CAN ANYONE ISLAMIZE OR CHRISTIANIZE NIGERIA? - BY DR. CHUBA OKADIGBO (20TH MARCH 2003)

via: facebook
An attempt is being made to frame General Muhammadu Buhari in the image of a 'religious bigot'. His political adversaries allege that he said that Muslims should not vote for non-moslems and that Buhari will use presidential power to islamize Nigeria. What Gen. Buhari said or did not say has been addressed elsewhere. The yet to be answered question is: Can anyone (not just Buhari) Islamize or Christianize Nigeria, by the fiat of presidential power? The categorical answer is NO and proof thereof are here under provided.

"Section 1 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 states that the Constitution is supreme and that its provisions have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federation. Subsection 2 thereof states that 'the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the Government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution."

To Islamize or Christianize our Federal Republic, there must be some amendment of the Constitution. Let it be known by all that in the first place, Section 10 proclaims that 'the Government of the Federation or of any State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.' To alter this provision, a person or group of persons must pass through a gamut of very dissuading, grilling and tedious processes and secure the cooperation of persons from differing religious and/or animist persuasions. In this country, as I see it, it should be easier for the head of camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for any person or group of persons to get the support of Christians and animists to Islamize Nigeria or to secure the cooperation of Moslem sand animists to Christianize Nigeria.

To Islamize or Christianize our Federal Republic, there must be some amendment of the Constitution. Let it be known by all that in the first place, Section 10 proclaims that 'the Government of the Federation or of any State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.' To alter this provision, a person or group of persons must pass through a gamut of very dissuading, grilling and tedious processes and secure the cooperation of persons from differing religious and/or animist persuasions. In this country, as I see it, it should be easier for the head of camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for any person or group of persons to get the support of Christians and animists to Islamize Nigeria or to secure the cooperation of Moslem sand animists to Christianize Nigeria.

For any amendment of the Constitution, one must comply with the rigorous provisions of Section 9. An Act for any alteration must NOT pass through either Houses of the National Assembly (the Senate and the Federal House of Representatives) unless the proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of ALL members of either House, and is also approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of NOT less than two-thirds of ALL the States in the Federation. The reality on the ground is that neither the Christians nor the Moslems of Nigeria have the singular capacity to evolve the Christianization or Islamization of our Republic. To make Christianity or Islamism the 'State Religion' of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a task more herculean than climbing Mount Everest and near impossible as having an angels and saints to preside over our National and State Assemblies.

It is true that some States in Nigeria, beginning with Zamfara, have adopted Sharia as a legal instrument in that particular State, by resolution of a State Assembly and the assent of the State Governor. The Constitution allows the application of Sharia on matters pertaining to Islamic Personal Law, with particular attention to marriage and inheritance, in any State that so desires, provided that they apply ONLY to Moslems and others who freely elect to be bound by Sharia Law applications. Notably, a State Assembly and State Governor can also root for Canon or Customary law, though to the extent of compliance with the provisions of the Constitution.

Here, I must pause to issue a caveat. Unlike the PDP controlled States of Bauchi, Kaduna, Kano, Nassarawa, and Plateau, there has been no religious riot in Zamfara. Remarkably, Nigerians of all religious persuasion that are resident in Zamfara live in peace and harmony. Curiously but certainly, there have been instances where and when Christians took Moslems to Sharia courts for settlements. To say the least, this is instructive. This can neither be compared or contrasted with the multiple occurrences of riots and crises that have taken place in Kaduna and Kano States in the name of Sharia.

Equally but painfully instructive is the truth that all sorts of riots and violent civic disturbances (wild border/boundary and ethnic clashes) have taken place in such PDP controlled States as Abia, Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Bayelsa, Benue, Cross River, Delta, Ebonyi, Edo, Enugu, Imo, Nassarawa, Plateau, and Rivers States, and the AD controlled States of Lagos, Ogun and Ondo, whereas there has been none in the ANPP controlled States of Borno, Gombe, Jigawa, Kebbi, Kogi, Sokoto, Yobe and Zamfara.

Furthermore, it should be pointed out that Section 5, especially subsection 8 thereof, stipulates that the legislative powers of the National and State Assemblies are subject to the jurisdictions of the courts of law. The courts hold the power to decide when any Act of the Legislature or deed of the Executive contravenes any section of the Constitution and the courts are empowered to specify any action necessary for remedy or reprimand. For instance, should any law (Sharia, Customary or Canon) run afoul the Constitution or the Fundamental Rights of Citizens, the Courts can intervene decisively.

