Why Henry Okah Was Tried, Convicted and Jailed In South Africa

By Okoi Obono-Obla

In the wake of the trial, conviction and sentence of a Nigerian, by a South African High Court, Mr. Henry Okah; one of my good friends, Sunday E. Iyamba Snr, privately asked me a question which has been agitating and nagging a lot of Nigerians. The question by Mr. Iyamba was thus: “Please I am at a loss as to why a crime
committed in Nigeria will be prosecuted by a foreign govt (using their tax payer’s money) as in the recent Orkar terrorism case. Is that a normal practice in International law or is it because terrorism is a global concern? I’m making this enquiry just for the purpose of learning from a legal mind”.
I crave the indulgence and seek the permission of Mr. Iyamba to publicly discuss the question he posed to me in private several weeks but which I never answered because of my crowded schedule. Henry Okah was established by the South African Court to be one of the leaders of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND). He was found guilty this week on a 13 count charge of terrorism brought against him by the South African Police and sentenced to a 24 years jail term for complicity in the bombing at the Eagle Square, Abuja on the 1st October, 2010 at a ceremony to mark the 50th independence anniversary of Nigeria.
Undoubtedly Terrorism is an international crime. It is a crime against humanity to all intents and purposes. The United Nations in conformity with the purposes and principles of its Charter of responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and the promotion of good-neighbourliness and friendly relations and cooperation among States has made the terrorism an international crime. This is also in appreciation of the threat the scourge of terrorism poses to human civilisation. Terrorism is therefore in all form and ramification transnational crime. It straddles international boundaries.
The leader of MEND, Henry Okah lives in South Africa and there is evidence that linked him with those who carried out the bombing in Eagle Square in Abuja that led to the death of so many people. So despite the fact that the offence was actually committed in Nigeria, a Court in South Africa has jurisdiction to try the offence and those who were linked with it.
There are several United Nations Conventions on suppression and prevention of Terrorism. One of them is the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism Bombings, 1997. It came into force on the 23rd May, 2001. Nigeria and South Africa being members of the United Nations are signatories to the Convention. The International Convention on Suppression of Terrorism Bombings is a multi-lateral treaty open to ratification of all States designed to criminalize the unlawful and intentional use of explosives in public places to kill, injure, or to cause extensive destruction to compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing some act.
South Africa and Nigeria are therefore bound by its provisions and obligated to enforce them. After the bombing of the Eagle Square some people were arrested and after investigation it was established that the group responsibility was the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta. Henry Okah who lives in South Africa was implicated. The Nigerian Government through diplomatic channel reported Henry Okah to the South African authorities. He was arrested and charged to Court in South Africa.
Article 7 (1) of the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism Bombings provides thus:
“Upon receiving information that a person who is alleged to have committed an offence as set forth in Article 2 may be present in its territory, the State Party concerned shall take further measures as may be necessary under its domestic law to investigate the facts contained in the information”.
Article 7 (2) of the International Convention on Suppression of Terrorism Bombings further provides thus:
“ Upon being satisfied that the circumstances so warrant, the State Party in whose territory the offender or alleged offender is present shall take the appropriate measures under its domestic law so as to ensure that the person’s present for the purpose of prosecution or extradition”.
It is obviously that the South African Government invoked the provisions of Article 7 (1) (2) & (3) of the International Convention on Suppression of Terrorism Bombings as soon as the Nigerian Government made a report against Henry Okah over his complicity in the Eagle Square bombing. The South African Government was therefore under international law was obligated to investigate the allegation against Henry Okah.
In this regard Article 8 (1) of the International Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism Bombings provide thus:
“The State Party in the territory of which the alleged offender is present, shall in cases to which article 6 applies, if it does not extradite that person, be obliged, without exception whatsoever and whether or not the offence was committed in its territory, to submit the case without undue delay to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution, through proceedings in accordance with the laws of that State. Those authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any other offence of a grave nature under the law of that State”.
Article 19 of the International Convention on Suppresion of Terrorism Bombings expressly excludes from the scope of the Convention certain activities of the State and Armed Forces thus:
“Nothing in this Convention shall affect other rights, obligations and responsibilities of States, and individuals under international law, in particular the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and International humanitarian law. 2. The activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under international humanitarian law, which are governed by that law, are not governed by this Convention, and the activities undertaken by the military forces of a State in the exercise of their official duties, inasmuch as they are governed by other rules of international law, are not governed by this Convention.”
At the African Regional level, there is the Organization of African Union Convention on the Prevention and Combating Terrorism, Algiers, 1999 and the Protocol to that Convention signed in Addis Ababa in July, 2004. In the light of the above, I then wonder aloud the strident call by some interest groups and individuals for the Federal Government to grant amnesty to the Boko Haram terrorists whop have been carrying out recklessly and randomly a massive campaign of terrorism bombings in Northern Nigeria since 2009 which has led to the death of more than 4000 persons and destruction of property.


IndepthAfrica

Winnie… the woman who stood out of Madiba’s women

Their relationship was a love story, which some believe was tragically tempered by politics. It was a love story almost like none other. A love tale classical in nature, yet down-to-heart. The late Nelson Mandela’s relationship with Winnie Madikizela was an affair of two larger-than-life protagonists.


Winnie endured a lot because she was his wife: the years of imprisonment, solitary confinement and house arrests. But no matter his loyalty to her, Winnie and his family always came second to his other great love: the ANC and by extension, the liberation struggle, a fact Winnie still sees as an act of betrayal.

Their love story gave room for love letters laced with poetry, music, imageries and drama. For the 27 years he spent in prison, Mandela wrote Winnie several letters from Robben Island.

In one of such letters written on April 15, 1976, Mandela said: “My dearest Winnie, Your beautiful photo still stands about two feet above my left shoulder as I write this note. I dust it carefully every morning, for to do so gives me the pleasant feeling that I’m caressing you as in the old days. I even touch your nose with mine to recapture the electric current that used to flush through my blood whenever I did so. Nolitha stands on the table directly opposite me. How can my spirits ever be down when I enjoy the fond attentions of such wonderful ladies?”

