Buhari: Three scores and twelve

By Mukhtar Jarmajo

Soon after the 2011 presidential election which General Muhammadu Buhari amongst others lost to President Goodluck Jonathan, the General`s political future became a topic of debate amongst his friends, political associates and supporters. All agreed that Buhari lost that election and those of 2003 and 2007 not on a level playing ground. In 2003, they opined, the Abel Guobadia led INEC connived with the presidency to organize a joke then named it election. They went further to assert that the presidential election supervised by Maurice Iwu in 2007 witnessed unprecedented rigging that even the ultimate beneficiary of the maneuver, late Umaru Yaradua had to acknowledge before the United Nations Assembly of the irregularities involved in it. And for the election supervised by Attahiru Jega in 2011, the rigging involved a lot of sophistication culminating in figures doctoring at polling units and collation centers, both schools of thought noted emphatically.

On whether or not Buhari should remain in active politics however, two schools of thought emerged. Some were of the conviction that having lost presidential contest three times, the tooth-gapped General should quit active politics but should remain on the nation`s political turf to motivate the masses work against injustice. Contrarily, believing Buhari remains the last option if matters were to change for the better in Nigeria, others argued he should remain in active politics stressing that if he should quit, the pages of history may not record another Abraham Lincoln in contemporary times. This thought held that all the Daura born General needed was a better political platform with trustworthy cohabitants who in the long run will not sale Nigeria`s future to the People of Deception and Prestidigitation (PDP).

Quite alright, apart from the fact that the nation`s election umpire – the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has been subservient to the powers that be, Buhari has also suffered political setbacks as a result of party leaderships who in the cause of time metamorphose the party to a mere extension of the ruling Peoples` Democratic Party (PDP). Thence, with a more reliable political platform, the retired General can expect a successful political outing.

Meanwhile, in the cause of his campaigns ahead of the 2011 elections, Buhari at a point mentioned that that was going to be his last political outing. With this and being a man many see to always mean what he says and says only what he means, the latter school of thought may not have that requisite confidence to confront Buhari with its proposition. In the end however, perhaps hearkening to the Hausa mantra that says “magana biyu ce dattijo”, he returned to the trenches.

The mantra literally implies that a gentleman should always have two decisions to consider, first his and then very importantly that of his people. For, all one is doing is for the interest of the generality of the people. Therefore it is gentlemanly to take a second position when the people say no to yours. 

Thus, in a manner that suggested he hearkened to the gospel of the latter school of thought, Buhari involved himself in efforts aimed at creating a formidable opposition political party in Nigeria. In the end, the defunct All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Alliance Congress Of Nigeria (ACN), his Congress for Progressives Change (CPC) and factions of some political parties merged together to form the now major opposition political party, the All Progressives Congress (APC).

And that he joined and won in a manner that was reminiscent of a political coup-de-grace the race to pick the APC presidential ticket is no news. Today he poses the greatest challenge the ruling PDP has ever encountered. Whilst President Jonathan has not been able to handle the baton of leadership with the requisite courage, sincerity and competence, Buhari`s credentials are a synopsis of leadership ability, altruism, sincerity and dedication.

Within and without the Army, he carried out all his assignments with diligence and willingness and as if he was blessed with a Midas touch, all projects he laid his hands on, end up a success. As Military Administrator of the defunct Northeastern state and later that of the former Borno state, Buhari administered public trust incorruptibly.

And as Federal Commissioner for Petroleum Resources, Buhari constituted the NNPC Board thus became its first Chairman. He gave the institution a solid foundation as a result of which until recently when money thirsty politicians came on board, the oil and gas sector of the economy was a bit healthy. And here we must remember that fine civil servant, the late Chief Sunday Awoniyi, Aro of Mopa, who as his Permanent Secretary gave him the needed support. 

When Buhari came in as Head of state at the eve of 1983, he sought to give the nation`s façade a new rendering. Fully aware of the fact that the economy of a nation means everything to its people, his government began making meaningful economic policies which though were radical both in theory and practice. But in all ramifications, the policies were very realistic in that the same approach was used in taking countries like Taiwan, Thailand and Indonesia to great heights.

Nigeria`s former economic czar, now Emir Of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi had this to say in 2002 in his article captioned “Buharism: Economic Theory and Political Economy”; “Buharism represented a two-way struggle: with Global capitalism (externally) and with its parasitic and unpatriotic agents and spokespersons (internally). The struggle against global capital as represented by the unholy trinity of IMF, the World Bank and the multilateral “trade” organizations as well that against the entrenched domestic class of contractors, commission agents and corrupt public officers were vicious and thus required extreme measures.”

"Draconian policies” Sanusi continued “were a necessary component of this struggle for transformation and this has been the case with all such epochs in history…..To this extent Buharism was a despotic regime but its despotism was historically determined, necessitated by the historical task of dismantling the structures of dependency and launching the nation on to a path beyond primitive accumulation.”

Ever since he joined the Army in 1962 till August 1985 when his regime was truncated in a bloodless coup, Muhammadu Buhari worked enthusiastically and patriotically towards defining better paths for enhanced development and liberating the people from the shackles of post-colonial slavery.  He was to later again prove this when he was made the Executive Chairman of the defunct Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund (PTF).

In 1994, the PTF was established to manage “monies received from the sale of petroleum products less the approved production cost per liter…” to improve the sectors of education, health, food supply, road and road transportation, water supply, security services “and such other sectors as may be approved from time to time.” Buhari was picked to chair the PTF Board and as usual, he performed creditably well. Fifteen years after it has been scrapped, there are projects of the PTF that are still standing today and  that was to tell of the success the PTF recorded.

 Indeed, it raises no eyebrows that he was successful at the PTF for as seen earlier, through dint of hard work and diligence, Buhari gets the best results. And now that he is in the race to the presidency with these credentials, Nigeria and Nigerians have our hopes for better days ahead rekindled. But to ensure this dream comes true, we must unite as a nation to support this rare gem who last week celebrated his seventy-second birthday. Thus, whilst wishing him success in next year's election, here is also wishing Buhari a happy birthday! 

Jarmajo is on Twitter: @mukhtarjarmajo

Buharism: Economic theory and political economy

By Sanusi Lamido Sanusi

I have followed with more than a little interest the many contributions of commentators on the surprising decision of General Muhammadu Buhari to jump into the murky waters of Nigerian politics. Most of the regular writers in the Trust stable have had something to say on this. The political adviser to a late general has transferred his services to a living one. My dear friend and prolific veterinary doctor, who like me is allegedly an ideologue of Fulani supremacy, has taken a leading emir to the cleaners based on information of suspect authenticity. Another friend has contributed an articulate piece, which for those in the know gives a bird’s eye view into the thinking within the IBB camp. A young northern Turk has made several interventions and given novel expressions to what I call the PTF connection. Some readers and writers alike have done Buhari incalculable damage by viewing his politics through the narrow prism of ethnicity and religion, risking the alienation of whole sections of the Nigerian polity without whose votes their candidate cannot succeed.

With one or two notable exceptions, the various positions for or against Buhari have focused on his personality and continued to reveal a certain aversion or disdain for deeper and more thorough analysis of his regime. The reality, as noted by Tolstoy, is that too often history is erroneously reduced to single individuals. By losing sight of the multiplicity of individuals, events, actions and inactions (deliberate or otherwise) that combine to produce a set of historical circumstances, the historian is able to create a mythical figure and turn him into an everlasting hero (like Lincoln) or a villain (like Hitler). The same is true of Buhari. There seems to be a dangerous trend of competition between two opposing camps aimed at glorifying him beyond his wildest dreams or demonising him beyond all justifiable limits, through a selective reading of history and opportunistic attribution and misattribution of responsibility. The discourse has been thus impoverished through personalisation and we are no closer at the end of it than at the beginning to a divination of the exact locus or nexus of his administration in the ebb and flow of Nigerian history. This is what I seek to achieve in this intervention through an exposition of the theoretical underpinnings of the economic policy of Buharism and the necessary correlation between the economic decisions made and the concomitant legal and political superstructure.

