Do You Support 'Zoning' or Not? Please Read!

Friends! I bumped into this article, written by Dr Alex Ekwueme, on the internet. It provides an insight into the issue of “zoning”, and what could have been if the 1995 Constitution was passed. Having read this article, I can now understand the spirit behind the zoning clause in the PDP Constitution.

Please read and share your thoughts.

What Nigeria Lost By Abacha's Untimely Death

Well-thought Out Provisions Of The 1995 Constitution
 

By

Alex Ekwueme

May 29, 2005

I was an elected member of the 1994-1995 National Constitutional Conference, which sat exactly for one year (June 26 1994 -June 26 1995) and had reasonable time to discuss and ponder over many thorny issues that concerned the Nigerian polity. We were anxious that the military should disengage as soon as possible and hand over to elected civilian governments at all levels. At one time we passed a resolution, later rescinded, setting January 1996 as the date for hand over. The work of the National Constitutional Conference culminated in a two-volume report, Volume 1 of which was report of the constitutional conference containing the draft constitution 1995.

In December 1995 we held a very successful "All politicians summit" At Eko Hotel, Victoria Island, Lagos which I had the privilege to chair. I describe the summit as "very successful" notwithstanding its disruption by agents of the government. It was obvious that General Abacha was in no hurry to disengage. We then formed the Institute of Civil Society, which again I had the privilege to chair, one of whose objectives was to sensitize the Nigerian public on the need for an early return to democratic ethos as we considered military rule which is imposed on and not elected by the populace, a vicious form of colonialism. It eventually materialised that Abacha set October 1, 1998 as the date for the transition from military to civilian government. But it was soon clear, judging by the decisions of all the five registered political parties to nominate him as the sole presidential candidate that it was his wish to hand over from Abacha as a military head of state to Abacha as civilian president. Some of us did not think that this was the right thing for Nigeria and at a meeting of the "G34" in April 1998, we decided to advise Abacha by a well considered memorandum not to countenance the prompting by sycophants that he should succeed himself. Within two months of the G-34 memorandum, Abacha was dead and so the question of self-succession also died a natural death.

There is no doubt that if it was necessary for anybody to flaunt anti-Abacha credentials, I was in a position so to do. Arguably, there was much that Nigeria gained by Abacha's untimely death, including release of some detainees and prisoners, accelerated transition to elected civilian administration midwifed by his successor, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, recovery of some looted funds etc. Although some of these so-called gains may have turned out in retrospect and with the benefit of hindsight to have been mixed blessings.

However, it is with a consideration of what Nigeria lost by Abacha's untimely death that I am here concerned. Before Abacha's death, "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1995 (with Amendments)" had been finalised and was to have been promulgated by decree to come into effect on October 1, 1998. This constitution introduced some fundamental changes to Nigeria's previous presidential constitutions (1979 and 1989) based on experience garnered over almost four decades of Nigeria's independence, all calculated to conduce to a stable Nigerian polity within which all Nigerians could truly feel a sense of belonging and which would elicit the collaborative efforts of Nigerians to make the country a great nation.

With the death of Abacha, the 1995 Constitution was not promulgated. The reason for this is found in the report of the Justice Niki Tobi led Constitutional Debate Co-ordinating Committee set up by the General Abdulsalami government to propose a constitution for the incoming 1999 civilian administration. The 1995 Constitution was not adopted because it was suggested that "Nigerians raised compelling reservations" about it, holding forth that it was "a product of disputed legitimacy" and suffered from a "crisis of authenticity in the public consciousness." Significantly, the above-stated reservations emanated mostly from South-Western Nigeria, which had officially boycotted the 1994-1995 National Constitutional Conference and was therefore not prepared to accept that there was anything good that could come out of it. They, more or less, decided to throw away the baby with the bath water so to speak, and therefore preferred to settle with "the 1979 Constitution" (which), according to them, "had been tried and tested and, therefore, provides a better point of departure in the quest for constitutionalism in Nigeria." "Making only minor adjustments to the 1979 document, the Tobi committee recommended adopting the adjusted document as the new (1999) constitution."

Accordingly, Abacha's untimely death on June 1998 robbed Nigeria of the opportunity of having the 1995 Constitution promulgated on October 1, 1998. In order, therefore, to assess "What Nigeria lost by Abacha's untimely death" (the object of this piece) it would be in order to highlight a few of the salient and radical provisions of "the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1995 (with Amendments)," to wit:

1. Recognition of six geopolitical zones

S.229 (4): For the purpose of subsection (1) of this section, the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria shall be as set out in part III of the First Schedule To this Constitution.

1.zone | states

1. North-Central - Benue, Kogi, Kwara, Nasarawa, Niger, Plateau, and Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

2. North-Eastern - Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Taraba and Yobe.

3. North-Western | Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Sokoto and Zamfara.

4. South-Eastern | Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo.

5. South-South | Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo and Rivers.

6. South-Western | Ekiti, Lagos, Ogun, Ondo, Osun and Oyo.

This is the first formal recognition of the six geo-political zones now in common usage politically in a legal or constitutional document.

2. Diffusion of federal executive responsibility

In addition to the offices of President and Vice President and Ministers, the Constitution provides also for the offices of Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister:

S. 149(2): "Subject to such reservations or conditions as may be made by him, the President shall assign to the Prime Minister responsibility for the general administration of the Government of the Federation"

S.149(4): "The President shall hold regular meetings with the Vice President, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and all the Ministers of the Government of the Federation for the purposes of -

a) Determining the general direction of domestic and foreign policies of the Government of the Federation (b) Co-ordinating the activities of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the Ministers of the Government of the federation in the discharge of their executive responsibilities..."

Single 5 - year term of office for governor coupled with rotation of office of governor etc.

S. 149(4): "Subject to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section a Governor shall vacate his office at the expiration of a period of 5 years commencing from the date when (a) He took the Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office..."

S.184(1): "A person shall not be qualified for election to the Office of Governor of... (b) He has been elected to such office at an immediately preceding election..."

S.229(2): "The Office of Governor, Deputy Governor and Speaker of the House of Assembly shall rotate among the three Senatorial districts in the state.

If the above provisions had been incorporated into the 1999 Constitution, two of the three senatorial districts of each state would have already produced governors in every state leaving the third (remaining) senatorial district to produce the Governor at the next election. All the problems currently bedevilling most states in the matter of "power shift" would not have arisen and all parts of every state would have been given a sense of belonging.

Single 5-year term of office for president coupled with rotation of office of President etc.

S. 138(2): "Subject to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, the president shall vacate his office at the expiration of a period of 5 years commencing from the date when (a) He took the Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office..."

S. 140(1): A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if ... (b) He has been elected to such office at an immediately preceding election..."

S. 229(1): "The following six principal offices shall rotate among the six geo-political zones created under subsection (4) of this section, namely -

The office of the President; The office of the Prime Minister The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister The Office of the President of the Senate The Office of the Speaker of the House of Representatives