The extent and limits of such applications in the affected States are yet to be determined by the Supreme Court of Nigeria. I recall that as President of the Senate, I advised President Olusegun Obasanjo on three separate occasions to order the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (at that time Chief Bola Ige) to go directly to the Supreme Court to secure the proper definition and context of Sharia Law applications in their relation to Common Law in the Federation. Due to his reluctance or timidity or reluctance to act on thereon, we caused a resolution that backed this advice to be passed in the Senate in year 2000. I am sad to note that the failure of Gen. Obasanjo to act on this Senate resolution accounts for some of the confusion, crises, conflicts and even riots that have disturbed and threatened peace, harmony, stability and the security of life and property in many parts of our Fatherland.

I also recall that I was a member of the Constituent Assembly 1977/78 that framed the 1979 Nigerian Presidential Constitution. Gen. Obasanjo was a) the Head of State that convened this Assembly, b) that intervened when it faced a crisis on the position of Sharia Law, and c) proclaimed this Constitution into law, after some arbitrary modifications at the purported instance of the Supreme Military Council. Experience also commands me to affirm that Gen. Obasanjo has been characteristically timid and vacillating on matters pertaining to Sharia, and that the attendant indecision and disability have always occasioned avoidable general confusion and public distress.

Gen. Obasanjo would rather leave the matter of legal determinations on crucial matters of urgent national interest to individuals or private concerns, knowing fully well that the distance between a State High Court or Federal High Court and the Supreme Court is long, tedious and expensive. When, for example, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba, SAN, attempted to get some legal clarifications on Sharia Law, his suit was dismissed on ground of a lack of locus standi, whereas such dismissal cannot be pronounced had the same matter been taken up, at Supreme Court level, by the Attorney General of the Federation.

Significantly, President Obasanjo has been callously irresponsive to Supreme Court determinations, whenever his Government sought it pronounced relevant decisions. Regarding the littoral states and the application of the derivation principle, he has either denied the littoral States of a lot of money or has been unduly late in payments. He also refused to sign the dichotomy bill passed by the National Assembly. Rather, he substituted same with fuzzy (amendment) proposals that flout the due legislative process and the legitimate aspirations of the good people of Nigeria from the Delta region. All these have fueled the temper and tempo of restlessness, alienation and Angst in the Niger Delta region.

In the light of the foregoing, it is clearly preposterous and wicked for anyone, including Obasanjo, to resort to ad hominem (name calling) and ad baculum (appeal to fear) on matters of public interest. To tell the people of Nigeria in Bayelsa that they should not ask for their rights, since they should be grateful to have been liberated from BiAfra and their killing by Ndigbo is a naked depiction of the falsity of the ad baculum variant. Similar to such perversion is his claim that Gen. Buhari would jail them if they vote for him. And to call Gen. Buhari a 'religious bigot' by ascribing to him what he NEVER said, i.e., that Moslems should not vote for non-Moslems is a horrible appeal to the ad hominem fallacy.

In point of truth, it is irreligious to abuse or misuse religion, and in point of fact, bigotry is the application of falsehood to perpetrate falsehood. A purported 'God-fearing man', more so, a man who claims to be a 'born-again Christian' must desist from inflammation of Christian sentiments and from tinkering on the tinderbox of defamation on grounds of a presumptive 'religious' political campaign. For such is the opium that can make religion burn. Surely, it is irreligious to misuse religion to the ends of cheap political gains.

Looking again at the Constitution, nobody, including Gen. Buhari, will be in the position to jail people by whim in that constitutional and democratic government is NOT military. We know that both Generals Buhari and Obasanjo were Heads of Military Governments that were NOT democratic. Therefore the claims of any General or Head of State being more democratic than the other under military dictatorships is sham. We also know that Gen. Buhari has pledged to stand by and on the Constitution, now and when elected as President of Nigeria. There is no reason to doubt his sincerity and resolve, any less than Obasanjo's. Plainly speaking, those in glass houses should NOT throw stones.

Now, we have also adduced sufficient evidence that prove that Buhari or any other person, high or low, can Islamize or Christianize the Federal Republic of Nigeria, by sheer political fiat or religious zealotry. Nor will his Vice Presidential running mate, who is a Christian, go along with any Islamization plot, in the hypothetical event of such absurdity. Similarly, I hold it to be self-evident that Gen. Obasanjo, for all his highly advertised Sunday church services in his Aso Rock chapel, and all his Baptist admonitions elsewhere, cannot Christianize Nigeria. Even if and when he tries it, we will definitely rise to stop him.

Put together, let us all comply with the plea of Islamic and Christian clerics as well as nationalists and patriots for all round religious tolerance. Religion, being a matter of individual choice and faith, must be left where it is, such that our clerics can take care of our souls and religious persuasions, while elected civilians take care of the businesses of governance. In these connections, the holier than thou and I know it all postures should be consigned to the bonfires of perdition or the dustbins of cant. In the mighty name of God, let us resolve NOT to overheat the system any further and to make love rather than war.

