Oby Ezekwesili: Corruption, national development, the Bar, and the Bench – Part 4.

inShare

Being the text of a paper presented by Obiageli “Oby” Ezekwesili On August 28, 2012 @ the 2012 Nigeria Bar Association Conference, Abuja, Nigeria.
Part 1 of this Series
Part 2 of this Series
Part 3 of this Series
What then can be done to uproot the scourge of systemic corruption in society? In fact more appropriately since we now see how deeply structural the problem really is should we not be eager to first address the fundamental issues of dysfunction of our overall Governance architecture? Should our question then not be “is there any prospect that Nigeria can ever reverse the seeming descent into an implosive cesspool of systemic corruption?”
A very comprehensive picture of the quality of governance in Nigeria emerges from the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) studies. The WGIs aggregate existing measures of governance to produce cross-country performance indicators for six different dimensions of governance, including voice and accountability, government effectiveness, political stability, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption. The good news is that once upon a time not too long ago, the world saw evidence that even Nigeria had begun making early progress to reversing the misfortune those decades of stifling poor governance and its symptom corruption has had and continues to have on it. As the globally relevant World Governance Indicators studies showed then, Nigeria made progress over the period 2000 – 2008 in such governance dimensions as Rule of Law, Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption.
It is evident that, key supply-side governance and anti-corruption initiatives including those that serve as deterrent to bad behavior amongst public officials such as the ICPC and the EFCC;those with the objective of instituting structural and institutional mechanisms in the way of running government such as the NEITI, the Due Process Office, the Budget Office and the Office of the Auditor-General; and those efforts aimed at re-orientating Nigerians through enlightenment programs such as the Code of Conduct Bureau, are largely responsible for the significant improvements in many governance indicators such as the percentage of firms reporting bribery; responses on leakage of public funds as well as bureaucracy as constraints to business. ​A closer look at these indicators show that the country made more progress in on voice and accountability, regulatory quality, rule of law and control of corruption.
For added measure, other global studies aligned with the finding of the WGI. In the Competitiveness Report work of the World Bank it found that efforts at ensuring greater integrity in public service during the Obasanjo Administration led to significant improvements in many governance indicators such as the percentage of firms reporting bribery; responses on leakage of public funds as well as bureaucracy as constraints to business.  For instance, over the three year period to 2005, the percentage of firms reporting bribery declined significantly from 98% in 2002 to 60% in 2005.  The largest area of improvement was in public procurement.  Similarly, the proportion of firms reporting diversion of public funds to companies and/or individuals dropped from 100% in 2003 to 70% in 2005. And by the way, the latest edition of the same exercise shows a reversal of that improvement following the release last Monday of the study conducted in 26 states in Nigeria. The report indicated that about 80 per cent of businesses in the country paid bribes to government officials in 2011 to stay in business. The message to take away from the evidence enumerated is that institutions matter and when government direct attention to key governance dimensions, it makes a difference. To consolidate the progress made under the reform agenda of 1999-2007, key supply-side governance initiatives such as the ICPC, EFCC, the BMPIU now the Bureau for Public Procurement, need to be strengthened and made to work as should such other agencies as the Public Accounts Committee.
However, the fight against corruption and demand for good governance must go beyond the actions or efforts of government.  Citizens must get involved as beneficiaries of public policy.  This is why of recent the issue of social accountability and the increased role of civil society and community-based groups have begun to gain prominence.   Demand side approaches to policy and service delivery are currently high on the agenda of governments in the developing world and Nigerian civil society and professional groups like the Bar Association have many countries to learn from.  These countries have promoted the complementary demand side agenda in recognition of the fact that supply-side interventions have had limited success in a number of areas, including improved service delivery which is what increases the chances of poverty reduction amongst majority poor in the society.  The growing importance of social accountability therefore is because of its promise and potential to strengthen governance, increase development effectiveness and empowerment through an approach that relies on civic engagement in demanding accountability from public officials, service providers, and decision-makers (World Bank, 2004).
In the context of Nigeria, demand side approaches have a strategic importance because they provide the platform for strengthening transparency and accountability: In practice, this involves strengthening federal and state systems for procurement, internal auditing and internal control functions, statistical capacity and public financial management to allow Nigeria to better manage its resources.  As part of efforts in these regard, the Government of Nigeria not only makes public the federal allocations to States and Local government but also publishes a large percentage of federal government’s contract awards above a threshold through the Bureau of Public Procurement.   To complement these supply side reforms, there is a need to build in demand-side tools to hold public officials to account.  For example, civil society organizations or non-state actors can play a significant role in making public budgeting more transparent and accountable and can engage in various stages of the budget process that can strengthen the oversight process and accountability in the use of public resources.  They can also partner with MDAs and project implementation units implementing development projects in the delivery and monitoring as well as evaluation of the impact of their interventions. Such tools as Citizen’s Score Card, Beneficiary Assessment and Report, Civil Society Independent Evaluation and other participatory feedback mechanisms in project design and implementation have often been adopted.