The one he wrote on October 26, 1976 was about Winnie’s detention. It drilled of sadness. In it, he said: “I am struggling to suppress my emotions as I write this letter. I have received only one letter since you were detained, that one dated August 22. I do not know anything about family affairs, such as payment of rent, telephone bills, care of children and their expenses, whether you will get a job when released. As long as I don’t hear from you, I will remain worried and dry like a desert.

“ I recall the Karoo I crossed on several occasions. I saw the desert again in Botswana on my way to and from Africa—endless pits of sand and not a drop of water. I have not had a letter from you. I feel dry like a desert.

“ Letters from you and the family are like the arrival of summer rains and spring that livens my life and make it enjoyable.

“ Whenever I write you, I feel that inside physical warmth, that makes me forget all my problems. I become full of love.”

Then on June 26, 1977, he wrote of their daughters, their unfulfilled dream of having a baby boy and all that. “We couldn’t fulfill our wishes, as we had planned, to have a baby boy. I had hoped to build you a refuge, no matter how small, so that we would have a place for rest and sustenance before the arrival of the sad, dry days. I fell down and couldn’t do these things. I am as one building castles in the air,” he said.

His letter of November 22, 1979 was poetic-prose at its best. It was about her visit five days earlier. He described what she looked like and how he “felt like singing, even if just to say Hallelujah!”

But, time and political tides blew their love away. And on April 13, 1992, at a press conference in Johannesburg, flanked by his two oldest friends and comrades, Walter and Oliver, the late Mandela announced his separation from Winnie. He said the situation had grown so difficult that he felt that it was in the best interests of all concerned – the ANC, the family, and Winnie – that they part. He said though he discussed the matter with the ANC, the separation itself was made for personal reasons.

The statement he read at the news conference reads:”The relationship between myself and my wife, Comrade Nomzamo Winnie Mandela, has become the subject of much media speculation. I am issuing this statement to clarify the position and in the hope that it will bring an end to further conjecture.

“Comrade Nomzamo and myself contracted our marriage at a critical time in the struggle for liberation in our country. Owing to the pressures of our shared commitment to the ANC and the struggle to end apartheid, we were unable to enjoy a normal family life. Despite these pressures our love for each other and our devotion to our marriage grew and intensified….

“During the two decades I spent on Robben Island she was an indispensable pillar of support and comfort to myself personally…. Comrade Nomzamo accepted the onerous burden of raising our children on her own … She endured the persecutions heaped upon her by the Government with exemplary fortitude and never wavered from her commitment to the freedom struggle. Her tenacity reinforced my personal respect, love and growing affection. It also attracted the admiration of the world at large. My love for her remains undiminished.

“However, in view of the tensions that have arisen owing to differences between ourselves on a number of issues in recent months, we have mutually agreed that a separation would be best for each of us. My action was not prompted by the current allegations being made against her in the media…. Comrade Nomzamo has and can continue to rely on my unstinting support during these trying moments in her life.

“I shall personally never regret the life Comrade Nomzamo and I tried to share together. Circumstances beyond our control however dictated it should be otherwise. I part from my wife with no recriminations. I embrace her with all the love and affection I have nursed for her inside and outside prison from the moment I first met her. Ladies and gentlemen, I hope you will appreciate the pain I have gone through.

“Perhaps I was blinded to certain things because of the pain I felt for not being able to fulfill my role as a husband to my wife and a father to my children. But just as I am convinced that my wife’s life while I was in prison was more difficult than mine, my own return was also more difficult for her than it was for me. She married a man who soon left her; that man became a myth; and then that myth returned home and proved to be just a man after all.

“As I later said at my daughter Zindzi’s wedding, it seems to be the destiny of freedom fighters to have unstable personal lives. When your life is the struggle, as mine was, there is little room left for family. That has always been my greatest regret, and the most painful aspect of the choice I made.

“We watched our children growing without our guidance,’ I said at the wedding, ‘ and when we did come out (of prison), my children said, ‘We thought we had a father and one day he’d come back. But to our dismay, our father came back and he left us alone because he has now become the father of the nation.’” To be the father of a nation is a great honour, but to be the father of a family is a greater joy. But it was a joy I had far too little of.”

The separation of April 1992 became a divorce in March 1996, having spent only five of their 38 married years together. And Winnie became history in his life. Now, he is history to South Africa, which he loved more than his family, and the world, which appropriated him to the extent of setting out his birthday to honour his humanity. In November 2009, the United Nations General Assembly announced that his birthday, July 18, is to be known as “Mandela Day” to mark his contribution to world freedom.

Winnie, who felt betrayed by the Madiba, once said: “This name Mandela is an albatross around the necks of my family. You all must realise that Mandela was not the only man who suffered. There were many others, hundreds who languished in prison and died. Many unsung and unknown heroes of the struggle, and there were others in the leadership too, like poor Steve Biko, who died of the beatings, horribly all alone. Mandela did go to prison and he went in there as a burning young revolutionary. But look what came out.

“Mandela let us down. He agreed to a bad deal for the blacks. Economically, we are still on the outside. The economy is very much ‘white’. It has a few token blacks, but so many who gave their life in the struggle have died unrewarded.

“I cannot forgive him for going to receive the Nobel (Peace Prize in 1993) with his jailer (FW) de Klerk. Hand in hand they went. Do you think de Klerk released him from the goodness of his heart? He had to. The times dictated it, the world had changed, and our struggle was not a flash in the pan, it was bloody to say the least and we had given rivers of blood. I had kept it alive with every means at my disposal.

“Look at this Truth and Reconciliation charade. He should never have agreed to it. What good does the truth do? How does it help anyone to know where and how their loved ones were killed or buried? That Bishop Tutu who turned it all into a religious circus came here.

“He had the cheek to tell me to appear. I told him a few home truths. I told him that he and his other like-minded cretins were only sitting here because of our struggle and me. Because of the things I and people like me had done to get freedom.

“Look what they make him do. The great Mandela. He has no control or say any more. They put that huge statue of him right in the middle of the most affluent ‘white’ area of Johannesburg. Not here where we spilled our blood and where it all started. Mandela is now a corporate foundation. He is wheeled out globally to collect the money and he is content doing that. The ANC has effectively sidelined him but they keep him as a figurehead for the sake of appearance.”