Let me begin by stating up front the principal thesis that I will propound. Within the schema of discourses on Nigerian history, the most accurate problematisation of the Buhari government is one that views it strictly as a regime founded on the ideology of bourgeois nationalism. In this sense it was a true offshoot of the regime of Murtala Mohammed. Buharism was a stage the logical outcome of whose machinations would have been a transcendence of what Marx called the stage of primitive accumulation in his Theories of Surplus Value. It was radical, not in the sense of being socialist or left wing, but in the sense of being a progressive move away from a political economy dominated by a parasitic and subservient elite to one in which a nationalist and productive class gains ascendancy. Buharism represented a two-way struggle: with global capital (externally) and with its parasitic and unpatriotic agents and spokespersons (internally). This was a vicious struggle and thus required extreme measures. Draconian policies were a necessary component of this struggle for transformation and this has been the case with all such epochs in history. The Meiji restoration in Japan was not conducted in a liberal environment. The Industrial Revolution in Europe and the great economic progress of the empires were not attained in the same liberal atmosphere of the 21st century. The "tiger economies" of Asia such as Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia and Thailand are not exactly models of democratic freedom.

To this extent Buharism was a despotic regime but its despotism was historically determined, necessitated by the historical task of dismantling the structures of dependency and launching the nation on to a path beyond primitive accumulation. At his best Buhari may have been a Bonaparte or a Bismarck. At his worst he may have been a Hitler or a Mussolini. In either case Buharism drawn to its logical conclusion would have provided the bedrock for a new society and its overthrow marked a relapse, a step backward into that era from which we sought escape and in which, sadly for all of us we remain embedded and enslaved. It is not enough to accuse Buhari of being a dictator (as his detractors are wont to do) or to pretend that he was never one (as his admirers so fallaciously claim). What is required is a dispassionate analysis of the true nature and source of such despotism and its problematisation within an intellectually vibrant political discourse.

One of the greatest myths spun around Buharism was that it lacked a sound basis in economic theory. As evidence of this, the regime that succeeded Buhari employed the services of economic "gurus" of "international standard" as the architects of fiscal and monetary policy. These were IMF and World Bank economists like Dr. Chu Okongwu and Dr Kalu Idika Kalu, as well as Chief Olu Falae (an economist trained at Yale) and the famous "Triple A" (Alhaji Abubakar Alhaji). At the time Buhari’s Finance Minister, Dr Onaolapo Soleye (who was not a trained economist) was debating with the pro-IMF lobby and explaining why the naira would not be devalued I was teaching economics at the Ahmadu Bello University. I had no doubt in my mind that the position of Buharism was based on a sound understanding of neo-classical economics and that those who were pushing for devaluation either did not understand their subject or were acting deliberately as agents of international capital in its rampage against all barriers set up by sovereign states to protect the integrity of the domestic economy. When the IMF recently owned up to "mistakes" in its policy prescriptions all patriotic economists saw it for what it was: a hypocritical statement of remorse after attaining set objectives.

Let me explain, briefly, the economic theory underlying Buhari’s refusal to devalue the naira and then show how the policy merely served the interest of global capitalism and its domestic agents. This will be the principal building block of our taxonomy. In brief, neo-classical theory holds that a country can, under certain conditions, expect to improve its balance of payments through devaluation of its currency. The IMF believed that given the pressure on the country’s foreign reserves and its adverse balance of payments situation Nigeria must devalue its currency. Buharism held otherwise and insisted that the conditions for improving balance of payments through devaluation did not exist and that there were alternate and superior approaches to the problem. Let me explain.

The first condition that must exist is that the price of every country’s export is denominated in its currency. If Nigeria’s exports are priced in naira and its imports from the US in dollars then, ceteris paribus, a devaluation of the naira makes imports dearer to Nigerians and makes Nigerian goods cheaper to Americans. This would then lead to an increase in the quantum of exports to the US and a reduction in the quantum of imports from there per unit of time. But while this is a necessary condition, it is not a sufficient one. For a positive change in the balance of payments, the increase in the quantum of exports must be substantial enough to outweigh the revenue lost through a reduction in price. In other words the quantity exported must increase at a rate faster than the rate of decrease in its price. Similarly imports must fall faster than their price is increasing. Otherwise the nation may be devoting more of its wealth to importing less and receiving less of the wealth of foreigners for exporting more! In consequence, devaluation by a country whose exports and imports are not price elastic leads to the continued impoverishment of the nation vis a vis its trading partners. The second, and sufficient, condition is therefore that the combined price elasticity of demand for exports and imports must exceed unity. These two conditions are known in neo-classical international economic theory as the Marshall-Lerner conditions for improvement in a country’s balance of payments through devaluation.

The argument of Buharism, for which it was castigated by global capital and its domestic agents, was that these conditions did not exist clearly enough for Nigeria to take the gamble. First our major export, oil, was priced in dollars and the volume exported was determined ab initio by the quota set by OPEC, a cartel to which we belonged. Neither the price nor the volume of our exports would be affected by a devaluation of the naira. As for imports, indeed they would become dearer. However the manufacturing base depended on imported raw materials. Also many essential food items were imported. The demand for imports was therefore inelastic. We would end up spending more of our national income to import less, in the process fuelling inflation, creating excess capacity and unemployment, wiping out the production base of the real sector and causing hardship to the consumer through the erosion of real disposable incomes. Given the structural dislocations in income distribution in Nigeria the only groups who would benefit from devaluation were the rich parasites who had enough liquidity to continue with their conspicuous consumption, the large multi-national corporations with an unlimited access to loanable funds and the foreign "investor" who can now purchase our grossly cheapened and undervalued domestic assets. In one stroke we would wipe out the middle class, destroy indigenous manufacturing, undervalue the national wealth and create inflation and unemployment. This is standard economic theory and it is exactly what happened to Nigeria after it went through the hands of our IMF economists under IBB. The decision not to devalue set Buharism on a collision course with those who wanted devaluation and would profit from it - namely global capitalism, the so-called "captains of industry", the nouveaux-riches parasites who had naira and dollars waiting to be spent, the rump elements of feudalism and so on. Buharism therefore was a crisis in the dominant class, a fracturing of its members into a patriotic, nationalist group and a dependent, parasitic and corrupt one. It was not a struggle between classes but within the same class. A victory for Buharism would be a victory for the more progressive elements of the national bourgeoisie. Unfortunately the fifth columnists within the military establishment were allied to the backward and retrogressive elements and succeeded in defeating Buharism before it took firm root. But I digress.

Having decided not to devalue or to rush into privatisation and liberalisation Buharism still faced an economic crisis it had to address. There was pressure on foreign reserves, mounting foreign debt and a balance of payments crisis. Clearly the demand for foreign exchange outstripped its supply. The government therefore adopted demand management measures. The basic principle was that we did not really need all that we imported and if we could ensure that our scarce foreign exchange was only allocated to what we really needed we would be able to pay our debts and lay the foundation for economic stability. But this line of action also has its drawbacks.

First, there are political costs to be borne in terms of opposition from those who feel unfairly excluded from the allocation process and who do not share the government’s sense of priorities. Muslims for example cursed Buhari’s government for restricting the number of pilgrims in order to conserve foreign exchange.

Second, in all attempts to manage demand through quotas and quantitative restrictions there is room for abuse because there is always the incentive of a premium to be earned through circumvention of due process. The reason for this is simple to understand. The only reason quotas are necessary is because the demand for the product exceeds its supply, which means it is priced below equilibrium (the level at which the market is cleared). In theory, if the price is allowed to increase some consumers will be priced out of the market and some producers priced in leading to a closure of the demand gap. Keeping the price low by fiat creates what is known in economics as "artificial scarcity". In the case of the foreign exchange market, this was addressed by the federal government through the system of import licensing.

Precisely because of the existence of a repressed demand, there will always be economic agents willing and able to pay a much higher price than the official one for scarce foreign exchange. Import licence becomes a "hot cake" and the black market for foreign exchange highly lucrative. The policy line chosen by Buharism could only succeed if backed by strong deterrent laws and strict and enforceable exchange rules. So again we see that the harsh exchange control and economic sabotage laws of Buharism were a necessary and logical fallout of its economic theory.

I have tried to show in this intervention what I consider to be the principal building blocks of the military government of Muhammadu Buhari and the logical connection between its ideology, its economic theory and the legal and political superstructure that characterised it. My objective is to raise the intellectual profile of discourse beyond its present focus on personalities by letting readers see the intricate links between disparate and seemingly unrelated aspects of that government, thus contextualising the actions of Buharism in its specific historical and ideological milieu. I have tried to review its treatment of politicians as part of a general struggle against primitive accumulation and its harsh laws on exchange and economic crimes as a necessary fallout of economic policy options. Similarly its treatment of drug pushers reflected the patriotic zeal of a bourgeois nationalist establishment.