For example, under the Education Sector Reforms of 2006, the Community Accountability and Transparency Initiative (CATI) was borne out of the need to ensure that federal funds earmarked for projects that would enhance Nigeria’s Universal Basic Education targets were efficiently used.  The CATI therefore allowed citizens across the country to scrutinize the information provided and with it monitor the actual implementation of the projects and by so doing hold government accountable.  True to promoting the ideals Demand for accountability, we rolled out CATI under our partnership with the Civil Society Action Coalition on Education for All (CSACEFA), an umbrella body for all CSO groups committed to advocacy for education.   Unfortunately I doubt that the initiative which received unsolicited endorsement many years later on the floor of the British parliament may not have lasted beyond my own days in the Education sector. In one of Lambsdorff’s interesting causative analysis, he found that “Democracy obtained the expected positive impact on absence of corruption. However, this impact was more complex. Only countries with high levels of democracy, or electoral systems with high rates of participation, are able to reduce corruption. Medium levels of democracy can even increase corruption. The effect of democracy is also not immediate but takes decades rather than years. Thus, democracy reduces corruption in the long run, but not the lukewarm type of democracy.
Thus such strategic importance of demand side approaches and the absolute engagement of citizens in its processes and activities have several important implications. One such is the need to come to terms with a changing institutional landscape with new and evolving configurations of actors and relationships.  Strengthening the demand-side of accountability by deepening support to wider stakeholder involvement in decision making, monitoring and implementation is critical.  The desired outcomes of such an emphasis are improved service delivery, enhanced public participation and local ownership of reform agendas, greater transparency of decision-making and wider public access to information. Governments that involve the public will be in a better position to make good decisions, and decisions will enjoy more support once taken. Therein lays the linkages in our topic for it is all of the aforementioned that sustained over time become the solid pillars for national development.
So beyond the usual platitudes on the important role of the judiciary, the bar and their law enforcement colleagues in causing or tackling poor governance manifesting as corruption what else is new? I mean nothing that is short of a new burst of ideas in their respective roles can succeed in repositioning our Judiciary and Bar in Nigeria. Of course, I should still raise the usualby reiterating how they could help improve governance by strengthening the mechanisms that detect and prevent corruption. In the justice sector, having the Judiciary with its new leadership that we have been told interlaces the distinctively feminine attributes of resilience with a strong intellectual knack and determination to leave a legacy, it may not be long before we began to see the fruits of effort at improving the administration of justice and promoting professionalization of the judiciary and a more transparent justice system with ease of access to all judicial information; perhaps even introduce the novelty of Justices negotiating a code of ethics for all Judges like your Moroccan counterparts (the Moroccan judges’ association vigorously promotes adherence to its Charter of Judicial Ethics by its members) . and such other measure common to any ambitious program of judicial reforms. Yet, such progress will be lasting only to the extent that it is the result of the profession and the judiciary fully asserting and inserting their true powers and roles for society which for too long has been subordinated to individual caprices. For the latter; the power to sanction as a veritable tool of deterrence and for the former, co-leading and building a vibrant coalition to promote the Demand Side for accountability role of citizens(including particularly a rainy season clean out of the profession’s Augean stable through a “Bring Back Our Ethics and Values” initiative by your association). You can then perhaps even go further again like your Moroccan contemporaries who have been working to fight the country’s endemic corruption by using their association, The Union of Young Lawyers to open an anti-corruption legal advocacy center (ALAC) in 2010. The advice would further be to do thiswithin the same ambit of deterrent, preventive and advocacy/activism measures of the other two arms so that it fully completes the tripod in any comprehensive set of integrated anti-corruption menu.
Whatever may be the level of epiphany that the new leadership could lead the Judiciary and the rest of their profession to undergo I must still insist that no durable structural change of the corrupted Nigerian society will crystalize without our going back to where I started from- Good Governance! The keys to good governance, as articulated by the United Nations Development Program being the rule of law, participation, and accountability and transparency means that theinstitutions of the judiciary branch and the legal profession at large have an indispensable role toplay in these two areas: “the judiciary is the bedrock of a society functioning according to the rule of law, and it can ensure that other institutions of government and individual leaders are held accountable for their actions”.
The foundation of every democracy is of course the Constitution. A good (note that I did not say perfect) constitution is one that evolves out of the multiple experiences and aspirations of a people who though divided along the lines of diverse persuasions yet being divinely co-located to become one nation become adept at using principled dialogue to build their consensus on certain core values, ethos, principle, structures, processes and functions that promote equitable development of their country and constantly improve the well-being of their citizens. The experiences of many other nations have shown that any constitutional process which from the very beginning anchors its fundamentals on the twin concepts of incentives and sanctions have often delivered better political, economic and social outcomes for citizens both as individuals and as a collective. Therefore, if we all agreed that our problem is deeper than what an even solid comprehensive anti- corruption program can solve then the next thing should be an to discuss if there is an agreement that engendering a new Nigerian constitution from such an incentive-sanctions framework is an imperative.
Should there be a consensus around that, then some key questions that should arise would be “How can we realign the incentives and sanctions in a functional structure of our entity called Nigeria?” “How substantive and germane to the fundamentals of our structural deformity are the current priorities of the National Assembly Constitution Review Committee?” “What can we learn from our sister country Kenya (similarly troubled by governance challenges) and which upon experiencing an explosive and costly wake-up call seized the moment and commenced a structural overhaul of their polity and its entire governance framework through citizens’ driven constitutional review process”.
I should expand some more on the last question. The Kenyan constitutional process produced a new 2010 Constitution that every Kenyan stands protective of because of their true ownership of its content through a Referendum. Today, most citizens and outsiders who are abreast with the politics and economics of Kenya as I was in my previous position at the World Bank all acknowledged that there are indeed early signs of salutary impact on Governance and what changed in their judicial arrangement is a major contributor to this fresh optimism. For Kenya, receiving cautious praise on Governance even from renowned skeptics is already a signal that they have taken that legendary right step in the direction of the 1000miles travel.