(Late Dr. Chuba Okadigbo was the Vice Presidential Candidate of the ANPP April 2003 National Election and Former President of The Senate. Federal Republic of Nigeria)

Jonathan Bares His Fangs, By Bola Ahmed Tinubu

Former Lagos governor, Bola Tinubu

It is now abundantly clear that President Jonathan has finally bared his fangs confirming what was widely speculated. By declaring a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa, he has intimidated and emasculated the governors of these States. We are witnessing a dangerous trend in the art of governance and a deliberate ploy to subvert constitutional democracy.

The body language of the Jonathan administration leads any keen watcher of events with unmistakable conclusion of the existence of a surreptitious but barely disguised intention to muzzle the elected governments of these states for what is clearly a display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2015.

Borno and  Yobe  states have been literally under armies of occupation with the attendant excruciating hardship experienced daily by the indigenes and residents of these areas. This government now wants to use the excuse of the security challenges faced by the Governors to remove them from the states considered hostile to the 2015  PDP/Jonathan project.

Let me be quick to say that this administration will be setting in motion a chain of events the end of which nobody can predict. Experience has shown clearly that actions, such as this one under consideration, often give root to radical ideologies and extremist tendencies, a direct opposite of the intended outcome of unwarranted and unintelligent meddlesomeness. The present scenario playing out in the country reminds one of the classical case of a mediocre craftsman who continually blames the tools of his trade for his serial failure but refuses to look at his pitiable state with a view to adjusting.

It has become crystal clear, even to the most incurable optimist, that the country is adrift. That the ship of the Nigerian state is rudderless is clearly evident in the consistent and continual attacks ferociously executed by elements often referred to as the insurgents in some northern states of the federation, particularly Borno and Yobe states respectively.

Indeed, no part of the country is immune from the virulent but easy attacks, veritable indices of a failing state. Unfortunately, the tenuous and uncoordinated approach adopted by this government betrays a grossly incompetent disposition which stands at variance with current realities in the country, nay the international community where acts of terrorism are engaged and contained. No Governor of a state in Nigeria is the Chief Security Officer. Putting the blame on the Governors, who have been effectively emasculated, for the abysmal performance of the government at the centre which controls all these security agencies, smacks of ignorance and mischief.

Terrorist acts are perpetrated routinely and the government at the centre appears incapable of stemming the tide of the horrendous crimes unleashed on the hapless populace. The considerable ease, with which lives and property are destroyed on a daily basis, should excite deep introspection on the part of a government truly desirous of finding a lasting solution.

The Constitution provides that the safety and welfare of citizens shall be the primary purpose of having that structure of any political leadership in the first instance. This Government, through acts of omission and commission, has fallen far short of expectation. It actively encourages schisms and all manner of divisive tendencies for parochial expediency. Ethnicity and religion become handy weapons of domination. Things have never been this bad.

The response to the pervasive chaos in the Northern region of the country has been militarisation, mass arrests and extra judicial killings by the Joint Task Force, JTF, a convenient euphemism for an army of occupation seemingly set loose on the people of the localities concerned. The tenor of the State of Emergency declared by the Federal Government yesterday portends danger for the polity. The full militarisation of security operations in these states will compound the already tense situation.

Both local and international media are awash with news of reckless attitudes of the invading forces. The fact that security operatives are killed cheaply and reprisals from the state find expressions in organised pogroms in the immediate communities is sure evidence of a government, which lacks basic understanding to appreciate the enormity of the current security challenges. If development is about the people, all measures put in place for the sustenance and maintenance of the super-structure of the society must take into cognisance local contents.

It is evident from the grim experiences in recent times that this government has failed, or does not know that it is necessary for it to avail itself of the benefits accruable from exchange of ideas and notes on the latest in terms of technology and human resources among nations of the modern world, especially those which have been fighting terrorist organisations over the years, on the most effective mode of combating this menace. Technologically advanced countries of the world will never discard the idea on the need for the establishment of an effective local intelligence outfit.

Our suggestions along this path have always been met with suspicion and acerbic criticisms from both the informed and the ignorant alike. A government which stoutly defends its opposition to the decentralisation of the police force from its present over-centralised command structure is already experimenting with all manner of means patently extra-legal.