• Had the above provisions been incorporated in the 1999 Constitution, two of the six geopolitical zones would already have produced a President of Nigeria and a third zone would have been looking forward to producing the President in the next dispensation. The present controversy or argument as to which geopolitical zone or group of geopolitical zones or region should present the President in the next dispensation would have been narrowed down to manageable proportions. 30-year transition period for evolving a Nigerian nation as distinct from a country or "mere Geographical expression" S. 2290(1): "The principle of rotation enshrined in this section shall be strictly adhered to by the political parties during the transition period of 30 years commencing from the date this Constitution comes into force." During this "transition" period of 30 years, at the state level each senatorial district would have filled the office of Governor two times, the office of Deputy Governor two times, and the office of the Speaker of the House of Assembly two times, each term of office being of 5 years duration. At the national level each of the six geopolitical zones would have filled the offices of President, Vice President, Prime Minister, deputy Prime Minister, President of the Senate and Speaker at the House of Representatives for a term of 5 years each. Thereafter, the cry of "marginalisation" would have been a thing of the past. The 30-year period would have been used to positively and constructively promote state level and national integration at all levels, following which all positions could then be filled on the basis of merit and competence in the true democratic spirit. Discharge of functions of President S. 147(1): "Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of this section, if any vacancy occurs by reason of the death or resignation or the removal of the President from office (impeachment) in accordance with section 144, 145 or 340 of this Constitution, the Vice President shall hold the office of President for the period of not more than 3 months during which there shall be an election of a new President from the same zone, who shall hold office for the unexpired term of office of the last holder of the office." On the few occasions when President Obasanjo has been threatened with impeachment by the National Assembly, a few members, instead of looking at the grounds canvassed for impeachment on their merits, preferred to consider what would be the necessary result of a successful impeachment process, namely: that the Vice President (currently from the North-Eastern geopolitical zone) would be the beneficiary of the exercise as he would step into the shoes of the impeached President. On one occasion, in the Senate, it was the Alliance for Democracy senators from the South-West, who did not in fact vote for the President in the first place who threatened hell and brimstone should the impeachment exercise proceed further. The 1995 Abacha Constitution anticipated this possibility and provided that the Vice President shall fill the vacancy for 3 months only as a maximum, while INEC would arrange to elect a President from the same zone (in this case, possibly Olu Falae?). With this provision, it would be possible to examine a President's breaches of the constitution and other misconduct objectively to see if they justify or warrant impeachment. Farewell to "Winner takes all" S. 148(7) "The majority of the number of ministers appointed pursuant to subsection (3) of the section shall come from the political party or parties on whose platform the President is elected." S. 148(8): "Any political party which wins not less than 10 per cent of the total number of seats in the National Assembly or of the total number of votes cast at the election, shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (7) of this section be entitled to representation in the Federal Executive Council in proportion to the number of seats won by the party in the National Assembly." This is a prescription for an all-party government with ministers drawn from all serious political parties (with 10 per cent of the votes cast at the National Assembly election). This is to promote consensus building rather than antagonism among the political parties; and holders of ministerial posts from parties other than the President's party will appreciate that they hold such positions as of right by virtue of the constitution and not as a gift by the President or his party. Certainly not an invitation to "come and chop." Elimination of incumbency and its abuse to the electoral process The December 1959 Federal Parliamentary Elections may have had its abuses some of which were highlighted by Harold Smith in his autobiography "Blue Collor Lawman" but the 1964 Federal Parliamentary Elections certainly had many more electoral abuses than the 1959 election. Similarly, the 1979 Presidential, National Assembly and Gubernatorial elections may have had some abuses but they were, by comparison, much more free and fair than the 1983 elections. In the same way, in spite of any problems associated with the 1999 Presidential and other elections, they were certainly more free and fair than the 2003 edition. So, historically, it would be generally accepted that the incumbency factor does not promote free and fair electoral processes. Based on this historical experience, the Abacha 1995 Constitution provides as follows: S. 140(1): "A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if (b) He has been elected to such office at an immediately preceding election..." An incumbent President and incumbent Governors are therefore disqualified from standing election for the same office during their incumbency. This eliminates the incumbency factor and the abuses arising there from in connection with the electoral process. In summary, because of Abacha's untimely death in June 1998, "the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1995 (with amendments)" was never promulgated and Nigeria therefore lost the benefit of some of its well-thought out provisions which were intended to promote justice, equity, and national unity in the process of transforming Nigeria from a country of many ethnic nationalities into a modern nation state within a "transition period" of 30 years. This is what Nigeria lost by Abacha's untimely death.

Will You Join PDP, If..........?

Let me start by sharing a recent experience. Few months ago, I received an email from a ‘facebook’ friend, who asked if I was interested in becoming a member of his political group. According to him, the group intends to mobilise interested Nigerians to become members of the PDP, with the aim of hijacking the party machinery. After reading the email, I quickly declined his offer. I declined the offer for three reasons. Firstly, because I’m based overseas and I couldn’t see how I can add value to their cause. Secondly, I have never hidden how much I detest PDP as a political party. Mind you, not that I believe any of the other political parties are better. I’ve just never believed anything good can come out of the party, except by “accident” (as a friend will say). And thirdly, I didn’t know the guy personally, so I wasn’t sure if they were been sponsored by another ‘cabal’.


Ok! That was then, but, what about now?

The PDP Chairman, Dr Nwodo recently noted that, the party will begin registration of its members this week. Prospective members of the party will be expected to pay a mandatory registration fee which will be registered online. According to media reports, the party believes it could raise N10bn annually by levying its members N1,500 each.

The PDP Chairman was also quoted as saying “gone are the days, where a ward chairman will not register a member because he/she doesn’t like the face of the prospective member”. But given the opportunity, how many people are interested in being members of the PDP?

So should the call for membership by PDP be seen by progressives, as an opportunity to get involve? What would it take to mobilise 500,000 “progressives” to register as members of the PDP, with the sole aim of reforming the party?. Why can’t all the political groups on facebook and other online social network work collaboratively, and join the PDP en mass? With 500,000 members (all on the same page), how difficult can it be to take over the party machinery, and force a change?

You may ask, why PDP and not ACN or ANPP? The answer to that is simple. Like it or loathe it, PDP remains the only party in the country with the geographical spread and structure to win an election. If one can mobilise enough numbers, why waste your time joining a party that only appeals to certain ethnic groups.

So I put the question to you, will you join the PDP, if there exist an opportunity to force a change within the party?

..........Still On Power Rotation and PDP

The leaders of the People’s Democratic Party seems to have reached a consensus that the zoning/power rotation agreement should be dumped. As expected, political jingoists have all jumped on the bandwagon. Anti-power rotation now seems to be flavour of the month in the PDP. Those who told us seven months ago that there’s no vacancy in Aso Rock, have suddenly become the arrowheads of the anti-rotation campaign.


Even members of the cabal who held sway during Yar’Adua’s administration, engaging in all manners of public deception and manipulation in order to hold on to power have also now become Apostles of anti-zoning.

It’s common knowledge that Nigerian masses have been so impoverished to the point that they now care less about the ethnic origin of their leaders. The underdevelopment has reached a point that, if the Constitution permits a foreigner to be President, and the masses can be guaranteed good quality of life, they will be more than happy to have him/her as President. The man on the street just wants to see food on the table. All he wants is decent healthcare, employment, good quality education and infrastructure.

And it’s for these obvious reasons that anti-zoning has become a ‘populist’ idea. Unlike in the past, the political elites have realised that ethnic sentiments seems not to wash with the citizenry. The benefactors of the so-called power rotation even find it difficult to convince that man on the street, because it has offered him no value whatsoever. So the only option available is for them to join the bandwagon and spread the anti-rotation propaganda. They know fully well that , it’s what the public wants to hear.

But in all of this, we need to ask ourselves if all these Apostles and Evangelist of anti-rotation are really acting in the public interest. They may be telling us what we want to hear, but does that mean they have our interest at heart?

Supporters of anti-rotation in the PDP fall broadly into two categories. There are those who want to use Goodluck Jonathan to rule the nation by proxy. They failed with Umaru Yar’Adua, because he wasn’t a stooge they expected him to be. A Goodluck Jonathan presidency therefore presents another opportunity for them to form their own ‘cabal’. These are ‘politically expired’ individuals who see Goodluck Jonathan presidency as the only way to become politically relevant once again. For them, it’s a ‘third term’ by proxy, as they can continue to rule the nation from Otta farm.

The second group are those who have been subconsciously coerced into anti-rotation bandwagon. Left to them alone, they would rather keep rotating power. Members of this group have had their hands soiled in all manners of corrupt activities. They know their case files are still within reach of anti-corruption agencies. And with the return of the likes of Nuhu Ribadu, it’s in their own interest that they ‘fall in line’. Any show of dissent means their files will be dusted up very quickly. A case in point is the ongoing prosecution of the former PDP Chairman, Vincent Ogbulafor.

