Only Buhari’s letter, not Oyegun’s, can be read in Senate – Na’Allah

Premium Times

 

Buhari writes Senate, seeks approval to a

The Deputy Leader of the Senate, Bala Ibn-Na’Allah, says only a letter from the president of Nigeria can be read on the floor of the Senate or the House of Representatives.
Mr. Na’Allah told journalists in Abuja on Tuesday that it was the reason the purported letter written by the leadership of the All Progressives Congress to the National Assembly was not and will not be read at plenary.
“A lot of people do not understand; as a member of the National Assembly, the moment you step into the National Assembly, you either take the Bible or the Quran; and then you subscribe to the oath of allegiance and then take your oath of office.
“The oath of office says that you will uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Law and then the Rules of the Senate.
“Outside these three documents, (a) senator does not have any leverage to do anything; there is no other document outside these three.
“And then if you carefully look at the rules of the Senate, the only letters that can be read on the floor of the House should a letter from Mr. President.
“And that is the convention not only in Nigeria, but in all other parliaments all over the world”.
He stressed the need for Nigerians to understand the workings of democracy before making attributions unknown in democratic circles.
Mr. Na’Allah, however, said that the party could influence its members in the National Assembly and at the state level through the various caucuses, but not by imposition.
“I have not seen any issue here; it is just that people are trying to overheat the polity without knowing what the process is all about”.

EXCLUSIVE: Joda Committee to Buhari: Merge debt-ridden Arik, Aero, others to form national carrier

Bassey Udo

President Muhammadu Buhari on Day One at Presidential Villa

The Buhari administration may be considering merging all debtor airlines in the country into a national carrier, capable of serving the West and Central African regions, with Nigeria as the regional aviation hub.
That is part of the recommendations by the Ahmed Joda transition committee, which submitted its report to President Muhammadu Buhari about two weeks ago. Volumes of the report were exclusively obtained by PREMIUM TIMES.
Six of Nigeria’s leading domestic airlines are currently bogged down by huge debts totalling almost N130 billion, forcing them to turn to the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) for a lifeline.
In 2014, the Federal Ministry of Aviation gave the debt portfolio of five of the airlines with AMCON at over N190 billion. The amount excluded sundry debts to aviation agencies like the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), the Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA), suppliers and other institutions.
The ministry said it arrived at the huge figure after a comprehensive audit of the operations of all the domestic airlines.
Details of the audit findings, the Ministry said, showed Aero Contractors’ debt stood at over $200 mn (N308 bn), with 60% of its equity already taken over by AMCON, while Arik Air has been in debt to the tune of over $600 mn (N924 bn); IRS Airlines, $55 mn (N84 bn); Chanchangi Airlines, $55 mn (N84 bn), and the now bankrupt Air Nigeria owing about $225.8 mn (N347.7 bn).
In 2012, Arik, Aero, IRS, Bellview, Chanchangi, Afrijet, Albarka, Caverton, Continental, Air Nigeria and Savannah, were at the verge of going under when AMCON waded in with a N132billion lifeline, saving in the process over 7,000 staff from being thrown into the labour market.
Aviation industry experts told PREMIUM TIMES at the weekend that some of the airlines that were still grappling with working capital challenges recently approached AMCON again with a multi-billion request for a bailout to enable them settle accumulated aviation fuel bills to oil marketers.
The Joda committee advised President Buhari to consider a public-private partnership (PPP) arrangement that would involve all airlines currently with AMCON, as part of the Federal Government’s contribution to a national carrier project.
The committee recommended the decision be carried out in six months.
The committee said this will increase government revenue from the sector, reduce capital flight, expand the local aviation industry and create more employment opportunities to the people.
The Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), the report said, should work with the Ministries of Aviation, Finance, Industry, Trade and Investment to implement an aviation-focused PPP framework that would create the environment for the development of aviation infrastructure, procurement and upgrade.
The committee, which noted poor utilization as one of the key challenges in the sector, said about 75 percent of passenger traffic were generated from three airports – Lagos, Port Harcourt and Abuja, while over 90 percent of the revenue earned came from Lagos and Abuja.
To ensure a realistic capital base for domestic and international airlines for sustainability in accordance with global best practices, the committee said the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) should in the next three months consider the upward review of capital requirements for airlines to N2.5 bn (domestic) and N 5billion (International).
Within the target period, the government would undertake the immediate repairs and upgrade of passenger facilities, including air-conditioning systems, luggage conveyor belts, passenger tunnels, to improve customer experience, increase revenue, and improve the safety of travelers, it said

EXCLUSIVE: Joda Committee to Buhari: Sack Jonathan's last minutes appointees, review contracts of 18 months.