On the other hand, the policy also has major drawbacks, particularly if not well managed. As happens in all such cases a number of innocent people become victims of draconian laws and sweeping policies. Some honest leaders like Shehu Shagari, Clement Isong and Balarabe Musa were improperly detained and treated like common thieves. Whatever the crimes Umaru Dikko was alleged to have committed, the humiliation visited upon his innocent father was totally inexcusable. The government also went overboard in its sensitivity to constructive criticism and, in cases like the Irabor case, took measures far out of proportion to the actual damage done by the alleged offence. The same can perhaps be said of the government’s sanctions on two respected traditional rulers who went on a private trip to Israel. The reality however is that many of those claiming to be victims today were looters who deserved to go to jail but who would like to hide under the cover of a few glaring errors. The failure of key members of the Buhari administration to tender public and unreserved apology to those who may have been unfairly treated has not helped matters in this regard. Buhari owes it to himself, as a human being and a Muslim, to seek forgiveness from those who may have suffered injustice at the hands of his agents.

I will now address a question I have often been asked. Do I support Buhari’s decision to contest for the presidency of Nigeria? My answer is no. And I will explain.

First, I believe Buhari played a creditable role in a particular historical epoch but like Tolstoy and Marx I do not believe he can re-enact that role at will. Men do not make history exactly as they please but, as Marx wrote in the 18th Brumaire, "in circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past." Muhammadu Buhari as a military general had more room for manoeuvre than he can ever hope for in Nigerian politics. I am not sure that sterling performance as head of a military junta translates into the same level of competence in a liberal environment where the tools are persuasion rather than coercion, and negotiation rather than suppression. There is also the reality that globalisation and liberalisation, which Buhari so correctly fought against, have swept across the third world and emasculated nation states thus reducing the scope for independent sovereign action. The agents of international capital are much stronger and far more pervasive than in 1984 and their international support has increased with the new arrogance of their patrons who still bask in the glow of their victory in the so-called cold war. The days of regulation are now history and the hands of the clock, as they say, cannot be turned back.

Second, I am convinced that the situation of Nigeria and its elite today is worse than it was in 1983. Compared to the politicians who populate the PDP, ANPP and AD today, second republic politicians were angels. My view is that Nigeria needs people like Buhari in politics but not to contest elections. Buhari should be in politics to develop civil society and strengthen the conscience of the nation. Everywhere you turn you see elements who have amassed wealth at the expense of the nation: be they legislators, local government chairmen and councillors, or governors and ministers. But these are the heroes in their societies. They are the religious leaders and ethnic champions and Nigerians, especially Northerners, will castigate and discredit anyone who challenges them. The problem is not so much that leaders are corrupt and useless, but that the followers refuse to recognise this fact. In the North in particular, illiteracy and ignorance is so widespread that almost anyone can use slogans of religion and ethnicity to gain mass support, which is in turn betrayed. My fear is that Buhari has greater potential for changing the North than is offered by the opportunistic tapping of this wellspring of primordial loyalty. Anyone can campaign on a platform of ethnicity and religion, especially if the political environment is ripe for it. Few have the courage to stand on a platform of principle, even if they risk alienating the majority in their own constituency. It is this minority, which is being gradually extinguished through blackmail, misrepresentation and outright elimination that needs to be strengthened by the likes of Buhari. Unless we start by educating our people and changing their value system, those who speak the truth will remain outcasts in their own society, castigated by the very people whose interest they seek to protect at great personal cost.

Having said all this let me conclude by saying that if Buhari does succeed in getting a nomination he will most probably have my vote (for what it is worth). I will vote for him not, like some have averred, because he is a Northerner and a Muslim or because I think his candidacy is good for the North and Islam. I am a Nigerian and I believe anyone who wants the presidency must be willing to serve all Nigerians fairly, without regard to creed and ethnicity. I will vote for Buhari as a Nigerian for a leader who restored my pride and dignity and my belief in the motherland. I will vote for the man who made it undesirable for the "Andrews" to "check out" instead of staying to change Nigeria. I will vote for Buhari to say thank you for the worldview of Buharism, a truly nationalist ideology for all Nigerians. I do not know if Buhari is still a nationalist or a closet bigot and fanatic, or if he was the spirit and not just the face of Buharism. I do not know if he can cope with a Nigeria (and a world) that has changed since he was last in office. I do not even know if Buhari himself has changed and if such a change was for better or for worse. My vote for him is not based on a mythification of the man, a fossilisation of his image in an ideal state. It is rather, and more fundamentally, a celebration of what his government was and what it gave to the nation.

Now Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II wrote this and was first published by the dailytrust edition of Tuesday 20th August, 20002 and gamji.com

As easy as PDP (to defeat)

By Sonala Olumhense

Is there really an electoral contest in Nigeria next February?

Yes, the electoral commission, fulfilling its constitutional duty, has listed an election on its calendar for that month, but it is really a referendum on 15 years of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in charge of Nigeria.

The event should be re-cast as a festival, a celebration of the opportunity for Nigerians to regain their dignity by inflicting on the PDP the most lopsided defeat in modern democratic warfare. Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, Adamu Muazu and President Goodluck Jonathan

I do not mean that 2015 should be seen as the coronation of another party simply because it claims to be in opposition, but that it is an opportunity for Nigerians to reaffirm their dignity and express their indignation at the polls.

 

The PDP should be easy pickings, but anyone seeking to replace it should show imagination.  The PDP has already shown cause.

 

Everyone, including the PDP, knows that Nigeria has become the butt of jokes around the world on account of its character as a looting gallery.

If you do not know they are laughing at Nigeria, that is probably because you lack literacy skills, not because you are in the PDP.  There is no reason on earth why a party that is held in such contempt for various reasons ought not to be humiliated out of relevance with at least 80% of the popular vote.

 

This is the report card it has earned in 15 years of malice and malfeasance.  This is the precinct not even of politics, but of common sense: if someone hurts you, you seek vengeance, or avoidance.  If someone loots your family, you want your heirlooms back, and you want the thieves in prison.

 

If someone insults your mother, or rapes your wife, or kills your sons, or abducts your daughters, you do not give him the keys to your heart: you want him dead and his carcass thrown to the hyenas.  You do not give drink with him.  You do not give him a bed in your home.  You do not let him gloat about his exploits.

There is no other way to describe what the PDP has accomplished in Nigeria.  Under its watch, Nigeria has moved from a nation of hope to one of doubt; from one which enjoyed the respect—sometimes admiration—of other countries to one that is now routinely called names.

 

Under its watch, Nigeria has moved from a nation which labored under gross mismanagement and overwhelming corruption to one where they are now merely an opinion.

   

Under the watch of the PDP, reports are merely to be written, not implemented; a budget just a speech to be read, not an obligation to be fulfilled; and good governance is just a concept, not a principle.  Was there ever a report by a Presidential Projects Assessment Committee about at least 11,886 projects?  Do the many reports about the rot at the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation have any relevance to the quality of life of the people?

 

Did anyone ever debate former Minister Oby Ezekwesili over her allegation that that $67 billion left by the President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government has been squandered by the current one?  Yes, the government removed Central Bank governor Lamido Sanusi, but did anyone ever establish whether the NNPC actually failed to remit to the federation account from 2012 to 2013 the sum of $50 billion?   $21?  $10?

If nothing is clear, that is exactly what is intended by the PDP because in no enquiry can the party and its practices face the facts.

Under the watch of the PDP, Nigeria has ground to a halt, even to a fraction of its size.  In full view of the PDP government, intrepid militants are taking over Nigeria, village by village, child by child and town by town, chasing Nigerians out of their homes and out of their country.

 

Under the PDP, Nigeria is giving away everything: self-respect, territory, refugees, children, dreams.

Under the PDP, propaganda is the only mission in order that it might look immensely better than it has accomplished.

 

A transformation was promised four years ago, but in its place, Nigerians got a Tantalization Agenda.  Fifteen years ago, the Nigerian president and his wife enjoyed their healthcare in European hospitals; today, the Nigerian president and his wife enjoy healthcare in European hospitals.