And it’s only for this reason that the likes of Senator Jubril Aminu, who is currently facing investigation on his alleged role in the Siemens bribery scandal, can support anti-rotation. It is also the reason why ‘criminals’ like, former Attorney-General of the Federation, can say ‘zoning’ is unconstitutional.

Some may argue that power rotation is a PDP policy, so why waste precious time discussing an issue that has no place in our constitution. The truth is, we cannot afford to be oblivious to the fact that PDP remains the only dominant party in Nigeria’s polity. Like it or loathe it, it remains the only political party with a structure to win a presidential election. And whilst we may not all be card carrying members of PDP, any decision made by the party will inevitably have a huge impact on the nation’s political landscape.

It’s now very obvious that Apostles of anti-rotation in the PDP are not doing the masses any favour. They are doing do so only to pave way for a Goodluck Jonathan presidency. They see a Goodluck Jonathan presidency as an opportunity to perpetuate themselves in power and exert their political influence.

I have no issues with PDP’s plan to dump its rotation policy. However, any attempt to jettison the rotation policy must be done properly. As I noted in my last post, the rotation policy is more than a gentleman’s agreement as it is enshrined in the PDP constitution. It’s only when the PDP expunge Section 7(2)C from the party constitution that we will know that it is really serious about dumping power rotation. Until then, any attempt to disregard the policy in order to pave way for a supposed ‘anointed’ candidate come 2011, will only sweep the issue under the carpet.

And unless the nation graduates from its current one-party political system to a level where we have formidable opposition parties, the issue of power rotation will remain with us for a long time. The attempt to sweep the matter under the carpet will only complicate things further in the future.

If the status quo remains, Goodluck Jonathan will more than likely succeed in remaining in power beyond 2011. And unless the opposition gets its acts together, there’s the high likelihood he will rule for two terms until 2019 (except he does a Yar’Adua). But with Section 7(2)C still enshrined in the party constitution, the question is, what will happen after 2019?

On PDP, Power Rotation and Federal Character

Power rotation or call it ‘zoning’ has become a very topical issue in Nigeria’s polity. The view held by some political elites is it that, ‘rotation’ is the only way to maintain political balance in a nation like Nigeria that is divided along religious and ethnic lines.


This same view was shared by the US Under-secretary of State, Johnnie Carson, when he said recently that “the United States supported the rotation principle as a guarantor of stability in Nigeria, a country of 140 million split between the Muslim north and predominantly Christian south”.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) remains the only party in Nigeria whose party constitution supports power rotation/zoning. Section 7(2)C of the PDP constitution states:

“In pursuance of the principle of equity, justice and fairness, the party shall adhere to the policy of rotation and zoning of party and public elective offices and it shall be enforced by the appropriate executive committee at all levels”.

This confirms that the PDP power rotation policy is more than just a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ as we’ve been made to believe by “AGIP” (Any Government In Power) political sycophants.

But in spite of the PDP constitutional provisions, many within the party believe that the power rotation policy has outlived its usefulness, and that it should be jettisoned altogether. Considering that these calls are coming at a time when a non-Northerner is occupying the seat of power sounds quite suspicious. In the current prevailing circumstances, the sincerity of the anti-rotation supporters within PDP will always remain questionable. I will say that the jury is still out on whether such calls are been made in the public interest or just serve the personal benefit of President Goodluck Jonathan, to remain in power beyond 2011.

It beggars belief that same political jobbers and sycophants calling for the abolition of rotation policy, after they themselves have been a major beneficiary, are same people scouting for the next Party Chairman from a particular region of the country. So why haven’t they declared that anyone can run for the post of PDP Chairmanship instead of ‘zoning’ it to the Southeast. If zoning is bad for the presidency, then why is it good for political party offices?

The hypocrisy in the PDP was further exposed by the recent announcement that Ogun state 2011 Governorship slot has been zoned to Yewa/Awori. This decision according to the party officials is in the spirit of “equity, justice and fairness”. So on one hand, we have some National Party leaders saying the power rotation should be dumped to pave way for Goodluck Jonathan, but on the other hand, we have a state chapter of the party announcing that it has zoned its Governorship slot to a particular ethnic tribe. Again, this begs the question, if zoning is not good enough for the Presidential slot, why must it be forced down the throat of state party supporters?

For how long will these Papas Deceiving Pickin continue? A Yoruba proverb says “eniyan meji ko ni padanu iro”. Which literally means, “two people cannot fall victims of lie or deceit”. Whilst the ‘deceived’ could be genuinely’ ignorant, the ‘deceiver’ definitely knows what he/she is doing.

Social and political commentators argue daily that power rotation is unconstitutional, and should not be taken seriously as it only binds members of the PDP. But that statement is not entirely true. Whilst the constitution may not be explicit on power rotation, it clearly supports the principle of federal character. Section 14(3) of 1999 constitution states

“The composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few State or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies”.

For me, there’s no fundamental difference between Section 7(2)C of the PDP Constitution and Section 14(3) of the 1999 constitution. Whether you call it power rotation, zoning, federal character principle, are all aimed at the same purpose. The single purpose, as we are made to believe, is to prevent the predominance of a particular ethnic group or tribe in political office.

Whether such a provision/clause is good or bad is a different argument altogether. In my opinion, Section 14(3) is one of the fundamental errors of 1999 constitution. Any legislation or policy that aims to restrict political office to a tribe, religion or sex only breeds mediocrity. There’s enough evidence to show that rotation, zoning, federal character principle or whatever name you call it, has contributed immensely to the paucity of development in the country. No region in Nigeria has benefitted from zoning or federal character principle. For example, Ex-Pres. Obasanjo ruled the nation for almost 10 years both as civilian and military Head of State. But I don’t think Abeokuta is any better developed than Benin.

Yes we hue and cry about how bad power rotation is. We say it’s PDP policy and no one else. We say people should be free to seek elective office irrespective of tribe or religion. But the reality is, the political landscape and machineries of government are guided by medieval and retrogressive constitutional provisions, which in fact transcends individual party policies.

It is such medieval constitutional provision that has given political parties like the PDP, the audacity to adopt a rotational policy. And until we expunge such provisions from our constitution, changes in presidential power base would only mean very little in reality.

IBB, PDP and 2011 Elections

If we are to believe recent media report, it seems the ‘evil genius’ is contemplating throwing his hat into the ring. Whilst speaking to journalist during his last visit to Abeokuta, Nigeria’s former Head of State, General Ibrahim Babangida was quoted as saying “he would be favourably disposed to the presidency of the country if it was the yearning of Nigerians”. When asked if he will be interested in running for the Presidency, his reply was "I am still doing some consultation and honestly I will hint you on that when I have finished. I will give you a feedback very soon”.

For IBB to have noted that he’s consulting means two things. It’s either he’s interested in himself, and currently taking his time to sound out his followers and apologists. Or it could be that, he’s under pressure from his sychophants to contest the 2011 presidential elections.

This will not be surprising as quite a number of people both within the political elites and civil society believe that IBB is the only person that can move the nation forward.What informed such thinking I don't know! You may say that such people are deluded. But the fact is, one of the principles of democratic governance is freedom of speech and opinion.

Gen. Babangida’s comments however seem to have ignited a flurry of angry remarks. Interestingly, social commentators have been quick to tell us why IBB is not suitable as President, however they have all failed to tell us how to STOP him from being President.

But who’s afraid of Babangida? Is Babangida the most hated Nigerian leader? If so, why? Is Babangida the worst leader in Nigeria’s history?

Some have argued that the Retired General has no “moral right” to run for any political office in Nigeria. To an average Nigerian, the two biggest sins of IBB are the annulment of June 12 election and corruption.

