ANPP Leaders Optimistic over Opposition Coalition.

By Onyebuchi Ezigbo in Abuja

There is growing optimism within the ranks of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) that the much-touted move by key opposition political parties to merge will come to fruition after all.

ANPP is joining two other leading opposition parties, the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) to plan for a possible merger to confront the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) at the polls in 2015.

THISDAY gathered that due to the interest and enthusiasm the merger issue has generated, the party has decided to further enlarge the contact committee on opposition merger talks to 20 members, including all its governors, senators and top leaders of the party.

According to party sources, members’ interests increased following considerations of its position in the political calculation with three states under its control.

This includes the possibility of the party members being considered for the top most position under the emerging common platform.
However, the move has been delayed as it was learnt that the plan by leadership of ANPP  to inaugurate a contact  committee on the merger talks was shifted because most of the members had gone on pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia.

Also, the inauguration planned to enable the committee to set out modalities for engaging other parties  in the coalition  was postponed because the national chairman, Dr. Ogbonnaya Onu, was still being expected from a trip to the United States.

A party source told THISDAY that the top hierarchy of ANPP, particularly the Chairman of the Board of Trustees (BoT), Senator Modu Sheriff,  are desperate  to go into negotiations with the other parties.

“Everyone among the progressives believe strongly that working in collaboration is the only way the opposition parties can stop the PDP and this is why all the parties are ready to make the necessary sacrifices to see that it succeeds,” he said.

Also, Onu who spoke in an interview with THISDAY, expressed the confidence of the party leadership that the proposed merger would succeed.

He said the party was already in discussion with other progressive opposition parties and that contrary to critics’ views that the talks will collapse, there was every reason to be optimistic over the success of the alliance this time around.

“We are working very hard on it. You know this cannot be easy but we are working in collaboration, we are talking to the major opposition political parties. 

“We are in discussion with them and we are very hopeful that by the end of the day we will able to secure an understanding that will help us to merge. 

“Our first option is to achieve a merger but if that is not possible, we settle for a coalition.  We started early this time, this has never happen before though many do not still believe it could be possible because they think it is difficult. 

“It has never happened before that discussions like this started early.  But I believe we have enough time to sort out all the problem that arise.

On the views that the opposition merger move is nothing but a marriage of convenience by parties with no common ideologies and that it will never work, Onu said those expressing such views are ignorant of the ideologies of most opposition progressive parties.

“I do not think that opposition parties involved in the talks have different views.  Out manifestos are quite similar and the new ANPP believe in the unity of Nigeria. We believe in a stable,  peaceful and prosperous country.  We also believe that there must be responsible leadership to offer service to our people so that Nigerians can get the best from their government.

“I feel that this one thing that binds all members of the opposition parties and there is a commitment that the time has come for us to provide this alternative platform that will help us get the desired Chang for the good of the nation,” he added.

Jonathan summons PDP govs, Tukur, others to crucial meeting.

BY HENRY UMORU
…Security, state police, excess crude, PIB top agenda
ABUJA—WORRIED by the security challenge in the country, especially with activities of Boko Haram sect where killings and destruction of property have been carried out, President Goodluck Jonathan has summoned the governors elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to a meeting.
Vanguard gathered yesterday that others who have also been summoned to the meeting which will hold at the Presidential Villa today, are the PDP National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, National Secretary, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola and Secretary, PDP Board of Trustees, BoT, Senator Walid Jibrin.
It was gathered that the meeting has become imperative to save the governors because the President was no longer comfortable with the situation where the governors sing different tunes when they ought to have agreed on a position when national issues come up for discussions.
The President is said to be unhappy because of discordant tunes by the PDP governors over the constitutional amendments, especially with regard to the demand for State Police, as well as activities of Boko Haram.