The massacres of local communities attendant upon the attacks on security agents by unknown elements will further alienate the people who should, ordinarily, partner with the government in securing their immediate environments. An army which invades a community maiming, raping and killing defenceless civilians will end up radicalising the youths whose parents and young ones have been wiped out most cowardly and recklessly. This government should concentrate more on encouraging the development of local intelligence which will, inexorably, lead to the practice of true federalism. Adopting the use of excessive force against those perceived as harbouring terrorists does not portray this government as possessing the wherewithal to find abiding solutions to the lingering security challenges.

The President’s pronouncement, which seeks to abridge or has the potential of totally scuttling the constitutional functions of Governors and other elected representatives of the people, will be counterproductive in the long run. A State of Emergency already exists in the states where JTF operates. Residents of these communities live in constant fear. Their rights are violated with impunity under the guise of searching for terrorists in their respective domains.

Hiding under some nebulous claims which border on the intractability of the security challenges posed by Boko Haram or some acclaimed traditionalists who have killed some policemen to render ineffective the constitutional powers vested in elected Governors and other representatives of the people, perceived as not amenable to manipulation for the 2015 project amounts to reducing serious issues bordering on the survival of the country to partisan politics.

Let all those who love this country genuinely advise the federal government not to tinker with the mandates of these Governors under any guise. It is a potentially destructive path to take. If security of a society is about the protection of lives and property of the citizenry, the involvement of the people is a sine qua non to effective intelligence gathering. Any measures put in place which alienate the people, in particular their elected representatives, should be considered as fundamentally defective by every right thinking person in the country.

Mr. Bola Ahmed Tinubu, was a two-term governor of Lagos State, and now a leading voice of the opposition party, the Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN.

 PremiumTimes

El-Rufai’s book causes Chief Justice of Nigeria to query Abuja Chief Judge

Nnenna Ibeh

Nasir El Rufai

Former FCT Minister, El-Rufai, had said in his book that he made payments to the FCT judiciary.

The Chief Justice of Nigeria, Aloma Mukhtar, has fired a query in the direction of Lawal Gunmi, the Chief Judge of Federal Capital Territory, seeking explanation over an annual grant made to the FCT judiciary by the FCT administration during Nasir El Rufai’s administration.

Mr. El Rufai had said in his recently published book, The Accidental Public Servant, that his administration decided to budget an annual grant in support of the FCT judicial system to make some procurement.

“…We also decided to budget an annual grant to support our judiciary to procure court recording and automation equipment…,” Mr. El Rufai said.

Now, a coalition of over a hundred and fifty anti-corruption organisations, under the umbrella of the Civil Society Network Against Corruption, CSNAC, want the Chief Justice to investigate the use of the said budget and its legality.

In its petition, signed by its coordinator, Olarenwaju Suraj, CSNAC made a case that the outcome of the investigation be made public as a way of enhancing the respect and integrity of the judiciary.

“We are aware of these grants/ allocations were outside the FCT budget. We are therefore, by this petition demanding that the National Judicial Council ( NJC) undertake a thorough investigation into these allocations, their legality and use; and make public the outcome(S) of the investigation to guarantee the respect for and the integrity of the judiciary.

“This demand is in line with other investigations of the NJC, under your leadership, to sanitize and reposition the judiciary,” CSNAC said.

Following the petition, Ms. Mukhtar asked Mr. Gunmi to explain the details of the budgetary allocation.

 In the query dated May 6, 2013, she demanded that Mr. Gumi give details of the annual grants.

“I forward herewith a petition dated 2nd April, 201 against you by one Mr. Olanrewaju Suraju, Chairman of Civil Society Network Against Corruption on the above subject matter. The petition is self- explanatory. I shall be glad to have your comments within three week from the date of receipt of this letter, please,” said Ms. Muhktar.

The Accidental Public Servant

Mr. El Rufai’s book has generated a lot of controversy since its launch earlier in the year. The autobiography details some of the happenings within government circles during the former minister’s various positions in government. The often acerbic contention between the author and presumed victims of some of  the book’s claims have made perhaps one of the most engaging literary disputation in modern Nigerian literary culture.

 PremiumTimes

Empowered Newswire; Abiola's friendship with IBB, Abacha led to his death - Don

Chief M.K.O Abiola

By Laolu Akande (Empowered Newswire)