Ini Ekott

Chairman of Transition Committtee, Dr Ahmed Joda, President Muhammadu Buhari, Vice Chairman Doyin Salami, APC Nartional Chairman Chief John Oyegun during the final presentation of report of Transition committee to the President at the defence house in Abuja

 

The hmed Joda transition committee has urged President Muhammadu Buhari to immediately terminate all dubious appointments made by former President Goodluck Jonathan in the last nine months, and review all contracts awarded by the administration in the last 18 months.
The committee said this is to help the new government sidestep ineptitude and waste, and scale up its revenue base.
The recommendations are part of a portfolio of swift steps Mr. Buhari must take within three months of assumption of power if he must save cost and “enhance liquidity”, the committee said in its 800-page report to the president.
PREMIUM TIMES exclusively obtained volumes of the report, which contain extensive analyses of Nigeria’s key challenges, with suggested responses for the economy and finance, governance and social welfare.
The report details a list of prompt, medium and long term decisions Mr. Buhari must take, or authorise, within 30, 45, 60 and 90 days of taking office, to create immediate impact, reduce government liability, increase revenue and stabilise the polity.
For instance, to deal with crippling fuel crisis, and backlog of unpaid salaries by states and the federal government, the committee advised Mr. Buhari to “borrow immediately or use CBN (Central Bank) advances” for salaries and fuel subsidies to “avoid chaos”.
For contracts, it urged the administration to “review all contracts signed in the last 18 months by FGN”.
“Non-strategic contracts that have not commenced or where no payments have been made can be cancelled,” the committee said, while also urging Mr. Buhari to negotiate exits for projects where mobilisation payments have been made but work not commenced.
That move will “save expenditure on non-strategic projects, and can free up cash flows for other vital initiatives”, the committee said.
The decision on contract is to be taken within 90 days from May 29, and should be handled by the Federal Executive Council and the Bureau of Public Procurement, BPP.
At a time Mr. Buhari is facing growing criticism over his delay in making key appointments, and his failure to lay out initiatives to assure a burdened nation of immediate relief, the Joda report provides a fresh perspective on preparations by the new government and the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, to confront some of Nigeria’s monstrous problems.
The committee said the president should review all appointments made by Mr. Jonathan in the last nine months, and “for strategic agencies requiring professional leadership, the government should terminate all appointments not based on merit”.
The Joda panel said such move will save costs associated with poor decision making by an incompetent management team, and must be delivered within 45 days of the new government.
That recommendation appears to take into consideration the last minute appointments by Mr. Jonathan after he lost the March 28 elections.
In less than two months, Mr. Jonathan, not previously given to readily hiring and firing, sacked dozens of top officials and replaced them before leaving office.
As further measures to check waste and increase efficiency and accountability, the committee urged the government to quickly implement a single bank account, to be called Treasury Single Account, and to commence full implementation of the Fiscal Responsibility Act within 60 days, and chase up any outstanding funds from all government offices.
This will curtail the “excesses carried forward from previous administration”, it noted.
The committee also advised the government to fully implement the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System, IPPIS, and Integrated Government Integrated Financial Management Information System across all MDAs within 60 days.
The two facilities were used by the past government to check thousands of “ghost workers” who drew billions of naira in salaries that ended in the pocket of fraudulent officials.
Despite its claim of saving more than N100 billion from “ghost workers”, the Jonathan administration failed to punish those behind the scam.
Claims by former Finance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, that the case had been transferred to the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) alongside names of indicted officials, were repeatedly refuted by the anti-graft body.
But more than other proposals in that unit of the report, the committee paid greater attention to government contracts and urged President Buhari to be decisive in reviewing the deals.
The committee said the handover notes from the Jonathan administration showed aggregate contractor liabilities of N4 trillion as at April 2015.
Of that amount, the Ministry of Education owed the most at N1.2 trillion, followed by the finance ministry which has N467.7 billion.
The committee warned Mr. Buhari that it would be irrational to rely on the purported huge balances the former government claimed it left behind.
First, it said, the numbers lacked key information to establish the authenticity of the contracts.
It made the following observation regarding the claims by the former government regarding outstanding liabilities:
– The aging of these liabilities was not provided.
– A detailed list of contracts was not provided and therefore, some balances maybe double counted (eg contracts funded through debt maybe captured in both MoF and the contracting Ministry).
– Some balances may be disputed. Therefore, liabilities may change once settlement/judgement is reached.
– No documentation was provided to confirm if the projects were executed to the agreed specifications.
– Some contracts maybe cancelled or terminated”.
As a first step, the Joda-committee advised Mr. Buhari to establish an Inter-Ministerial Task-Force to review all outstanding contracts (and associated liabilities) across all Ministries, Departments and Agencies within three months.
“The mandate of this Task-Force is to confirm the existence of the liability and authenticate the accuracy of information provided in the handover notes,” it said.
“The Government should only recognise the liabilities verified and confirmed by this Task-Force.”