President Jonathan

Other issues that will feature in today’s meeting include the onshore/off shore dichotomy debate and the Petroleum Industry Bill, PIB.
A source at the party said, the PDP was pushing for a coordinated constitutional amendment. Vanguard was told: “The idea where the President, who is a product of the PDP would be continually at logger head with governors produced by the same PDP is not good for the polity. There are 36 governors, and 23 of them are from the PDP, yet they cannot speak with a voice, this is not good for the system; the meeting will endeavour to have a coordinated stand on issues.
Common stance on national issues
“It is expected that there would be a unified position at the meeting, especially as the National Assembly is about to reconvene from break.”
It will be recalled that there was a split among the governors under the aegis of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, NGF, on the demand for State Police, just as it became a confrontation between the northern governors and the rest.
At the end of its meeting in Abuja, on July 27, the Northern governors had through their Chairman and Governor of Niger State, Dr. Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu said they did not agree on State Police at an earlier meeting of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum held June, 25 at the Rivers State Governor’s lodge.
According to the Northern States governors, “the forum was not in support of the creation of State Police. It however, resolved to prevail on the Federal Government to embark on Police Reform that will assist the states in control and management of Police affairs, and further emphasise on the sound philosophy for modern policing by amending the provision of section 215 of the Constitution.
Also recall that President Jonathan had said last week during the conference of the Nigeria Bar Association, NBA that Nigeria as a country was not ripe for State Police.
Strong indications emerged that there was crisis on the issue of on/off shore when the Northern Governors set up a committee to discuss the on and off shore dichotomy, just as they also directed their various Commissioners for Justice to discuss the implication of the on/offshore oil production and advice on the way forward.
Kano State governor, Rabiu Kwankwaso had spoken for the northern governors, when he stressed that the policy of on/off crude oil production was not acceptable to the northern governors.

Election Tribunal: Edo PDP Denies Alleged Compensation By Oshiomhole.

PATRICK OCHOGA.

Amid innuendos by some aggrieved Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, members in Edo State over the withdrawal of the party from the suit filed by its governorship candidate, Major General Charles Airhiavhere challenging the victory of Governor Adams Oshiomhole at the Election Tribunal, the party yesterday debunked the rumour making the rounds that the leadership of the party was ‘settled’ by Oshiomhole.
The party disclosed this in Benin in a press statement signed by the party’s Publicity Secretary, Matthew Urhoghide. Urhoghide in the statement explained the reasons why the party decided not to be joined in a legal tussle against Oshiomhole after the July 14th governorship election in the state.
He said the official position not to challenge either the result of the July 14, 2012 Governorship Election or any issue was reached after several prolonged meetings attended by strategic leaders and stakeholders of the party including the PDP flag bearer in the election.
 “Our party did not take a position a few days after the election. It took over three weeks to reach a decision and within which period a series of consultations and meetings were held to determine the best line of action. In its carefully considered opinion, Edo PDP decided not to challenge the election outcome at the Election Tribunal.
“We did not also come by the decision easily. The resolve not to go to court was as difficult for the leadership to arrive at as it must be for our numerous faithful and loyal members and supporters to come to grips with and accept.”
“It is malicious, wicked and unfounded for a group of people to bandy innuendoes and rumours suggesting that the leadership of Edo PDP accepted compensations to sell out their rights to challenge the result of the election. In fact, these same people are known to have worked against the candidate and party interest in the July 14, 2012 election. It is to our knowledge that the new aim of these people is to cause disaffection within the party, and strive to gain some sympathies and favours for themselves from top PDP leaders including the opposition party.
“For the avoidance of doubt, no money and promises of choice positions both in the local government offices and in Governor Oshiomhole’s cabinet were offered to and accepted by the PDP and no high-up leader of the party bargained the party’s rights away. The decision, reached by all at the said meetings, was simply a case of the right thing to do after responsibly and painstakingly weighing all the angles”, he added.

Attorney-Gen. to Jega: you’ve no CEO powers.

By Augustine AVWODE.