Is it farfetched to imagine that our Judiciary can courageously step up its leadership on the constitutional debate? Could it demonstrate the strength of will by reaching beyond the shores of our land to learn some of the lessons of the Indian judiciary which has earned a reputation for being the arm of government that pushes the boundaries in ensuring that Good Governance is rarely compromised and undercut by the short term and shifting political incentives of the parliamentary and executive arms of government. Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Chief Justice of India until 2007 said in an inspiring speech during his tenure that “in order to guarantee that the role of law would inure to, and for, everyone and the promises made by the Constitution would not remain merely on paper, the Constitution makers made provisions for independence of the judiciary. Judiciary in India enjoys a very significant position since it has been made the guardian and custodian of the Constitution. It not only is a watchdog against violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution and thus insulates all persons, Indians and aliens alike, against discrimination, abuse of State power, arbitrariness etc. but borrowing the words of one of the founding fathers of the American Constitution, James Medison, I would say that the Judiciary in India is “truly the only defensive armor of the country and its constitution and laws”. If this armor were to be stripped of its onerous functions it would mean, “The door is wide open for nullification, anarchy and convulsion”.
The Kenyan lawyers were activists and advocates for this first of a kind participatory and substantive constitutional process since their independence. Can we ever dare to hope that the voice of our Bar Association will be heard on the on-going process that unwittingly seems like a purely politicians led constitutional review in Nigeria in that despite the best intentions of the leaders of the national Assembly it still the credible voice and participation excludes the larger majority of citizens? Should our modern democracy be allowed to miss one major opportunity to fully practice that key concept of participation and inclusion that Good Governance advocates by ensuring that the broader society with careful attention to minority and vulnerable groups are brought into the discussions that will determine those thorny but strategic issues that are fundamental to the structural overhaul and re-balancing of our polity? Does your Bar not have an incentive to complement my proposed judicial activism just like your colleagues in India who were applauded by their Chief Justice?  Further on in the same speech that detailed the primus role of the judiciary in promoting good governance by insisting adherence to the rule of law he stated, “The rule of law, one of the most significant characteristics of good governance prevails because India has an independent judiciary that has been sustained, amongst others, because of support and assistance from an independent Bar which has been fearless in advocating the cause of the underprivileged, the cause of deprived, the cause of such sections of society as are ignorant or unable to secure their rights owing to various handicaps, an enlightened public opinion and vibrant media that keeps all the agencies of the State on their respective toes.
“An independent judiciary is important for preserving the rule of law and is, therefore, most important facet of good governance. The judicial system has an important role to play ultimately in ensuring better public governance. There may be a plethora of regulations, rules and procedures but when disputes arise, they have to be settled in a court of law. There is no area where the judgments of Supreme Court have not played a significant contribution in the governance – good governance – whether it be – environment, human rights, gender justice, education, minorities, police reforms, elections and limits on constituent powers of Parliament to amend the Constitution.”
Appreciating such a judicial context as remarkable as the Indian one, should our own Judiciary at a time like this when the discussions on the amendment of the constitution is reaching a crescendo not be more courageous in aligning with the voices of agitation that seek to have your own arm of government become truly independent and not beholden to corrupting interests. In so doing, would it not offer renewed hope to our society which has watched with great distress and even despondent resignation the not at all dignifying trend in adjudication of corruption charges (both political and economic) in our recent history? May be you already know, but I shall take the liberty of your inviting a “not so learned” chartered accountant cum public policy expert like me to your event and pass on a message generally given by those who knew of your kind invitatio1n to me “Nigerians are at once disappointed and worried for your profession and the entire Justice system”.
Most now say that we crossed the Rubicon once even our Judiciary, that same very last hope if the common man and woman in the golden era of your profession, became engulfed in what seems like an orchestrated “Kidnap of Justice?” I heard that term poetically used by one of the prodigiously talented young Nigerians that recited an Ode to Justice only this past weekend at a youth event by The Future Award, a youth group determined to behold The New Nigeria. If you heard the words of that poem, something tells me that some of you would rise into action and become that Remnant group that has always historically paid the price for the greatness of the multitude. There is a price to be paid for the return of our Lady Justice. So my last word is “who among us is ready to let character be their destiny?” Count me in should you need a slightly learned friend!

