it:




  1. possesses shared values with other independent federating units;

  1. wants an access to a larger domestic market;

  1. desires a secured access to a sea port;

  1. seeks access to a higher standard of living; and

  1. would enhance its welfare policies.




Politically, a nation decides to federate in order to:






bullet

bullet
strengthen existing relations with its co-federating units
bullet
possess a stronger voice internationally.
Thirdly, a nation decides to enter into a federation in order to be able to protect itself from real or imagined threat to its national security.
The above factors, in varying degrees, could be said to influence the leaders of Nigeria’s three regions to federate after they had obtained their respective independence. We recall that the East and the West obtained their self government status (independence) in 1957, while the North obtained theirs in 1959. Each could have opted to go its own way as we witnessed in the case of the former federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, which metamorphosed into the independent states of Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Malawi. More importantly for us Midwesterners, the above factors influenced our decision to remain as a constituent unit of the Nigerian federation in 1963. None of the federating units became parts of a federal Nigeria in order to forefelt their independence. It is essential that we take this point into consideration in our discussions of Nigerian federalism.



IMPLICATIONS OF FEDERALISM

1 The central government represents the federation as a subject of international law.

  1. Federating units cannot represent themselves as subjects of international law.

  1. Federating units independence within own jurisdiction must not do harm to the federation

  1. A highly centralized central government does harm to the federal polity as it could lead to a quasi federal (or unitary) system.

  1. A decentralized federalism could destabilize the federal polity as it is capable of eroding the powers of the central government and making the federating units too powerful.

  1. The two levels of citizenship - state, and central - could be entangled in perpetual conflict if the central government and the federating units fail to agree on vital issues of interest to the federating units.

  1. Citizens' loyalty gravitates towards their respective federating units than to the central government in a highly decentralized federal polity.

  1. A central government's inability to equitably relate to the federating units could give rise to centrifugal forces that could destabilize the federal polity.

  1. It is more expensive to run a federal system than it is to run a unitary system because of the levels of governments in the former.

  1. The system of checks-and-balances is more evident in a federal polity than in any other system of government.
The 1963 Republican constitution of Nigeria recognized the independence of the federating units. It was an example of how a federal constitution should look like. Unfortunately, we have witnessed a systematic erosion of that independence since the military intrusion in the governance of Nigeria. As I indicated in "If Nigeria Must Survive", in the Sunday Observer, (August 28, 1988, Benin City, p. 5) "A mere criticism of the military regime does not, and could not, imply that Nigerian civilian governments have performed creditably in operating federalism". The performance of the Shehu Shagari administration of the Second Republic continued the pattern established by the previous military regimes, while that of the current Olusegun Obasanjo’s civilian administration is an extension of his own military administration of the 1970s. I referred to the Hausa-Igbo-Yoruba triumvirate as a tripodal conspiracy in our brief discussion on the creation of the Midwest State above. No where is this more glaring than in the area of revenue allocation.




TABLE II: EVOLUTION OF REVENUE ALLOCATION FORMULA IN NIGERIA
YEAR
FORMULA PERCENTAGE

DERIVATION
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
FEDERATION ACCOUNT
1953
100
nil
nil
1954
50
20
30
1964
50
15
35
1970
45
25
30
1975
20
nil
80
1979
nil
nil
100
1982-89
1.5
nil
98.5
1999-
13
nil
87

It is interesting to note that, the decline of the amount due each state of the federation coincided with the growing significance of oil as the main stimulant of the Nigerian economy. The current revenue allocation formula, as defined in Section 162 (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, discriminates against the minority ethnic groups of the oil producing areas of the country. We should also note that, this formula is not applicable to other natural resources as iron, hides & skins, cocoa, palmoil which, again coincidentally, are situated primarily in the non minority regions of Nigeria. When these products constituted the mainstay of Nigeria’s economy, the revenue allocation formula favoured the respective federating units. But the game was changed when oil became the dominant single produce sustaining the Nigerian economy. Who changed the rules of the game? The answer is simple: members of the tripodal conspiracy group! Ask we say in Nigeria, monkey de work, bamboo de chop. Not only did the change violate the principles of federalism as they were when Midwest State was created, it also demonstrates a gross misuse and abuse of the power of the majority to subjugate the minority. As I have argued elsewhere ( "The Nigerian Polity." Sunday Observer, Benin City, September 18, 1988, p. 5), the "federal revenue allocation to states should be made to correspond proportionately to the revenue generated within each state. It is only in this way that states will begin to be serious and strive to be independent and autonomous, instead of waiting for a national cake shared on a wrong formula whereby the bakers get less".