Miracle in Abuja. A largely democratic and peaceful handover of power.

“THEY RIGGED AND rigged right until the very last moment,” says one Western diplomat of Nigeria’s March election. A variety of techniques were employed. First, the police and the army insisted on the election being postponed by six weeks, arguing that they needed extra time to ensure security. But most people believed that the delay was instigated by the ruling party, which feared it was at risk of losing and hoped that this would give it more time to buy votes. More blatantly, states around the Niger Delta saw ballot-box stuffing and submission of false counts, and across the country bags of cash were being handed out to prospective supporters. As a result the local currency, the naira, weakened as politicians converted it into dollars. These came in high denominations, taking up less space in the suitcases used to cart them about on the campaign trail.



To be fair, both sides were guilty of malpractices. Observers in the north say that supporters of the governing PDP were threatened, and many stayed at home. Some also reported seeing large numbers of children voting for the winning APC. All the same, the outcome broadly reflected the will of the electorate in what most observers said was the fairest election in decades—even though some informed sources reckon that a more accurate count of the vote would have delivered about 60% of the total to Mr Buhari, rather than the 54% he was officially credited with. So how did democracy triumph against the odds?









Much of the credit goes to Attahiru Jega, a soft-spoken academic who was put in charge of the independent electoral commission in 2010. His appointment came too late to influence the 2011 election, but he has spent the past five years cleaning up the voters’ roll and introducing electronic ID verification that makes it much more difficult to stuff ballot boxes. He has also proved to be stubbornly non-partisan, to the chagrin of many in the PDP.
Even Mr Jonathan’s sternest critics give him credit for stepping down quickly once it became clear he had lost
A second factor was the PDP’s sheer incompetence. With little leadership or direction emerging from Aso Villa, the presidential compound, the party had become so weak in government that it seemed incapable of defending its position. “They were too incompetent even to rig the election properly,” says one insider.
Third, many voters had become deeply frustrated with Mr Jonathan’s government and were desperate for change. Tempted by the ruling party’s bribes, they may have worked out their own moral compromise. As one observer put it, “people took the money and then voted their conscience.”
Last, across the country independent monitors kept an eye on the polling stations. Many took photos of the results recorded at each station and posted them on social media, making it difficult for officials subsequently to fiddle with the numbers. Others submitted results to a parallel vote count run by the Transition Monitoring Group, a non-government organisation. This flagged up instances of ballot-box stuffing by the PDP in the Niger Delta and helped limit its extent. It also encouraged the police and army to stay largely neutral, even as senior figures within the PDP tried to get them to take sides. Pressure from abroad, mainly America and Britain, played a part too.
Though Mr Jonathan’s presidency was in most respects a failure, even his sternest critics give him credit for stepping down quickly once it became clear he had lost, even before the final tally was in. In doing so he pulled the rug from under senior PDP members who were said to be plotting to try to keep the party in power. One plan was to try to kidnap Mr Jega to disrupt the count, according to Reuters, a news agency.
The democratic outcome, however tenuously achieved, sets an important precedent. Having spent the past 16 years under the rule of a single party, and most of its history before that under military rule, Nigeria has matured into a multi-party democracy that is not ruled along ethnic or religious lines. The PDP, for all its failings, was a largely national party. When it came to power in 1999 under Olusegun Obasanjo, it managed to unite the country’s north behind a president from the south. Mr Obasanjo, a Yoruba-speaker from Ogun state in the south-west of the country who had ruled as military dictator in 1976-79 before handing over to a short-lived civilian government, managed to win the trust of northerners.
North v south
Nigeria’s population is about half Muslim and half Christian, and for some time it was widely argued that the PDP was the only party that could overcome the country’s religious and ethnic divisions, not least thanks to its policy of “zoning” whereby the presidential candidates it nominated would alternate between northerners and southerners. The opposition, by contrast, was seen as dominated by northerners and Muslims, who are concentrated in the north and west of the country, and was divided. That changed in 2013 when the three biggest opposition parties joined to form the APC, offering policies slightly to the left of the PDP’s.
Yet despite the apparent victory for democracy, concerns remain. In his previous terms as a military ruler, Mr Buhari was no democratic pin-up. He banned political meetings and free speech, executed people for crimes that were not capital offences when they were perpetrated and sent whip-wielding soldiers onto the streets in a “war against indiscipline”. Mr Buhari has since said that he is committed to democracy, but many Nigerians fret that he may try to rule by decree. Before his inauguration he threatened to expel critical journalists from press conferences, but his party did a swift about-turn on that.



Even if democracy has now taken root at the centre, it has yet to establish itself in state governments, most of which are little more than the fiefs of their governors. State governors often control the party apparatus in their states and thus dole out seats in the assemblies to loyal followers, and the state assemblies that should hold the executive to account are often vehicles for patronage. Many local governments are still more of a mess. There may be a need for constitutional reform to make all levels of government answerable to the citizens as well as to clarify how powers are to be divided among states and central government.
The election also highlighted the urgent need for political reform, not least in campaign finance. Contesting elections in Nigeria costs a fortune. Rigging them costs even more, leaving presidents and state governors in hock to various “Ogas”, the local slang for big-man or godfather. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, a long-standing PDP finance minister, recalled in her memoir, “Reforming the Unreformable”, that in the latter part of Olusegun Obasanjo’s second presidential term, in 2006, businessmen and party patrons asked her to waive a 50% tax on imports of rice. She reckoned such a waiver might be worth $1 billion to the importers and party funders, but would ruin many rice farmers who had been encouraged to plant by an import-substitution policy that included hefty tariffs. So she refused, and was kicked out of the finance ministry soon afterwards.
Keeping the Ogas at bay
The way Nigeria’s main political parties are run, too, needs to be made more democratic. Voters get to vote for one presidential candidate or another, but there is very little transparency over how each party selects its nominee. For the two main parties this is meant to be done at party congresses, yet there is talk of bidding wars as Ogas buy votes for their preferred presidential candidates. Once in office, politicians can dispense patronage to their supporters and influence legislation to benefit their Ogas. One solution might be to move to American-style open primaries in which voters elect their parties’ candidates directly. If overseen by an independent electoral commission, such primaries might make parties more responsive to voters and force them to come up with new ideas and policies. Nigeria’s recent election was fought mainly on perceptions of which candidate would be more effective and less corrupt, rather than on their policies or ideologies. But policies also matter, not least on how the government collects and spends money.

Idada tells Buhari to review Jonathan's last minute appointments.

