Hajia Turai Yar'Adua, Where Is Our N10bn?

It was in July 2009 that the former First Lady used her position to coerce prominent personalities to raise fund for the implementation of her proposed Cancer Centre in Abuja. As expected, the event recorded high turn out of private businessmen and public officers. According to media reports, a total of N10bn was realised at the event. The money raised include donations from state governors private businessmen. I recall that Gov. Babangida Aliyu made a staggering donation of N720million on behalf of the Governors forum. Messrs Aliko Dangote and Aminu Dantata also donated N1bn and N1.2bn respectively.

Fast forward to 2010. Umaru Yar’Adua is dead. Turai is back in her village in Katsina. Also, all seem to have gone quiet on the N10bn donation and proposed Cancer Centre. Up until now, there’s no single evidence to show the project has either commenced or was abandoned. No single block has been laid for the commencement of the project.

There’s also no evidence to suggest that the donors are yet to redeem their pledges. Even if some of the monies are yet to be received, I don’t think it’s too much to ask how much is in the coffers of the proposed Cancer Centre. The last time I checked, the only visible impact of the N10bn was the development of a project website (http://iccanigeria.org/index.htm). In fact the website has not been updated since June 2009.

The need for investment in the Nigerian health sector cannot be over emphasised. Without exaggeration, N10bn is a drop in the ocean, in terms of how much investment is required to turn the ailing health sector around. Millions of Nigerians die daily due to common illnesses. With specific regards to Cancer treatment, it is public knowledge that there are only four active radiotherapy centres in Nigeria, giving a ratio of one machine to about 30 million people, as against the recommended one per quarter million by the World Health Organisation.

The available spectrum of anti-cancer drugs is also very limited and such drugs are not readily available. Imaging facilities for staging patients with cancer, such as computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are difficult to come by, and when available the cost of such studies puts them out of reach of the average citizen.

It is therefore imperative that any proposal to improve and modernise the health sector are made through proper channels. For any public officer or their associates to seek donations (in form of charity) for a project that is bereft of any governance structure, smacks of criminality and it is tantamount to blatant abuse of office.

The proposal to build a Cancer centre in Abuja raises serious questions that are begging for answers. For instance, under whose ownership will the Cancer Centre be? Is it the Yar’Adua household or the Health Ministry? Who will manage the operation of the hospital? As a charity organisation, where is the ‘Board of Trustee’? And who are the members, if there’s one?

Having looked through the website of this sham Cancer Project, all I can see is a list of members of the Planning Committee, which is made up of former Federal Ministers. But now that these Ministers have been sacked, who is now responsible for planning the cancer centre? Has a new planning committee been constituted? Who are the members and how often do they meet?

Truth be told, N10bn is a lot of money in any currency. The coercion of public officers and private individuals by the first Lady for donations towards a supposed charity project itself is the height of corruption. And for her to have collected such monies without any commensurate development to show for it after almost 18 months beggars belief!

Unfortunately, ‘corruption’ has a different meaning in Nigerian context. When you talk of corruption, some folks believe it’s only when you blatantly deep your hands into the public treasury.. But I’m still searching for a jurisdiction outside Nigeria, where a first lady will collect money from donors, under the guise of charity, but refuse to undertake such a project. The question of whether it’s government money or not, is totally irrelevant. It’s any different from the Red Cross asking for donations on behalf of Haiti earthquake victims but siphoning such funds into private pockets.

If Hajia Turai was really serious about improving the health sector, why didn’t she raise funds to develop and improve the cancer units in existing government hospitals? It is my understanding that almost all government hospitals in Nigeria have a cancer unit. So what’s the point of starting afresh in Abuja. And if she wants to be tribalistic, why not develop the Ahmadu Bello University Teaching Hospital and make it ‘world-class’?

But of course she wouldn’t do that. These thieving first ladies, who usurp powers not granted to them by the constitution are just rogues. They use their position to enrich their pockets, under the guise of sham charity projects. Rather than build institutions, they take advantage of their position, as wife of head of state to build up their ‘pension’

We are now used to Nbillions donated to various pet projects at federal and state level without any commensurate result. The lifespan of such projects are only as long as the tenure of their promoters. Before, it was Maryam Babangida’s Better Life for Rural Dwellers, then came Mariam Abacha Family Support Programme, and Stella Obasanjo’s Child Care Trust. Despite the amount of donations showered on all these projects, I’m yet to see any infrastructure that has survived beyond the tenure of these women. But this trend must stop!

As for Hajia Turai, I implore her to either refund the donations she has collected or commence the Cancer Centre project without delay. And if not, I make bold to say, the blood of millions of Nigerians who have died as a result of cancer-related illness will FOREVER be on her head.

Adios Umaru Yar’Adua…..Bienvenido “Saint” Goodluck Jonathan

The shenanigans that engulfed the nation’s political landscape was brought to an abrupt end last week. The death of President Umaru Yar’Adua drew to a close, the political uncertainty that eclipsed the nation for almost six months. Whatever anyone says, one thing is certain, President Umaru Yar’Adua is gone. The questions about him turning up at next Friday’s Jumat service or jogging up and down the stairs are now history. A new chapter has now been opened in the nation’s history book from the 5 May 2010.

Whether Umaru Yar’Adua is a good or bad leader is now totally irrelevant. Engaging in endless discussions dissecting the Yar’Adua administration or personality will not put food on the table of 150 million Nigerians. Writing hypocritical and sycophantic eulogies about Umaru Yar’Adua or portraying him as “least corrupt” Nigerian President will not provide jobs for the 21 million unemployed youths roaming the streets of Lagos, Port Harcourt or Zaria. To describe Umaru Yar’Adua as an “epitome of humility” or Apostle of “Rule of Law” is now redundant statement. It’s not our tradition to speak ill of the dead, however, heaping unnecessary and hypocritical praises on the dead also makes no sense!

Our attention should therefore now be focused on the “new chapter” that is currently being written. We cannot change what is gone. However we do have an opportunity to shape the future.

We need not remind ourselves that the system that produced Umaru Yar’Adua as President is still very much alive and kicking. It’s Umaru that is dead not the “system”. And while the masses hue and cry over Yar’Adua’s death, the system is busy oiling its machinery and gearing up for the next election.

So what has changed? If Nigeria can be described as a car travelling on the highway, one can say that only thing that has changed in the last six months is the car driver. The car is still very much the same. We have a “new” reluctant driver, who seems to have no sense of direction. This new driver is been guided by the same old GPS system. The same system that has been in operation for the past 11 years, without taking us anywhere.