NigerianEye

Mandela Was Angry With Nigeria; “I Cannot Understand Why Nigerians Are Not More Angry”

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 604

   
  EmailShare
• 
  
• 
  

By Dr. Hakeem Baba-Ahmed

“It is better to help a friend pay his fine, than tell a lie to help him cover a crime.”  – Nigerian proverb.
It was literally a life-long ambition, and I used every opportunity to meet the old man in person. I was finally in a position to press buttons and call old friends to render favours, and in early 2007 I succeeded. I was told I could see Mandela for only 30 minutes at his home, but I needed to get there one hour earlier. Colleagues I had leaned on were skeptical that I would see him despite the appointment, particularly since I will not say it was official. An old South African friend and course mate from South Africa who helped, suggested I asked questions or matters I wanted to discuss with him and send them in advance. I did not think that was the type of meeting I wanted, so I did not.
Mandela was surprised when he was told I worked at the Nigerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but had spent 6 months trying to see him to pay my personal respects. Why did you not go through your colleagues here? I told him the visit was not official. I just wanted to meet him. He relaxed and apologized that it had taken that long for me to see him. Others left us, except a lady who sat discreetly away from us. I thought she was a medical person.
How are my Nigerian brothers and sisters? He asked me. He will not let me take the initiative. ‘You know I am not very happy with Nigeria. I have made that very clear on many occasions’. Now I was curious. I knew of course that he led our suspension from the Commonwealth after the hanging of the late Ken Saro-Wiwa and his Ogoni compatriots. It was also no secret that South African governments including one he headed had considerably cooled off towards Nigeria, and by the time I was meeting him, Nigeria was a dirty word in most cities in South Africa. I mentioned that Nigerian people had very strong and positive dispositions towards South Africa and the Southern African region, and many were puzzled that people who marched all the way with South Africans can be despised by the governments and people of South Africa. Yes, he responded. Nigeria stood by us more than any nation, but you let yourselves down and Africa and the black race very badly.
I knew I was going to get a lecture, so I sat back. He spoke with passion and anger at a nation which has one-quarter of the black race, and had everything needed to be great, but is known principally for its dictators and its criminals. Your country, he said, used to be respected. After your suspension from the Commonwealth, many western countries approached me to help in isolating Nigeria so that it will be easier to bring down your military dictators. I consulted many African leaders, and all were unanimous in their advice. They told me to stay clear of Nigeria. That you will fix your problems. You have done it before. ‘But’, he shook his head, ‘you have not. Not this time’. The world will not respect Africa until Nigeria earns that respect. The black people of the world need Nigeria to be great as a source of pride and confidence. Nigerians love freedom and hate oppression. Why do you do it to yourselves? He remembered Tafawa Balewa, the first leader who gave his party, ANC, financial contribution.
I saw an opening here. I suggested that all Africans are bitter at their leaders. With due respect, I  said, his presidency had not changed lives of black South Africans much, and his successors are not likely to do so. Yes, he agreed,’ but we raised hopes that others can do so. ‘He was back to Nigeria. ‘Your leaders have no respect for their people. They believe that their personal interests are the interests of the people. They take people’s resources and turn it into personal wealth. There is a level of poverty in Nigeria that should be unacceptable. I cannot understand why Nigerians are not more angry than they are’, he continued.

• NewsRescue-Nigeria Is Broke! Trillions In Oil Revenue Looted

Since it was obvious that he was intent on pouring his heart out, I decided to let him speak. ‘What do young Nigerians think about your leaders and their country and Africa? Do you teach them history? Do you have lessons on how your past leaders stood by us and gave us large amounts of money? You know I hear from Angolans and Mozambicans and Zimbabweans how your people opened their hearts and their homes to them. I was in prison then, but we know how your leaders punished western companies who supported Apartheid’. I reminded him that we had elected governments since 1999, and he knew some of our leaders in person. Yes, he did. ‘But what about the corruption and the crimes?’ he asked?  ‘Your elections are like wars’. Now we hear that you cannot be president in Nigeria unless you are Muslim or Christian. Some people tell me your country may break up. Please don’t let it happen’.
He sat back. I obviously got a lot more than I bargained for. Then he mellowed down, and apologized. He had not even asked me what I wanted to see him for, and he was tearing at my country. It was fine, I assured him. I merely wanted to meet him and pay my respects. He then asked me a lot of personal questions, and in particular what I was doing personally to improve the capacity of the Nigerian people to build the nation to be a source of pride and comfort for Nigerians, Africa and the black race. But he was in a lecturing mood.
‘Let me tell you what I think you need to do’ he said. ‘You should encourage leaders to emerge who will not confuse public office with sources of making personal wealth. Corrupt people do not make good leaders. Then you have to spend a lot of your resources for education. Educate children of the poor, so that they can get out of poverty. Poverty does not breed confidence. Only confident people can bring changes. Poor, uneducated people can also bring change, but it will be hijacked by the educated and the wealthy’.
‘Like South Africa today, sir’, I quipped. He paused. ‘It will be difficult for the world to understand that it will take generations to eliminate the structural roots and effects of Apartheid.’ ‘But’, I drove the point home, ‘You created the impression that the political compromises and concessions you made would lead to a dramatic change in the fortunes of black people’. ‘Drammatic?’ he asked. ‘In many ways we achieved dramatic results’.’ Like in sports’, I pressed further. ‘Sports is important to South Africans. It gave them confidence to believe things are possible. And it united them”. ‘But sir, it created a false sense of progress, and people here think it is all a gimmick by white people to create a diversion’.’ It is not a diversion, he countered. It is real. South Africans will have to come to terms with the reality that their country is a multi-racial, multi-cultural nation with rich and poor. Any efforts to reduce the gulf between  the races and classes is useful, he insisted.
Then he was back to Nigeria. People had said to him that South Africa could become an alternative beacon of hope and inspiration for the black race and Africa. He told them it was always going to be Nigeria. Nigeria, Egypt and South Africa can provide a tripod for real change but young Africans need to capture that vision. ‘So’, he said to me, ‘If this audience has been useful, I am glad. But it will be more useful to me if you go back to Nigeria and work to give young Nigerians good education. Teach them the value of hard work and sacrifice, and discourage them from crimes which are destroying your image as a good people.’
I have re-lived that rare opportunity many times since that visit. The 30-minute audience lasted for one hour, and I was escorted out by a man I saw close up as human as anyone. I had rarely come across such candour about my country, but it was clearly the product of genuine concern that one of Africa’s greatest assets was being frittered away.
As he shook my hand to say goodbye, he apologized again over his comments, but assured me that he would love to see Nigeria grow and develop into a world economic power under a democratic system. If there is any comfort to draw from Mandela’s disappointment, it will be that he may not have observed our free-fall as a nation in the last five years.