In my opinion, the recent attacks on IBB candidacy underscores the deep hypocrisy that exists within the civil society. If one could ask, why should IBB alone carry the can of June 12 election annulment? Is it not ironic that some of the major actors involved in the annulment of the June 12 elections are the same people ruling the nation? Has anyone queried the role of the current Senate President, David Mark during the last days of Babangida regime? Did anyone query Arthur Nzeribe’s nomination and subsequent election as a Senator in 1999? Did anyone question Senator Uche Chukwumerijie election into the Upper House, despite been spokesperson for the Shonekan-led Interim National Government? If Babangida does not have a moral right, then what moral right does David Mark have to be No.3 citizen? What moral rights do all past military leaders and civilians that served under the Babangida administration have, to seek public office?

The point of my argument is General Babangida is not any worse than most of our present and past political leaders. There’s no scale for immorality or bad governance. Whilst he might have taken corruption to a new level, he did not introduce corruption into the system. Corruption in Nigeria is not just about individuals, it’s “systemic”. Most of the politicians condemning IBB’s political ambition, will probably do far worse things if they had same opportunity.

If the provisional election timetable released by the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission is anything to go by, it means we have barely 12 months before the 2011 general elections. However, we are yet to see any serious contender come out to declare his/her Presidential ambition. The only person to have declared his ambition did so in the US (!). I cannot understand how someone will leave the shores of the country he wishes to govern, only to go and declare his political ambition in a foreign land. As I write we are yet to see his manifesto.

Another of the “supposed” Presidential aspirants is also busy conducting opinion poll on a social networking website. He’s been propping up other people’s name apart from himself. How can such people be considered serious? Yet, they tell us everyday why IBB shouldn’t be the next president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. So who should be? When will such a person declare his political ambition? For me, if by now such a person is undecided, then he/she is a time waster.

With an unorganised opposition, flawed electoral system, a civil society that has exhausted most of its energy looking for a “missing president”, I can’t see how IBB wouldn’t win the 2011 polls - if he succeeds in picking up a nomination ticket under the PDP. Like it or loathe it, PDP remains the only party in Nigeria with a structure to win a presidential election, within the current timeframe.

My message is simple. Let’s begin to direct our energy to the right causes. There’s no point wasting our time attacking individuals. Everyone is free to seek political position, except those found guilty of criminal offence. What we need is a fair and transparent electoral system that ensures that our votes count. It’s then up to the electorates to decide. As they say, a nation gets a leader it deserves.

Anambra State, Electoral Reform and 2011 Elections

Without any doubt, the Anambra state election wasn’t without its own drama. And considering INEC track record in organising credible elections – especially under the leadership of Prof. Maurice Iwu – anything different would probably have been seen as a “variance”.


Just two days prior to Election Day, the Federal High Court in Lagos ruled that the Independent National Electoral Commission lacks the merit to conduct elections in the country. As we may know, there are only four commissioners sitting on the INEC board, instead of 13 as stipulated in the INEC Act. As a result, Justice Liman ruled that the board lacks the quorum required to conduct elections. As I write, what this ruling portends for the just concluded election is still unknown.

There were also reports of delays in the delivery of election materials across the state. It was reported that many polling stations remained closed for hours after the election was scheduled to have started because of non-availability of voting materials. Some people even reported ballot boxes stolen in some parts of the state.

Going by the scene of jubilation on the streets of Awka on Sunday, one can assume that the victory of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) gubernatorial candidate Peter Obi, is in line with desire and expectation of Anambrarians.

The jubilation on the streets of Awka is in total contrast to what we saw in Ado-Ekiti, following the re-run of Ekiti gubernatorial elections last April. The tragedy of the Ekiti elections is still very fresh in our memory. We can all remember the famous Madam Ayoka, who decided to call it quit in the mid-way into the election, and only to be threatened by her Abuja masters. The story of Ekiti election re-run cannot be complete without mentioning the naked women protests on the streets of Ado-Ekiti.

But as residents of Anambra celebrate, the question I asked some of my friends was, did Peter Obi win the election on genuine votes? Or was he just successful in “out rigging” his opponents?

Whilst there’s been no confirmation of rigging on the part of the Peter Obi, who is also the incumbent governor, I still believe it is a reasonable question to ask, considering our clamour and agitation for genuine electoral reform.

If anything, the public reaction to the APGA victory –or perhaps, PDP loss – further underlines the growing hatred for the PDP. The hatred now seems to have hit a crescendo that most people don’t really care how PDP is removed from power or prevented from seizing office. In the desperate attempt to kick PDP out by all force, anything and everything seems acceptable.

There seems to be a general consensus that the Anambra election was not “free and fair”. In fact, Peter Obi was very vocal in condemning the way and manner INEC has organised the election. However, I found that most Nigerians were willing to accept these anomalies as “inconsequential” only because PDP lost. I then wondered what would have been the case if the election was won by PDP, what the reaction of such people would have been to the election process aa a whole.

In “normal” circumstances there would have been calls for the head of Prof. Iwu. But following the loss of PDP last Saturday, no one seems to be interested. Most people seem to have taken the Anambra result as a victory over PDP. So does that mean Prof. Iwu has regained public confidence?

We cannot be ignorant of the menace and decadence suffered under the 10 year rule of PDP. However, the fact remains that most of the leaders of the opposition are one time or the other members of the PDP. I don’t know of any party in Nigeria that was created based on any set of ideology or principles. These parties were borne out of self-preservation and actualisation of personal agendas.

The obnoxious belief that PDP is the biggest problem facing our democracy will create more harm than good. The problem in our electoral system is more than just PDP, AC, or ANPP. What we need is a genuine electoral reform that will guarantee free and fair election, and deter electoral malpractices. It is not rocket science to have a free and fair election. We have had it before. The annulled June 12 election is a perfect example. It is therefore nonsensical for anyone to say no election can ever be perfect. Are they saying we should accept electoral fraud as part of our democracy, just as we’ve accepted that corruption comes with leadership?

When you talk about electoral reform, some assume it’s just about lining up to vote. Voting is just one part of the electoral process. Although, we hear about allegations of fraud in western democracies, but you can be sure that if anyone is caught engaging in electoral malpractices he/she is likely to end up in prison. It is only in Nigeria where machines for printing ballot papers are found in people’s house, and it is regarded as a joke!

As 2011 draws nearer, it is important that the electorate keep their eyes wide open when electing their leaders. The last thing we want is to replace one evil with another just because it presents itself in a different colour.

We need to forestall a repeat of what happened in 1999, when crooks and criminals rode on the back of the pro-democracy group-cum-political party Alliance for Democracy (AD) into public office.

And just before I go, I will like to say BIG thank you to Mr Egghead Odewale for his regular twitter and facebook updates on the Anambra election. It was citizen journalism at its best!

Corruption: Between Anthony Anenih and Bode George

As part of its usual ‘probe cum wild goose chase’, the Senate ad-hoc committee on Transportation indicted the former chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Board of Trustees, Chief Tony Anenih. The Senate ad-hoc committee investigated alleged corruption in the transport sector since 1999. And according to media reports, ad-hoc committee report is filled with revelations of alleged serial malpractices, through multiple contract fraud, unhelpful connivance between contractors and government officials over the last ten years. In fact it was noted that N633 billion was spent on only 4,752 kilometres of road; short-changing the government of N47 million per kilometre of road.

It was also reported that between 1999 and 2009, the Ministry of Transportation, gave contracts for the construction and rehabilitation of 11, 591km roads at a cost of N1.7 trillion – about N87 million per km – and with only 24 per cent of the roads achieved, 64 per cent of the contract value has already been paid; about N133 million per km(!). The Senate ad-hoc committee alleged that, during Mr. Anenih’s tenure as minister, and three others that later headed the ministry in the last 10 years, multi-billion dollar contracts were awarded to contractors based on estimates and without preliminary design.

The Senate ad-hoc committee report on this brazen corruption was meant to be debated on the floor of the Senate last Thursday. However for some inexplicable reasons, discussion on the ad-hoc committee panel report was shelved indefinitely! So the question is why the sudden change in gear? Why has the Senate decided to dump the ad-hoc committee report? If the Senate was not interested in pursuing the allegations of corruption to a logical end, then why waste taxpayers money on silly probes?