Major Marketers Raise Depot Price of Petrol over Shortage.

 The Minister of Petroleum, Mrs Diezani

By Ejiofor Alike

Fear of petrol scarcity loomed at the weekend as most of the six major oil-marketing companies and NIPCO Plc have exhausted their stock of the product.

THISDAY learnt that the shortage has led to an increase in the depot price of petrol.

Investigations revealed that some depot owners have capitalised on the tight supply situation to sell at ex-depot price of between N93 and N100, as against the official price of N89 per litre.

However, sources said while the pump price of petrol would still be maintained at N97 per litre in Lagos and its environs, the marketers could capitalise on the increase in depot price to jack up the price in the hinterland where there is less supervision from regulatory agencies’ officials.

The drop in fuel supply, it was learnt, was worsened by the refusal of the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) to allow fuel cargo imported by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to discharge its products for the marketers at Apapa Port, since last Tuesday over unresolved financial issues.

Deputy Director and spokesperson of the DPR, Mrs. Belema Osibodu, however, told THISDAY that the vessel was allowed to discharge yesterday after all the relevant documents requested by the agency were presented.

“They had issues with the bill of lading, regarding the mother vessel but the issues have been resolved. The product is of good quality and they have been allowed to discharge,” she said.

A spokesperson of the NNPC, Dr. Omar Farouk Ibrahim, told THISDAY that the vessel was prevented from discharging because it had “a financial lien.”

“It has nothing to do with the quality of the product. It is essentially a financial matter. It was supposed to make some payment and I believe they are going to pay or they must have paid by now,” he said.

Sources within the six companies that constitute the Major Oil Marketers Association of Nigeria (MOMAN) and NIPCO Plc, whose depots are located in Apapa, Lagos, told THISDAY that the seven companies had a two-day stock level as at last Wednesday, which was largely exhausted by Friday.

THISDAY gathered that Conoil, for instance, had 159 metric tonnes of petrol as at Wednesday; while Forte Oil had 5,486 metric tonnes.
The stock levels of other five companies as at last Wednesday included, MRS Oil and Gas, 1,276 metric tonnes; Mobil Oil Nigeria Plc, 743 metric tonnes; NIPCO Plc, 3,100 metric tonnes; Oando Plc, 1,000 metric tonnes; and Total Nigeria Plc, 2,000 metric tonnes.

This product, which amounted to 13,764 metric tonnes or 18,237,600 litres, represented only two-day load out, as Apapa accounts for 60 per cent of the country’s fuel supply.

It was learnt that the six major marketers and NIPCO have stopped importation of products due to the accumulated unpaid subsidy claims and interest charges on loans.

The marketers rely on the NNPC, which has been rationing its imported products to the marketers, to keep their supply chain active.
The marketers’ woes worsened last week after the NNPC vessel was prevented from discharging products at the Apapa Jetty.

One of the marketers, who spoke to THISDAY, blamed their inability to import products on the delay in the payment of their subsidy claims and the interest charges on loans by the banks.

“When you owe N200 billion and you have only been able to pay out less than N50 billion, it is not enough. Our position is that those with major infractions in the Aig-Imoukhuede report should be isolated, while others should be paid immediately. But the payment has been too slow and even the money being paid goes straight to our bankers because a huge amount of interest has accumulated,” he said.

Subsidy: NU Warns Jonathan Against Providing Soft Landing For Culprits.

ABDULLAH OLESIN.