  “A former Provost Marshal of the Nigerian Army, Brig-General Idada Ikpomnwen, has called on President Muhammadu Buhari to review the last minute appointments made by his predecessor, President Goodluck Jonathan. According to him, the said appointments were contrary to the president’s powers to appoint capable individuals who will drive his reform processes. Idada in a statement issued on Tuesday, noted that the ex-president had ulterior motive for doing that. He said: “It is inherent in the presidential system and by the clear wordings of our constitution, that the president is empowered to appoint aides who share his ideas and philosophy to various executive positions in order to efficiently carry out the all-important but herculean task of running government and in turn deliver the dividend of democracy to the people who elected him into office. “The point has also been made that the powers of any head or member of any national executive body flow from the president and as such all political appointees work for the president and must, therefore, hold office essentially at the president’s pleasure. It has also been posited that since the tenure of the president is four years as provided for under section 135(2) of the constitution, which is same as other political appointees, it is worrisome and indeed unacceptable that political appointees under sections 153(1) and 171 (2) (b),(c),and (d) are clothed with five years tenure which is beyond the tenure of the president who appointed them. “The idea of making political appointments with tenure of over four years should not be countenanced in our system. Consequent upon the above arguments, it will not be inappropriate for the current administration to dissolve all such boards and appointments spilling over from the previous administration,” he added. - See more at: http://citynews.ng/idada-tells-buhari-to-review-jonathans-last-minute-appointments/#sthash.lIHIR5DS.dpuf