NewsRescue

President Jonathan Encourages Corruption In Nigeria, House Speaker Tambuwal Says

Speaker of the House, Aminu Tambuwal 

 

By Sani Tukur

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal, has stated that President Goodluck Jonathan is encouraging corruption in Nigeria by his handling of corruption cases.
“The President’s body language’ seems to be encouraging corrupt practices in the country,” the speaker said.
Mr. Tambuwal said the executive arm, headed by Mr. Jonathan, has failed to act on corruption cases revealed by the National Assembly.
He spoke while responding to questions on Monday after he presented a paper titled the ‘role of the legislature in the fight against corruption in Nigeria’ at a one day roundtable to mark the international anti-corruption day organised by the Nigeria Bar Association, NBA, in Abuja.
“Take the subsidy probe, the pension, the SEC probe and recently the bullet proof car cases. After the House of Representatives did a diligent job by probing and exposing the cases, you now see something else when it comes to prosecution.
“In some cases, you have the government setting up new committees to duplicate the job already done by the parliament. Take the bullet proof cars case, the NSA, with all the security challenges confronting the country, should not be burdened with a job that can best be handled by the anti-corruption agencies,” he said.
He also said the government has no business setting up any administrative committee in a corruption case that is clear to all Nigerians, in apparent reference to the committee set up by Mr. Jonathan to probe the N255 million car scandal involving the Minister of Aviation, Stella Oduah. The three-man presidential committee had since submitted its report to Mr. Jonathan, with the president taking no action.
“What the President should have done was to explicitly direct the EFCC to probe the matter. With such directives coming from the President, I am sure we still have good people in EFCC who can do a good job,” Mr. Tambuwal said.
“By the action of setting up different committees for straightforward cases, the president’s body language doesn’t tend to support the fight against corruption.”
While lamenting what he described as the selective nature of prosecution of cases by the anti-corruption agencies, Mr. Tambuwal pledged the support of the national Assembly in the fight against corruption.
Below is the excerpt of the speech he earlier read at the event.
THE ROLE OF THE LEGISLATURE AS THE VANGUARD FOR ANTI CORRUPTION CRUSADE IN NIGERIA: BEING TEXT OF THE SPEECH BY RT HON AMINU WAZIRI TAMBUWAL CFR, SPEAKER HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA AS GUEST SPEAKER AT THE 2013 INTERNATIONAL ANTI-CORRUPTION DAY ORGANIZED BY THE NIGERIA BAR ASSOCIATION (NBA) ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMITTEE – 9TH DECEMBER 2013, SHERATON HOTEL & TOWERS, ABUJA
PROTOCOL:
1. I should like to start by expressing my sincere appreciation to the Anti-corruption committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) for assigning me the role of Guest Speaker at this auspicious occasion of the 2013 International Anti-corruption day observance.
2. The subject matter, corruption, is so vast that to attempt to address it generally will take ages. Accordingly, therefore, I have decided to restrict my discussion today to “the role of the legislature as the vanguard for anti corruption crusade in Nigeria”
3. As a phenomenon, corruption is so notorious that it does not require introduction at an occasion or definition in a discussion such as this. The mere fact that corruption has been able to secure a whole day globally set aside for the observance of the prosecution of war against it confirms it’s notoriety beyond doubt. It also establishes the fact that corruption is a global citizen.
4. Nonetheless, for purposes of refreshing our memories, corruption refers to dishonest or illegal behaviour or conduct especially by powerful people. It is the impairment of integrity, virtue or moral principle and a departure from what is pure and correct.
5. Even though the tendency has been to talk of corruption more with reference to persons in position of governmental or managerial authorities, in reality corruption permeates all segments of society and indeed all societies since government and authorities are products of societies. It must be admitted though, that the level of prevalence differs from society to society.
6. For us in Nigeria, the reality that no greater challenge than corruption confronts us as a people is not in controversy. Indeed if the roots of the overwhelming majority of our woes were traced, they are sure to terminate at the doorsteps of corruption. This is a commonplace fact known to all Nigerians and requiring no corroboration. Yet for the avoidance of doubt, it is important to state that in its 2012 Global Corruption Perception Index (CPI) by the global corruption watchdog, Transparency International ranks Nigeria as the 36th most corrupt country globally! Nigeria placed 139th of the 176 countries assessed scoring 27% in contrast with the least corrupt countries; Denmark, Finland and New Zealand which scored 90%.
7. A survey of the social media showed that 98% of Nigerians who commented not only agreed with the country’s corruption ranking but in fact felt Transparency International was too generous to Nigeria. A few of the comments read: “We don’t need a report to tell us what we already know” another “Wow, I taught (sic) we were No.1, I wonder what country (SIC) are before us. We all need prayers and serious fasting for our nation”. The other “to be fair, I always thought Nigeria is the most corrupt country in the world” yet another “Me too… 35th is actually being nice”.
8. A list of manifestation of corruption especially in the public sector of Nigeria is legion ranging from direct diversion of public funds to private pockets, contract over-pricing, bribery, impunity, nepotism, general financial recklessness, fraudulent borrowing and debt management, public assets striping, electoral fraud, shielding of corrupt public officers among others.
9. It is a well established fact that corruption thrives well in any environment or society where there is community indifference or lack of enforcement policies. Societies with a culture of ritualized gift giving where the line between acceptable and non-acceptable gifts is often hard to draw. Societies in which values have been overthrown by materialism, societies in which laws are observed more in the breach.
10. It would appear that these environmental preconditions are all prevalent in the Nigerian society and no wonder therefore that corruption has found fertile soil to blossom.
11. As noted earlier, corruption is Nigeria’s greatest problem and a cancerous impediment to any development effort planned or envisaged. It follows then that if Nigeria is to witness true development, then corruption must be dealt with decisively and comprehensively. It is a duty requiring will, zeal and passion on the part of the three arms of government and indeed the entire citizenry.
The Role Of The Legislature.
12. The legislature plays three basic functions in a democracy, to wit Legislation, Representation and Oversight. It is within this scope of authority that the legislature can and indeed does impact on governance and can thus participate in the prosecution of the war against corruption in Nigeria .