Adoke

Minister’s letter says chairman can’t be INEC’s accounting officer

Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chair Prof. Attahiru Jega has lost out in his battle to hold tight to executive powers at the agency. 
Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mohammed Adoke has advised Jega to quit his role as the accounting officer of INEC.
There has been a running battle between Jega and some of the National Commissioners over the INEC chair’s alleged “acquisition of wide powers to himself”.
At a recent retreat in Lagos, the commissioners reportedly took the chairman up on such powers, which, in their view, are open to abuses. 
They also said if the chairman continued the way he had been running the body in “a one man show arrangement”, it could lead to a major crack in the leadership and endanger the agency’s future.
Some of them buttressed their argument that Jega had been obsessed with power with his request for sweeping powers for the INEC chair in his proposal for an amendment to the Electoral Act 2010.
Jega, had last May, requested the National Assembly to amend the 2010 Electoral Act to allow for electronic voting in 2015 and to give him powers to appoint the Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) because, according to him, “there is no clear sense of the relationship between RECs and the commission at the national level.” 
He added:  “We will like to be given a role in order to streamline authority structure within the commission.” 
The INEC boss said he wanted the electoral body to be allowed to sanction political parties that violate internal party democracy with a view to enhancing the democratic process.
He spoke at a retreat for members of the House of Representatives ad-hoc committee on the review of the 1999 Constitution in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital. 
Jega, who urged the National Assembly to expunge Section 52 of the Electoral law which prohibits the use of electronic voting machine in elections, was represented by Mrs Thelma Iremiren, a National Commissioner. 
To get the legal backing to his enormous powers, Jega had written a letter dated June 19, to Adoke, asking for clarification on who should be the accounting officer of the body.
He noted: “Since our assumption of office as a new Commission in July 2010, having regard to the fact that neither the Constitution nor the Electoral Act defined the role of the Secretary to the Commission as the Accounting Officer, I have considered myself as such, relying upon provisions of the Procurement Act, particularly Sections 18, 19 and 20 of the Act and Regulations issued by the Bureau of Public Procurement to the effect that in an MDA/Corporate procuring entity, the Chief Executive is the Accounting Officer.
“I have also done this, given the weighty personal liability which the Procurement Act places on the shoulders of the Accounting Officer. The tradition in INEC had been that a Permanent Secretary was posted as the Secretary, until 2008, when INEC, having regard to the provisions of the Constitution and Electoral Act appointed its Secretary. The functions/roles of the Secretary as specified did not say or imply that he is the Accounting Officer”.   
Jega told Adoke that the clarification was necessary in the light of the restructuring and reorganisation going on in the commission as it prepares for what he described as “better, effective and efficient service delivery towards 2015 and beyond”. 
He insisted that it was “pertinent to seek this clarification for the avoidance of doubt and in order to put lingering matters to rest.”
The “lingering matters” Jega spoke about, it was learnt, might not be unconnected with what a source described as the frosty relationship between the chairman and other commissioners over the chairman’s powers.
In a July 26 reply to Jega’s reply, Adoke declared categorically that the chairman is not the accounting officer of INEC.  
Adoke said: “I have examined relevant provisions of the law particularly, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, the Electoral Act, the Public Procurement Act and extant Financial Regulations in order to determine whether the law has expressly provided for the position of either the ‘Chief Executive Officer’ or ‘Accounting Officer’ of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
“Regrettably, it would appear that no such terminology was used in the statutes examined. Item 14(1)(a) of Part 1 to the Third  Schedule of the Constitution only provides that the  Chairman shall be the Chief  Electoral Commissioner. The provision does not state that the ‘Chief Electoral Commissioner’ is the ‘Chief Executive Officer.
“I have similarly examined the functions and powers of the Commission as provided for in item 15 of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution and sections 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Electoral Act and wish to observe that these are functions and powers that can only be exercised by the Commission and not by the Chairman or any individual Commissioner except as may be delegated by the Commission under Section 152 of the Electoral Act or item 15(h) of Part 1 to the Third Schedule to the Constitution.”
“Consequently, in the absence of any clear donation of the powers of a Chief Executive Officer or Accounting Officer by the relevant statutes, and in the absence of any evidence to indicate that these functions and powers of the Commission have been delegated to the Chairman, I am unable to come to the reasoned conclusion that the law contemplates that the Chairman of INEC shall be the Chief Executive Officer or Accounting Officer of the Commission,” Adoke explained.
 He added that the Electoral Act confers on the Secretary enormous administrative powers akin to those of  Directors-General, who are “statutorily the Accounting Officers and Chief Executive Officers of their various Commissions”. 
Adoke pointed out that this is what obtains in similar commissions, such as Police Service Commission, National Population Commission and Federal Judicial Service Commission.    
Some of the commissioners were said to have warned that unless Jega is checked, he could become a “dictator” as demonstrated by his actions after the Kogi State governorship election when Jega, who should be a disinterested party, directed that one of the contending candidates be sworn in as governor, fueling speculations that the electoral body has metamorphosed into a “game changer”.
 Jega’s actions are according to sources, believed to have been buoyed by his membership of the Justice Mohammed Uwais panel on Election Reform.