But perhaps what is worse is what no longer exists: 15 years ago, Nigerians could travel around their country in relative safety; today, they are told to travel by air.

The country is in disrepair and in division, but what may be called the future is considerably worse unless the PDP is crushed by Nigerians so that it may be re-invented by those who care.

   

I do not know who will contest against the PDP, but it is an easy, almost unfair, battle. Between the popular disenchantment and the divisions within the PDP, there is no reason why it should not now lose more than 70% of the electoral gains it held in 2007.

What is exciting about 2015 is that many of the parties outside power can exploit the PDP’s scorched-earth incompetence, lootocracy and abysmal arrogance over the years.  The challenge is to go where the PDP does not, and will not go: directly to the voters whom they have betrayed

The choice could be no clearer: the offer of hope where only despair exists, and where the only other choice is hopelessness.  This is the time for the Nigerian voter to invest in his own dignity and future.  The PDP has had 15 years, and Nigerians who are not dipping their hands into its soup pot know they are considerably worse-off than they were 15 years ago.

The one thing the PDP cannot tolerate, but the only language it understands, is electoral defeat.  There is no better time than the present to inflict it.

 

One approach is to write up 774 reports, each no longer than half a page, on the last four or 15 years.  That is the number of local government areas in the country, and they will make clear the depth of the government’s irresponsibility so far.  Consolidate them into manageable sectoral campaign research.  Contending political parties can take a look at the national budgets for those years here or here.  At the local levels, it is easy to demonstrate how suddenly-wealthy legislators are in dissonance with mounting poverty.

What parties need to do is to campaign intensively at the grassroots: village to village, house to house.  Not on social media, as tempting as that is, or on television.  Encourage voters to accept PDP money and food, but to vote it out.  Drag the PDP into running on its record, at the same time demonstrating a clearer commitment to serving the people.

 

The PDP may well be the most scandalous party in modern political history.  It is not the only sinner in the world, but it is the only one that advertises its sins, and pays itself for them.

The PDP is a pushover right now, and it should be pushed.  Because there was a country.

sonala.olumhense@gmail.com

Twitter: @SolanaOlumhense

The scope of Jonathanian continuity

By Mukhtar Jarmajo

Last Tuesday, President Goodluck Jonathan officially declared his intentions to seek reelection in the general elections slated for early next year. The declaration which came only a day after over fifty secondary school students were killed in a bomb blast incident in Potiskum, Yobe state, was greeted with mixed reactions. Whilst many saw it as a good action in the right directions believing he had performed wonderfully in the last six years, others believe the president has no record to show as to make Nigerians want him to come back.

In a true democratic setting, for a politician to contest any political office, they most have an excellent record of performance to justify their capability to deliver. Whilst for first time runners, their past work experience remains a reference point, for those seeking reelection it is their performance in the lapsing tenure. This is especially imperative given that for success, contestants most use all available means to convince and canvass for votes of electorates. Thus Mr. Jonathan’s record of performance is of significance here.

Frankly, most Nigerians are today suffering untold hardship courtesy of an unhealthy economy. The people are seriously in want and need. Abject poverty is what most Nigerians are in today. Whilst according to the indices of Finance Minister Okonjo-Iweala our economy is improving, practically, her words remain unbelievable. There was no way an economy will get healthier amidst inadequate electricity supply. Ditto, with the number of unemployed graduates increasing by the day, you are sure the minister wasn’t sincere.

Ever since he assumed power in May, 2010, Mr. Jonathan had shown very poor leadership qualities. And over the years, he proved beyond reasonable doubts a lame in administration that has no capacity to deliver. He allowed corruption, which is mortally dangerous to the entire human species, to become a prominent structure in the nation`s political and socio-economic landscapes. On the fault lines of religion, region and ethnicity, President Jonathan successfully polarized Nigeria and Nigerians cannot be more divided.

And whilst the future of a nation solely depends on its youths, Nigeria, under President Jonathan isn’t making any efforts at nurturing us. Education standard here has continued to helplessly drop with incessant strikes by lecturers of institutions of higher learning. Much the same, there is nothing to write home on President Jonathan’s efforts at improving Nigeria`s health system. Even in cities, standard healthcare services are hardly accessible let alone in rural communities.

In the last six years in short, Mr. Jonathan supervised this nation with mediocrity. As a result, his regime has failed to carry out even its primary responsibility of protecting the territorial integrity of Nigeria and ensuring the safety of lives and property of Nigerians. Under the watch of Mr. Jonathan, a part of Nigeria is now under the control of some faceless insurgents just as everyone in the rest parts of the country never sleeps with both eyes closed. And ever since all these started, the only action government has been taking to stop it was pointing accusing fingers at the opposition blaming it of sponsorship for political gains.

It had remained insensitive to the plight of ordinary Nigerians who bear directly the consequences of this insurgency. While thousands a Nigerian have lost their dear lives in this, thousands more have been displaced. Thus another term for Mr. Jonathan means a continuation of insensitivity to the plight of Nigerians by government authorities. Another term for Mr. Jonathan means continued decay of government infrastructures owing to a non-performing economy. Another term for Mr. Jonathan means another turbulent ride for Nigerians in the journey to 2019.

Jarmajo is on Twitter: @mukhtarjarmajo

PHOTO: PDP GOVERNORS, CHEIFTAINS IN OBI`S RESIDENCE AS HE DEFECTS TO THEIR PARTY

TAN, Jonathan and Mandela Single Term

By Erasmus Ikhide

There is no stopping President Goodluck Jonathan from falling into the clairvoyance trap. Already, the presidency has reached the empty point. The timeless advice, “Say what you mean, and mean what you say”, which must be preceded by knowing what you mean did not find a place in the heart of Mr President. We are not at a lost as to how things come to this sober moment.

Transformation Ambassadors of Nigeria, TAN has given him the reasons to continue to wobble and to violate the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; the same constitution he swore to uphold and protect. President Jonathan now believe that truly committed following like TAN’s group and others automatically sense his ambition and know what he want without being told. They have been reading his decisive body language and had keyed into the anomalies, forthwith.

Now, the oddity. The hempy group called TAN has dragged the name of the Sainted late former South Africa President Nelson Mandela onto the bargain. The immoral swamping mud of Nigeria politics as a cynosure of presidential waywardness has taken the centre stage. The is a country where executive recklessness, status arrogance, presidential corruption of all hues, electoral manipulation, ritual killings are given metaphors of governance.

Interestingly, those who stole the nation’s Fuel Subsidy billions are said to be the ones sponsoring TAN and several other frauds recorded under president Jonathan Administration. Any wonder that the N32.8 billion Police Pension Fund; N40 billion Gbenga Daniel’s theft of Ogun State money, the former minister of Works and Housing N75 billion looting, N94.2 million Faruq Lawal versus Femi Otedola bribery, N58 billion squandered by four Governors, N20 billion NNPC missing fund, N7 billion Shell Petroleum Tax Evasion, the $1.1 billion OPL 245 Malabu bribe, Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor’s $9.3 million arms deal can never be unearthed.

There is no doubt that President Jonathan got Pan-Nigerian mandate in 2011 for his seemingly candid promises to fix the rust of the nation. He also promised to run for single term in office. So far, he has failed the nation on the two promises. Nigeria has got the worst of image problems in terms of insecurity and doing exactly opposite what its leader promised. Yet, TAN has consistently – in its daily advertisement – equates President Jonathan with the South Africa icon, late President Nelson Mandela.

Madiba was one of the world’s most revered statesmen, who led the struggle to replace the apartheid regime of South Africa with a multi-racial democracy. Jailed for 27 years, he emerged in 1990 to become the country’s first black president four years later and spearheaded the drive for peace in other spheres of conflict. He also won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993. His charisma, self-deprecating sense of humour and lack of bitterness over his harsh treatment, as well as his amazing life story, partly explain his extraordinary global appeal.

One wonder, therefore why TAN should be equating President Jonathan with the Madiba, the last liberator of the 20th century – whose exemplary life of struggle, triumph, dignity, freedom, and hope found expression in the live of billions across the globe? Why would TAN compared the Otuoke man with the Thembo man who gave potent voice to the claims of the oppressed and the moral necessity of racial justice? Why must the President enjoy the adulation of his lifeless presidency as portrayer for excellent leadership? Why would TAN disingenuously compared Jonathan with Mandela – a who man erected a constitutional order to preserve freedom for future generations? A man who was committed to democracy and rule of law and ratified same not only by his election, but by his willingness to step down from power after only one term?