Since Goodluck Jonathan assumed office, praise-singers and adulators have been busy heaping praises on him. The calls for him to contest the 2011 election have been coming from left, right and centre. But, why all these unnecessary praise singing? What has Jonathan done in the last three months that makes him more worthy of the exalted office of the President than Dele Momodu or Omosule? What policy has he implemented that makes him the “messiah” we have been waiting for? Yes he reconstituted the Cabinet and “sacked” the INEC Chairman Maurice Iwu. And so! The decision to sack the Cabinet and Iwu were only coincidental with public agitations. There were not really taken in the public interest. Let’s not be deceived, Jonathan needed to break the backbone of the cabal that held sway during the Yar’Adua administration and consolidate his hold on power. Also, while he thinks about his next move, he needed to make sure that he’s in absolute control of whoever is in charge of INEC.

As I write, any criticisms of Goodluck Jonathan are now perceived by the Pro-Jonathan loyalists as symptoms of “Pull Him Down” syndrome.. When the issue of allegations of corruption against his wife, Patience, are brought to the public forum, the Jonathan apologists are always quick to remind us that “no Nigerian politician is clean”. When we ask that allegations of corruption against Patience be fully investigated, we get told that “he who is without sin should cast the first stone”(!). When we say, Goodluck Jonathan has no moral right to fight corruption, they reply, “nobody is a saint”.

I have no issues with GJ apologists, as everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. However, I find it quite nauseating that those who are not interested in the allegations of corruption against Patience Jonathan are the same people asking that James Ibori should be sentenced to death by firing squad. Those who say “he without sin….”, are the same calling for the probe of Yar’Adua cabal. These are the same people calling for the investigation of allegations of corruption against Gov. Fashola. We cannot say we want leaders with integrity, but turn around to say “no Nigerian politician is clean”. The minimum that can be demanded from any leader is “integrity”.

I heard someone say recently that “Nigerians should now be satisfied because Jonathan is now the President”. Let me say this. The clamour for transfer of power to Goodluck Jonathan was a matter of principle and not personality.. It was not about Goodluck Jonathan becoming President. Just as the June 12 pro-democracy activists will tell you that the June 12 struggle was not just about MKO Abiola. It was about support for rule of law and democratic sustainability. At that time, it was imperative that we adhere strictly to provision of the Constitution. So for anyone to make such a statement is not only patronising but insulting.

Let Goodluck Jonathan run for the office of the President if he chooses to. After all it’s his prerogative. And thank God we are in a democracy. However, one thing is clear, we are watching. Let him not use the power of incumbency as a rigging tool. Any attempt by his administration to fight corruption must be transparent and genuine. The EFCC should not once again be turned into a tool for fighting perceived political enemies. His appointment of the next INEC Chairman should not be for the sole purpose of perpetuating himself in power.

There’s no doubt, one thing Pres. Goodluck Jonathan has in his favour right now is public goodwill. It’s therefore important that it takes advantage of this, positively. There’s enough time between now and next general elections for him to lay good solid foundation for credible elections and infrastructure development. If he provides decent power supply and appoints credible people at INEC, Nigerians – irrespective of tribe and religion – will line up behind him come 2011.

The question on everyone’s lips now is, will this new driver dump the GPS system and take us to a new destination? You will have to agree with me that the new driver himself was a passenger cum co-driver. He had no plan to be in the car in the first place, hence his reluctance to take over when the car was about to crash. So taking an independent decision devoid of interference from the GPS system will be a tall order.

Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan Sworn In As 14th President of Nigeria

Watch Video

Political Symbiosis of President Umaru Yar'Adua's Illness

I started writing this piece sometime last week, but abandoned it half way. My view was that the political impasse may take a different dimension following Wednesday’s Executive Council of the Federation (EXCOF) meeting,


With the changing political landscape, there’s always the risk of your post/article been obsolete even before you press the ‘save’ button on your computer keyboard. However, the events of the last 48hrs reinforced my thinking.

The huge expectation that Cabinet Ministers and the Acting President, Goodluck Jonathan will go for the “kill” at Wednesday’s EXCOF meeting did not come as a surprise. Following the international support the Acting President has garnered over the last few days, many expected him to consolidate his hold on power and move the nation forward. It was clear that the only way he could do this would have been seek the support the EXCOF members in declaring Pres. Yar’Adua incapacitated and thus, invoke s144 of the Constitution.

Prior to the EXCOF meeting, we heard the comments of the Gov Bukola Saraki-led Governors Forum and Prince Vincent Ogbulafor, PDP Chairman. Whilst the Governors Forum concluded that ‘impeachment’ of Pres. Yar’Adua is not an option, the PDP Chairman stated categorically that the Acting President should forget about nursing any ‘presidential’ ambition in 2011, as the presidential ticket has been conceded to the North, to maintain PDP’s power rotation agreement!

So, reading between the lines, any “proposal or memo” (if it exists) calling for the declaration of President Yar’Adua as incapacitated was “dead on arrival”. In fact there was no incentive for the Acting President or any member of the Cabinet to raise the issue. Let’s not forget, most of the Ministers were nominated by their State governors. So we can only expect that they tow the line of their benefactor, by remaining loyal to President Yar’Adua and burying their heads in the sand.

The sudden return of the President Yar’Adua, like a contraband item, was a clear demonstration of the cabal’s intent to hold to power by all means. And by noting “cabal”, I’m not just referring to President Yar’Adua’s “kitchen cabinet”.

So what is a cabal? a “cabal” is a number of people greater than two together in some close design, usually to promote their private views and interests in a church, state, or other community, often by intrigue. The term can also be used to refer to the designs of such persons or to the practical consequences of their emergent behavior, and also holds a general meaning of intrigue and conspiracy. (Wikipedia)

In the current political climate, the word “cabal” has somewhat become synonymous with the first lady Turai, former AGF Aondoakaa, Sayyad Ruma, Tanimu Yakubu and other Pro-Yar’Adua members in the federal cabinet. But the fact is, the cabal steering the ship of the nation extends beyond the Pres. Yar’Adua’s kitchen cabinet and his loyal wife Hajia Turai..

What we are currently witnessing is a grand conspiracy between three key groups.,. Although these groups have different personal interests (money, power etc), they are working in unison to achieve a common objective.

The common objective shared by these groups, encourages a symbiotic relationship that only helps further their selfish interests. It’s clear that none of these groups can work in isolation. They both need one another to stay on top of the current political game. These groups are the “kitchen cabinet”, with Turai Yar’Adua as its matron, the “People’s Democratic Party (PDP)” and the “Northern elites”. Interestingly, there are few members whose share the same interests with more than group.