World Bank, EU, others worry about power reform.

By John Ofikhenua.

Nnaji

 

The World Bank and other international partners are worried  that Nigeria’s power reform programme may collapse, following last week’s sudden exit of Minister  Barth Nnaji.
Prof. Nnaji was forced to quit as a result of his alleged conflict of interest in the ongoing privatisation of the successor companies to the dissolved Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN).
President Goodluck Jonathan said in Onitsha last Thursday that Nnaji “is a seasoned professional” who is “very competent” and who has “not committed any offence”, but he had to go because he had interests in the ongoing privatisation.
At the weekend, officials of the World Bank, the United Nations International Development Organisation (UNIDO), the European Union (EU) and others met with Minister of State for Power Mr. Darius Ishaku to express their worry about the government’s power programme. 
The UNIDO Country Representative, Dr. Patrick Kormawa, who led others to the ministry, said: UNIDO has been working in concert with other agencies for rural electrification in the country, especially in the renewable energy sector.
The EU Head of Cooperation, Mr. P. Philippe, said “when Brussels (the EU headquarters), got the news, it was alarmed and feared for the continuity of the reforms in the sector,” said. 
The UNIDO Country Representative added: “We have no choice than to continue our support even though we were disappointed at the recent event.”
The partners also sought to know how far the privatisation process had gone and whether Nigeria was still committed to the timeline. 
The World Bank representative, Mr. Erik Feinstiom said he was at the last power summit in Asaba, the Delta State capital, which was presided over by Prof. Nnaji, and were not left in any doubt about the former minister’s focus, passion and direction. 
A statement by a power ministry official Mr. Greyne Anosike, quoted another member of the delegation as saying allowing Prof. Nnaji to go the way he did, is certainly a setback adding that the issue was wrongly handled.
The statement added that Minister of state for Ishaku assured the development partners that the power reform programme was on course. 
Ishaku said: “we are part of the immense institutions Prof Bart Nnaji had made and the structures he put on place. He took us along all the way.
“I want to assure you and reassure you that this government will continue to build on and nurture all the institutions he had put in place”.
“Privatisation is ongoing with all the timelines. Continue to give us all your usual maximum support as we have no choice but to continue from where he stopped”.
On the discussion with labour officials, the Minister said: “we have moved beyond the Nigerian Union of Electricity Employees (NUEE), Ministry of Power and Ministry of Labour level right now. The matter is being handled at the highest level with the Trade Union Congress (TUC), the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Secretary to the Government of the Federation working at resolving the remaining one or two issues.
“The Federal Government cannot break its own laws but would continue to bend backwards as it has continued to do in the past, to the workers in the sector.
The focus now is the 100 days mandate. Advise us, give us assistance, nothing will change” Ishaku assured the delegation.
At the meeting were representatives of DFID, JICA, AFD, EU, World Bank AFDB, GIT, UNIDO, UNDP, USAID, among others.

Police Reform: Is The Ministry Of Police Affairs The Scapegoat?

GABRIEL EWEPU.