Madiba’s commitment to this cause was aptly captured thus: “I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I’ve cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and [with] equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

Granted that Madiba was not a bust made of marble; he admitted so: “I am not a saint,” he said, “unless you think of a saint as a sinner who keeps on trying.” But President Jonathan credited sainthood to his Administration in his 53th Independence Day speech, saying his Administration has touched every segment of the society: “We have recorded notable success in the social sector. Nigeria has been globally acknowledged for reducing extreme hunger by more than half, with the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) formally presenting the country with an award for achieving the Millennium Development Goal on Hunger three years ahead of the 2015 target date set for the Millennium Development Goals.”

This is coming at a time Nigeria has been rated one of the worst governed countries in Africa based on the 2014 Ibrahim Index of African Governance [IIAG], which was released a few days ago. In the report, Nigeria is rated 45.8 per cent lower than the African average (51.5 per cent) and ranked 37th out of 52 in the overall governance scale. The country scored lower than the regional average for West Africa which stands at 52.2 percent and ranked 12th out of 15 in the region. While Nigeria got the damning rating by the IIAG, Mauritius is adjudged the best governed country in Africa, with 81.7 per cent, followed by Cape Verde, with 76.6 percent.

IIAG is sponsored by the Mo Ibrahim Foundation, MIF, a non-grant making organisation committed to defining, assessing and enhancing governance and leadership in Africa. It presents annual assessments of the quality of governance in African countries. It also provides the framework for citizens, governments, institutions and the private sector to assess accurately the delivery of public goods and services, and policy outcomes, across the continent. Other countries that made it to the top of the list included Botswana which is rated the third best governed country in the continent with 76.2 percent and South Africa which comes fourth with 73.3 percent. Ghana is rated 7th; Rwanda 11th; Benin Republic 18th; Egypt 26th; Mali 28th; Niger, 29th; Liberia; 31st; Cameroon 34th and Togo 36th; all ahead of far more endowed Nigeria.

With a population of 173.6 million and population growth rate pegged at 2.8 percent, Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product, GDP, is put at $3013.3 USD, while inflation and unemployment rates stand at 8.5 percent and 13.7 percent, respectively. Nigeria also received appalling ratings in such categories such as safety and the rule of law where it is rated 44th with 38.1 per cent, 32nd in the rule of law with 41.0 percent and 30th in accountability with 36.6 percent. The country got its lowest rating in personal safety where it is ranked 49th with 16.5 per cent and second lowest in national security where it is ranked 48th with 58.2 per cent. Under participation and human rights, the country is rated 26th with 46.9 per cent, 31th on sustainable economic opportunity with 43.3 per cent and 34th in human development with 53.0 per cent.

The danger in the arc of Jonathan’s Administration is histrionic. The danger in it is that young and gullible Nigerians would be tempted to conflate actual governance, purposeful leadership and broad mindedness witnessed in the life and time of Madiba to mean mere opportunism masquerading as governance in Nigeria. They will be confused into believing that President Jonathan is offering socio-economic panacea needed in the 21th century, as presented by TAN. Such grandstanding by president Jonathan and TAN will erase the legacy of Madiba, his sense of equality, economic and political justice which he fought and died for.

In Nigeria today, we still see children suffering from hunger and disease; 10. 8 million children are out of school, we still see run-down schools everywhere. We still see young people without prospects for the future and without means of livelihood. In and around Nigeria today, men and women are still imprisoned for their political beliefs, and are still persecuted for who they worship, and how they worship, and who they love. The grinning president has no answer to the chronic poverty and growing inequality in the country.

This is where clarity of purpose suffice. Without doubts, the starting point for all effective leader is vision and visioning. It’s only when a leader is absolutely clear about what he wants that the hard work of leadership is simplified and can be actualised. Then, the distance between beloved leader and despised leader becomes shorter than we think. The swath is so thin that proper conceptualisation will readily bridge the gap. That is one of the reasons we have been witnessing the public downfall of leaders from almost every area of endeavor – politics, religion, business and sports. Today they are on top of the heap, the next day, the heap is on top of them!

Unfortunately, President Jonathan is trying to become a leader and has fallen into the trap of leadership “becoming”. Incidentally, leadership flows from natural inner vision and character. President Jonathan Administration is suffering from lack of leadership clarity. This has manifested in the way and manner the president has been double speaking. When leaders are unclear about their purpose in governance, they often hide their confusion and uncertainty in the continuity subterfuge.

President Jonathan, long before now had slipped onto the slopping valley of failure. A nation is in danger when its leader confuses manipulation for leadership and when compromised ethics is rationalised away as necessary for the “greater good” for the “greatest numbers”. These are more manifest when leaders over indulged themselves in any pleasures, be they food, drink, drugs, gambling or sex with increasing acerbity.

Mark Sanborn who has been acknowledged for expository essays on leadership classifies leadership thus: “A leader’s credibility is the result of two aspects: what he or she does (competency) and who he or she is (character). A discrepancy between these two aspects creates an integrity problem”. That is the oddity confronting Presdent Goodluck Jonathan and his Administration.

Erasmus wrote in from Lagos, Nigeria

Tel: 234 8056 225 515

"They are the same" is not a political party in Nigeria

By Lauretta Onochie

I cannot count how many times I have been told, “This is Nigeria, not UK”. It’s usually in response to my democratic nonsense. I am a democrat. I also live in a democratic society. I was born in Nigeria. I grew up in Nigeria too. So I have a fairly good understanding of how we do things in Nigeria. I also have an understanding of what governance means in Nigeria. It’s meaning and style are a far cry from what they mean, even in Ghana.

Then I stumbled on a word, an English word. “Change”. So many of us’ Nigerians, began to dream. We began to imagine how this word, “Change”, could transform the lives of all Nigerians. We dreamed of heights hitherto unattained by Nigerians that we could now attain as individuals and as a nation because of “Change”! We dreamed of reclaiming our position as the giant of Africa that roared in the days of apartheid and the world listened. We dreamed of our leaders standing shoulder to shoulder with world leaders and other lesser nations, queening to have audience or even a glance at our leaders.

We began to imagine that the 6-3-3-4 system of education, one of the best in the world would now be properly implemented in its original form, fulfilling the aspirations of many young Nigerians who have been shoved into higher academic institutions when apprenticeship schemes in technical education for requisite skills acquisition would have sufficed.

We also began to dream that change would revamp and resuscitate our comatose health sector that has sent the few remaining middle class Nigerians to Indian hospitals and our elites, including our political captors, to the United Kingdom, America and Germany. The same sector that has not met the needs of ordinary Nigerians who die daily from common ailments and manageable health conditions.

We thought “change” would repair our dilapidated roads that have become death traps for thousands of road users around our nation. We believed strongly that change would finally, bring about an end to the incessant power failure that Nigerians have become accustomed to, that has crippled small business and left all Nigerians with the burden of generating their own electricity, noise and environmental pollution.

Yes we hoped that change would reverse the state of lawlessness that has overwhelmed our nation where the law descends heavily on small time criminals while our elected and appointed political office holders, their spouses and friends, commit every known crime, including mass murder of immigration jobseekers and yes, they go free. Sometimes with a pat on the back.

We hoped that “change” would usher in accountability, efficiency and restore some sanity in the way we view public service. We also believed in the ability of change to put an end to vices such as corruption, tribalism, nepotism, discrimination of all kinds and high level impunity.

Religion is good but when it becomes the only focus of a people, it’s an indication that such a people have lost hope in all else. They begin to have their vision clouded as they can no longer decipher between normal occurrences and miracles. We became a nation where giving birth to babies, securing a jobs, waking up to a new day, a new week and a new month are now miracles that have to be celebrated. So we began to hope too that change would support the refocusing of Nigerians on themselves with a view to rediscovering their God-given potentials to do great things. We had hoped too that religion would return to being a medium of doing good and fostering peaceful coexistence among the multi ethnic people of Nigeria.