The Northern Union (NU), has warned President Goodluck Jonathan against providing soft landing for those involved in the oil subsidy scam in the name of plea bargaining.
The NU further advised the federal government to publicize the amount of money it recovered from the ‘oil thieves’ and as well name those involved in the scam.
The political group also demanded that the government should announce to Nigerians what it intends to do with the recovered oil subsidy money.
It opined that transparency in the deployment of the recovered funds was necessary, “to justify public trust and increase confidence in his (President Jonathan) administration’s agenda”.
The union in a statement signed by the national coordinator of its youth wing, Comrade Kolo Jerry and publicity secretary, Muhammed Katun, added that, “our stand and resolve against oil subsidy scam is for the federal government to resistantly find the courage amidst these revelations and manipulation to see through the prosecution of the culprits and their accomplices within and outside the public service.”
“We strongly advise the president not to provide a back door exit for the scammers in the name of plea bargaining for soft landing.
“Also, the federal government should bring to public domain how much it recover at the end and the names of those involved”.
The NU called on other stakeholders like the organized labour unions, civil society organization and opposition parties to stand firmly by the federal government on the prosecution of those involved in the oil theft.

UN, EU lament Nnaji’s exit •N/East, S/East divided over appointment of power minister •Gains in power sector irreversible -FG .

Written by Leon Usigbe, Paschal Okeke and Tunde Dodondawa.

Former Minister of Power, Prof. Barth Nnaji

THE international community, especially development partners, have sought assurance from the Federal Government that the legacies of the former Minister of Power, Professor Barth Nnaji, would be sustained.
The partners had stormed the Ministry of Power at the weekend, to seek assurance that the progress made in the power sector during the tenure of the former minister were pursued diligently to an impressive end.
Country Representative of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO), Dr Patrick Kormawa, who led others to the ministry, said the organisation was working in concert with other agencies for rural electrification of the country, especially in renewable energy sector.
The European Union (EU) Head of Cooperation, Mr P. Phillipe, said when the EU headquarters got the news, it was alarmed and expressed concern over the continuity of the reforms in the sector.
The partners also sought to know the stage of the privatisation process and whether Nigeria was still committed to the time lines.
The World Bank representative, Erik Feinstiom, said he was at the last power summit in Asaba, Delta State, which was presided over by Nnaji.
The Minister of State for Power, Mr Darius Ishaku, in his reaction, said everybody in Nigeria was as alarmed as the international partners at the exit of the former minister.
However, the Federal Government, on Sunday, reaffirmed that in spite of the resignation of Professor Nnaji, the progress already made in the sector would be consolidated.
It also assured Nigerians that President Goodl-uck Jonathan was committed to ensure investors’ confidence and credibility in the power sector were protected.
A statement issued by the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public Affairs, Dr Doyin Okupe, in Abuja, noted that necessary structures and institutions to drive them had already been firmly established.
It said President Jona-than expected that before the end of December, with the progress being made in the area of gas supply to the National Integrated Power Project (NIPP), the present improvement in the electricity supply for domestic and industrial use would not only be sustained, but would be also improved.
The statement pointed out that the president had set a target for the actualisation of uninterrupted power supply to drive economic development.
Meanwhile, following the resignation of Professor Nnaji, North-East politicians and their counterparts from the South-East have been divided over who becomes the next power minister.
Leading South-East politicians, comprising Third Republic senator, Ebenezer Ikeyina; former Anambra State governor, Dr Chukwuemeka Ezeife; leader of the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Chief Ralph Uwazuruike; First Republic Minister of Aviation, Chief Mbuzulike Amaechi; insurance guru and former president-general of Igbo socio-cultural organi-sation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Professor Joe Irukwu and the president’s Special Adviser on Inter-Party Affairs, Senator Ben Obi, were reported to be clamouring for the appointment of another Igbo man as power minister.
But a group of northern elite, Junkun of Taraba, had kicked against the plan of the president to replace the former minister with another Igbo man.
The group expressed its displeasure with the president during a news conference at the weekend, saying that the appointment of another Igbo man for the position was against true federalism..
The official spokesman of Jukun kingdom, Chief Ibrahim Sangari, noted that “at no time in the history of this country have the Jukuns been so unfairly treated as under this present administration,” adding that we have the mandate of the Aku Uka of Wukari, Dr Shekarau Angyu Masa Ibi, to express our sadness at the turn of events.”

Reconstructing Nigeria for Prosperity (1).