The friendship between the late winner of the June 12, 1993 election, Chief M.K.O. Abiola and former military president, Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha led to his death. The death of late Major General Shehu Yar'Adua has also linked been linked to his friendship with Generals Babangida and Abacha, Empowered Newswire reports.
The friendship between President Olusegun Obasanjo and late Attorney-General of the Federation, Chief Bola Ige, and former Military President, and between General Ibrahim Babangida, the late Head of State, General Sani Abacha and the winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, Chief M.K.O. Abiola, have been described as "disastrous friendship".
It is a kind of friendship that leads to death and destruction. This statement was made by a Nigerian scholar who teaches at the University of California, Davis, USA, Professor Wale Adebanwi, while delivering the 2013 Annual Lecture of the African Studies Centre, at St. Anthony's College, Oxford University, United Kingdom. Adebanwi, who is the author of Authority Stealing: Anti-Corruption War and Democratic Politics in Post-military Nigeria, also analysed the friendship between Babangida and his late friend, former Minister of Federal for the FTC, Abuja, Major General Mamman Vatsa, Abacha and late Major General Shehu Musa Yar'Adua and former Bukinabe leader, Captain Thomas Sankara and President Blaise Compaore. He concluded that the friendship that existed between these competing and ambitious leaders contained the possibility of danger and death.
Professor Adebanwi stated that it was not a surprise that the kind of "instrumental" friendship that these leaders shared among them led to the death of some of them in their pursuit of power, position and prominence. He cited the example of the execution of Vatsa by his friend and best man, Babangida, the assassination of Sankara by his friend, Compaore, the alleged murder of Yar'Adua through the injection of a killer virus into his body by the agents of his friend, General Abacha, the annulment of Abiola's election by his friend, Babangida, the imprisonment in solitary confinement of Abiola by his friend, Abacha, and the assassination of Bola Ige while serving under his friend, Obasanjo. He added that it is ordinarily surprising that in spite of the gruesome way in which Ige was killed and his loyalty to President Obasanjo, Obasanjo later dismissed his friend as someone who did not know his left from is right.
He told the audience that Ige was assassinated while planning to return home to stop Obasanjo's party from rigging the 2003 elections in the southwest. the lecturer also reminded the audience of the famous statement by the philosopher, Aristotle, "O my friend, there is no friend!"
In a lecture entitled, "What are Friends For? The Fatality of Affinity in the Postcolony" Adebanwi challenges African scholars to pay attention to friendship among powerful people in understanding the nature of power and political competition in Africa. He cited philosophers who states that friendship can be used for three things, including virtue, pleasure and utility. He added that in the context of political competition, friendship is often not used for virtue but for utility thereby turning friends into enemies.
Stated the former Bill Gates Scholar at Cambridge University, "First, from the profile of all these men, their roles, and the positions they occupied in Nigeria’s national life, it is already evident that their friendships could not but have been politically consequential. However, the fact that their friendships were also fatal in virtually every case invites us to examine the potential fatality of friendship when friendship intersects with the search for power in (Africa). Two, the friendships and ambitions of these men have largely defined the political history of Nigeria in the last three decades and half.... Three, the friendships of these men were largely cross-cutting."
Adebanwi, whose much-expected book on the Awolowo political movement will be released by the Cambridge University Press in 2014, recalled the secret execution of General Vatsa and General Domkat Bali's expression of regrets many years later. General Bali had stated that there was no clear evidence that Babangida's friend, Vatsa, was really involved in the coup plot for which he was executed. He also recalled Babangida's statement that he realised after the execution of Vatsa hat he and Vatsa had been involved in a competition for most of their lives.
The lecturer traced the personal and political history of the friendship of all these Nigerian leaders and quoted someone who said that "Politics seems a real testing ground of friendship chiefly because it is a testing ground of character and goodness." He added that political friendship does not only have disastrous consequences for individuals who are involved in the friendship, but also for nations, as the example of the Nigerian leaders and the Bukinabe leaders show. The lecturer also stated that Nigeria's crisis is not unrelated to the fact that the "disastrous friendships" of these Nigerian leaders have defined the fate and destiny of Nigeria in the past 30 years.
The chief host, Dr. David Pratten, the Director of the African Studies Center, Oxford University and Fellow of St. Anthony's College, Oxford, stated that the University was happy to invite Adebanwi to give the annual lecture which had been delivered in the past by distinguished scholars from all over the world.
Those who attended the lecture included the Governor of Ekiti State, Dr. Kayode Fayemi and his wife, Erelu Bisi Fayemi, Senator Babafemi Ojudu, representing Ekiti Central at the National Assembly, Dr. Tokunbo Awolowo Dosumu, the Managing Director and Editor-In-Chief of the Tribune newspapers, Dr. Anthony Akinola, former editor of TheNEWS, Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye, popular Punch columnist, Mr. Tunde Fagbenle, a famous British publisher, Mr. James Currey, Dr. Anthony Akinola of Oxford.