Those were some of the hopes we had that “change” would usher in. But everywhere I turned, there was someone reminding me that this is Nigeria, not the United Kingdom. Even those I thought would understand democracy would say to me, “Yes we understand what you are saying, but that’s not how we do it in Nigeria”. Those in government see those of us who insist on democratic principles as enemies. Anyone or anything that is inimical to anything should be eliminated. That you are reading this piece is a clear evidence that our people do not mean it or do not understand the meaning of “Enemy”. Finally I decided to examine how it is done in Nigeria.

I have put in so much effort but have found nothing. I have not found out how it is done in Nigeria. What I have discovered is that those in the political arena make it up as they go along. They change their own rules to favour them. When opponents or the competitions catch up with then, they change the rules again and again.

In the past, political party godfathers would chose their political sons or daughters and then they were foisted on the people. Ballot boxes were stuffed and/or snatched in favour of the selected one. Later on, church thanks giving services would be organised and that act of electoral fraud and treachery, would be dedicated to the glory of God!

Today, it’s no longer called selection, its called “Anointing”. Once one has been anointed, all the other aspirants are expected to close shop and queue behind the anointed one. This anointing is also now followed by a gale of endorsements from various groups, known and previously unknown. Many of these endorsements are quite damaging to the endorsee as they are badly written in poor English language with no substance to the endorsement of mostly people that have not even declared their intention to stand in the election. But it’s not just at the state level as President Jonathan, who has still not declared his intention to stand in the election, is receiving endorsements too.

At this stage, I do not know what name to call the system of government we practice in Nigeria. I would opine that it’s closer to traditional rulership than it is to democracy. So I would say that it’s more like a mixture traditional rulership and a bad military regime. I will mention two facts about our government, or is it an empire which should add to how I would arrive at a name for our peculiar kind of government. The first is that it’s a government run by old men and their women. This is known as gerontocracy. Secondly, It also has a massive dose of religion as the leaders attribute everything to God or evil spirits. It is known as theocracy.

Since the system has no known name, I will try to fashion one. So what do we call the system of Government in Nigeria seeing it’s not democracy?

Gerontocracy + Theocracy = GeronTheocracy

GeronTheocracy is the government of Nigerians by Nigerian Elders and for Nigerian Elders, their friends and families. I have already established that candidates are usually selected and then anointed. After many years of burying my head in the sand like the proverbial ostrich that Nigeria is a democratic nation, I have now come to the realisation that democracy is not a word many of our people understand.

Many Nigerians would come out openly to defend Old men who impose their stooges on us claiming its God’s doing. “It’s God that gives power”, they would say. But just as I decided to shut my mouth about democracy and swallow what Nigerians believe work for them, those who have been defending imposition as God’s handwork are now screaming that imposition is undemocratic! The reason being that their own aspirants have had another aspirant superimposed on them.

What! How can imposition be undemocratic? When did we return to democracy to become a democratic nation? When last did we elect many of our leaders on merit? When did INEC recognise majority votes as the voice of the people?

This is the reason we are now all saying, “They are all the same”. This is nothing but pure and undiluted cop-out! Nigerians, he who stand for nothing gets nothing. Thirteen years of Labour government in the UK, brought the economy on its knees, in the worst recession in modern and peace times.

The British people voted Labour Party out and the Coalition government under a Conservative leadership emerged. They are now taking very difficult decisions and the economy is recovering faster than predicted. But If the British people are no longer happy with the Coalition, they will vote them out and Labour will be back……

That is democratic politics. It’s not church. It’s politics. We must choose one of the parties. “They’re all the same”, is a statement that confronts us as we go knocking on many doors in the UK. But they also know they must choose one or be stuck with one chosen by others.

“They’re all the same”, is now a common saying amongst Nigerians too. But what then do we do? “They’re all the same” is not a registered political party in Nigeria so can never win any election.

It’s through the process of voting the Parties, in and out of power, that change will happen. We cannot afford to stick to one party. Parties may have great ideas but at some point, they run out of steam and ideas.

We must make a choice. We cannot have nothing. It has to be people in PDP or APC or Labour etc. These are the only choices we have been presented. We must hold our noses and support individuals we consider straight enough in this messy political environment. To stand aloof would pertuate, forever, the mess that is our nation today!

Would it be a return to democracy or would we continue with Gerontheocracy? The choice is ours.

Follow me on Twitter @ Laurestar

Email: laurestar@aol.co.uk

That logjam in Taraba

By Mahmud Jega

The last time that I wrote about Taraba State and its politics was in 2008, on the occasion when Governor Danbaba Danfulani Suntai received in audience the Wurkum Elders Association. He used the occasion to issue a blistering threat against his friend turned political opponent Mr Danladi Baido. That was six years ago. I am not happy that I am returning to Taraba State on this page today only to discuss a political and constitutional logjam.

This time around the crisis is not so much about anything that Governor Suntai has said but more about what he has not said, which other people are claiming that he has said but which still other people, notably members of the State House of Assembly, do not believe that he said. Now, in the traumatic business of power transfer, the constitutional process is easy to follow when death comes swiftly to a chief executive. I often thought how lucky Danbaba Suntai was to survive a plane crash when the governor of my native old Sokoto State, Alhaji Shehu Kangiwa, died from a horse accident in 1981.

There was also no succession problem when Yobe State Governor Mamman Bello Ali died in a Florida hospital in 2009. Dr Goodluck Jonathan, who was the Acting President of Nigeria on that day because President Umaru Yar’adua had transmitted a letter to the National Assembly saying he was on leave, ordered deputy governor Ibrahim Gaidam to immediately take the oath of office. Maybe it was a dress rehearsal. I do not think the people who wrote the 1999 constitution of Nigeria ever thought that someone will be an Acting Governor for two years. They also never thought that someone will be a substantive governor when he has not so much as entered the governor’s office in two years.

The Taraba imbroglio is not without precedent, a very ugly one. When President Yar’adua fell very sick in 2009, persons close to him absolutely shut out Nigerians from any information about his state of health. Yar’adua didn’t transmit a letter and was in no state to write or sign one; hence Jonathan became the Acting President only when the National Assembly contrived the “doctrine of necessity.” Things have been made slightly easier in Taraba State because the Constitution has been amended to provide that where the chief executive is unable to transmit a letter within 21 days, the legislature could act and recognise his deputy as acting governor or president.

But for how long should a man act in that capacity? In the civil service an acting appointment is for a maximum period of six months, after which an officer must either be confirmed or he reverts back to his normal position. My first temporary job when I finished secondary school was as receiving clerk at the Sokoto State Public Service Commission, so I knew this matter very well. Later in life, I personally became tangled in the matter of prolonged acting appointment. I was appointed the Acting Editor of New Nigerian in January 2000 and I continued in that capacity for nearly two years. Several times during that period, super permanent secretary and former Secretary to the Federal Government Malam Liman Ciroma called to ask me why I had been acting beyond six months. He said he will draw the Federal Government’s attention to it. When I said our local management was responsible, he said he would to take up the matter with the MD but I urged him not to do so because I didn’t want it to look like I reported the matter to him. Old man Alhaji Garba Umar UTC must be in my shoes now [chuckle].

Only that, in his own case, the governor’s chair is not governed by Public Service Rules. Suntai has been sick for two years now with little sign of improvement in his mental and physical state. One would have thought that, for his own sake and also for the progress of the state, a man in that position should relinquish the office and concentrate instead on regaining his health. However, Suntai is not in a position to resign even if he wants to. Were he to transmit a resignation letter to the State House of Assembly today, good conscience and policy consistency requires that it must be rejected on the same grounds that his letter of “resumption of duty” was rejected. That is, until it can be proved that he actually wrote it. Of course family members and close associates will never permit Suntai to write such a letter, if their conduct so far is any guide.

Which leaves only one option, to follow the route prescribed by the Constitution to declare him incapacitated. This route was embarked upon three weeks ago when the state executive council passed a resolution asking the Speaker of the State Assembly to constitute a medical panel to determine Suntai’s state of health. Speaker Kente has already done so. He selected the panel with an obvious eye to expertise in the relevant area. Its chairman, Professor B.B. Shehu, is one of Nigeria’s most eminent neurosurgeons with a long reach abroad. I heard stories years ago of Nigerian patients with spinal problems who shunned our hospitals and went to Germany, only to be attended to by him! For a man like that, Taraba looks like a surgical piece of cake. Why would anybody stand in the way of a constitutional process to ensure an orderly transfer of power? At the most charitable, it is because family members hope that Governor Suntai may fully recover and return to his office. We would not know what German, American and lately British doctors have told the family about prospects for Suntai’s full recovery but surely time has been lost. Even while he recuperates, there is such a thing as the larger public interest. Taraba is one of the more backward states in Nigeria. Ideally, it needs a leadership that is twice as vigorous as Lagos State’s in order to reduce the development gap. Maybe Alhaji Garba Umar’s smiling face and white goatee beard is not the political answer to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, but even a slow performing substantive ruler is preferable to the permanent acting situation in Taraba.