13. Under the legislative function, Section 4 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 provides to the effect that the National Assembly shall have the power to make laws for peace, order and good government of the country. More specifically, under Section 15 (5) of the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, it provides, “The state shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of office”. Again in Section 2 (2) (b) and (c)’ government is enjoined to harness the resources of the nation for the common good and to prevent the concentration of wealth or the means of production and exchange in the hands of few individuals or of a group.
14. The responsibility of fashioning the legal framework for the fight against corruption and corrupt practices is thereby vested in the legislature.
15. In the exercise of this mandate, the National Assembly has enacted, the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal, The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2002 and The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission Act 2000′ for the purpose of investigating and prosecuting Public Officers and other persons suspected of involvement in corrupt practices. In both legislation, the Commissions are given extensive powers of investigation and prosecution to deal with all cases of corrupt practices and abuse of office that may arise.
16. With respect to the specific objective of injecting transparency and accountability in the management of the resources of the nation, the National Assembly enacted the Fiscal Responsibility Act 2007 and the Public Procurement Act 2007. Both legislations make copious provisions aimed at engendering transparency and accountability in the public space.
17. I make bold to say that if the provisions of these legislation and indeed others were diligently enforced, significant milestones would have been accomplished in the fight against corruption and corrupt practices in Nigeria. Sadly however these Legislations are observed more in the breach by the majority including government and government agencies.
18. I am pleased to report that the House of Representatives is currently working on some proposals for the reform of these laws with a view to reinforcing the independence of the agencies administering these laws including their mode of constitution and disbandment. I wish therefore to call on members of the NBA and indeed all Nigerians to prepare to buy into these reforms by making their inputs now or when the time comes for Public Hearings.
19. One other area which has been of great concern is the culture of undue secrecy that surrounded the operation of government. Whereas our Constitution enjoins in its Section 14 (2) (c) that ” the participation of the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution” government business tended to be run like secret societies to the exclusion of the citizenry. It was clear that this tended and was indeed intended to aid the concealment of corruption such that even in times of suspicion, members of the public including gentlemen of the fourth realm could not access public information.
20. The National Assembly has passed the Freedom of Information Act 2011 to enhance the right of access to public records and information about public institutions. This is one Legislation that attracted massive public interest and it is my expectation that Nigerians will make maximum use of the right created under this legislation in order to defeat the culture of undue secrecy in the running of government business.
21. The other function of the legislature is oversight of the other arms of government. Section 88 mandates the National Assembly to investigate the conduct of affairs of any person, authority, ministry or government department charged or intended to be charged with the duty of or responsibility for
i) Executing or administering laws enacted by the National Assembly or
ii) Disbursing or administering moneys appropriated or to be appropriated by the National Assembly
The main object of investigation according to sub section 2 (a) and (b) of Section 88 is for law reform and to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste in the execution or administration of laws or administration or disbursement of public funds. Similar provision is made in Section 128 of the constitution for legislatures at the sub-national levels.
22. Another critical role of the Legislature is the provision of adequate funding for Anti Corruption Agencies through appropriation. Unfortunately efforts to exercise this function by the legislature is often misconstrued by the executive arm and even some members of the public. Yet without adequate funding the anti corruption agencies cannot execute their functions satisfactorily. I wish to call on the other arms of government and indeed the general public to corroborate with us in the exercise of this mandate .
23.It is in exercise of this mandate that the House of Representatives and indeed the National Assembly has been carrying out oversight of government agencies and series of investigations or probes over allegations of corruption and corrupt practices. As you are all aware, the legislature has over the years exposed several cases of corruption.
24. It is important for me to stress once again at this stage that the mandate of the legislature is to expose corruption. It does not have further mandate to prosecute. That mandate of prosecution lies with the Executive and Judiciary. I have heard public comments to the effect that the public is tired of investigation by the legislature since the people indicted in their findings are never prosecuted and sanctioned.
25. Let me reiterate that the Legislature will not abdicate its responsibilities on the account of inaction or negligence of another arm of government. If nothing else we will at least continue to name and shame. As noted earlier, the war against corruption is the responsibility of all and I call on the citizens of this great nation to rise in the exercise of their constitutional power to insist on the prosecution and sanctioning of persons indicted by the Legislature or by any agency whether public or private concerned in the fight against corruption.
26. In the exercise of the mandate of oversight the legislature is able to audit both pre and post expenditure of agencies of government and to give appropriate direction on the administration and disbursement of funds and execution of programs and projects under the Appropriation Act. Indeed the Public Accounts Committee of both the House and Senate has the specific mandate to review the disbursement and administration of public funds by ministries, Departments and Agencies.
27. As representatives of the people, Legislators will continue to be for all Nigerians their eyes to see, ears to hear and mouth to speak out against corruption anywhere and at anytime it rears its ugly head.
28. The task may appear daunting but I wish to assure that wit will, zeal, passion and determination we shall eventually overcome this hydra headed dragon. Only let us be single minded that it’s a task that must be done in order to preserve the country for posterity.
Thank you all for your attention and God bless Nigeria.