Their actions could be described as three Captains on the same ship, with different sailing skills but aiming for the same destination. The argument that that you cannot have more than one Captain on a ship does not hold in this instance.

These Captains all have a stake in this “sinking” ship (albeit self), and it’s in their interest to work collectively to save the ship from sinking. So the least they can do is to offer their different skills set and talents to save the ship from sinking. There is no ambiguity in their mandate. It is crystal clear – save the ship from sinking and sail it to its final destination..

Now back to the Nigerian political cabal, the common objective of the three power groups is to make sure that Umaru Yar’Adua remains in power until at least 2011. It doesn’t matter how this is achieved, even if it means locking him up in a mobile ambulance or being plugged to a life support machine. As a result of their desperation, they have effectively turned the gravely sick President. Umaru Yar’Adua into a “collateral”.

So what are the interests of these power groups?

As for the Hajia Turai and her cohorts in the kitchen cabinet, their personal interest is just to use the mandate of Umaru Yar’Adua to amass personal wealth. These are people that have been shot into fame by virtue of been close friends of Umaru Yar’Adua. As they have nothing to lose, they might as well exploit the political impasse for as long as they can. After which they can all retire to their farms in Katsina and Kano.

As for the PDP, it’s in the interest of the party to maintain some form of stability before the 2011 elections. With 2011 elections around the corner, the last thing the ruling party wants is a division at the national level. So for now, the centre must hold.. And it’s for this simple reason that the PDP Chairman Vincent Ogbulafor has come out openly to foreclose any chance of Goodluck Jonathan seeking nomination in 2011.

The Northern elites are also keen to make sure that “unconstitutional” power rotation agreement is maintained. Already some of these elites are feeling shortchanged by the decision of former President. Obasanjo to impose an ailing president on them. So they will do anything it takes to sustain their grip on power.

A Goodluck Jonathan presidency is more than likely to disrupt the current power rotation agreement. And again, how can the northern elites be sure that Goodluck Jonathan will not seek to contest the presidential elections in 2011 if he’s appointed “substantive” President. With executive power at his disposal, he can never be trusted. With the “absolute” power enjoyed by the Nigerian president I for one will not hold my breath.

The uneventful outcome of Wednesday’s EXCOF meeting lends credence to the symbiotic relationship between these power groups. These power groups have successfully scuttled any plan to change the status quo. And as along as the Acting President carries on with his mandate of being a ‘social prefect’, we can expect more presidential instructions from the mobile ambulance.

The question now is, for how long we will continue to fold our hands and allow this dangerous symbiotic relationship to flourish among the cabals? Our destiny is now decided by a handful of political jobbers sitting in a beer parlour. They have continued to subvert democratic principles through unconstitutional zoning system.

Without any doubt, the Nigerian masses are the biggest losers of this conspiracy. This conspiracy also portends doom for 2011. We need to remember that the man at the centre of the machinations, Goodluck Jonathan still remains part and parcel of the ruling party. Whether he likes it or not, he has an obligation to make sure the ruling perpetuates itself in power. It’s therefore bad news for my friends clamouring for electoral reforms, anti-corruption etc. As long as Goodluck Jonathan remains under the tutelage of Vincent Ogbulafor and co, nothing ‘good’ can come out of his leadership.

From all indication, it seems we are stuck with the contraband presidency until 2011. Anyway God dey sha!.

Contraband Presidency - Security Alert!!!!

The attention of Association of Nigerian Online Militants has been drawn to the smuggling of a contraband item into the country from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The package was flown into the country on a white unregistered aircraft. It arrived at presidential wing of the Nnamdi Azikwe International Airport on early hours of Wednesday morning, at about 1.30am.


According to sources, the unregistered aircraft carrier landed at the Abuja airport in the company of the presidential jet. It is unknown at this stage if there were other passengers on board both aircrafts.

It is believed that the contraband package was smuggled into the country with the aid of “unknown” soldiers. From our preliminary investigations, these unknown soldiers are alleged to have been deployed from the Nigerian Army 22nd Battalion Brigade. The soldiers took charge of the airport, while the staff were given marching orders.

As we know, President Umaru Yar’Adua is currently comatose; it is therefore unclear on whose orders the soldiers were acting. The Acting President has also denied any knowledge of any troops deployment.

The contraband package was alleged to have been transferred from the White unregistered aircraft to a White Ford E-250 bullion van. The last sighting of this bullion van was around the Presidential Villa at Aso Rock.

It is clear from all indication that, this is a well orchestrated crime. The perpetrators of this heinous crime are likely to be highly placed influential Nigerians. The audacity with which the smuggling was carried out is unprecedented in the history of our country.

Up until now, the location and content the contraband package remains unknown. The Nigerian online militants considers smuggling as a threat to the national security. In view of this, all security agencies across the nation have been notified. The nation’s borders have also been put on high alert.

The Nigerian Online Militants are particularly interested in the location of the White bullion van and its content. If anyone has any information on its whereabouts please contact your nearest internet militant via Facebook or Twitter.

We urge members of the public to remain calm. In your own interest, please do not approach the driver of this vehicle as he may be carrying dangerous weapon.

Signed

Association of Nigerian Online Militants (ANOM)

Blogosphere

Unnecessary "Necessity"

After weeks of dilly dallying, the Senate decided to act on the nation’s political impasse. A resolution was passed by the Upper House to recognise the Vice-President, Goodluck Jonathan as the nation’s ‘Acting President’. It’s right to say that the Senate action has not been short of controversies. While some consider the action of the Senate unconstitutional, the Senate itself and some other public observers believe the action was ‘expedient’. The Senate has tried to justify its action on the basis of political expediency and “doctrine of necessity”.

So what is “doctrine of necessity”?

According to the Senate President,

"The doctrine of necessity requires that we do what is necessary when faced with a situation that was not contemplated by the Constitution….Viewed from an ordinary reading of Section 145, we came to the conclusion that the President, through his declaration transmitted on the BBC, has furnished this parliament with irrefutable proof that he is on medical vacation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and has therefore complied with the provisions of Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution. For avoidance of doubt, let me re-emphasise the import of prayer two of our resolution. The President will automatically resume office as President and Commander-in-Chief once he is well enough and returns to the country and informs us accordingly, pursuant to Section 145".