CONCLUSION
The current structure of Nigeria federalism will lead to the demise of Nigeria, except a thorough restructuring of Nigerian federalism is urgently put in place. A key consideration in a democratic polity is for the dominant political and economic class to recognize and respect its limits to power. It should be prepared to discard its own selfish agenda where this conflicts with the national interest of the nation as expressed by the population in given circumstances. It should not appropriate to itself the right to determine what should be the national interest of the nation. It is the task of the ruling class, particularly in an embryonic democratic polity like Nigeria, to always ensure that democratic principles prevail. Members of the tripodal conspiracy have failed in this regard. This is reflected in the entire body of the current (1999) constitution where the federating units are described as subordinates of the central government. The concepts of independent and coordinates, key prerequisites of federalism, have been completely discarded. Furthermore, the proposed Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) bill which President Obasanjo recently submitted to the Nigerian Senate is a graphic display of the machinations of this tripodal group. The bill outlines a strategy of how to systematically dismantle a federal state.




HAPPY BIRTHDAY MIDWEST STATE

At Last, UK Releases 2009 Letter Of “Ibori MP,” Tony Baldry.


"Ibori MP", Tony Baldry
By SaharaReporters, New York
The British Government has finally released—but partly—the September 2009 letter on behalf of former Delta State governor James Ibori that it received from a Conservative Member of Parliament, Tony Baldry.
The letter, which ignited a Freedom of Information (FOI) controversy in 2010, demonstrates why Mr. Baldry did not want it in the hands of the public: while he did not make a direct case for Ibori or his associates, the letter was a disguised, intensely-sympathetic appeal to the government to intervene on their behalf.
The granting of the FOI request was made in a letter dated July 31, 2012, from Jonathan Drew, a Deputy Head of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, to author and blogger Richard Wilson.
In it, Mr. Drew said the decision to release Mr. Baldry’s letter followed an internal review of the events of 2010, and that disclosure of the letter would, in fact, enhance public understanding of the UK’s relationship with Nigeria.  He also explained the decision to withhold certain portions of the letter, saying of those sections, “public interest in withholding this information is greater than the public interest in disclosing.”
Mr. Baldry’s infamous letter to the government followed a meeting with the then Nigerian President, Umaru Yar’Adua.  At that time the MP for Banbury, Baldry, now Sir Baldry, the Member for North Oxfordshire, wrote it to the Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, at that time the Rt. Hon. David Milliband, MP, and it became quickly regarded in Nigeria as an effort to obstruct the trial of associates of Mr. Ibori.
The newly-released letter demonstrates a carefully-thought out attempt to sway thinking in the government in favour of the former Nigerian governor and his associates in the UK, following an intense appeal to the MP by Mr. Yar’Adua, who was Ibori’s friend and a political beneficiary.  It is as yet unclear how Mr. Yar’Adua chose Baldry for his advocacy, but it seems as though the two men were brought together by Ibori himself.
“My understanding is that James Ibori faces no charges in the United Kingdom,” Mr. Baldry wrote.  “However, his wife and a number of people closely associated with him have been indicted to stand trial at Southwark Crown Court on a number of counts of offences allegedly against the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.”
According to Mr. Baldry in the leter, “Arising out of those proceedings the Courts made a fairly Draconian world-wide freezing Order on all of James Ibori’s assets.”
The MP lamented how the actions of the Crown Prosecution Service had inflicted “obvious and serious consequences for James Ibori and his ability to live his life day by day…”
Quick to stress he was not holding a brief for any of the defendants, he was nonetheless armed with a good deal of information that was favourable to the former governor, and he reeled off some of the pertinent credentials, saying: “James Ibori is a public figure in Nigeria, a former Governor of Delta State, and still actively involved with the governing party of Nigeria.”
Thus establishing that “He is not hard to find,” Mr. Baldry wondered aloud into the heart and ears of the government why “notwithstanding several visits to Nigeria by the Metropolitan Police, in connection with these matters, no attempt has ever been made to invite James Ibori’s response to the allegations that have been made against him, or to give him an opportunity to put his side of the story…”
The MP then pitched: “I enclose a notarized statement, together with supporting documents, given by James Ibori, which he tells me is the first time that anyone has sought to listen to his explanation of what has occurred.”