The long awaited Police Reform report submitted to President Goodluck by the Chairman of the committee, Mr Parry Osayande, recommended that the Ministry of Police Affairs should be totally scrapped based on alleged sheer corruption and non-performance. GABRIEL EWEPU takes a critical look at the implications of this recommendation.
The police reform report submitted recently by the chairman of the Presidential Committee on police reforms, Mr Parry Osayande to President Goodluck Jonathan made salient recommendations in their findings.
A part of the recommendations made by committee was the total scrapping of the Ministry Of Police Affairs, alleging it to be an ivory tower of corruption built over the years which has also permeated into the Nigerian Police Force, whereby the rank and file are not performing to their duty as expected by Nigerians despite the huge funds channeled into the ministry. This has made the committee to call for its total scrapping.
Part of its recommendation reads, “The budgeted fund of the police is unjustifiably domiciled with the Ministry Of Police Affairs.  The result is that some of the projects being executed are not priorities to the police.  This is an aberration which has led to abuse, misapplication and haemorrhage of the limited resources made available to the police.
“The ministry determines police project and award contracts, including organising and running training programmes involving billions of naira with no input from the police who are the end users.”
The recommendation by the committee on the Ministry   Of Police Affairs to be totally scrapped is not in the interest of Nigerians in general.  It is quite understanding that corruption reigns supreme in the ministry as far as funding and equipping the police is concerned. However, calling for its total scrapping is not a panacea to the corruption that has corroded the ministry and the police, because all ministries, departments and agencies in Nigeria are deep-rooted in corruption, and why should the Ministry Of Police Affairs be the scapegoat as recommended by Osayande and his committee members?
It is pertinent to state that the reasons given by the committee in their recommendation to scrap the ministry is not convincing enough, rather it triggers questions and suspicions other than solutions as the committee thought that their recommendation would come to the rescue of the comatose police force.
The recommendation also fails to consider that throwing away the baby and the bath water is doing more harm than good. Critically examining the case the committee is making for its scrapping, the implication that would follow will worsen the remedy the committee is trying to proffer. This is because, many employees will be thrown into the labour market and the affected families will be frustrated with hardship.
Other aftereffects of the dissolution of the police affairs ministry are the sudden unemployment of its staff will cause many of their families to live in poverty and this might cause their children to drop out of school. The health implications that the recommendation will cause could be fatal; many employees could develop high blood pressure, stroke, mental disorder and illnesses caused by poor nutrition.
The social implication is that many employees will not be able to pay their house rent and other bills, thereby they will be thrown of their homes. While others would not be able to pay their loans owed the banks, of which failure to pay will lead to confiscation of their property. Many dependants will be affected.
Scrapping the ministry of police affairs will not succour the police; rather there should be recommendations for the repositioning of the ministry and investigating and dealing decisively with those involved in the corruption, whether serving or retired officers. The role of the ministry should be critically examined to revaluate its purpose, performance and productivity. And also funds should be given directly to the police, but it should be accountable to the ministry of police affairs.
The committee set by President Jonathan to look into the report of the Osayande committee should make its recommendation holistic and rational especially on the issue of scrapping the ministry of police affairs.

North tackles Yoruba leaders on autonomy.

BY CLIFFORD NDUJIHE, SONI DANIEL & HENRY UMORU
… We agree with S-West on six regions — Ohanaeze scribe
LAGOS—NORTHERN leaders, Sunday, spurned Yoruba leaders’ agitation for regional autonomy and a return to the parliamentary system of government, describing the clamour as a recipe for Nigeria’s disintegration.
Yoruba elders under  the banner of Yoruba National Assembly, YNA, had after a meeting in Ibadan last Thursday, canvassed a return to the parliamentary system of government and granting of regional autonomy to the South-West.
They also called for removal of the immunity clause for criminal offences; a new Nigeria consisting of a federal government and six regional governments (based on the current six geo-political zones) operating federal and regional constitutions, respectively; and adoption of Regional and State Police force structure among others.
But responding to the development, some prominent northern leaders, who spoke exclusively to Vanguard, kicked against YNA’s call, saying that the agitation would plunge the nation into incalculable crises and hasten her break-up.
However, Secretary-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Nduka Eya, said the demands of the Yoruba leaders were in tandem with the position of Ndigbo, which had been sent to the National Assembly for inclusion in the on-going constitution amendment exercise.
Former Kaduna State Governor, Alhaji Lawal Kaita, said the call for regional autonomy and a return to parliamentary system of government was self-serving and had the semblance of secession.
Kaita said: “I do not really understand what they mean by regional autonomy. They should be bold enough to say that they do not want to be part of Nigeria any longer and stop talking about what does not make sense anymore in the country.
No longer ideal — Kaita
“Regional autonomy and parliamentary system of government can no longer serve a complex society like Nigeria and our founding fathers were wise enough to jettison the system and adopt the present Presidential system, which to all intent and purposes, remains the best for a country like ours,” he noted.
According to the founding member of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, neither the granting of autonomy to any region in the country nor a return to parliamentary system of government would solve the socio-political problems of the nation.
Kaita said that all that was needed to make the presidential system more useful was to strengthen the institutions of government to serve the citizens better and reposition the country as a strong, united nation in the world.