By definition, the “Doctrine of Necessity” is a common law rule, which allows judges to do justice in situations not envisaged by specific provisions of the law. It is also regarded as a legal principle that justifies a person’s action in an emergency that he or she did not create. Although it is generally agreed that the doctrine of necessity in itself is not ‘illegal’ in law, its application by the legislative assembly remains controversial.

I’m not convinced by the statement of the senate president, claiming that the current situation wasn’t contemplated by the constitution. If that’s the case, then what’s the purpose of Section 145 of the 1999 constitution? To say that Section 145 is imprecise is probably a better argument than saying, "situation wasn’t contemplated by the constitution”.


In my opinion, the action of the legislative assembly raises more questions than answers. Why did it take the Senate, 79 days to come up with a solution – albeit controversial? This is the same legislative assembly that told 140 million Nigerians just few weeks ago that its hands were tied. So have their hands suddenly been let loose? Or have they only just realised that it would be politically expedient for them to take an action?

The question also needs to be asked about why the Senate resolution was passed just before the Federal Executive Council had the opportunity to discuss the much publicised memo by the Minister for Information, Dora Akunyili.

For now, it seems everyone is happy. And as they say, “the end justifies the means”. But whilst the Senate might have successfully plugged the power vacuum in the interim, their action has not in anyway addressed the key issues around the health status of President Yar’Adua. Unfortunately, the nation is now carried away by the euphoria of power transfer to Goodluck Jonathan.

I will like to draw everyone’s attention to the loophole in the Senate resolution. The Senate noted that “President Yar’Adua will automatically resume office as President and C-in-C, once he is well enough and returns to the country and informs us accordingly, pursuant to Section 145”. So what exactly is the Senate definition of “well enough”? If they do not have a full understanding of the president’s health status, how can they determine if he is well enough to return to work? It’s like trying to determine how fast a car can travel without any test drive.

Also, let’s assume President Yar’Adua returns to Nigeria next week, who will certify his fitness? Will the Senate set up a panel to determine his fitness? We should also bear in mind that the constitution does not stipulate the minimum health requirement of the president.

For me, the Senate resolution makes mockery of the relevant provisions in the nation’s constitution. Instead of rushing to pass the controversial resolution, the Senate should have exerted pressure on the FEC to investigate the president’s health status. The memo presented by the Minister for Information should have been allowed to be debated. Failing this, the Senate can then pass the resolution. And then we can talk about ‘doctrine of necessity’.

The Dora Akunyili Memo

STATE OF THE NATION

1. I want to start my humble submission by stating that I am a 100 per cent loyalist of President Yar’Adua. He appointed all of us because he trusts us and wants us to help him to run government effectively and efficiently. Mr. President has given all of us seated in this chamber the opportunity to serve our nation as members of this council.

I believe that in the choice of all of us, as individuals and group, Mr. President must have considered our ability to guide him aright to serve our people better, promote and protect the constitution in line with the oath of office taken before him in this chamber by each and every one of us. President Yar’Adua is very dear to me just as he is to all of you.

2. We are all aware of what has been happening in Nigeria, especially as it concerns the issue of making the Vice President an acting President. There have been debates for and against.

3. Some have argued that there is no vacuum and that it is okay for the Vice President to function as Vice President, not as Acting President pending the return and recovery of Mr. President. For the proponents of this theory, I want to remind them that Permanent Secretaries had been waiting to be sworn in for over two months now. Consequently, many ministries are without Permanent Secretaries including my ministry.

As it is today, the Vice President cannot take any document to National Assembly. In a very desperate situation like the recent Jos crisis, the Vice President deployed troops to Plateau, but many have openly said that he does not have the right because there cannot be two Commanders-in-Chief at a time.

4. Just recently, Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta, MEND, has opted out of the amnesty and resumed hostility. They argued that they have been kept in limbo since the President took ill and they appeared to have been abandoned since nobody could talk to them or keep the promise made to them. Our economy is once more being threatened.

5. The past Chief Justice of the Federation swore in his successor for the first time in the history of our nation. The power vacuum at that level has also compounded our ‘poor image’ at the international level because of our failure to rise to international expectations, commitments and engagements that require the presence of our President.

Many of those opportunities have existed in the past 70 days that I do not need to recount. I do not need to repeat the uncomplimentary statements made by United States, United Kingdom and EU concerning the current state of affairs in Nigeria .

6. There has been persistent agitation by the public for members of the Federal Executive Council to do something. Nigerians expect us to rise to this challenge on behalf of our President as the leader of this administration. Some eminent citizens have spoken. They include former Heads of State and others who have served our nation in various capacities.

The Senate has also taken a position of which we are all aware. The looming crisis in the system is over boiling. Our hard earned democracy is being threatened by the day.

Threat to democracy

7. What went wrong? We love our President but we should remember that he is not infallible. Before he left Nigeria he had a moral and constitutional obligation to officially inform the Senate and hand over the mantle of leadership to the Vice President pending his return and recovery. That did not happen. Yes, the mistake has been made by our Boss and our brother.

Mr. President is ill and did not choose to be sick. But while we continue to pray for his recovery, we should try to right the wrong.

8. Some have argued that he left the country in a hurry. This argument has been punctured by the fact that he signed the Appropriation Bill for National Assembly. If he could sign the Bill, why did he not sign a letter for Vice President to act on his behalf until he is well enough?

9. We have a local proverb that says that "A goat does not get strangulated by the rope used in tying it when an adult is present." We are all in a better position to know that the polity is overheated to a frightening level. Posterity will judge us harshly if we do not positively intervene to resolve this logjam.

10. I wish to call on the Federal Executive Council to act now in the best interest of our dear President and our dear Nation.

We also need to save ourselves from shame because our stand is becoming very embarrassing. He has been away for about 70 days now, even if he returns tomorrow, is it not better for him to rest and recover before taking over from the Vice President?

11. We need to do what is morally right and constitutional for the President to officially hand over to the Vice President to function as Acting President. If he does not, we can evoke whichever aspect of the constitution that should make the Vice President an Acting President.

On the other hand we can take advantage of the 14 days ultimatum by the court which will expire on Friday. When the President resumes duty as soon as he recovers, by the grace of God, he takes over his position.

12. I am not saying that President Yar’Adua should resign or condemn him for being sick. He did not choose to be sick. We will continue to pray for him, but all I am saying is, let us encourage him do the right thing so that our hard earned democracy will not be truncated. Anybody who feels otherwise is unfair to our President (who has been preaching the rule of law), and utterly unfair to our country.

13. The name of our President and all his achievements are being rubbished by this unfortunate debacle. The President and his family are also being put under undue pressure which will not help his recovery.