Saharareporters

Henry A. Giroux | The Spectacle of Illiteracy and the Crisis of Democracy

 By Henry A Giroux, Moyers & Company (Photo: Peter Lang Publishing Group)C. Wright Mills argued 50 years ago that one important measure of the demise of vibrant democracy and the corresponding impoverishment of political life can be found in the increasing inability of a society to translate private troubles to broader public issues. [1] This is an issue that both characterizes and threatens any viable notion of democracy in the United States in the current historical moment. In an alleged post-racist democracy, the image of the public sphere with its appeal to dialogue and shared responsibility has given way to the spectacle of unbridled intolerance, ignorance, seething private fears, unchecked anger and the decoupling of reason from freedom. Increasingly, as witnessed in the utter disrespect and not-so-latent racism expressed by Joe Wilson, the Republican congressman from South Carolina, who shouted “you lie!” during President Obama’s address on health care, the obligation to listen, respect the views of others and engage in a literate exchange is increasingly reduced to the highly spectacular embrace of an infantile emotionalism. This is an emotionalism that is made for television. It is perfectly suited for emptying the language of public life of all substantive content, reduced in the end to a playground for hawking commodities, promoting celebrity culture and enacting the spectacle of right-wing fantasies fueled by the fear that the public sphere as an exclusive club for white male Christians is in danger of collapsing. For some critics, those who carry guns to rallies or claim Obama is a Muslim and not a bona fide citizen of the United States are simply representative of an extremist fringe, that gets far more publicity from the mainstream media than they deserve. Of course this is understandable, given that the media’s desire for balance and objective news is not just disingenuous but relinquishes any sense of ethical responsibility by failing to make a distinction between an informed argument and an unsubstantiated opinion. Witness the racist hysteria unleashed by so many Americans and the media over the building of an Islamic cultural center near ground zero.
Also see: Bill Moyers | Henry Giroux: Zombie Politics and Casino Capitalism
The collapse of journalistic standards finds its counterpart in the rise of civic illiteracy. An African-American president certainly makes the Rush Limbaughs of the world even more irrational than they already are, just as the lunatic fringe seems to be able to define itself only through a mode of thought whose first principle is to disclaim logic itself. But I think this dismissal is too easy. What this decline in civility, the emergence of mob behavior and the utter blurring in the media between a truth and a lie suggest is that we have become one of the most illiterate nations on the planet. I don’t mean illiterate in the sense of not being able to read, though we have far too many people who are functionally illiterate in a so-called advanced democracy, a point that writers such as Chris Hedges, Susan Jacoby and the late Richard Hofstadter made clear in their informative books on the rise of anti-intellectualism in American life. [2] I am talking about a different species of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. Illiterate in this instance refers to the inability on the part of much of the American public to grasp private troubles and the meaning of the self in relation to larger public problems and social relations. It is a form of illiteracy that points less to the lack of technical skills and the absence of certain competencies than to a deficit in the realms of politics — one that subverts both critical thinking and the notion of literacy as both critical interpretation and the possibility of intervention in the world. This type of illiteracy is not only incapable of dealing with complex and contested questions, it is also an excuse for glorifying the principle of self-interest as a paradigm for understanding politics. This is a form of illiteracy marked by the inability to see outside of the realm of the privatized self, an illiteracy in which the act of translation withers, reduced to a relic of another age. The United States is a country that is increasingly defined by a civic deficit, a chronic and deadly form of civic illiteracy that points to the failure of both its educational system and the growing ability of anti-democratic forces to use the educational force of the culture to promote the new illiteracy. As this widespread illiteracy has come to dominate American culture, we have moved from a culture of questioning to a culture of shouting and in doing so have restaged politics and power in both unproductive and anti-democratic ways.
Think of the forces at work in the larger culture that work overtime to situate us within a privatized world of fantasy, spectacle and resentment that is entirely removed from larger social problems and public concerns. For instance, corporate culture, with its unrelenting commercials, carpet-bombs our audio and visual fields with the message that the only viable way to define ourselves is to shop and consume in an orgy of private pursuits. Popular culture traps us in the privatized universe of celebrity culture, urging us to define ourselves through the often empty and trivialized and highly individualized interests of celebrities. Pharmaceutical companies urge us to deal with our problems, largely produced by economic and political forces out of our control, by taking a drug, one that will both chill us out and increase their profit margins. (This has now become an educational measure applied increasingly and indiscriminately to children in our schools.) Pop psychologists urge us to simply think positively, give each other hugs and pull ourselves up by the bootstraps while also insisting that those who confront reality and its mix of complex social issues are, as Chris Hedges points out, defeatists, a negative force that inhibits “our inner essence and power.” [3] There is also the culture of militarization, which permeates all aspects of our lives — from our classrooms and the screen culture of reality television to the barrage of violent video games and the blood letting in sports such as popular wrestling — endlessly at work in developing modes of masculinity that celebrate toughness, violence, cruelty, moral indifference and misogyny.
All of these forces, whose educational influence should never be underestimated, constitute a new type of illiteracy, a kind of civic illiteracy in which it becomes increasingly impossible to connect the everyday problems that people face with larger social forces — thus depoliticizing their own sense of agency and making politics itself an empty gesture. Is it any wonder that politics is now mediated through a spectacle of anger, violence, humiliation and rage that mimics the likes of The Jerry Springer Show? It is not that we have become a society of the spectacle — though that is partly true — but that we have fallen prey to a new kind of illiteracy in which the distinction between illusion and reality is lost, just as the ability to experience our feelings of discontent and our fears of uncertainty are reduced to private troubles, paralyzing us in a sea of resentment waiting to be manipulated by extremists extending from religious fanatics to right-wing radio hosts. This is a prescription for a kind of rage that looks for easy answers, demands a heightened emotional release and resents any attempts to think through the connection between our individual woes and any number of larger social forces. A short list of such forces would include an unchecked system of finance, the anti-democratic power of the corporate state, the rise of multinationals and the destruction of the manufacturing base and the privatization of public schooling along with its devaluing of education as a public good. As the public collapses into the personal, the personal becomes “the only politics there is, the only politics with a tangible referent or emotional valence,” [4] the formative educational and political conditions that make a democracy possible begin to disappear. Under such circumstances, the language of the social is either devalued, pathologized or ignored and all dreams of the future are now modeled around the narcissistic, privatized and self-indulgent needs of consumer and celebrity culture and the dictates of the allegedly free market. How else to explain the rage against big government but barely a peep against the rule of big corporations who increasingly control not only the government but almost every vital aspect of our lives from health care to the quality of our environment?
Stripped of its ethical and political importance, the public has been largely reduced to a space where private interests are displayed and the social order increasingly mimics a giant Dr. Phil show where notions of the public register as simply a conglomeration of private woes, tasks, conversations and problems. Most importantly, as the very idea of the social collapses into an utterly privatized discourse, everyday politics is decoupled from its democratic moorings and it becomes more difficult for people to develop a vocabulary for understanding how private problems and public issues constitute the very lifeblood of a vibrant politics and democracy itself. This is worth repeating. Emptied of any substantial content, democracy appears imperiled as individuals are unable to translate their privately suffered misery into genuine public debate, social concerns and collective action. This is a form of illiteracy that is no longer marginal to American society but is increasingly becoming one of its defining and more frightening features.
The raging narcissism that seems to shape every ad, film, television program and appeal now mediated through the power of the corporate state and consumer society is not merely a clinical and individual problem. It is the basis for a new kind of mass illiteracy that is endlessly reproduced through the venues of a number of anti-democratic institutions and forces that eschew critical debate, self-reflection, critical analysis and certainly modes of dissent that call the totality of a society into question. As American society becomes incapable of questioning itself, the new illiteracy parades as just its opposite. We are told that education is about learning how to take tests rather than learning how to think critically. We are told that anything that does not make us feel good is not worth bothering with. We are told that character is the only measure of how to judge people who are the victims of larger social forces that are mostly out of their control. When millions of people are unemployed, tossed out of their homes, homeless or living in poverty, the language of character, pop psychology, consumerism and celebrity culture are more than a diversion: they are fundamental to the misdirected anger, mob rule and illiteracy that frames the screaming, racism, lack of civility and often sheer and legitimate desperation.
Authoritarianism is often abetted by an inability of the public to grasp how questions of power, politics, history and public consciousness are mediated at the interface of private issues and public concerns. The ability to translate private problems into social considerations is fundamental to what it means to reactivate political sensibilities and conceive of ourselves as critical citizens, engaged public intellectuals and social agents. Just as an obsession with the private is at odds with a politics informed by public consciousness, it also burdens politics by stripping it of the kind of political imagination and collective hope necessary for a viable notion of meaning, hope and political agency.
Civic literacy is about more than enlarging the realm of critique and affirming the social. It is also about public responsibility, the struggle over democratic public life and the importance of critical education in a democratic society. The US government is more than willing to invest billions in wars, lead the world in arms sales and give trillions in tax cuts to the ultra-rich but barely acknowledges the need to invest in those educational and civic institutions from schools to the arts to a massive jobs creation program — that enable individuals to be border crossers, capable of connecting the private and the public as part of a more vibrant understanding of politics, identity, agency and governance. The new illiteracy is not the cause of our problems, which are deeply rooted in larger social, economic and political forces that have marked the emergence of the corporate state, a deadly form of racism parading as color blindness and a ruthless market fundamentalism since the 1970s, but it is a precondition for locking individuals into a system in which they are complicitous in their own exploitation, disposability and potential death.
The new illiteracy is about more than not knowing how to read the book or the word; it is about not knowing how to read the world. The challenge it poses in a democracy is one of both learning how to reclaim literacy so as to be able to narrate oneself and the world from a position of agency. But it is also about unlearning those modes of learning that internalize modes of ignorance based on the concerted refusal to know, be self-reflective and act with principled dignity. It is a problem as serious as any we have ever faced in the United States. At the core of any viable democratic politics is the ability to question the assumptions central to an imagined democracy. This is not merely a political issue but an educational issue, one that points to the need for modes of civic education that provide the knowledge and competencies for young and old alike to raise important questions about what education and literacy itself should accomplish in a democracy. [5] This is not an issue we can ignore too much longer.