Gen. Mohammed Buhari discussing with National Leader of ACN, Bola Tinubu at a meeting in Abuja

Adding his voice to the debate, National Secretary of the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC, Buba Galadima, described any call for regional autonomy as an invitation to the dissolution of the country.
“If they make the mistake to allow the kind of regional autonomy requested by the Yoruba, it is a recipe for the country’s disintegration because of the kind of politics being played in Nigeria. Our political immaturity would lead to dismembering the country as soon as any region is granted autonomy,” the politician noted.
Galadima warned that the country could disintegrate if urgent steps were not taken to address the growing sense of injustice and marginalisation of sections of the country by the government.
He maintained that demands for autonomy and other issues were borne out of perceived injustice and inability of the administration to provide the basic needs of the people.
It’s retrogressive — Haliru Mohammed
In his submission, immediate past Minister of Defence, Dr. Bello Haliru Mohammed described calls for a return to regional structure as retrogressive.
According to him, states replaced the regions because of demands by ethnic nationalities for self-determination, adding that a u-turn to the old structure would be a repeat of the scenario where major ethnic groups like Hausa, Yoruba and Igbo were in total control of the regions and marginalised other groups.
The former Acting National Chairman of the PDP said rather than advocate regionalism what was required of the country now was to sit down and work out the modus operandi of our federation to accommodate all the ethnic diversities without any section feeling dominated.
His words: “Going back to regional structure is going to be retrogressive because states were created because of the demand by ethnic nationalities for self determination. To go back to regional structure where the major ethnic groups like Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo were in complete control of the regions is dangerous.
“General Yakubu Gowon responded to the demands of the minority groups and created states to allow for some level of self-determination for ethnic nationalities. Going back will make major ethnic groups to continue to dominate the minorities. Now, there is some level of equality between the nationalities regardless of the number and size.
“What Nigeria needs now is to sit down and work out our modus operandi of a federation that would accommodate all our ethnic diversities without one section feeling a sense of domination by others. Federating units should be different ethnic nationalities as we have in states. If there is need for creation of more states like in the case of South-East and also to break some of the larger and more populated states in the North and South, that can be accommodated rather than going back to regions.”
However, a former Senator from Kano State, Usman Kabiru Umar, stated that he would support any political restructuring that would bring about a strong, united and progressive Nigeria, where every citizen would have a sense of belonging. “Now, if they say that autonomy and return to parliamentarism would guarantee the promotion of peace, development and a united Nigeria, so be it,”
Indeed, Eya, who spoke in his personal capacity as a public commentator, said the South-West clamour for six regions was sound.
“Before the Presidential system was introduced, we had four regions. The North accepted the regions and we had Parliamentary system. The presidential system is very expensive; if we continue with it, we will soon go bankrupt. The parliamentary system worked for us. Then, if you did not win an election you cannot become a minister. Now the president appoints ministers from everywhere and they are not accountable to the people.
Noting that Ohanaeze had prepared a document on the constitution amendment, he said: “We agree with the South-West on six regions, which should become the federating units. The Federal Government should have nothing to do with state or local government creation.
“There is constant demands for new states and local governments because the military made them avenues for getting more allocation from the centre. Local governments should be states’ creation; they are not federating units. We stand for equity, fair-play and justice. The military gave North undue advantage and they do not want to relinquish it,” he said.