14. If we fail to act now, history will not forgive us. I rest my case.





Professor Dora Akunyili

"Missing President" - A Case for Constitution Review

The Abuja Federal High Court, yesterday declared that Vice President Jonathan Goodluck is “empowered by the 1999 Constitution to exercise, in the absence of President Umaru Yar’Adua, all the powers vested in him, including signing of sensitive documents, so far such powers are delegated to him”.

Justice Dan Abutu made the pronouncement while interpreting sections 5(1) and 148 (1) of the 1999 constitution in a suit brought by a lawyer, Mr. Christopher Onwuekwe. Mr Onwuekwe had asked the high court to declare that “in absence of the President Umaru Yar’Adua, the Vice President, by virtue of the provisions of Section 5(1) and 148 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, could exercise all the powers vested in the President in the interest of peace, order and good governance pending when his boss, Yar’Adua, would resume office.

In his judgement, Justice Abutu noted that both sections 5(1) and 148 (1) are clear about how the president can transfer to the Vice President or any of the cabinet member. However it did not specify the manner or the procedure through which Mr. President could delegate any of the presidential powers.

So in simple terms, the Vice President could be instructed via a simple phone call from Saudi Arabia to sign the 2010 Budget Appropriation Bill. In fact the Judge went further that it’s no one’s prerogative to query the mode of transfer of power to the Vice President (!). In the current situation where it is rumoured that the president is comatose, how can anyone be sure that the president is actually passing instructions. Another implication of the judgement is that it indirectly legitimises the “unofficial” role of the First Lady as a conduit between president and cabinet members, since no one can challenge the ‘mode of power transfer’.

Whether good or bad, the current political impasse has helped underline the ambiguity in the nation’s constitution. And from the events of the last few weeks, I have come to a conclusion that when you are dealing with Nigerian issues, matters of legal importance need to be spelt out in ‘black and white’. You cannot afford to have grey areas, because if you do, it will be exploited to its maximum as we are currently experiencing.

The truth is, as things currently stand, President Umaru Yar’Adua has not breached any provisions in the 1999 constitution. I’m sure some would ask, what’s this guy talking about?. Whilst it might sound harsh, that is the blunt truth.

There is nothing in the constitution about how much time the president can spend overseas, just as the Deputy Senate President said recently. So as far as the constitution goes, President Yar’Adua can stay in Saudi Arabia as long as he likes. Also, just as the Attorney-General once said, the constitution does not state that the president has to be physically present in Nigeria to rule the country. This means, President. Yar’Adua can continue to rule Nigeria from Saudi Arabia until kingdom come. In fact there is nothing stopping us from voting for an offshore president, if we so decide, in 2011. If people can contest and win elections while in prison, how much more having a ‘President in Diaspora’.

Also, we have been told many times by the Yar’Adua apologists that there is nowhere in the constitution where it is mandated that the President has to handover to his deputy. Whilst some might not agree, it is the fact. The president is not obliged by the constitution to do so. This could easily be interpreted as been discretionary.

Even on the issue of incapacitation of the president, the constitution does not clearly articulate what it means to be incapacitated. And like I wrote in one of my previous articles, does lying on a hospital bed mean been incapacitated? Or is it being brain-damaged? Or is it when you are in coma? Some might say these are trivial questions of which you can apply common sense. But as we all know, ‘common sense is not always common’. When an individual is allowed too much discretion, you cannot expect him/her not to exercise the discretion in his/her favour.

So the question is, how do we prevent a repetition of the current political crisis? You need not to be a Professor of constitutional law or political science to know that the nation’s constitution needs wholesale review. And when I say constitution review, I’m not talking about opportunity for state creation or tenure elongation. The loopholes currently being exploited needs to be plugged, as a matter of urgency. Legislative provisions need to be set in black and white, since it has become apparent that our political leaders cannot be trusted with the use of discretion. If it takes having clauses that limit the duration of the president’s absence, so be it!

The power to investigate the health status of the President should not rest solely on the Executive. The national assembly should be given powers to initiate such investigation. For me, vesting such powers on the Executive represents a major conflict of interest. Most, if not all, members of the federal executive council are the loyalists to the president. So how can anyone expect them to launch an investigation that could ultimately result I them losing their jobs.

Don’t get me wrong, there is no perfect constitution. You must be living in utopia to want to have a perfect constitution. Like every legal document, it can never be fool-proof. But at the same time, there is no point having a constitution that is not ‘fit for purpose’. Irrespective of how the current crisis is resolved, there is a growing urgent need for a wholesale review of the constitution. We cannot afford a repetition of the current political impasse. A situation where a nation’s president will go missing for 50 days is totally unacceptable in any jurisdiction. Nigeria is not a banana republic.

A Shameful Act - NEXT Editorial

And on the 50th day, they did nothing.

Our national legislators met yesterday in our benighted capital, and promptly decided they needed not pronounce on the fact that our president has vanished from our shores for 50 straight days.

It is rapidly becoming a kind of macabre joke, or at least a rich subject for sarcasm, were the fate of 150 million people not directly tied to it.
It is 50 days. Do you know where/how/what your president is?
As thousands of citizens filled the streets of Abuja yesterday, demanding action on an absentee president, the expensively maintained members of our National Assembly met in their first session, after a prolonged holiday, to declare that it was unimportant to even discuss what to do about a president who is no longer able to perform his duties. Other than to send a delegation to Saudi Arabia, all the while making clear that they will leave any real action to a cabinet that has so far shown no inclination to live up to its constitutional duties.

Instead, they wanted to divert themselves with something called "anti-terrorism" measures. Or where to find your lost dog Bingo. Or whatever.

Anything, it appeared, but the most urgent matter at hand-a dangerous leadership vacuum created by the indefinite absence of a critically ill and incapable president, who is believed to be suffering multiple organ failures, brain damage, cognitive dissonance, and is alarmingly emaciated.


Let us be very clear: Umaru Yar'Adua, decent man though he is, and sympathetic though we are to him personally and to his family, is no longer able to discharge the functions of the presidency. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar and should produce the president for the world to see.
We at NEXT take no pride at all in the personal travails of the president. If anything, we would love nothing more than for him to somehow magically be restored to full health so that he can function effectively as president. He seems to be a decent enough man, at least compared to most in our political leadership. And it may not have been entirely his fault that his exit from Abuja in late November has created such a mess. After all, he is critically ill, and perhaps we could not have expected that he had the time, or the wits, to have prepared a formal letter to the Senate President announcing his absence and the appointment of his deputy to act during his absence.