He then turned to his meeting with Yar’Adua, and wrote about how deeply concerned the president was that Nigerians accused of corruption be prosecuted in Nigeria.  He even played the sensitive colonialism card, describing Ibori’s experience with the UK as “a sort of colonialism with London trying to control what happens in Nigeria.”
By Baldry’s own account, the meeting with Yar’Adua lasted only 45 minutes.  “The President’s sense of injury must, I suspect, affect the nature of UK/Nigerian bilateral relations,” he lamented in his closing arguments.
It would be recalled that while Mr. Baldry in 2009 admitted having written the letter, he refused to produce it for public examination.  But what he had to say was so important to him he had also sent copies to the Attorney-General, the Rt. Hon Baroness Scotland QC; the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, the Rt. Hon Jack Straw MP; the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Rt. Hon Alan Johnson MP; and the UK High Commissioner to Nigeria.
The challenge of unearthing the letter was taken up by Rally for Nigeria and the Nigeria Liberty Forum (NLF), which filed an FOI request with the government to try to obtain a copy of the letter.
It was on the basis of the activism of the NLF and its allegations against Mr. Baldry that Mr. Wilson originally wrote a blog about the Ibori issue in February.  He was subsequently contacted by the MP’s lawyers, who claimed that his article was defamatory and threatened to sue he and his webhost for libel.
Mr. Wilson stood down the article.  So had the UK Independent, which had published another story about the matter, as Mr. Baldry—fortified by Yar’Adua’s determination to keep Ibori out of embarrassment and jail—deployed threats of libel as well as obfuscation of his roles as an MP and a barrister into potent weapons of self-preservation, and profit.
For his 45 minutes with Yar’Adua, Mr. Baldry was paid royally.  “Received fee of £22,012.57 from Zaiwalla & Co. (Solicitors to James Ibori), for advising clients.  Time worked: 16 hours,” he registered in the MP’s Register of Interests on September 28, 2009, just four days after he fired off his infamous letter to the Foreign Secretary.
Not bad: that translates into £490.00 per minute.   Or—if you are measuring by his lavish estimate of 16 hours of “professional” labour as “barrister,” not MP—nearly £1376 per hour, First Class travel and all-expenses paid Abuja welcome mat not included.
But that was in September of 2009, five months after Mr. Yar’Adua told The Guardian (Nigeria), in an exclusive interview, that some former governors (read: Ibori) being accused of corruption were simply “my friends.”  It was also three months before a deeply-compromised Justice Marcel Awokulehin, at the Federal High Court, Asaba, dismissed all 170 corruption charges against Mr. Ibori, claiming the former governor had no case to answer.  [The current government of Delta State, led by a cousin of Ibori’s, is, as we speak, trying to get its hands on a sum of $16million by which Ibori had tried to bribe Nuhu Ribadu, who headed the Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission at the time.]
Of greater importance, Mr. Baldry’s letter was written only two months before Mr. Yar’Adua fell fatally ill, leaving Ibori without the cover of federal power he had enjoyed since he left office two and a half years before, anchored on complicity at the highest levels.
Despite that support, the trial of Ibori’s associates continued in London courtrooms.  Without that support, Ibori’s trial soon followed, shortly after he took to his heels in Nigeria but was arrested in Dubai and repatriated to the shores of England where his criminal nature was first confronted by the authorities in 1990.
Each of his associates on trial, as well as his wife, received a jail term, and without that support, Ibori himself received 13 years behind bars.
Without that support, it is little surprise that Mr. Baldry’s letter, expunged of the seedier segments that supposedly hinge on inter-state relations, has now come to light, and exposed the MP for what he really is: a man for whom the rich and corrupt mean far more than the people they have robbed or pillaged.
In January 2010, Mr. Baldry, stomping on his critics, wrote to SaharaReporters claiming we had failed to authenticate the facts we published against him, without indicating what he was referring to, or providing any evidence to enable us do better than he had suggested.
Publishing his response out of good faith, we appealed to him—in the same good faith and in the assumption that his interest in the Ibori matter was truly in the interest of law—to provide us with a copy of the letter that he had to the Foreign Office.
Predictably, he did not. 
We do not know if Mr. Baldry has yet had his high-priced libel lawyers threaten the Foreign Office, but the letter through which he acquired international notoriety is now public property, and although the redactions leave him with a couple of fig leaves behind which to hide, we do not think anyone will have difficulty recognizing him for what he really is.
He will occupy the same memory cell block as one Justice Awokulehin.
READ Mr. Baldry's Letter  Here