This sudden ‘u-turn’ begs the question about the sincerity of this government and perhaps the PDP in the fight against corruption. The decision of the Senate not to debate the panel report forecloses the opportunity to prosecute Anthony Anenih. However, if Bode George, who is also a chieftain of the PDP, could be sentenced to two years imprisonment for abuse of office, why can’t Anthony Anenih be prosecuted for blatant corruption? Or is it that the powers that be, in the PDP are beginning to develop cold-feet because of the recent judgement delivered by Justice Oyewole?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not naïve of the power and influence Anthony Anenih exerts in Nigerian politics. Mr ‘Fix It’, as he is often called, is arguably one of the strongest political godfather in Nigeria. Many have even described his recent appointment, as the Chairman of Nigeria Ports Authority as an indirect appointment of President Yar’Adua second term ‘campaign manager’.

The Senate decision reinforces the public belief that some individuals are above the law. Just as someone said, “the anti-corruption law in Nigeria is like a cobweb. It is too strong to catch the weak but very weak to catch the strong”. The action vindicates the widely held opinion that the prosecution of Bode George was a smokescreen, and that Bode George was only a victim of high level political machinations. It is becoming obvious by the day, that enemies of Ex-President Obasanjo are President Yar’Adua’s best friends.

But the six-four thousand dollar question is, who will deliver us from this cancer called ‘corruption’ that has eaten deep into the bone marrow of our nation? Every morning we wake up to allegations and counter-allegations of corruption on front pages of newspaper. We have an Attorney-General whose key performance indicator is the number of government cronies he can shield from corruption charges. The A-G performance is assessed on how many corruption charges against government cronies he can subvert under the guise of ‘rule of law’.

As citizens, it is imperative that we demand for justice on issues relating to allegations of corruption. There should not be one rule for goose and another for the gander. The likes of Bode George cannot be convicted , while bigger thieves continue to loiter along the corridor of power.

In mean time, as Bode goes to jail, Anthony Anenih continues to relax in his country home.....

Bode Goes to Jail: The optimists, pessimists and conspiracy theorists

My heart was filled with so much joy when I heard the news that the former chairman of the Nigerian Ports Authority, Olabode George along with five other members of the 2001/2003 Ports Authority Board are to spend two years in jail. Bode George and the NPA Five were found guilty and convicted on a 47-count charge, which includes disobedience to lawful order and abuse of office by splitting contracts to the tune of N84 billion by Justice Olubunmi Oyewole of the Lagos High Court.

The public reaction that followed the court ruling can be classified into three broad categories. As expected, we have the optimists. These are people who believe that the jail sentence – albeit two years, will serve as a deterrent to other corrupt politicians. For this group of people, such a ruling renews the hope in the nation’s judiciary as an arbiter of the ‘rule of law’. Secondly, we have the ‘pessimists’. The pessimists are of the view that sentencing Chief Bode George to two years imprisonment for a N84 billion fraud is a mere ‘slap on the wrist’ and makes mockery of the judicial system. In fact, such people are of the opinion that the PDP chieftain will probably have the sentence reduced on appeal, after which he can relax and enjoy his ‘booty’.

And thirdly, we have the ‘conspiracy theorists’. The conspiracy theorists are of the view that the sentence is more or less a ‘smokescreen’ to create a distraction so that the Oligarchy can carry on with its business of ‘do nothing’ and protection highly placed powerful individuals from prosecution. And of the course, the recent action of the Attorney-General in the case of James Ibori and Co lends further credence to their view. They refused to get carried away by the euphoria of court judgement because they are not convinced (and rightly so!) that the anti-corruption campaign of the Yar’Adua administration is ‘genuine’.

Whichever way one looks at the issue, the antecedents of this government provides enough evidence to substantiate any of the viewpoints. However for now I belong to the group of ‘optimists’. Yes I agree that two years imprisonment seems laughable, just as the former Edo State Governor Lucky Igbinedion was fined for N3.5m for embezzling N4.4bn! Yes I agree that Chief Bode George and the NPA Five can afford to live in Kirikiri Prison for two years while their proceeds from the N84bn continue to yield interest in their bank accounts. Yes I agree that there are probably bigger thieves, who seem untouchable roaming around the corridor of Aso Rock.

However, we can take delight in a few things. We need to be appreciative of the fact that, despite the rot in the nation’s judiciary, we still few judges in the country who are willing to stand up for the truth against all the odds. We must praise the courage and sagacity of Justice Oyewole in delivering this landmark judgement. Secondly, with the court ruling, Justice Oyewole has effectively nailed Chief Bode George’s political coffin. Whatever be the case, Bode George is now a ‘convict’. Whether he gets a commuted sentence at the Appeal Court is immaterial. This effectively means he cannot hold any political office for the rest of his life! As someone said, even if sleeps one night in Kirikiri maximum prison, that is enough. Also, we need not to look too far to dig up his criminal records, unlike Messrs Ibori and co. There will be safely kept at the Lagos High Court.

Overall it is worth noting one fact on the ongoing saga. Truth be told, the camp of corrupt individuals and treasury looters has no ethnic or religious barrier. You need not to belong to a particular ethnic group or religious sect to be a member. In fact, you need not speak the same local dialect. The unifying factor of corrupt minds is ‘self-enrichment’ and the common language is ‘money’. When people want to collude to loot the nation’s treasury they forget about that ethnic group. The ethnic diversity in the list of the convicted persons is very clear (Bode George, Aminu Dabo, Olusegun Abidoye, Abdullahi Tafida, Zanna Maidaribe and Sule Aliyu).

We need to point out this fact before some ethnic bigots’ say that the prosecution of Bode George is an ‘ethnic agenda’.

Prof. Charles Soludo: The Case of Moral Integrity

After weeks of political machinations, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) finally announced the nomination of the former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Prof. Charles Soludo as its flagbearer for February 2010 Anambra State Governorship elections.

Following an injunction from the Anambra state High Court against the planned governorship primaries, the former CBN governor was handpicked by the PDP national executive after the 47 aspirants failed to reach a consensus.


There is no doubt that, only very few surpass Prof. Soludo in academic achievements, intellectual capacity and expertise. His curriculum vitae speak volumes. Whether go or bad, he left an indelible mark on the nation’s banking sector. But that been said; does Prof. Soludo have the moral integrity to run for a State Governorship seat? For me, the handpicking of Prof. Soludo is a slap on the face of Anambra state electorates. It also reaffirms the notion that our political class are mentally devoid of moral integrity.


It is on record, that during his time at the Apex Bank, Prof. Soludo oversaw the biggest consolidation in the nation banking history. This achievement as we know, won him numerous awards in and outside of Nigeria. There is no doubt that the Nigerian banking sector was revolutionalised under his leadership. But at the same time he got carried away while carrying out his regulatory functions. He became the ‘best friend’ of the CEOs, wining and dining with top bank executives.


As the regulator of the nation’s banking industry, he colluded with bank executives to hide the rot in the banking system. He encouraged the recklessness and excessive risks taken by bank executives. And when it became glaring the banks were in trouble, it is alleged that Prof. Soludo “threatened the banks with sanctions if they disclosed that the capital of some of their peers had been eroded”. Instead of dealing with the crisis, he was always quick to blame the banking crisis on ‘demarketing’ tactics employed by some banks to take away customers from their peers.


Even at the height of the global financial crisis, he was quoted as saying, “Nigeria’s economy cannot go into recession” (!). Despite the sharp fall in price of crude oil and rapid depletion of the nation’s foreign reserve, Prof. Soludo had the gut – without any sound justification - to say that Nigeria’s economy was immune from the global recession!


When countries were injecting monies into their banking system to mitigate the impact of the world financial crisis, Prof. Soludo claimed that Nigerian banks are very strong, hence do not need any government ‘bail-outs’. He in fact noted that, “it is the banks that will bail-out the government” (!).