Of APC and NASS crisis, Atiku cum Tinubu hullabaloo

Y ALABA YUSUF
“Only a faint-hearted man will choose to be headless rather than cope with the pains of a headache and no man can clap with one hand.”— The Late Bashorun M.K.O Abiola, an exponent of political etoism (Give and take arrangement)
I have chosen to engage the most trendy topic in Nigeria’s political firmament today. The impasse in the All Progressives Congress, (APC), led Na¬tional Assembly, NASS. And my approach to the subject is bi-focal, bi-polar and congruent. For a dream team always needs adequate dosage of steam to succeed. No wonder the invention in hu¬man affairs of such terminologies and coinages as “unity in diversity and the principle of hegemonic ascendancy.”
So, as I venture into this arduous task of mak¬ing sense out of nonsense, I shall be leaning on my diverse global experience as an international jour¬nalist and seasoned publicist, local political analyst and a UK-trained crisis manager’s pedigree. Lest I get misinterpreted.
Moreover, I have been a behind-the-screen stakeholder in our nation’s political architecture since age 21 in 1981, as a Press Officer to Chief Rueben Fashoranti (then Commissioner for Fi¬nance) in Ondo State during the governorship era of Pa Michael Adekunle Ajasin, a staunch ally of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the founder of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). Many years later (1998- 2002), I became the Public Relations Officer to the respected body of Nigerians in Diaspora known as Nigerian National Union (NNU) covering United Kingdom and Ireland. It was a precursor to the Nigeria In Diaspora Organisation (NIDO), the exponents of right to vote for Nigerians abroad. Still on politics, we later formed the Alliance for Democracy Europe branch with Yemi Amoo Olowe as Chairman while I was the Publicity Sec¬retary and in turn a member of the National Execu¬tive Council (NEC) of the AD in Nigeria (2003). Today, I am a silent PR-trician in the media team that campaigned for the current administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. All I do is to create maximum understanding amongst people, through thorough troubleshooting of webbed and entangled cross paths of human ideas and also preventing conflicts or managing crisis situations. PR is it.
Hence, a torchlight on the rancorous and frac¬tured NASS where so-called Honourables and Distinguished elected members wrestle for power, by practically exchanging blows while struggling to seize the staff of office, the Mace, cannot be less than the abyss of legislative misdemeanor and po¬litical indecency. However, to be fair to politics and politicians; politics falls within the orbit of unseri¬ous game rather than the longitude and latitude of well-thought-out morals and commonsense. So, all is fair in politics. After all, power and the spoils of it should belong to everybody and not just to some¬body. At this stage of our democratic age, Nigeria and Nigerians must be guided by the salient princi¬ple of political science which states that there is “no permanent friend or foe in politics or diplomacy but only permanent interests.” Therefore, those whose idea is to shoot down other gladiators or stars be-fore daybreak may be doing themselves outright disservice as politics is a game of wit and wizardry. Like a rubber ball, the veiled evil that men do to mankind has a way of ricocheting – bouncing back with forceful fury to the sender. No imagery here.
Come to think of it, Nigerians and the rest of the civilized body of rational beings are askance as to why our law makers would find it hard to choose amongst themselves helmsmen to run the National Assembly, without recourse to open warfare and physical throwing of brickbats. Pity, what a shad¬ow chasing exercise in the face of socio-economic hiccups. Understandably, the easiest thing to do at times like this is to poke the needle of blame into soft fabrics of flesh of perceived ‘actors and gladi¬ators’ in society. Thus the NASS imbroglio and political intrigues are being addressed to the front doors of the All Progressives Congress (APC), whose majority stake in the Senate and House of Representatives should have automatically given them an expressway to success.
But, alas, intra party wrangling and fratricidal imbalance have put a huge a wedge between the APC bottle and its inflammable human liquid con¬tent. Such implosion, if not stemmed immediately, through the creation of mutual understanding and the application of a balm of calm on the palm, may take uphill , an all-consuming political conflagra¬tion that could devour men and their grey beards.