Northern Governors Moves To Polarize Nigeria Governors Forum.

Babangida Aliyu-Governor of Niger State and chair of Northern Governors's Forum
By SaharaReporters, New York
Governors from Nigeria’s Northern states who are opposed to the establishment of state police may have started maneuvers to whittle down the efficiency of the Nigerian Governors Forum. The Nigerian Governors Forum, which has all 36 state governors as members, is pushing for a constitutional amendment to allow for state police.
SaharaReporters learnt that a majority of Northern governors kept away from a meeting of the Nigerian Governors Forum that was scheduled Wednesday night in Abuja. They also showed up at the Presidential Villa on Thursday morning to attend the National Economic Council meeting that was chaired by Vice President Namadi Sambo.
A source disclosed that Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, who chairs the governors’ group, looked forlorn and dejected as he descended the staircase at the Rivers State lodge in Asokoro, Abuja. The lodge was the venue of the meeting called to address issues pertaining to state police and other constitutional amendments the governors wish to back.
Some of the northern governors who stayed away from the meeting were in fact in Abuja, and took part in a regional meeting of the Northern Governors Forum that held earlier Wednesday.
In a clear expression of dejection, Mr. Amaechi refused to speak with journalists after his few colleagues who came for the ill-fated meeting had left.
Only nine governors and eight deputy governors attended the meeting, which had been billed as important by members of the Forum.
The governors in attendance were those of Rivers, Ebonyi, Akwa-Ibom, Ekiti, Ondo, Sokoto, Kaduna, Kano and Kogi states. The deputy governors of Niger, Adamawa, Yobe, Jigawa, Cross River, Bayelsa, Delta and Nasarawa states also attended the meeting.
At its last meeting on August 8, the forum had deferred debate on the on-going constitutional amendment until the end of the Ramadan fasting period. The fasting period ended last week.
At the August meeting, Mr. Amaechi had told newsmen that the Forum put off the debate on the constitutional amendment till the end of the Ramadan period to enable governors who traveled for the lesser hajj to return.
But a source who is a top aide to a Northern governor told SaharaReporters that several northern governors opposed to the establishment of state police deliberately kept away from yesterday’s meeting. “They knew that the issue of state police would be discussed at the meeting and therefore decided to stay away,” he said.
The governors from the northern part of the country had initially supported the idea of state police when it was first raised at a meeting of all 36 governors. However, several Northern governors backed away from the idea during a subsequent meeting of governors from the Northern sector. “They felt the time was not ripe for the creation of state police,” said our source.
Two sources also told SaharaReporters that northern governors were also at odds with their counterparts from the southern part of Nigeria on whether to abrogate provisions for offshore/onshore dichotomy as well as the derivation principle in sharing the country’s oil revenues. In addition, northern governors are reportedly against enshrining the country’s six geo-political zones in the constitution.
One source revealed that the existing wide disparity on some issues between northern and southern governors compelled the governors from the North to stay away from Wednesday’s meeting.