Now, a power transfer from Suntai to Umar will entail not only a loss of power by one man, his immediate family, his circle of friends and his political godfather. It is also seen by many people as transfer of power between two religious communities. I do not know the demographic statistics of Taraba State. This is partly because I have not set foot there since September 1990 when, as a cub reporter of Citizen Magazine, I spent a week in Wukari reporting on the Tiv versus Jukun crisis. There was even no Taraba State then. Even from afar though, it looks like the two major religions are heavily represented on Taraba’s mountains and along its rich river valleys. Someone should reassure them that the feeling of communal loss of power is only just that, a feeling.

It is a difficult point to make these days when many Northerners are saying they have been short-changed by Jonathan’s rise to power and are clamouring that power “returns” to them. I, for one, do not participate in clamours for communal power. I do not feel that under Goodluck Jonathan, state power is further away from me than it was when Yar’adua inhabited Aso Rock. The biggest stumbling block to the conclusion of power transfer in Taraba, reporters say, is the state’s most prominent statesman Lt Gen T. Y. Danjuma. Days after Suntai returned to the country in August last year, T.Y. answered a phone call from Alhaji Garba Umar. “Who is it?” he asked sharply, even though phones of nowadays show you the caller’s identity. Umar said, “It is the Acting Governor of Taraba State.” At that, T.Y. deployed a tone and temper fit for the Battle of Uli and shouted into the phone, “My friend, stop parading yourself as the Acting Governor! You are the Deputy Governor! The substantive Governor is back!” Could someone kindly call this statesman to order?

Governance, Protocols, frills and Cost- My Takeaway

By Babatunde Fashola

As we grapple with the challenges of participatory governance and the cost implication of keeping the wheels of government turning, it seems to me that there are little things that can be done that may lead us to big things. I like little things because they are simple to understand. They are also useful for preparing to do big things. One of the little things is the protocols of governance. Is it a frill or a necessity? If it is a necessity, does it apply at all times or at some times? If it applies at some times, have we defined those times, and if we have not, should we not? As I will show later, they have cost consequences, but for now let me get to the specific protocols.

The National Anthem

I know that Section 24 (a) of the Constitution impose an obligation of respect on citizens for the National Anthem whenever it is rendered. The constitution provides, and I paraphrase: “It shall be the duty of every citizen to…respect…the National Anthem…” What the constitution does not provide for, is when the National Anthem should be rendered. Should it happen at every event attended by our president and governors, such as social parties, political party rallies, book launches, conferences, seminars and all types of events to which our public officers are invited?

Should the National Anthem be rendered at the beginning or at the end or at both times, or indeed at any time these public officers arrive even if the event is halfway through and has to be interrupted for the National Anthem, as is sometimes the case? Indeed, there is the wider question about the appropriateness or otherwise of inviting public officers to these events and the infringement on executive time on the one hand, and their own response or refusal to respond on the other hand, and the political costs of their decisions.

How many times are presidents, governors, ministers and commissioners in other parts of the world invited to these functions as ‘chief host’, ‘chief guest of honour’ etc, and what is the impact on national productivity? But this is a matter for another discourse. For now, I will return to the subject of protocols. I must confess that the limited research that I have had the opportunity to conduct has not revealed the existence of any laws or regulations on this matter. But I can assert that these are matters where the federal government, whether through the National Assembly or the Presidency, can help to establish clear guidelines by legislative action or executive orders.

In case you are wondering how this affects the cost of governance, it might interest you to know that people are hired and paid to provide electronic equipment, speakers and amplifiers; and in some cases full bands such as the police, navy, army or prison bands to render the anthem at some of these events. Rental costs, transport costs, honoraria all go into the costs of government where the contract is at the instance of government. The issue therefore is not about rendering of the anthem. It is about direction as to when it is necessary to do so and, consequently, when it is necessary to spend public funds. In Lagos, I have issued an executive order since October 2010 to direct that the rendering of the National Anthem be done by singing rather than by electronic recording of the instrumentation, so that we can at least internalise the words which are rich and inspiring; and in some way hope to act and live those words.

Receiving Visiting Dignitaries at the Airport or Border Post

This is perhaps a more difficult protocol to understand. My attention has not been brought to any clear directive or regulation about what type of dignitary is deserving of an airport reception party or delegation, and if we have identified the dignitary that is deserving, what type of ‘visit’ deserves an airport reception? Is it every visiting head of state who is on a personal visit to our country or a state within it, that should be received by the governor or his designated representative? Is it every time the president visits a state (whether or not on a state visit) that he must be received at the airport by the governor or his delegate, irrespective of the commitments of the state on that date?

Put differently, does every visit, even for a political rally, qualify as a state visit? In other words, if a governor and a president are of opposing parties, should the governor go to receive the president when he comes to that state to campaign to defeat the party of the governor? What is the appropriate protocol when governors of opposing parties visit each other’s states for campaign rallies? What kind of reception should they get at the airport? It might surprise members of the public that a serving governor is raising these issues. The truth is they are simple, as I have said. But I am not aware that there are clear or set rules on the matter.

When you factor the number of vehicles that are deployed from one end of town to the other, the cost of fuel, the man hours lost, the work not done, the gridlock that characterises VIP movements and the cost of governance in actual terms and in lost opportunities, you are likely to see the point that small things are simple, but very important, because they accumulate to big things. Personally, speaking for myself, the only reception I expect at the airport is the vehicle that will take me to my destination. But my personal disposition cannot be the rule.

Salutations, Public Speaking and VIPS

“All protocols observed.” That must be a familiar phrase. To my mind, this is uniquely Nigerian, as I do not know any other country where this is done. Why is this important? It consumes time, it diminishes the real message, confuses people, and it is expensive.

Time Consumption

I think the accepted practice from where these protocols originated is to acknowledge the most senior public office holder, your host, if you are a guest at the event, to end by saying “distinguished ladies and gentlemen”. The truth is that if you are at any event worthy of the name and you do not find yourself able to fit into the class of those addressed as “distinguished ladies and gentlemen” then you are probably undeserving of being at the event. I once attended an event in “you know where”, and it took all of one hour and seven or so minutes to recognise all the guests and address protocols before the event started. Our country is behind on many developmental fronts, and we must be seen to seek to gain time, optimize its value and avoid waste of time, because the world will not slow down or wait for us. Time is the REAL MONEY.

Message Diminishes

It is now customary for aides of public officers to go ahead of them and write down a list of VIPs to be recognised by their principal before he gives his speech. Because we are all VIPs with brittle ego that have become bigger than ourselves, we take offence when our names are not mentioned. My stomach turns when I see aides of public officers, getting on the podium after their principal has commenced his address to pass notes of names of persons he did not acknowledge or even walking behind him on stage back and forth. Only in Nigeria.

Somebody (not one of my staff) once walked on to the stage while I was speaking, to pass me a note that I did not mention a particular public servant’s name. I believe he now knows better not to do it again. It is nothing but bad behaviour. What you then see is a protocol list that is two pages long which the speaker must go through before his message. In the event he first gets a huge applause for reading people’s names, and it may be either the speaker’s biggest applause for the day: because there may really be no message thereafter or “it is lost”. Try to see if you can connect this with idea of “Talk Shops”. When you evaluate what has come out in terms of development or quotable quotes that are indigenous, from the many conferences, summits and seminars that we hold. Put the best of these seminars together, and see if you can find the value that they have delivered in terms of speeches and contents.

Confuses People

Everybody now apologises for messing up the protocol or mixing it up simply because we have not stayed with the simple one of “Distinguished ladies and gentlemen”. Instead, after going through a two-page long list of names, we then say “All protocols observed”. This in itself is contradictory in my humble view. If you choose to observe all protocols, it should automatically dispense with the need or desire to mention anybody by name.