Unfortunately, the rising meteor of emotion and political calculus have pitched brothers and sisters of yesterday against one another within the APC. It is really sad to witness the whirlwind of allegations and counter allegations being hurled at the heads of the party’s chieftains; as the brains behind the rattling battle that is making adult legislators look and behave like Jonathanian ‘motor park touts’ or directionless kindergartens.
Lying flat here and barefaced on the canvass of misconception today are names of two great men who for no reason should be rubbished at all – Asi¬waju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (BAT) and, of course, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the Turakin Adamawa. These men are legendary political ‘dei¬ties’ whose immense contributions to the develop¬ment of democracy in Nigeria cannot, and should not, be under-quantified. The APC was , and still is, gifted to have such didactic, erudite and dynamic duo in its midst. Bridge builders and human uni¬fiers are hard to come by. Thus it is pure insanity for anyone, as being done by hatchet jobbers in the media, to attempt to drive a huge wedge between these two political master strategists, and hope to keep the APC pizza together in one piece. The hul¬labaloo about Tinubu’s love lost with Atiku should not be promoted. Both men are not legislators, and the legislators are no kids. People should answer their fathers’ names and own up to their assigned political responsibilities. Democracy prides itself with the doctrines of separation of powers and the sensible application of the tenets of party suprem¬acy. Enough of impunity borne out of excessive rascality. I recall vividly, over a decade ago, when as NEC member of Alliance for Democracy (AD) how BAT as governor of Lagos State would be the first to pay subventions for the running of the party, being led nationally by a Northerner, Alhaji Abdu Kadri Ahmed, who later became a Senior Special Adviser to former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Aside, BAT as he was then known usually surpassed the likes of other AD governors such as Chief Segun Osoba of Ogun State, Chief Lam Adesina of Oyo State, Chief Adebayo Adefarati of Ondo State, Otunba Niyi Adebayo of EKiti State and Chief Bisi Akande of Osun State. Tinubu’s contributions also never went unnoticed by party stalwarts such as Ambassador Mamman Yusuf, Chief Great Ogboru and other eminent attendees of the Parkview Hotel AD NEC meetings. There, hot arguments would ensue but at the end of the day, reason and logical polemics often prevailed. And some of us who were rookies did look up to these elders for political guidance and baptism.
As per Turaki Atiku, an enigmatic political spec¬tacle with numerous tentacles; he’s arguably one of the most misconceived and misrepresented ele¬ments in the theatre of public opinion in Nigeria. The reasons are legion. That notwithstanding, his inestimable visible attributes are enough to con¬vince any doubter – even his adversaries. He was a humble shepherd boy who later became the leader of men. Nobody can deny the fact that Atiku could be articulated as a zero-to-hero herdsman who rose through the ranks to become a headman. Atiku’s cumulative positive attitude has, over time, extract¬ed him from the multitude of humans and placed him on a high altitude that draws so much envy and bile. Be it business, public service, politics, educa¬tion, job creation, youth empowerment, diplomacy, philanthropy or faith matters, Atiku is head and shoulder above millions of minors.
My advice, therefore, is that the armchair and paid writers who currently throw mud at these two titans who plucked out the political eyes of the failed Goodluck Jonathan-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) at the March 28 and April 11 elections, should burrow into history by reading the achieve¬ments of both Tinubu and Atiku. Their biographies abound everywhere. The mercenary pen pushers should sip the milk of ethics, ethos and etiquette of sane journalism – of facts above fiction and eschew rumours baked in incredulous sensationalism.
Frankly speaking, it jolts one to see the electri¬fying volts being pushed through the un-insulated flesh of the Nigerian society by the crop of war¬mongers who want men of grace to be disgraced. Neither Tinubu nor Atiku has told anyone that there is a conflict of interest between them. I can’t re¬member anytime that the Turaki has shut the gates of his house to Asiwaju or vice versa.