So what am I saying? The selection of Prof. Soludo sends a very worrying signal. The decision makes mockery of Lamido Sanusi banking reforms. It further lends credence to the conspiracy theory (which I do not subscribe to) that Lamido Sanusi is acting the script of the northern oligarchs.

If I belong the ethnic agenda camp, the question I will be asking is, if the banks were so much in a precarious state, due to sharp practices of bank executives, which was encouraged (directly or indirectly) by the leadership of Prof. Soludo, then why would the same person be handpicked by the ruling party for a Govenorship seat?

This decision of course, indirectly exonerates Prof. Soludo from any complicity in the ongoing banking scandal. The decision therefore calls into question the “real” intentions of the ongoing “Sanutization”.


Also just last week, a national Australian newspaper reported that an affiliate company of the Reserve Bank of Australia is under Federal Police investigation for allegedly bribing Nigerian officials in a cash-for-contracts scandal. The alleged contract, awarded during the tenure of Prof. Soludo at the CBN, was for the newly launched polymer naira notes. Similar to the Halliburton scandal, these bribes were paid out to the Nigerian officials through two British businessmen who acted as proxies.


Unfortunately, this is not the first time Nigerian officials have been named in cash-for-contract scandal. Whilst investigation is still ongoing in Australia, there’s been no official comment from the government on this matter. Prof. Soludo has also not said anything about his involvement in this matter, despite the fact that the contract was awarded during his tenure.

In civilised societies, an allegation of such gravity is enough make a politician step down from office, talk less of having the audacity to run for a political position. However, in our society it is business as usual, as no one bothers to investigate such allegations.


With Prof. Soludo almost guaranteed to win the state governorship election, this effectively grants him immunity for eight years (if he seeks re-election). After which it will all be case closed.

The election of Prof. Soludo as the Governor of Anambra state wouldn’t come as surprise to many. It is only in Nigeria that elected politicians with corruption cases hanging over their heads, are sitting in the federal parliament legislating federal laws. It is only in Nigeria that a candidate can be elected into office, while been detained in prison. And we call this democracy?

Political Parties and Electoral Reform

The public reaction to the ruling of the elections petition tribunal sitting in Ogun State, in favour of the incumbent governor Gbenga Daniel was not surprising. The lopsidedness of our electoral system means that the odds are heavily stacked against any opposition. Our democratic system is one of the only few where an incumbent political party does not lose elections. The “absolute” power enjoyed by the incumbent, makes it virtually impossible for any opposition. In a situation where the President controls the electoral commission and law enforcement agents what can we expect? Even in cases where we have had election re-run as result of tribunal ruling, the incumbent still returns to power, even with larger votes! As seen recently in Ekiti State.

The public reaction to ruling against the opposition although expected, should however be treated with caution. As one would expect, the Action Congress (AC) supporters are always quick to point fingers at the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). When PDP win elections, we are constantly reminded of rigging, violence, intimidation etc. When an appeal is lost at the tribunal, the opposition is always quick to say that the Judges have been bribed. Yes I agree that some of that these things do happen, but the question is, does this make the opposition party a “saint”? Does it mean that opposition parties are not involved in rigging? Are we saying opposition parties have never offered bribes to tribunal judges or electoral commissioners? The fact remains that elections in Nigeria are won by the party with best “rigging” machinery. The difference between the incumbent and opposition is that, whilst the opposition employs the services of thugs, the incumbent uses the state apparatus (Police, Army etc). And from a layman’s perspective, a Policeman stuffing a ballot box is worse than a political thug intimidating voters. Also collating election results at the Police station is more serious than inclusion of fictitious names on the voters’ register. But really is one form of electoral fraud worse than another?

It was the same issue when the opposition party candidate in Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola was arrested and charged to court for forgery recently. The Inspector-General of Police alleged that the Police report tendered by Aregbesola is support of his appeal was indeed “forged”. As we will expect, the arrest was seen as another “government magic”. Many political and social commentators saw it as a ploy to suppress the opposition, but thank goodness that we are in democracy. The case is now in court, and it is up to the court to decide if the report was indeed forged. My argument on the issue has always been it is irrelevant if it took the Police twelve months to realise that the report was forged. The most important thing is to establish if it was forged or not. And if the report was forged, the Police have every right to charge him to court. An opposition that is engaged in forgery is no better than the incumbent that has rigged itself into power. We need to start calling a spade a spade, and not just an agricultural instrument.

I understand people’s frustration with the PDP. I agree that the PDP has offered us NOTHING for the last ten years since its being in power. But are the opposition parties any different. What is in the manifesto of AC, PPA, DPA, and ANPP? For me, the current group of political parties are no different from each other. Whilst they may have different names, their ideology and principle are all same – if any! These are parties founded on self-preservation and greed. The parties only provide a platform for people to seek political office, have a bite of the national cake and nothing more.

We have often criticised Former President Obasanjo and PDP for intimidating all the PDP presidential aspirants in 2007in order to pave way for Umar Yar’Adua. It is common knowledge that some of the former governors were even threatened with prosecution. However, how is that different from how Gov. Raji Fashola emerged? Was the imposition of Raji Fashola on AC candidates better than the intimidation of PDP presidential aspirants? Is that what we call democracy? The Fashola issue has however been swept under the carpet because of his popularity. However, if Umar Yar’Adua has also been performing, then how PDP conducted its Presidential primaries might also have been a “dead issue”.

My position is that the clamour for “genuine” electoral reform should be devoid of party partisanship. The interest of the nation should be of utmost importance. The current electoral system is not working, and voters are the biggest losers. Let’s not be deceived, even if an AC candidate becomes President in 2011 under the current system, the issues we have will still remain. Then it will be the PDP crying foul. The challenge with our electoral system is not about political parties. It is the system that has encouraged fraud, thuggery etc. Let’s continue to put pressure on the govt for a genuine electoral reform, instead of shouting AC/PDP or crying wolf. The Justice Uwais Panel report on Electoral Reform is a very comprehensive document. However, the govt has been “cherry picking” which aspect suits it most in order to further perpetuate itself in power. This approach cannot be right. Why can’t we have a healthy debate on the report has presented. I’m not canvassing for a total adoption of all its recommendations because some might not be practical. But the report represents a major starting point.

Why I missed my flight - The Nigerian idol worship

Written by Anosike Wilson
Thursday, 06 August 2009 09:23

It was the 25th of July 2009 and I was bound to travel to Lagos via Imo Airport with Chachangi Airlines for my onward travel out of the country the same day. Incidentally, The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was on his way to Imo State for the now celebrated defection of the state governor Chief Ikedi Ohakim from PPA to PDP.
For me it was not a big deal, the coming of the president is a party affair—coming to welcome a new convert—however, I was in for a shock. On my way to Imo Airport I observed that the ever-busy Douglas Road was a shelf of itself. It was a ghost street. Eke-ukwu owerri—one of the biggest and busiest market in Imo State—was locked. The governor has ordered that the market be shut for the coming of his Excellency the President! All buying and selling must wait till the President of Nigeria comes and goes and till Ikedi Ohakim completes his carpet-crossing. If you are aggrieved then go to court!

The deal was not done yet. As I veered towards the Airport I was met by a huge security set-up made up of the Police and the military. All vehicles heading towards the Airport were required to stop 2 miles away from the airport, whether you are traveling or seeing a relation off. We were forced to alight and walk all the way to the airport. Being sick and having lots of luggage, it was not a good experience. I had the courage to accost one of the military men to enquire what was going on, why should we stop so far away from the Airport just because the president will land at the Airport. His reply “I was sent from Abuja and I am doing my duty” my reply “why should our leaders treat us this way?” “I don’t know” came the reply. Well, Yaradua has sent me on a forced walkathon and I had to comply. After all, he is the commander-in-chief. The route of my walkathon was lined up by primary school students on uniform with paper-made Nigerian flags waiting to wave at the president. What! It is a Saturday morning and school children are dressed because of the president coming for a carpet-crossing!