But that having happened, we are left in the hands of a sinister cabal hell-bent on ruling the country from the shadows, for no other discernible purpose than self gain. This cabal,led by First Lady Turai Yar'Adua, has successfully kept the president from public view, curtailed any meaningful access to him by responsible officers of state, and chosen to dole out instructions supposedly emanating from the president. The last time this happened anywhere in the world, the Soviet Union was still in existence. We are worse that a banana republic; we are a butt of jokes in any part of our civilised world.

But instead of responsible organs of state and those that lead them standing up to clean up the mess left by Mr. Yar'Adua, we have had a failure of courage from virtually all sectors of our national political leadership.


The first and most obvious has been Mr. Yar'Adua's cabinet,which the constitution presumes will be populated largely by women and men of some character and patriotism, and therefore could be trusted to declare the president medically incapacitated so that Vice President Goodluck Jonathan could take over with some measure of orderliness until the next election.

Fat chance.

Then yesterday we faced the farce in the National Assembly,

presided over by the spineless and unpatriotic duo of David Mark, the Senate president,and Dimeji Bankole, the Speaker of the House. Both arms of the national legislature effectively said it was not important enough even to debate the issue. The political opposition, of course, is largely mealy-mouthed and has so far provided no concrete example of leadership around which the nation could rally.

Finally, we have political leaders, former President Olusegun Obasanjo prominent among them, who have proved most cowardly and unworthy.

What we have left are citizens, on whom we now call to express their justifiable outrage and disgust by saying, enough. Please sign our electronic petition on our web site, 234NEXT.com. Let a million voices be heard.

Article culled from NEXT  Newspaper.
Cartoon culled from Vanguard Newspaper

The House of Yar'Adua and Political Sycophancy

The pace of events since my last piece on the state of health of President Umar Yar’Adua has been extraordinary. If nothing, the events of the last few days have confirmed that President Umar Yar’Adua is not short of supporters and sympathisers in the political space. Most of whom can be aptly described as political sycophants. I have always found the continuous thoughtless praise of President Yar’Adua in the face of his ‘gross incompetence’ very sickening.


Sycophancy is not new phenomenon in our nation’s history. Even at the point of death, it will be stupid not to expect that some political jobbers and adulators will keep urging the President to carry on. These cheerleaders are neither acting in the interest of nation nor their ‘masters’. The motive behind this deceit is to use their master to perpetuate their own evil agenda. But as the Yorubas will say, “anyone who allows his/her head to be used to crack a coconut will never live eat it”

Despite acknowledging for the first time that it had no clue on the President’s return, the nation highest ruling body, Federal Executive Council (FEC), stuck to its guns not to yield to public clamour for the President resignation. And just when you think, the impoverished masses have not suffered enough from bout of hunger; the Minister for Information had the guts to tell Nigerians to embark on fasting. What a nonsense!

The comments of the FEC calling for ‘prayer and fasting’ on President Yar’Adua’s behalf is not only condescending but smacks of hypocrisy. Yes, people can fast and prayer for the President’s quick recovery. In fact some may choose to move to the mountain top in order to be closer to God, as that help hasten their prayer request. But truth be told, that has nothing to do with adhering to the provisions of the constitution.

Now it almost 19 days since the President went AWOL – albeit to receive medical treatment. But the questions remain, is it prayer and fasting that will help launch an investigation into the state of the President’s health? Is it prayer and fasting that will help determine if the President is incapacitated or not? Or is the FEC waiting for a ‘vision’ from heaven to inform their next course of action? As I write, it’s been reported by one of the local media that President Yar’Adua has lost his voice. For me, any call for prayer and fasting by the ruling elite is just a diversionary tactic.

We’ve also heard a member of President Umaru Yar’Adua, Hajia Binta Kuraje, rising to the defence of her brother. According to her, “The President has the ability and capacity to lead the country for another 16 years.” The lady was even bold enough to describe those calling for the President’s resignation as ‘corrupt’ because they are opposed the government anti-graft war.

Can someone please ask the Yar’Adua family what the govt anti-graft war got to do with this? I will be surprised if Binta Kuraje understands the meaning of ‘corruption’. Who is corrupt between a man (and his wife) that is intoxicated with power, and will do all it takes to hold on to it – despite his ill health, and a suffering masses calling for his resignation. And again, who says President Yar’Adua holds the monopoly on anti-corruption?

If Binta Kuraje does not know, “it is only when a man is alive that he can aspire to greater things”. Without fear of contradiction, I will say to the Yar’Adua family that the nation does not need 16 years of Umar’s presidency. Personally, I don’t care if Umar Yar’Adua is as agile as a monkey, because his first two years in office has demonstrated nothing but incompetence and lack of basic understanding of the requirements of his office. To put it in simple terms, President Umar Yar’Adua just does not get it. Period!

For how long will 150 million Nigerians be held to ransom by the ‘House of Yar’Adua’ and its political sycophants?

Let the House of Yar’Adua and all its political sycophants be told, Nigeria is bigger than any individual, household or ethnic group. This nation cannot afford a President that imposes a huge liability on its social and economic development. This nation cannot afford leadership through proxy. We do not want an absentee leader. We are not interested in a leader that will be ruling by proxy. We are not interested in a leader that will be passing instructions from a sick bed in far away Saudi Arabia.

President Umar Yar'Adua: Ill Health or Gross Misconduct?

It’s been 12 days since President Umar Yar’Adua’s abrupt departure from Nigeria, and public opinion remains divided over his sudden disappearance due to ill health.

Many believe the President should step down due to his ill health, which they perceive is having a huge impact on his performance. Such people are of the opinion that relevant provisions of the constitution should be invoked, and the Vice-President should take over the country leadership. This opinion is been championed by a group of 52 eminent personalities (G-52), who have recently signed a petition calling for the President’s resignation.

On the other hand, we have the Pro-Yar’Adua group. This group believe that the call for the President’s resignation is unconstitutional and short of ‘treason’. At this stage, it is reasonable to say the Federal Executive Council (FEC) is at the fore front of this campaign.

Whatever anyone’s opinion, the ongoing saga raises two important issues that should not be confused. The first issue is the failure of President to hand over to the V-P prior to his departure. The second issue is regarding his state of health and ability to discharge the functions of his office.

Interestingly, everyone calling for the President resignation seems to be quoting from S.144 of the 1999 Constitution. However, I do not think it is as ‘clear cut’ as these people make it. The procedure for removal of a President on health grounds is quite arduous.