For An End Game for Boko Haram, Spend Those Trillions on Education By Pat Utomi

Pat Utomi

As Albert Einsten once said “We can not solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them”. The challenge of terrorism and ostensibly faith and cult based intolerance, partly manifested in the Boko Haram insurgency, that we face in Nigeria was created at the level of ignorance. I have heard truly scholarly discussions and even in the last month at the CVL Faith and tolerance conference, the Chaplain of the University of Lagos House of Assembly spoke passionately about Islam as a religion of peace and one not opposed to Western education. That being the case the only solution is to fight ignorance with knowledge.

The top commanders of Boko Haram are not doing anything new. They do not believe that Boko or Book is Haram. If they really did would they be using Western weapons to fight? Would they be using Western media such as YouTube and other social media to communicate with journalists? Of course not. Malam Shekau was almost caught last year when he visited his wife in Kano and he escaped with the aid of a fast car, another fruit of Western Education. Thus it is safe to say that he and his top commanders are not against Western Education. Besides some of the leaders of the group are known to be University graduates. It would seem that they are revolutionaries in Boko Haram, whose goal is to overthrow the current establishment in Northern Nigeria just like their compatriots did in Somalia and their strategy in doing that is to take advantage of the massive illiteracy that is the bane of the Northern population.

This is no new strategy. Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge did the same thing in Cambodia. They killed the educated and targeted centers of learning for the same reason that totalitarians have been doing for millennia-the educated are more likely to rebel against tyranny!

So rather than spend trillions on security, the Federal Government has to look beyond the immediate and have a long term strategy to starve organized terrorist groups of the oxygen that feeds their fire. We must begin to educate the masses of the North so that they value their lives. Education increases their level of consciousness and when a man has a heightened level of consciousness he is no longer easily susceptible to manipulation using primordial sentiments. Education also expands the scope of how they can earn income and get to a level of self fulfilment that cannot make them available for ideologues fighting different agenda. But it should not be in the North alone. Similar levels of low literacy in parts of the south are also sources of the state of insecurity in the South East and South South. This is why I have offered a liberal perspective on Paulo Friers’s Pedagogy of the oppressed. The pedagogy of the Determined, which I have proposed, takes a community based entrepreneurial approach to activist learning that can transform and empower in a short period of time.

Last year, the government used the same argument that previous administration used which is that the funds meant to subsidize fuel is not getting to its intended target which is the poor. So instead of subsidizing fuel, Nigeria has been subsidizing corruption.

Sound logic on the face of it. So now let us flip this. Rather than subsidizing fuel (or corruption) I am not too sure that the government will face too much resistance if it says that it will henceforth subsidize education. With half of the money that we are currently spending subsidizing fuel Nigeria can offer free and qualitative education up to secondary school level, using social enterprises, faith based agencies to complement and compete with direct government funding of educational institutions.

This is the type of long term strategy that will defeat the menace of terrorism as well as increase our Gross Domestic Product because an educated people produce more, have less children and are more healthy.

There is no easy fix to fighting terrorism. Ask the Middle East, ask Somalia, ask Afghanistan. To defeat terrorism, you must look much farther ahead than the terrorists. You must target the intending terrorist in a policy of catch them young. Rather than fighting terrorism with trillions of Naira spent on security we are feeding it by causing deep hatred in the hearts of the people of certain parts of Northern Nigeria for the military. Right now many of these people cannot decide who they hate most between Boko Haram and the Joint Military Task Force (JTF). Instead we must spend trillions on education and education will do what guns and bombs cannot do-make people value their life too much to be fodder for terrorism.

It is fitting to conclude with a word on values over faith. Years ago a much respected moslem friend told me a true story of a great moslem cleric who visited the United States. Struck by the values of the people he met, he lamented the paradox of leaving a moslem country where the people do not behave like moslems and coming to this non-moslem country where they behave like moslems. What has gone awry in Nigeria is not a faith dispute but a crisis of values. And the insurgency can be curbed with education laced with the right values.