By Chukwuma Charles Soludo

In my 2005 National Democracy Day Lecture, I strongly argued that “for sustainable democracy, fundamental changes are required in the constitution, the electoral system, the fiscal federalism, as well as a gamut of legal-institutional reforms that are developmental and capable of promoting private enterprise and competition”. Seven years later, I feel more strongly about this point, and almost a sense of urgency to it. In the last two years, I have given several lectures on Nigeria’s dysfunctional political economy. I am glad that constitutional amendments are being debated. At least, let us start the talking. There is a systemic failure, and our institutions cannot take Nigeria on a sustainable path to prosperity.  In three articles, beginning with this one, I want to join the debate.

The word ‘restructure’ evokes all kinds of reactions. For some, it is a veiled campaign to dismember or weaken the Nigerian federation. I disagree. While I admit that Nigeria as a country or nation has been a colossal disappointment and a textbook example of “how not to do it”, I disagree that the solution is to dismember or weaken it.

I have three strong reasons to be a believer in one united and prosperous Nigeria. First, I am a pan-Africanist--- an Nkrumaist in terms of Pan-African unity.  As a scholar, about 60 per cent of my research and publications are on African economies. I am one of those dreaming of the second USA, the United States of Africa (with 54 states, encompassing the current 54 countries, with Nigeria as the Texas of Africa). Our destiny is tied together—the rest of the world simply sees one ‘Africa’ as if it is a ‘country’ but we think of ourselves as different. Combined, the 49 sub-Saharan African countries account for barely two per cent of global GDP (the size of Belgium with 10 million people). I see Africa’s future increasingly within the context of a more fully integrated continent. Enough of my dreams: now back to reality!
Second, I am proud to belong to the “big country”, and wish that it could become the “next China”. Nigeria is Africa’s most populous and its potentially biggest economy. In today and tomorrow’s world, size matters. Europe will inevitably move towards greater ‘federal Europe’ if the euro is to survive, and other efforts towards agglomeration are going on around the world. Nigeria accounts for far less than one per cent of global GDP (indeed if Nigeria were to submerge under a volcano tomorrow, the world would only notice it as a humanitarian disaster). I cannot imagine Nigeria breaking into smaller groupings. I do not see any of the groupings that will ‘happily’ stay together under one union without its own internal contradictions and tensions as in the larger Nigeria.

Third, I am aware that the hangover of history makes any reference to the word ‘restructure’ by an Igboman to be viewed with suspicion. I hate to think of public policy in those terms but if it helps this discourse, I make bold to say that as an Igboman, I will never support anything that will threaten the unity of Nigeria. Igbos have the greatest stake in Nigeria, and therefore stand to lose the most in the event of (God forbid) any disorderly unravelling of Nigeria. An enterprising, itinerant people with huge population in a tiny land mass, Igbos (like the Jews) are in need of a large domain or market for their commerce without molestation or discrimination. They are everywhere.  Of the estimated 17 million Nigerians in Diaspora, I can bet that at least 10 million of them are Igbos. They dominate most markets, especially for motor spare parts, in Africa. Onitsha traders now suffer because of Boko Haram as their supply chains to and from many parts of the North are grossly diminished.

There is hardly any village in Nigeria or town in Africa without an Igboman, speaking the local language and probably owning a house and feeling much at home. Without fear of contradiction, I can assert that at least 80 per cent of the Igbo elite live outside of Igboland (mostly in Lagos and Abuja), and more than 70 per cent of the investments by Igbos are outside of Igboland. I know that more than half of Anambra’s population lives outside of the state. There is hardly any former public office holder (governors, ministers, senators, Reps, etc) since 1999 who lives in Igboland. As Mallam Nasir el-Rufai was quoted as saying sometime, Igbos have turned Abuja into their ‘sixth state’, and some estimates opine that Igbos constitute 30-40 per cent of Lagos State. Even traditional marriages are now celebrated anywhere. The reasons for these are for another day.

The point of emphasis is that Igbos have the greatest need to keep Nigeria or even Africa as one united and prosperous market. An elderly Igbo friend of mine summed it nicely: “in the 1960s Igbos fought to leave Nigeria and the rest of Nigeria refused; we lost our properties and lives; now that we have re-built them everywhere, we are going to fight to make sure no one else will leave the union: we are all in this marriage for better or for worse”. Enough said!

Our thesis here is that a society can only prosper under conditions of ‘good leadership’ as well as a ‘good system’ that supports competition and wealth creation. So far, the dysfunctional system and its perverse incentives that make it almost impossible to make sustained progress in Nigeria have received little attention in public discourse. For three consecutive years, Nigeria has retained the 14th position in the world as ‘a failed state’ (with Somalia as number one) and many people think it is a joke. I posit that any serious discussion of public policy that ignores this issue misses the point. We believe there is a systemic failure that cannot be fixed by ad hoc ‘reforms’ irrespective of the type of leadership.