Section 144 says (in summary) “the President shall cease to hold office, if (a) a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of all the members of the FEC declare that he/she is incapable of discharging the functions of his office”, and (b) the declaration is verified, through medical examination by a medical panel established by the Senate President”.

But what we forget is that, the constitution does not define what is meant by been ‘incapable’. Does incapable mean being hospitalised? And if that’s the case, for how long does the President have to be in the hospital before he can be classified as ‘incapable’? Or does ‘incapable’ mean failure to attend FEC meetings? Also let’s not forget, the minimum health requirements for the post of President are not published anywhere.

Even if the President undergoes a medical examination as requested by the G-52, it will have to be assessed by a Panel. I’m not a medical expert, but I know from personal experience that interpretation of medical assessments can be subjective’. What Doctor X considers ‘serious’ might just be seen as ‘benign’ by Doctor Y. So for a panel to agree on such matters will be challenging. Also, let’s not forget that the Panel will be put together by the Senate President, who is also a member of the ruling party.

As for the President’s failure to hand to his V-P, I think there is a compelling case for the National Assembly to take necessary action. It is an abuse of office and irresponsible for a nation’s President to travel out of the country- without a definite return date – and not handover to his Vice-President.

But will the National Assembly rescue the nation from this political/leadership logjam? Your guess is as good as mine. We have heard the Deputy Senate President saying the President Yar’Adua can stay in Saudi Arabia for as long as he likes. In his words,

“The Constitution did not make provision for how long a President can stay out of the country and then he will would lose his job. There is no such provision in our constitution. So, if he spends one year abroad, of course, you have a Vice-President, who will be acting in his place…”

It is absolutely nonsensical for the Deputy Senate President to make such a statement. Yes the constitution does not stipulate the maximum length of time the President can be out of the country. But Section 145 states

“Whenever the President transmits to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration that he is proceeding on vacation or that he is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary such functions shall be discharged by the Vice-President as Acting President”.

The failure of the President to formally notify the National Assembly and hand over to his V-P, means technically, we do not have an Acting President. The fact remains that a leadership vacuum has been created by President Yar’Adua’s indiscretion. If the National Assembly does not see this as an act of ‘gross misconduct’, then we may as well move the seat of power to King Faisal Hospital in Jeddah.

The country is now at a crossroad. We have a President who is laying helplessly on the sick bed in far away Saudi Arabia. Back at home, governance seems to have grounded to a halt.

The V-P has no official mandate to act as President. The Federal Executive Council has decided to bury its head in the sand. And the National Assembly has told us categorically that the President can decide to live in Saudi Arabia for the rest of his tenure.

So where does the hope lie in all these? Who will break this political stalemate?

A National Call on President Umar Yar'Adua to Step Down

December 1, 2009




Press Statement

PRESIDENT YA'ADUA'S HEALTH CONDITION AND THE STATE OF THE NATION


It is clear to every discerning observer that President Umaru Yar'Adua's physical condition has had a negative impact on his ability to discharge the functions of the highest office in our nation. Within the last few months, he has been unable to attend to crucial affairs of the State at home and abroad and whenever he has found time to do so, his judgment appears impaired by his ill-health.


A few examples may suffice:


i. His health condition has necessitated several medical trips abroad but he has not transmitted to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration that he was proceeding on vacation or that he is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office as required by Section 145 of the Constitution.


ii. President Yar'adua though invited was unable to attend the United nations General Assembly for which a private audience had been arranged between him and President Obama for high level discussions of issues mutually beneficial to Nigeria and the United States because he was in Saudi Arabia to 'open a university' which was a dummy sold to cover up his treatments.


iii. It is also common knowledge that the incapacity of the president has affected the implementation of the nation’s budget because he has been unable to coordinate the management of the national economy and to preside over the Federal Executive Council in a diligent manner.


iv In the circumstance, Ministers have routinely flouted the orders of the President and engaged in infighting as a direct result in the vacuum of leadership. This was recently embarrassingly exposed to the world with the series of conflicting public statements credited to the Attorney General and the Chair person of the EFCC. This was also exposed further when the president disavowed knowledge of a memo to all foreign missions purportedly on his instructions. Furthermore, till date, ministers continue to flout the public instruction of the president that ministers who presented memos at the FEC should stay behind to brief the media.


v You may also recall that a battery of doctors complete with their paraphernalia escorted the president to the National Assembly last year to stand by as he delivered the budget and you may also recall that some pundits have revealed that the crisis between the Senate and the house on who should host the budget delivery by the president was contrived to provide an escape for the president who was reportedly physically unable to perform this formal task.


vi Finally, the current condition of the president has created a dangerous situation whereby no one is in charge of the affairs of the State contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution.


As responsible and concerned individuals from every part of Nigeria, we call on President Umaru Yar'Adua to immediately choose the honorable option of either:


(a) resigning his office immediately, or


(b) if he is confident of his true physical condition, request the Federal Executive Council to pass a resolution pursuant to Section 144 (1) of the Constitution to the effect that the President appears incapable of discharging the functions of his office. This honorable step will enable the Senate President to appoint a Medical Panel to confirm the fitness or otherwise of the President to continue in office.


As President Yar'Adua's compatriots and part of his larger Nigerian family, we sympathize with him and believe that his health should be given priority attention. At the same time, the need to provide effective governance for this nation of over 150 million people cannot be compromised. Indeed, the Constitution has rightly envisaged the situation in which the country has found itself..


In any event, we are of the view that the President should immediately and unconditionally hand over to the Vice-President, Dr Goodluck Jonathan to complete the current term of office, and conduct the next general elections on the basis of the report of the electoral reform committee headed by Justice Mohammed Lawal Uwais.