Our flight was scheduled for 11:30 am. The flight was to arrive from Lagos and pick up the Imo passengers back to Lagos. The high point of the drama then came when the in-coming Chachangi Airplane was seen hovering around the Airport, reason, it was not allowed to land since the President was at the airport waving like an imbecile(eme onye ara conductor….). I learnt later that it was not only Chachangi that was not permitted to land, Arik Airplane was also being delayed just because the president was waving at his retinues. Well, since I started traveling and listening to the news, I only heard that flights were advised not to land because of bad weather or accidental situations but not because the president landed.

While aboard I had to vent my anger on one of the crew, he clearly told me that I saw that they were not allowed to land and again, they had to take-off late from Lagos since it was a clean-up day. Well, the clean –up seems a better but ridiculous excuse. We managed to land at the Lagos Airport around 2pm. I clearly knew that I have missed my flight bound for Qatar by 2.40pm. However, I got myself down to Murtala Mohamed International Airport, having wasted some minutes for baggage waiting and paying for Throlley! Well, the flight was at the tarmac and ready to take-off. You can blame me for not being in Lagos a day or two before my departure, at least I have a valid excuse, having being sick and having re-booked my ticket thrice, I had to travel less my ticket becomes invalid.Yaradua having forced me to a walkathon now made me pay the sum of hundred and thirty-nine dollars of no-show. That is the Nigeria we are living in. The Nigeria of Vision 2020 and 7-points agenda!

Culled from Saharareporters

President Obama Is Coming Soon!

We have heard the good news from the Foreign Affairs Minister. Dr Ojo Maduekwe noted that President Obama will be visiting Nigeria very soon. The Minister was quoted in the media saying President Obama told him at the G8 meeting (shortly before he departed for Ghana) that he wants to visit Nigeria soon. In fact he went on further to say that the US President said to him that “whichever way Nigeria goes, Africa goes”.

Following President Obama visit to Ghana last week, I have been waiting anxiously for one of President Yar’Adua’s political jobber to come of in defence of his administration. The well-deserved media criticisms were so bad that I expected his Media Adviser to come out and save the face of his boss.

I was therefore not surprised to read the comments of Dr Maduekwe that Pres. Obama is coming soon to Nigeria. It is clear that the Yar’Adua administration is very desperate to be acknowledged by the western world. No wonder the Pres. Yar’Adua lobbied the German Chancellor to be invited to the G-8 meeting. We probably need to ask ourselves, how can a country that was not fit to be part of G-20 meeting about six months ago was now been invited to the G-8 meeting?

However, I don’t think Dr Maduekwe understood Pres. Obama statement. If Pres. Obama’s statement is taken within the context of his speech in Ghana, then Dr Maduekwe will understand that there is really nothing to be excited about. For me, I find Pres. Obama’s statement as sarcastic. Meaning he was insulting the Nigerian government indirectly. What Pres. Obama was indirectly saying to Dr Maduekwe was, I will visit Nigeria, soon after you have been able to restore good governance.

Also, the question needs to be ask about the Nigerian government and the PDP obsession with Pres. Obama. Is it not the ruling party that was accusing the US govt for wanting to meet with the opposition during Pres. Obama’s visit to Ghana? I want to believe that it’s Pres. Obama prerogative to visit countries and meet people that he feels are worthwhile of his time? Instead of this government to get on with its job, they are busy lobbying and trying to grab the attention of the US President. We don’t need attention-seekers as leaders. If you do what is right, you will be noticed. As small as Botswana is, it received a well deserved recognition from the US President. I also can’t remember reading anywhere that Ghanaian diplomats were seen at the White House lobbying the US President to visit Ghana. The reason why he chose Ghana is clear, “do the right thing, and the US will do business with you”.

Again come to think of it, was President Yar’Adua not at the G-8 meeting? If Pres. Obama was really serious about visiting Nigeria, he probably would have spoken directly with the Nigerian President and not the Minister! Dr Maduekwe said “I did what a Foreign Minister of my status can do; I walked up to the President of United States and I said Mr. President, nice to meet you; I’m the Foreign Minister of Nigeria. Mr. Obama was very warm when I introduced myself. Mr. Obama held me by the shoulder. He told me, ‘thank you Mr. Minister I want to visit your country very soon”. My take on this is, Pres. Obama probably knew why Ojo Maduekwe came to introduce himself, and thought, “let me just tell this guy what he wants to hear”.

Let Pres. Yar’Adua and his cohorts not be deceived, Pres. Obama has made it clear that the US will not endorse any government that promotes tyranny and oppression. It will not support any nation that does not promote the rule of law. It is not ready to do business with regime that actively or passively encourage corruption. It will do business with a country whose Attorney-General uses international bilateral agreements to frustrate corruption cases. It will support a regime that was sponsored into government by corrupt individuals. It will not support a government, whose President’s closest friends are politicians with corruption cases hanging over their heads. The US will not support a government that cannot hold credible elections in 46 electoral wards. The US will not support a government that embarks on military actions against its citizens.

Gov. Isa Yuguda and Political Prostitution

As we know, Governor Isa Yuguda, who is also the son-in-law of President Yar’Adua, was elected as Governor of Bauchi on the platform of the ANPP in May 2007. However, on 14 April 2009 in a brief ceremony, the state Governor announced his defection to the PDP. Following his clash with All Nigeria’s People Party(ANPP) leadership over appointments into President Yar’Adua’s so-called ‘Government of National Unity, his defection did not come as a surprise to many political commentators. His celebrated marriage President Yar'adua's daughter in January this year only just confirmed the inevitable. Since Gov. Yuguda’s defection, there has been speculations about the future of his Deputy; Alhaji Garba Gadi. But in defiance to the decision of his boss, the Deputy Governor decided to stay put in ANPP.

This issue is now becoming a moving beast in Bauchi State. And according to the Thisday newspaper, the PDP led government has now reached a decision to impeach the Deputy Governor for not “defecting” from the ANPP to the PDP with his master. In fact, it was alleged that any member of Bauchi House of Assembly that signs the impeachment notice is expected to receive a sum of N10 million!

Whether the plot to impeach the Deputy Governor succeeds or not is a matter of time. The conundrum currently being faced by the Governor and lawmakers is that there is no impeachable offence been committed by the Deputy Governor. These sorts of issues only reiterate the obvious that our democracy is a sham..

When did refusal to practise ‘political prostitution’ become an impeachable offence? Whilst I’m not a supporter of the PDP or ANPP, I’m fully in support of Alhaji Gadi’s refusal to defect to the PDP. Section 188 of 1999 Constitution is very clear on the grounds, on which a Deputy Governor can be impeached. According to Section 188 (2)(b) a deputy Governor may only be removed from office if, “the holder of such office is guilty of gross misconduct in the performance of the functions of his office, detailed particulars of which shall be specified”. In desperate move to remove the Deputy Governor, I wouldn’t at all be surprised if the Governor and lawmakers conjure up something trivial. It is already been alleged that an investigation has been launched by Gov. Yuguda’s “inner caucus” into all financial approvals given by the Deputy Governor since May 2007. This is of course aimed at finding a “smoking gun”, which can be used an excuse to impeach the Deputy Governor.

Secondly, we need to ask ourselves, how can a serving Governor defect to an opposition party whilst keeping his seat? It is not the first time that elected politicians will ‘jump ship’. If I could remember, sometime ago, a member of the Senate from Lagos State also decamped to the PDP from Action for Democracy (AD) It is also important to note that Gov. Yuguda is not the first serving Governor to defect to the opposition party. The current Governor of Zamfara State also decamped from ANPP. I can only compare this attitude to daylight ‘electoral fraud’. It is bad enough that we have an electoral process that is awash with violence, intimidation, forgery etc. But how can you describe a situation, where elected politicians switch platforms. The people of Bauchi State did not vote for the PDP. And if Gov. Yuguda his confident about his popularity, he can choose to do what his honourable, resign and seek re-election under the banner of PDP.