We therefore use the term ‘restructure’ to refer to the gamut of transformations in the nature and structure of the Nigerian State and society away from the current entanglements with the pursuit of rents to re-establish the link between the state and the people/business, and to re-engineer a society where competition and hard work drive success. Let us divide Nigeria’s post-independence history into the pre-civil war (under the 1963 Republican Constitution and its provisions for competitive federalism under the regions and a revenue allocation formula that forced hard work and competition) on the one hand, and the post-civil war with its centralised, unitary-federalism, with the centre repeatedly ‘creating’ the unviable federating units each entitled to the free money from the centre.

On literally all accounts, the average Nigerian was better off in the first than under the second: per capita income in 1966 was about $1,000 and about $1,400 in 1973 and is currently about $1,200. In REAL terms, the average Nigerian today (despite Nigeria earning over $600 billion from oil since 1973) has less than half of the income in 1966; is poorer; has a shorter life span; with poorer educational system and infrastructure. All the industries and palm and cocoa plantations and groundnut pyramids built by the regions have collapsed.
Our current unproductive system was designed to keep Nigeria ‘united’ by creating a strong ‘centre’. In the process, we have neither a federation nor a unitary system (at best a corrupted unitary system). All incentives and institutions are designed around a command and control structure for sharing and consuming the lottery jackpot from God (oil rents). For fear of death, Nigeria has indeed decided to commit suicide! There is no incentive for productive governance. National politics of competition for the oil rents has assumed a life of its own. On a per capita income basis, Nigeria has the most expensive parliament in the world. Every village now wants to be a state to get its own ‘share’. Don’t talk about fiscal viability! Have you heard any state governor advertising the number of new businesses that were attracted to his state or number of private sector jobs created as ‘the’ key performance indicator? There is little incentive for such! Debate on leadership is about who will share and where he comes from. It is not about who has the best plans to create jobs and wealth. Because you don’t need any skills to share, just about anybody can be a ‘leader’. Our politics has become a road to nowhere.

We need good leaders but equally important, we need a competitive system that allows any potentially good leader to emerge and perform. To use the metaphor of football, you need good footballers in a good pitch to have great football. If you have 10 Lionel Messis in a team but you take them to play in a cassava farm as field, their talents and efforts may come to little. In fact, because the field is a cassava farm, the ‘best players’ that would emerge could be the street urchins. Our view is that the type of leaders thrown up under a democracy and the latitude they have for creative change depends upon the nature of the legal-institutional infrastructure and the incentive-sanction system. As an economist, I understand that to change behaviour, two keywords are critical: incentives and sanctions. Both summarise what are popularly termed ‘institutions’. An individual can make a difference but ultimately it is institutions that make all the difference.  You can assemble a thousand technocrats, each with his/her ‘reforms’ and at best their positive impact will be at the margin.

Nigeria is in a chicken and egg situation. How will the ‘good system’ emerge without ‘good leaders’ and vice versa? Leave this for our next articles!

To prepare for life without oil, we need a new road map, and the starting point is a new constitution for prosperity! We need to understand the institutional/constitutional design that makes United Arab Emirates (UAE) produce the world class city of Dubai with little oil while other oil-producing countries of the Middle East are not diversified. We need to understand the incentive system that enables the State of Nevada in the US to prosper despite not having any natural resource in a country with oil rich states. It won’t be easy to repair the havoc oil and the destructive politics around it have wreaked on the society, including destruction of the productive elite. But the time to start is now.

To move forward, Nigeria must review the content and meaning of its current political map; rights over mineral resources and land; tax jurisdictions; citizenship rights; fiscal responsibility and fiscal federalism; powers of the central vis-a-vis regional governments; elimination of the suffocating hands of the Federal Government on the regions; etc. It is an oxymoron to repeat the same thing over and over, and expect a different outcome. For a new Nigeria to emerge, new thinking and new ways of doing business must be in place.

Oil Wells Dispute: Jonathan Urged To Intervene.

HAMZAT BABA.

A body known as Kogi Youth Progressive Association has called on President Goodluck Jonathan to urgently wade into the crisis between Kogi and Anambra States over the ownership of oil wells located in Odeke community, in Ibaji Local Government Area of Kogi State.
The chairman of the group, Alhaji Bello Ibrahim who made the call in a statement made available to LEADERSHIP in Lokoja yesterday, urged the federal government to, without further delay, to recognise Kogi State as an oil producing state.
He faulted the decision by the Jonathan administration to designate Anambra State as an oil producing state, leaving out Kogi State, adding that the federal government should not be seen to be part of the problem.
He further observed that the crude which was to service the Orient Oil Refinery located in  Anambra State was actually situated  in Odeke community in Kogi State.
Ibrahim disclosed that the matter was first raised in 1994, but regretted that  nothing was done by the government at the centre during the period, insisting that the only way out of the impasse was to declare Kogi State where the crude was found as an oil producing state, along with other benefiting states.
He stressed the need for Governor Idris Wada to open up discussion with his counterpart in Anambra State, to avert any possible clash by the contending communities as was the case a few years ago.