Signed:


(1) Alhaji Balarabe Musa (2) Chief Olu Falae (3) Senator Ken Nnamani (4) Alhaji Aminu Masari (5) Lt. Gen. Alani Akinrinade (Rtd) (6) Chief John Odigie Oyegun (7) Dr. Tunji Braithwaite (8) Col. Abubakar Umaru (Rtd) (9) Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN) (10) Alhaji Buba Galadima (11) Hon. Olawale Oshun (12) Dr. Usman Bugaje (13) Alhaji Adamu Maina Waziri (14) Mallam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai (15) Mr. Femi Falana (16) Mr. Yinka Odumakin (17) Alhaji Sadiq Yar’Adua (18) Hon. Adamu Farouk Aliyu (19) Chief Jos Ayomike (20) Hajia Naja’atu Muhammeed (21) Dr (Mrs) Joe Okei-Odumakin (22) Ms. Annkio Briggs (23) Mrs. Jumoke Anifowose (24) Chief Supo Shonibare (25) Mr. Odia Ofeimun (26) Hon. Lawal Garuba (27) Mr. Biodun Sowunmi (28) Hon (Dr) Ishaq Kurufi  (29) Hon. Uche Onyeagocha (30) Hon. Bashir Idrs Nadabo (31) Mr. Kayode Ogundamisi  (32) Saint George Eke (33) Mr. Bamidele Aturu (34) Prof. Sola Adeyeye (35) Mr. Osita Okechukwu (36) Hon (Dr) Haruna Yerima (37) Ms Ayo Obe (38) Mr. Akintoye Branco-Rhodes (39) Hon. (Dr) Almajiri Gaidam (40) Alhaji Amitolu Shittu (41) Mallam Uba Sani (42) Barrister Supo Ojo (43) Barrister Sani Hussaini Garun-Gabbas (44) Mr. Festus Okoye (45) Mallam Salihu Lukman (46) Dr Pat Itomi (47) Mr. Adetokunbo Mumuni (48) Alhaji Kabir Yahaya (49) Hon. Awwal Tukur  (50) Mallam Tanko Yinusa (51) Mallam Nasir Kura (52) Achike Chude (53) Mr. Iboroma Akpana (54) Mr. Morakinyo Ogele

The Ailing Leader - A Suitable Case for Occupational Medicine

The ongoing health saga of Pres. Umar Yar’Adua begs the question of whether prospective political office holders should be made to undergo ‘occupational health assessment’. During the course of my reading, I came across an article on this subject.

So what are your views of this issue? Do you agree that our leaders should be made to undergo health assessment?

The article goes thus,

The public is, of course, interested in the details of the personal lives of heads of state, even if it is in a spirit of prurience and directed more towards stars and royals. Illness and its effects on heads of state have interested only a few serious medically qualified historians, notably Hugh L’Etang, who produced three extremely readable accounts of the pathology of leadership and also wrote about occupational health in Africa

There is no doubting the seriousness of the subject—Hugh L’Etang estimated that since 1908, 11 out of 13 British Premiers and 6 out of 10 American Presidents had illnesses whilst in office that incapacitated them to some degree. The issues are (i) Does this matter? (ii) What safeguards can be put in place to prevent adverse fallout?

No one denies that serious illness, mental or physical, or substance abuse can affect performance and decision making, but can one really predict the consequences for a nation, or even beyond that nation, other than with hindsight? Presumably, many leaders have been seriously ill and impaired but their illness had no impact whatsoever on events. This may be even truer these days, where absolute power is becoming rarer and checks and balances, especially in democratic societies, much stronger. Who is to say that the really important conditions that affected the big decisions of the past were not actually rather minor ones—a bad migraine or an attack of gout, a reaction to a gloomy horoscope, even a bad night’s sleep?

Openness about a disease such as cancer may be desirable, indeed admirable, but most leaders are unwilling to divulge such a diagnosis to the undiscerning press who, oddly enough, seem to regard the condition (along with mental illness) with much more alarm than, say, arterial disease.

The 25th amendment to the US Constitution (1967) allows for the Vice President to immediately assume the powers and duties of the President should the President be unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. There is no mention of appraisal of the situation by medical professionals. In Britain, the Mental Health Act 1983 has a clause which involves ‘any registered medical practitioner’ reporting any Member of Parliament detained for mental illness under the Act to the Speaker of the House of Commons. The Speaker, receiving such a notification (or credible information from two members of the House of Commons to that effect), is obliged to arrange a visit to the MP by two specialists appointed by the President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, who must report their findings to the Speaker. If, after 6 months, the MP is still mentally ill, the House of Commons is informed and the seat falls vacant (Mental Health Act 1983, section 141).

Apart from this sensible course of action, limited as it is in scope, very little else seems to exist, in an official sense, to deal with the problems of an ailing leader who becomes incapacitated, although other countries may have mechanisms. Dr Owen gives his opinion on this issue and it also involves doctors. He asks ‘Is it reasonable for the personal physicians of a Head of State or Government to be charged with the dual responsibility—both to the good of their patient and to the best interest of their nation?’ He thinks it is not. ‘The primary purpose is to serve their individual patient. In that balancing act they should not lie in public statements about their patients but they have no mandate to disclose that which their patient refuses to sanction.’

.

This is not to say that there should be no involvement by independent doctors in a Head of State’s health— simply that it does not work at the pre-placement stage. I believe, however, that there may be a case for an activity well known to occupational physicians: namely, health surveillance.

Surveillance would have to be performed by an independent physician or physicians on a regular basis—say, once a year—and involve a discussion of health-related issues, including health education, a physical examination and some validated screening tests. Any occupational physician will be familiar with the approach. This activity would provide some quality assurance for the public but any results would be disclosed only to the Head of State and their personal medical attendants. Heads of State are often very lonely, may find it difficult to confide in their personal doctors and deserve to have objective advice fed back to them out with the treating doctor–patient relationship. The confidentiality of the arrangement would have to be watertight, although there might have to be some capacity for an independent doctor to disclose dementia or severe psychiatric disorder serious enough to render the leader incompetent or on the verge of committing illegal or immoral acts. This is the public interest argument and would only occur in an extreme situation.

A more likely scenario is, as Lord Owen says, that the press or public realize that a leader’s health is failing, and I agree with him that for personal or independent doctors to release their detailed findings to politicians or the public puts too much authority into the doctor’s hands. Removal of a leader under such circumstances is really more of a political than a medical judgement and in any case it is, or has been, frequently difficult for doctors to agree with one another in these circumstances. I suggest this might be because a person specification for a Head of State has yet to be written.

In his piece, Lord Owen has revived an important debate about how ill-health in leaders should be dealt with and why doctors, feeling responsibilities to the public as well as their patient, have often found themselves negotiating a minefield. Serving two masters—patient and employer—is a fact of everyday life for occupational physicians, who have devised a code of ethics that serves all parties very satisfactorily. Occupational physicians who are expected to predict fitness for work, even fitness to achieve pensionable age, know just how difficult this is to do in practice. Illness, incapacity and death come to us all. Leaders deserve the best of care in their own interests, not ours. Details of their ailments can be kept confidential whilst ensuring that robust and independent mechanisms are officially in place should functional impairment become dangerous.

D. Snashall

Occupational Health Department,St Thomas’Hospital,
Lambeth Palace Road, London SE1 7EH,UK