Saharareporters

Hard View: State Of Emergency To Slate The Insurgency By Hannatu Musawa

Hannatu Musawa

So after much deliberation and rigmarole, after much dissent by leading sectors of Nigerians, after the massacres and nauseating murders of men, women and children, the government has finally declared a state of emergency in three states. The unexpected declaration of the state of emergency to deal with the high rate of violence and spate of deadly attacks by militant groups has taken many by surprise. Yesterday evening, 14th May 2013, President Jonathan delivered an address in which he gave the military powers to take over security in the states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe. This step, which affects a broad range of civil rights, has already triggered widespread debate about the implications of the government's latest strategy, from the opposition, to religious groups, civil society and even the governor’s forum.
The state of emergency requires a presidential proclamation under conditions specified in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended under the provisions of Section 305 (1). It gives the authorities special temporary legal powers to arrest and search citizens without a warrant. It also imposes a curfew on the specified states, restricting residents to their homes between the times of a curfew. Other emergency powers regulations affect ‘habeas corpus’ and citizens’ rights to freedom of movement, assembly, association, speech, and privacy.
Over the past two years, the rate of violence in several states has increased dramatically, fuelled by the rise of militancy, extremism and the widespread availability of illegal weapons. Successive clamp down by authorities, an apparent trigger-happy task force, mismanaged deliverance of information on behalf of the government and a leadership that seems totally confused and not in control have had the utmost regressive effect, almost to the point of providing sympathy and understanding for the plight of the insurgents. In recent weeks, the country has been horrified by the series of violent murders. The situation became a lot worse, with the massacres in Baga and Bama town. Announcing the state of emergency, President Jonathan said, “The country is facing, not just militancy or criminality, but a rebellion and insurgency by terrorist groups which pose a very serious threat to national unity and territorial integrity”.
While I am often at variance with the utterances and policies of President Jonathan, it is not so difficult for me to understand why the president felt the need to take such an aggressive reaction, especially along his reasoning that no terrorist group, religious or tribal has a right to pose a threat to national unity and territorial integrity. Not Boko Haram or tramps and vagrants like Asari Dokubo or any other ignorant yobs who fancies themselves as the new Scarface and who happen to all be the same kind of bigoted criminals disguised in different garbs. The country cannot go to war because of some criminal elements have been threatening to overrun the Nigerian state under the guise of religious extremism, resource control, militancy or insurgency.
If reports that over a dozen local government areas in Borno State have been taken over by insurgents are true, if reports that in those local governments there is no semblance of authority are factual, then a state of emergency in those hotspots was absolutely and unquestionably necessary. Why should a whole nation be held to ransom by plundering and rancorous groups of brutes bent on creating havoc on a society, no matter how candid their grievance or cause? Why should a group of people organize themselves in guerrilla warfare and carry out the kind of offensive that is claiming the lives of innocent men, women and children? For goodness sake, when did our society sink to the depths of darkness we are in now; where we are forced to discuss the destruction of people’s lives and death of fellow human beings in such a blasé manner? That is what we have been reduced to. Every single morning, the minute one listens to the news or reads a paper, the first thing one is confronted with is stories of death, destruction and murder. I mean it is just so absolutely unbelievable for us to wake up every morning with news of the kind of senseless violence we have been witnessing. It is simply unacceptable. As a civilized society which has evolved from the dark ages, our current situation has got to be intolerable by every standard, even for those criminal Nigerians who are hell-bent on declaring a ridiculously, unnecessary and unfair war against innocent Nigerians.
It may be easy enough for those of us who are not directly affected by the violence to sit and judge this draconian declaration by the government, but even those of us that have not been directly affected by the violence and unwarranted massacres in the affected states have been shaken to the core by it and shudder at its domino effect. The situation of the murders and total disregard for human life has reached epic proportions; proportions which call for the authorities to respond in the most decisive manner possible.
There is no doubt that this measure which the government has taken will have an impact on the daily lives of innocent, law-abiding citizens in these areas and provide inconveniencies for them. It will limit people’s movements and give the regiment powers to arrest; it will even infringe on the fundamental rights and freedoms of the citizens, but, unless someone in authority takes the bull by the horn and affects this kind of stringent system, the situation in those areas will not be brought under control and it will come to a point when the violence cannot be contained. Those affected by the state of emergency should look at the bigger picture and recognize the need to protect them and bring the current violence surge affecting them under control. Many people have lost their loved ones to unnecessary violence in the past three years and unless something is done to restore normalcy in those areas, it will likely get worse.
Of course, there are other manners of dialogue and solutions that need to be adopted in order to bring this impasse totally under control; solutions that focus on long-term results to the problem and the fundamental issues that gave birth to the crisis itself has to be tackled. A state of emergency has a time-limit and therefore has a short-term effect and short term gain.
Therefore, in addition to placing the state of emergency, the government must immediately sit down and identify what is driving this upsurge of violence in these respective areas and address the best way to bring an end to it, otherwise when the emergency is eventually lifted, it will be ‘violence’ business as usual.
To show sincerity in its wish to end the violence, the government should immediately make an undertaking to release the innocent women and children that have been detained without cause in the quest to clampdown on the guerrillas. Government should further undertake to rebuild and relinquish the Mosques and properties that belonged to the Jamā'a Ahl al-sunnah li-da'wa wa al-jihād movement before the Borno state government under the leadership of Ali Modu Sheriff launched its offensive against them, before the murder of their leader Imam Mohammed Yusuf. And most importantly, the on-going trial of the security operatives who murdered Imam Mohammed Yusuf and Alhaji Buji Foi should be intensified, together with the arrest and prosecution of the government officials who allegedly ordered their execution. Those actions would show the sincerity and commitment of government to tackle the root of this problem and bring it to an end.
Now that the presidency has expressed determination to root out the insurgents in the affected areas, the good people of those states should endeavor to cooperate with the authorities in order to bring an end to the horror that surrounds them every day. To restore law and order to the states, people should be able to give accurate and dependable information as well as advice to all seekers of peace. It is expected that if the society as a whole resolves to end the crisis today, there will be no more killing or kidnapping of our people tomorrow. If the communities do not provide a safe haven for those who are out to disrupt peace, there will be no place for any criminals to hide. Our brothers that have turned renegades should also be persuaded to embrace peace and end the killings of innocent people.
The security officials deployed in the three states ought to understand that democracy is still in place in Nigeria as a whole and even though a state of emergency has been declared in those states, we are still a democracy and overzealousness of any kind should by no means be exercised or tolerated. The authorities themselves cannot use lawlessness to fight lawlessness because violence begets and encourages more violence.
One prays that we will soon see an end to the violence and hopes that the government, in enacting this state of emergency can tackle the mayhem in the troubled areas in the most responsible manner and be committed to placing every resource at their disposal towards winning this war in a way that is in the best interest of the collective.
The current rate of violence dictated for more to be done and stronger action to be employed. The situation, especially in Borno State, could not have been expected to continue the way it was going without a response commensurate with the wanton acts of violence and lawlessness; it is a response that is necessary to halt the current spike in the hostile activity of insurgents in the shortest possible time. Desperate acts require desperate measures.
So, even though the method is not ideal under our democracy, I can appreciate the current declaration of government to be more than a panic response. I do not see it through the lens of opposition, creed or tribe; I see it simply as a “state of emergency to slate the insurgency.”
Saharareporters