This is what happens in a society where politicians do not have any democratic value. Our political system is awash with ‘professional’ politicians, who are devoid of modern political ideologies. These professionals will do anything to perpetuate themselves in power. What does Gov. Yuguda actually stand for? What are his political ideologies? Is he on the left or on the right? Do his principles align with that of PDP? The fact that he is the President’s son-in-law does not mean they have to share the same political ideology.

The current trend of defection by elected politicians must stop! These politicians cannot expect to eat their cake and have it. Any elected politicians that defects to another political party should be made to stand down and seek re-election. The loophole within our electoral system that allows this to happen must be plugged.

And we really need to ask ourselves, is this, what is called democracy? How can the will of a few bigots continue to be enforced on the majority? We need to rid our system of charlatans and political jobbers. They seem to have mastered the art of deception, greed and fraud. But as I always say, the clock is ticking………….

PDP - What Manner of Political Party?

On the day when everyone was feeling the excruciating pain of the last ten years of democratic rule, the nation’s ruling party Peoples Democratic Party was having a field day. Their party leaders enjoyed lavish celebration of ‘demons of craze’, across the nation. The party also seized the opportunity to display its mediocre, self-serving and propagandist ideologies.

The Deputy National Chairman PDP Dr Bello Haliru Mohammed accused the United States government and its embassy in Nigeria of conspiracy and plotting with opposition groups to destabilise the country. He particularly noted that part of the plot is for the US Embassy to organise a meeting between the pro-democracy groups in Nigeria and President Barack Obama in Ghana, where the groups would seek to persuade the US President that the administration of President Umaru Yar’Adua is “illegitimate”. But shortly after, the National Public Secretary of the party Prof. Rufai Ahmed Alkali released a media statement dissociating the party from the statement, which it said was, at best, the personal opinion of the Deputy National Chairman.

What manner of political party is this PDP? It is clear that the party has lost the plot. Their leaders are now beginning to feel the heat. Despite the rebuttal from the National Publicity Secretary I do not believe that the comments of Dr Mohammed were his ‘personal opinion’. The allegations levelled against the US government are quite serious and I want to believe it is the collective opinion of leaders of the political party. The statement reflects the thinking of a political party that is gradually losing its grip on power and in awe of the opposition. From all indications, it seems the only way they can continue to subvert the opposition is to engage a cheap blackmail and propaganda. But you know what, their time is ticking and it is ticking very fast!

I find it very ridiculous that a political party that describes itself as the biggest political party in Africa can denigrate itself to the point of blackmailing the US President and US government. We need to ask PDP leaders few questions. Firstly, is it not the prerogative of the US President to meet with whoever he chooses? Secondly, is it now a criminal offence to meet with a foreign leader outside Nigeria? Thirdly, do we now need to seek permission to hold political meetings outside Nigeria? Fourthly, is President Obama so jobless that all he thinks about is political situation in Nigeria? Maybe someone needs to remind the PDP that we do not live in Communist China or North Korea.

We also need to ask the PDP leaders what they actually mean by plot to ‘destabilise’ the country. For me, you can only destabilise a country that is ‘stable. The ruling elite must be under illusion to think that Nigeria is stable. They must be suffering from mental delusion to think this way. Is a nation that is plunged into darkness for almost 365 years is stable? Is a nation that is faced with incessant fuel scarcity stable? Is a nation where commuters spend twelve hours in traffic queue stable? Is a nation with 60% unemployment stable? Is a nation where 80% have no access to potable water supply stable? Is a nation where 70% live on less than $1 a day stable? Is a nation where state agencies are used to rig electoral process stable? Is a nation where innocent civilians are intimidated with military soldiers stable? Is a nation where state agencies are used to subvert democratic principles stable? Is a nation where political office holders are allowed to loot the treasury without any fear of prosecution stable? Is a nation where innocent civilians are killed under the guise of fighting militant groups stable? Is a nation where innocent civilians are being kidnapped stable? Is a nation where oil installations are constantly blown up militant groups stable?

And by the way, I heard President Yar’Adua saying that “we must be ready to be democrats in thought, in word and indeed”. What a big joke! He might be democratic in thoughts and words, but he has failed to demonstrate any democratic principles in his actions. The Ekiti saga is a strong indictment of his failure.

Over the last ten years, PDP has continued to systematically propagate a doctrine that only reflects the views of their selfish and corrupt political leaders.

Ten Years of Democracy - Who is The Biggest Loser?

As we mark the 10 years of democratic rule in Nigeria, the question on my mind is who has been the biggest loser in the last ten years? Unfortunately, all socio-economic indices show that the nation has been retrogressing since independence. The last ten years of civil rule has also not made any difference. In fact some will agree with me that the situation in the last ten years is worse than what it was twenty years ago. The rot in our economy and social life has continued to perpetuate - even at a faster pace! Our leaders have continued to loot the treasury with impunity.

While the failure of how our leaders will suggest that the masses are the biggest losers, I however want to disagree. Yes I agree that the masses are yet to see the dividends of democracy. Yes I agree that nation’s infrastructure are in decay. I agree that our refineries are still not working. I know we have given up on stable power supply. I know we have no potable water supply. I agree that our major highways are death traps. I know we don’t have a functioning transport system. Yes, I agree that 70% of the nation live in abject poverty. Yes, I agree that our educational system is in a mess. I will however argue that our leaders are the BIGGEST losers.

They are the ones who have failed in all aspects of life. Despite the vast human and mineral resources at their disposal, they have failed to make any meaningful positive impact on the economy. Instead of providing good leadership and governance, they continued to loot the treasury with impunity. They have used their position to rob us of our commonwealth. They have turned a nation of 140 million into a country of Oligarchs. They sold government owned enterprise to their families and cronies under the guise of privatisation. They continue to distort the market by creating private monopolies under the guise of Public-Private Partnerships.

All they know about is rhetoric. They tell us about due process and rule of law. However, they award billion dollar contracts to their cronies without any regard for due process. They squandered the nation’s resources on grandiose projects that lack any public benefit. They use the ‘rule of law’ to subvert the fight against corruption. They use taxpayers’ money for cosmetic image laundering projects. In some other society, some of our leaders will be languishing in solitary confinement.


They come up with vision and agendas that are bereft of any rational thinking. They talk about Vision 2020, in a nation that can’t get its refineries to function. Our can we a one of top 20 economies when we can’t even get the simple things right. Our can we be one of top 20 economies when we can’t even generate 1500mw of power? How can be in top 20 when industries are closing down left, right and centre due to lack of power supply? How can we be in top 20 economies when we are still importing plastic chairs from overseas? How can a nation of 60% unemployment be in the top 20 economies? How can an economy that is controlled by few private individuals be in top 20 economies?

Our leaders are a failure. They are visionless. Most of them are born losers! Some are not even fit to run a family not to talk of nation. What else do they want? We have the vast mineral resources. We enjoyed almost 10 years of oil boom. We had the opportunity to develop our human capital. Despite all these opportunities they continued to lead us on a path of destruction. All we read about in the media in the last ten years is systemic looting and thieving. They have turned the commonwealth into private possession.

Our leaders are cowards. They loot the treasury and seek court injunction to prevent them from being investigated or probed! Due to fear of been voted out of office, they continue to rig elections. They use state agencies to intimidate innocent civilians and subvert democratic principles.

It is also interesting to know that some of these leaders are now attending Harvard University to learn about leadership and governance. These are some of the delusions of Nigerian leaders. Can someone please tell them that leaders are born and not made? You do not need to attend Harvard University to become a good leader. How many of the world great leaders are alumni of Harvard University?

But in all these troubles, I can see hope. The days of these kleptomaniacs are numbered. The alarms bells are ringing. The sound of the warning signal is getting louder. Let him that has ears listen. But as they say, the dog that is destined for doom will never heed to the call of the hunter.