TruthOut

Jonathan Disbursed N32bn to 16 PDP States; Illegally Starving APC States – APC Document

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 733

   
  EmailShare
• 
  
• 
  

Dec. 10, 2013
DailyTrust
The All Progressives Congress (APC) yesterday alleged that it had stumbled on a document indicating that President Goodluck Jonathan had disbursed N2 billion each to 16 states controlled by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
The Interim National Publicity Secretary of the party, Alhaji Lai Mohammed stated this in Ilorin during a media parliament organised by the Kwara State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ).
Mohammed, who said the party would take up the matter, alleged that the idea was to starve the APC states of their statutory allocations and secretly fund states that are in support of his re-election bid.
He also spoke on the controversy over the 2014 budget benchmark between the President and the National Assembly, alleging that the President deliberately pegged the 2014 budget at $74 per barrel to starve APC states of funds and clandestinely fund PDP states from the Excess Crude Account (ECA).

• NewsRescue-NNPC Diverted $49.8bn Meant For The Nigerian Treasury Between 2012-13, Says CBN Governor In letter To President Jonathan

According to him, the action portrayed the President as a sectional President. He warned that money accrued to the federation account is meant for the benefit of all Nigerians and not for the President to spend on his perceived allies and sympathizers.
“We are in possession of a document that Mr. President has given N2bn each to 16 states and of these 16 states, not one of them is an APC state. The idea is to starve the APC states of their constitutional entitlements and then secretly fund states that are perceived to be sympathetic to him. This is a matter we will take up and the National Assembly will look into the truth of the matter. But I think the matter should be thrown into the court of public opinion”, he said.
The APC spokesman also said that while a barrel of crude oil sells for $110, the President pegged the 2014 budget at $74 in order to divert the balance of $44 into the ECA which he could withdraw at will to strengthen states that are in support of his re-election bid.

NewsRescue

THOMAS SANKARA. THE TRUE AFRICAN HERO.

Biography of Thomas Sankara.

Thomas Sankara was Burkina Faso’s president from August 1983 until his assassination on October 15, 1987. Perhaps, more than any other African president in living memory, Thomas Sankara, in four years, transformed Burkina Faso from a poor country, dependent on aid, to an economically independent and socially progressive nation.