2015: We’ll check rigging with high-tech voters’ cards – Jega.

BY EMMANUEL AZIKEN, POLITICAL EDITOR
…Says Ondo election success will surpass Edo
PRofessor Attahiru Jega, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC and one-time national leader of the Academic Staff Union of Universities, ASUU, alongside senior officials of the INEC were in Lagos last week for an in-house strategic retreat.
Held in close collaboration with the Democratic Governance for Development, DGD Project, the retreat, an initiative of the United Nations Development Programme, UNDP, was to produce a strategic framework to guide the commission in its plans towards enthroning a regime of transparency in its management of elections in the country.
On the fringes of the retreat, Professor Jega in an interview, spoke on the commission’s preparations for next month’s gubernatorial election in Ondo State, the readiness of the commission to fully turn the chapter in the poor conduct of elections and the prospects of a new style in the commission. Excerpts:
What exactly is your agenda at this retreat?
By the time we finish this retreat in Lagos we would have come up with carefully prepared draft of a strategic plan that will guide all our actions between now and 2015 so that we can we have the kind of elections that Nigerians would be very, proud of and we have no doubt that given the commitment of all the staff in INEC and given all the preparations that we have been doing that this is an objective which we can attain.
What are the specific issues that INEC would be considering in improving the credibility of the voters register?
As we prepare for 2015, our efforts to bring remarkable improvements are all inclusive and they cover all key areas of the commission’s activities.
Efficient election management
We want to be a very, very effective and efficient election management body, we want to be a body that creates a level playing field for all contestants and all political actors and we want to be a body that is transparent, that is committed and that has integrity in the way in which it delivers electoral services.

INEC Boss, Prof Jega

That means that we have to do a lot of restructuring and reorganization  to bring better service delivery. It also means that we have to do a lot of training and re-training and we may also do some recruitment to bring additional competent hands to further improve on the efficiency and effectiveness of our work.
It also means that we have to do a lot of stakeholders’ engagement. We have to improve our relationships with all the critical stakeholders, from the government to the National Assembly to the political parties to civil society organisations. And the strategic planning process we are working on creates a framework where all of these activities will be carried out on a more sustained basis in order to keep on bringing remarkable improvements as we move towards 2015.
We are asking about the voters’ register?
As you are aware, when we did the registration in January and February 2011 we registered about 73.5 million voters. We intend to produce permanent voters’ cards in two major batches to ensure that every registered voter has a permanent voter’s card.
We have already given the contract for the first phase of this and as I speak with you, our hope is that before the end of this year we will commence the distribution of the permanent voters’ cards for about 40 million registered voters and by next year we hope to complete the distribution of the permanent voters’ cards.
The permanent voters’ cards are very good and in fact, unique in the history of this country because it is a chip-based card. Each card will contain a chip, which carries all the details and information about the registered voter from his photograph to his fingerprints to all the additional information that have been captured about the voter.
Our hope is that by the time we get to the 2015 elections we intend to deploy card readers in each polling unit, such that any person who comes to vote will easily be identified whether he is the legitimate holder of that card. That will go a long way in reducing some of the irregularities that Nigeria is famous for when it comes to election and abuse of voters’ cards.
How prepared are you for the Ondo election given reports that secret registration is already on?
There are all sorts of allegations and obviously, some of these allegations are for us to investigate fully and take remedial measures. And the security agencies are also to investigate these fully.
I can tell you that we received a petition, we investigated the petition and we have seen from the petition that some sort of registration is taking place, but it is not INEC registration, we are not doing any registration in Ondo State and we do not know the purpose for which that registration is being done.
Fraudulent registration
In any case, even if people are doing fraudulent registration, of course the security agencies should be able to apprehend them and prosecute them successfully. But I want to assure you that there is no way anybody can do any registration and put that data into our data base. We have a data base in Ondo State and we have an exact replica of that base in the headquarters. At any point we cross check and see that there is any discrepancy in the data bases, we will identify them and it is easy to deal with.
Remember before the Edo elections there were similar allegations. There were allegations that some people had penetrated the Edo data base and had put illegal names and it turned out not to be true and I have absolutely no doubt that as I speak with you our data base in Ondo State and in the headquarters has integrity. It is intact and has not been compromised and if anybody attempts to compromise it, it is very easy to detect and apprehend him or her.
How prepared are you?
We are adequately prepared for Ondo and our hope and aspiration is that Ondo would be much better than Edo elections.