Both men are avowed national leaders of APC and co-travelers in the days of People’s Democratic Movement, founded by the late former number two man in Nigeria, General Shehu Musa Yar’Adua. Both stars later joined hands with other well mean¬ing Nigerians to build a political warehouse in memory of the Great Tafilda, the Yar’Adua Centre in Abuja. So, why this war of words by mere by¬standers who have little or nothing at stake? Why ruin a good game with sordid gossip?
Meanwhile, the APC and the rest of us must march ahead in this democratic jungle and avoid pitfalls that may make us all stumble and crumble. The APC owes itself, the Nigerian nation, Africa and the world the patience and emotional intelli¬gence displayed by the outgoing INEC Chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega against the PDP attack dog called Elder Godswill Orubebe, on the eve of the election result that brought change and the APC presidential candidate, now President Muham¬madu Buhari, to power.
Undoubtedly, the real owners of the party must meet pronto and dialogue privately and honestly, no blame game or name shame approach at all, but an eloquent admittance of collective responsibility for all that have gone right or wrong. And nobody should be too egoistic to say sorry in order to end the worry; in a mutually nourishing and polishing court of honour where there can never be a victor or vanquished. It must be a win- win for all. His¬tory will never forgive those who have the ample chance to change the world around but failed by succumbing to mere myopia or adherence to ava¬rice or inability to separate personal greed from national need. Thus the pervading political wound in the APC today must not and should not, be al¬lowed to fester to the level of incurable cancer. Let all embrace a court of honour where the ship of truce will cruise to a bay of good hope. Enough of salvos, unsolicited provocations and innuendoes, please. Change is the only constant factor in human affairs, let’s live by its dictates – especially when we have no direct control over its dynamics. Change is unchangeable, let mortals abide for peace to reign.
Or what shall it profit the world of APC, if Ti¬nubu and Atiku are to be at dagger-drawn battle? Enough of this hullabaloo and political chicanery. The NASS guys should rise up and be nice to Ni¬gerian voters. Nation building requires all hands on the deck. Ideal politics lives, thrives and survives on what the late political juggernaut, Bashorun MKO Abiola, would proverbially tag ‘Eto’ (Yoruba for orderly arrangement built on give and take for¬mula). Not Sam Eto, the prolific Cameroun-born world footballer who plies his trade anywhere the price is right. As way forward, APC needs to put in place a formidable and all-encompassing, truly trusted Board of Trustees (BoT) consisting of genuine, selfless and experienced politicians with human faces. Nigeria is bigger than anyone – even a political party!
Hopefully, the state governors and Mr. President as reported would find a way of returning san¬ity back to the humanity of Nigeria’s lawmaking chambers. For our commonality and common¬wealth deserve nothing less than peace to enshrine anticipated development and progress promised to the electorate by the party. Lest the change mantra becomes a fluke. The APC has the cutting edge advantage of a dream team succeeding on popular steam. They should not press a self-destruct button of dynamite that could consume all. All must em¬brace the spirit of unity in diversity, one that breeds equity and fair play. Finally, let’s all jaw jaw and not war war! For the day ‘Warsaw saw war, the war ended.’ APC and Nigerians should learn from his¬tory. We all can still do a mindset reset, by restor¬ing lost credibility, translating adversity into greater prosperity, through a quick lever change from cur¬rent hostility to possible friendliness. This house must not crumble. The nation and the world are watching. Let the ayes have peace!
No one claps with one hand alone, a la MKO Abiola, and no sensible being will choose to be headless as a solution to not having a headache! A party is made of people and conflicts are neces¬sary evils within human affairs. Let’s give peace a chance. APC must, therefore, be a panacea to our national headache.
Long live the Federal Republic of Nigeria, de¬mocracy has come to stay!
■ The writer, Yusuf, is an international journal¬ist and public affairs commentator based in Abuja.