Thomas Sankara began by purging the deeply entrenched bureaucratic and institutional corruption in Burkina Faso. He slashed the salaries of ministers and sold off the fleet of exotic cars in the president’s convoy, opting instead for the cheapest brand of car available in Burkina Faso, Renault 5. His salary was $450 per month and he refused to use the air conditioning units in his office, saying that he felt guilty doing so, since very few of his country people could afford it. Thomas Sankara would not let his portrait be hung in offices and government institutions in Burkina Faso, because every Burkinabe is a Thomas Sankara, he declared. Sankara changed the name of the country from the colonially imposed Upper Volta to Burkina Faso, which means land of upright men.

Thomas Sankara’s achievements are numerous and can only be summarized briefly; within the first year of his leadership, Sankara embarked on an unprecedented mass vaccination program that saw 2.5 million Burkinabe children vaccinated. From an alarming 280 deaths for every 1,000 births, infant mortality was immediately slashed to below 145 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Sankara preached self-reliance, he banned the importation of several items into Burkina Faso, and encouraged the growth of the local industry. It was not long before Burkinabes were wearing 100% cotton sourced, woven and tailored in Burkina Faso. From being a net importer of food, Thomas Sankara began to aggressively promote agriculture in Burkina Faso, telling his country people to quit eating imported rice and grain from Europe, said, “let us consume what we ourselves control,” he emphasized. In less than 4 years, Burkina Faso became self-sufficient in foods production through the redistribution of lands from the hands of corrupt chiefs and land owners to local farmers, and through massive irrigation and fertilizer distribution programs.

Thomas Sankara utilized various policies and government assistance to encourage Burkinabes to get education. In less than two years as a president, school attendance jumped from about 10% to a little below 25%, thus overturning the 90% illiteracy rate he met upon assumption of office. Living way ahead of his time, within 12 months of his leadership, Sankara vigorously pursued a reforestation program that saw over 10 million trees planted around the country in order to push back the encroachment of the Sahara Desert.

Uncommon at the time he lived, Sankara stressed women empowerment and campaigned for the dignity of women in a traditional patriarchal society. He also employed women in several government positions and declared a day of solidarity with housewives by mandating their husbands to take on their roles for 24 hours. A personal fitness enthusiast, Sankara encouraged Burkinabes to be fitted and was regularly seen jogging unaccompanied on the streets of Ouagadougou; his waistline remained the same throughout his tenure as president.

In 1987, during a meeting of African leaders under the auspices of the Organization of African Unity, Thomas Sankara tried to convince his peers to turn their backs on the debt owed western nations. According to him, “debt is a cleverly managed reconquest of Africa. It is a reconquest that turns each one of us into a financial slave.” He would not request for, nor accept aid from the west, noting that “…welfare and aid policies have only ended up disorganizing us, subjugating us, and robbing us of a sense of responsibility for our own economic, political, and cultural affairs. We chose to risk new paths to achieve greater well-being.”

Thomas Sankara was a pan-Africanist who spoke out against apartheid, telling French President Jacques Chirac, during his visit to Burkina Faso, that it was wrong for him to support the apartheid government and that he must be ready to bear the consequences of his actions. Sankara’s policies and his unapologetic anti-imperialist stand made him an enemy of France, Burkina Faso’s former colonial master. He spoke truth to power fearlessly and paid with his life. Upon his assassination, his most valuable possessions were a car, a refrigerator, three guitars, motorcycles, a broken down freezer and about $400 in cash.

In death, Thomas Sankara’s burial place is unkempt and filled with weeds (click to see Thomas Sankara’s graveyard http://youtu.be/bY2UpSxXPlw ).

Few young Africans have ever heard of Thomas Sankara. In reality, it is not the assassination of Thomas Sankara that has dealt a lethal blow to Africa and Africans; it is the assassination of his memory, as manifested in the indifference to his legacy, in the lack of constant reference to his ideals and ideas by Africans, by those who know and those who should know. Among physical and mental dirt and debris lie Africa’s heroes while the younger generations search in vain for role models from among their kind. Africans have therefore, internalized self-abhorrence and the convictions of innate incapability to bring about transformation.

Transformation must run contrary to the African’s DNA, many Africans subconsciously believe. Africans are not given to celebrating their own heroes, but this must change. It is a colonial legacy that was instituted to establish the inferiority of the colonized and justify colonialism. It was a strategic policy that ensured that Africans celebrated the heroes of their colonial masters, but not that of Africa. Fifty years and counting after colonialism ended, Africa’s curriculum must now be redrafted to reflect the numerous achievements of Africans.

The present generation of Africans is thirsty, searching for where to draw the moral, intellectual and spiritual courage to effect change. The waters to quench the thirst, as other continents have already established, lies fundamentally in history - in Africa’s forbears, men, women and children who experienced much of what most Africans currently experience, but who chose to toe a different path. The media, entertainment industry, civil society groups, writers, institutions and organizations must begin to search out and include African role models, case studies and examples in their contents.

For Africans, the strength desperately needed for the transformation of the continent cannot be drawn from World Bank and IMF policies, from aid and assistance obtained from China, India, the United States or Europe. The strength to transform Africa lies in the foundations laid by uncommon heroes like Thomas Sankara; a man who showed Africa and the world that with a single minded pursuit of purpose, the worst can be made the best, and in record time too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My Note:

Thomas Sankara is a Fulani Christian. Alas! If he were to be a Nigerian today he would have been crucified, vilified for being a Fulani. He would have been castigated for being a military man and would yet be killed or accused from all angles for being upright, honest, no nonsense and not one to dance with corruption or the corrupt.

Such a one exists in Nigeria but little wonder that that one is the most vilified and castigated by the corrupt political class and a brigandage of brown envelope journalists and bias media.

Many hypocrites call and are extolling Madiba today, yet they would have taken him through hell were he a Nigerian.

Our calls and shouts are simply hypocritical. We are not yet serious.

Being on the right track is not the popular thing to do. However, some of us will stick to it no matter the odds.

Courtesy: Dazuowei Pantani