Nigeria Drowning In Sea Of Corruption – Gov Akpabio

Akwa Ibom State governor Obong Godswill Akpabio yesterday said that Nigeria“has been drowning in a sea of corruption” and urgently needed men of goodwill like the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission(ICPC) to salvage the situation.

Speaking as the special guest at the ICPC Governors’ Forum, he lamented that “what is wrong with the country is that poor leadership by past leaders led to the problem of corruption”.

Corruption, he declared, ranges from stealing to inflation of contracts, adding that corruption occurs when leadership fails in the management of resources and lacks the ability and courage to plug loopholes in the economy.

“Our country has been drowning in a sea of corruption and we urgently need men of goodwill like you to salvage our situation. It is corruption when leaders take decisions on the basis of tribal sentiments, rather than common sense. It is corruption when projects are sited near the homes of those in authority and not in proximity to raw materials. It is corruption when a NAFDAC official tests a drug and certifies it as good because he has been financially compromised.

The drug would, thereafter, become a menace to society and lead to the death of innocent citizens. It is corruption when a customs official allows dangerous weapons to be smuggled into this country and such weapons are used to kill people,” the governor stated.

He spoke on the theme, “Good Governance and Transformation”.  “If we must achieve good governance, we must collectively fight and stop corruption. Men and women in positions of influence in bodies such as anti-corruption and law-enforcement agencies should not use their positions to settle personal scores.

The man who banks government money and denies the people the fruit of democracy (like it was done in a particular state) and ends up leaving billions in the bank is guilty of denying the people the dividends of democracy. We must remember that justice delayed is justice denied. Such a man would breed discontent and cause social problems like Boko Haram. Like the Bible says, ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish’,” he said.

Nonetheless, the governor praised President Jonathan: “We must commend the president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces of our nation for his transformational governance of our country. The imprints of transformation are manifest in the agricultural, power, health, transport and indeed all sectors of the economy.

His vision for our country bears eloquent testimony of this. Though beset with many challenges, he has done a difficult job well and made every patriotic Nigerian proud.”

The topic, “Good Governance and Transformation”, he said, was very apt, considering the last six years of his administration in Akwa Ibom State. “It is my candid belief that it was in appreciation of what we have done that you invited me to talk with you. Let me start by saying that we began our administration in 2007 by putting in place the principles of responsible governance.

We plugged all loopholes in the system and employed best practices in the management our resources. With a budgeting of over 80 per cent capital expenditure and less than 20 per cent recurrent, we were embarking on a journey of transformation of infrastructures.”

Earlier, the ICPC chairman, Ekpo Nta, who said the forum was apolitical, maintained that the commission deemed it right to periodically invite governors to come and share their experiences on strong and sustainable institutions for good governance. He said other governors would soon follow and that their selection would be based on public opinion.

Naija.com