The implication of toying with Mr. President's security - Ejiofor, ex-DSS Director.

By Ben Agande, Abuja
In this interview, a security consultant and former Director of the Department of Security Service, Mike Ejiofor, speaks on the implication of the withdrawal of the DSS personnel from protecting the president.
What do you think is the implication of the withdrawal of the DSS from the Villa?
First of all, I don’t believe the story that the DSS has been withdrawn from protecting the president because his security should not be toyed with. If the president is intent on changing the security architecture, a policy formulation should be made. He should come up with a working document streamlining the different functions of the various agencies. Statutorily and constitutionally, the Department of Security Service is charged with the protection of the president, the vice president, the Senate president, the governors, deputy governors, speaker of the House of Representatives and state lawmakers and their families.
The president’s security should not be toyed with. I believe that what is going on now is people who are trying to settle personal scores. Instead of looking at national security, they want to settle personal scores and, in the process, compromise national security and the security of the president. I don’t believe it, but if it is true, it’s rather unfortunate because the military personnel being drafted are not trained in body guard protection. The DSS men are trained for VIP protection and the president falls under VIP.

•Ejiofor

Let us go down memory lane. How was the National Security Organisation formed? It was established in 1976 after the assassination of General Murtala Muhammed specifically to protect the president and maintain internal security. The NSO continued until 1986 when General Ibrahim Babangida over threw the government of Muhammadu Buhari and clamped down on the NSO because the NSO frustrated various efforts to over throw the government. The president himself can attest to the loyalty and the defense of his government by the NSO. It so provoked Babangida that when he assumed office, he said he was going to overhaul the NSO, which led to the split of the then NSO into three bodies: the National Intelligence Agency, charged with external intelligence, the State Security Service, charged with internal security, and the Defence Intelligence Agency, which is purely a military affair. I don’t want to believe that Mr President gave that directive but silence disturbs. Government should come out to clarify the issues because the life of the president is being toyed with by people who are pursuing personal interest.
The argument is that the DSS was manifestly partisan in the run up to the election and, as such, their loyalty to the new administration cannot be guaranteed.
That argument is neither here nor there. Don’t forget that the SSS personnel are Nigerians. There are many people who have sympathy for the APC in the DSSS. There are people who also have sympathy for the PDP. There are laid down procedures for doing things. If government institutes an investigation and discovers that perhaps the leadership of the DSSS compromised in loyalty to the nation, then appropriate actions should be taken.
In 1999 when Obasanjo came in, he clamped down on the DSSS, accused it of various offences and set up the Oputa panel. Eventually the DSSS was not indicted. So if you are from afar, there are all kinds of allegations people make, but they should be subjected to investigation. What I am saying is that we should not compromise our security architecture on the altar of personal interest. People out there to serve their personal interest are the problem. What ever happened amounts to what the APC said they were coming to fight: impunity. Also recall the directive given even before the president was sworn-in barring AIT from covering the president but it was reversed because the president said he was not aware of it.
Do you think the army has the capacity to provide close body guard protection for the president?
It is a laughable question because, on one hand, the president is directing that the military check points be withdrawn to perform their military duty. How can you now entrust the life of the president to the military when there are people who are statutorily charged with the responsibility? Whether the ADC was given the directive, he doesn’t have the authority and capacity and I stand to be challenged. It cannot come from the ADC. If government has been constituted, such matter should either come from the NSA or the Secretary to the Government of the Federation.
What do you think is the way forward?
In the present circumstance, government has to issue a statement because the statement from the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity did not deny or confirm that the DSSS has been asked to leave the Villa. There must be a specific statement on whether they have been withdrawn or not. As we speak, we don’t know the true position and it is very dangerous to the security of the president.