Expensive

I take this opportunity to suggest for our consideration a draft like the one below as a full version: “Mr President/ Governor (if he is the most senior public officer present or represented), Your Excellencies (to cover vice-president/deputy governors, and other governors, diplomats present), Your royal majesties/highness (to cover traditional institutions where present) Distinguished ladies and gentlemen.”

It seems to me that in this its longest format (which may be shorter, where some classes of people are not present), we can dispense with salutation protocols in under one minute and save a lot of time and money. These uncertainties about protocols of governance make it difficult to totally disagree with those who contend that our democracy is nascent. That said, it must be beyond contention that their resolution is one of the challenges that we must overcome in our democratic journey. As we seek to rebuild our union and renew our nation, we must find consensus on these little issues because they have larger consequences on time management, productivity and national development

Fashola is Lagos state governor

Nigeria: Leaving it to God since....1960

By Prince Charles Dickson

"Just leave am for god, Amadi Ora"

It was October 1st, and trust me, many parts of Nigeria was green and white, some parents went the extra mile, dying their kids hair the national color, my own kids went to a party and came back with a green and white faces.

In Abuja, the nation's capital very many cars had flags flying, whether at full or half-mast it was inconsequential. Activists, Unionists and leaders of all shades had a word or two to say, radio and television had Independence Day tailored programs, and Newspapers had commentaries from my comrades in pen arm.

The message was basically of two kinds--Hope and Despair: For the hopeful, you could not discount their pride in the Nigerian spirit. And for those that despaired, the tales of woes where inevitable, and you dare add true.

Many compared the nation to the 54-year-old crawling man, others said; the fact that we are still a nation is a miracle and a plus.

And prompt, talking about miracles, my eye caught the attention of a friend's comment, "just leave am for god", Amadi Ora said "the damage this singular statement has done us in this country is immeasurable!"

I could not but agree, as I reflected on that comment, Sallah was upon us as a nation, and I decided that without sounding like some episcopal theologian or expert in religion my admonition will take this dimension.

Kindly and patiently follow me...Are you a Christian, did you eat Sallah meat?

I enjoyed my childhood so much that most times I detest growing up and old. If there was a reason I did not like failing in school, especially any term that preceded the festive period, it was because I hated missing the visits and festive roaming because of poor performance reprimands.

Those visits were worth the fun of a whole year.

Like Christmas, Ileya (Eid-el-Kabir) used to be fun for us, even though we were/are Christians. We would put on our best clothes and go visiting our family members and friends who were Muslims, they who would do same during Christmas.

The only difference I knew that existed between a Christian and a Muslim, then, was the place of worship; we went to church; they went to the mosque. Shikena!

Every year, our freezer and pots would be filled with “Rago leya, nama Sallah or Eran Ileya” (Sallah Meat) that would last several days after the celebration was over. I could recount the names of those who would bring “abinchin Sallah or ounje odun” and at what time it would be.

Any knock on our door, after the family altar, would usher in the first set of pounded yam and greatly garnished Egusi soup (a special recipe reserved only for that season).

Later to be followed by a variety of rice and meat from different cooks. But as we started growing, things changed.

There is this hypothesis forbidding the eating of “such meats”. Some tag it “meat offered to idols” while some just hate the fact that it was a ram.

Some people would eat the chicken and the cow meat served on Sallah day but not the ram (though all came from the same pot). I have no intention of going into the theology of difference in Gods of Christians and Muslims.

The crux of this piece is not to establish whether eating Sallah meat is right or wrong for a Christian! On the contrary, as time past, with numerous ethno-religious crisis, with building hatred, with the 'Islamic' agenda, with the "Christians" have it spirit. With who took us to OIC and who should bring us out taking center stage, with how many Muslims have been IG, or how many Christians would be ABU vice chancellor becoming the issues, suddenly we are not sure what to leave to God and what not to leave to Him.

Leaders stole us to the gutters, we left it to god in establishing the ethnicity of the thief, and we refuse to leave it with God when it came to the faith of the thief.

Did we leave Ebola to God, or we left it to fate, is the light (electricity) meant for Nigerians in the hands of god, have we left our courage to god, in return for cowardice.

Let me cap it all with this story. When I was teaching in a private nursery and primary school, I had both Christian and Muslim students in my primary 1 class.

On resumption after a Sallah break, one of the kids ran to me with a parcel of meat and said excitedly, “Uncle, I brought this for you”. Would you have expected me to reject such from a kid whose sole understanding of Sallah was a period of celebration just like birthday or Xmas and a time to share with his loved ones?

Nigerians are so religions yet with no godliness, we live in an era of mutual suspicion, we have lost our innocence from the moment we started leaving what God intended for us to do, in the hands of god.

So, while the flag glowed in the blazing sun, and I remain an unrepentant optimist yet a cautious one about the Nigeria dream, while I ate my Sallah meat till my tooth ached, and though I still expect the main Sallah meat from you, I reflected that on the 1st October there was no flag flying hoisted anywhere around Nigeria’s foremost Independence Square—The Tafawa Balewa Square, could it be that, we equally left that to God…while we bicker on whether to eat Sallah ram together as a nation, one wonders when we will get it right—Only time will tell.

NB

Kindly note my use of both capitals and small letters in spelling “GOD” at different times, it is deliberate.

Yours in High Regards

Prince Charles Dickson, 234-8033311301, 8057152301

Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso: Nigerian Political Messiah

By Mubarak Anwar Rijiyarlemo

Nigeria is third among the countries with most poor people on the planet having garnered 7% of world poor people according to World Bank. By and large the so called giant of Africa become a country with largest refugees in Africa and also ranked third globally superseding the failed state of Somalia.

Due to collapsed and collapsing institutions of development across the nation in the hand of the ruling party since the return of democracy in 1999, Nigerians would not be blamed if they agitate for positive change in their efforts to save their nation from the hand of inept and callous politicians who have sunk the country in the ocean of corruption.

As the election year draws nearer, the indefatigable defender of common man and governor of the most populous state of Kano, Rabi’u Kwankwaso remains the best option for vulnerable and good Nigerians who admires to see the nation revamped and rescued from the hand of PDP that planted the nation in the hot desert of chaos.

For positive political change, Nigerians must unite to vote out the raining regime like how we teamed up against EVD in order to save our father’s land from dreadful quagmire.

Jonathan’s regime is nothing but bunch of corrupt politicians, those people have turned our nation into one of the most disorderly nations in the world, one of the most corrupt, insensitive and one of insufficient places under the sun.

Kwankwaso, the perspicacious leader of Kano has become a yard stick for most states across the federation in view of his heavy and abundant projects across the nook and crannies of the state despite limited resources.

In the hand of pioneer of new North-West and KUST universities, Kano would soon over take Ekiti in terms of number of professors in view of the more than 2000 students sponsored to pursue MSc and PhD globally by his government, more than the amount sponsored by federal government.

“Owner of the room knew where it leaks” according to Hausa adage, Kwankwaso declared and implements free education in Kano and set to send 121 HND distinction and upper credits graduates to abroad for Msc in October.

Youths of Nigeria would smile if Kwankwaso come to power in 2015 more than how people of Kano are smiling, he has zero tolerance to corruption, job creation, farming and security are his priority.

The hydro electric power stations at Tiga and Challawa constructed by Kwankwaso are set to gear up in January next year which would generate thousands of jobs and revive the economy of commercial city of Kano which clearly indicates power problems is going to be history if Nigerians vote Kwankwaso in coming election.

Kano is becoming the Dubai of sahel while united Nigeria will rub shoulders with developed countries in the hand of visionary leadership of Kwankwaso in a short period.

Dirty, callous, noisy and ostentatious politicians shielded by government of president Jonathan in exchange of their support in coming election would have no iota of space to loot public treasury if Rabi’u Kwankwaso takes the mantle of leadership in Nigeria comes 2015.

Give us Kwankwaso for better Nigeria. God bless Nigeria.

Twitter: @mubarakovic

Facebook: MubarakAnwar/facebook

Who is afraid of Muhammadu Buhari?

By Simon Kolawole

The moment millions of Nigerians have been waiting for is finally within touching distance. You know it: that moment when the opponent of President Goodluck Jonathan in the February 14, 2015 presidential election will be known. And that candidate has to come from the All Progressives Congress (APC), the biggest opposition party in the history of our democracy – judging by the number of states controlled and the legislative seats occupied. I expect one of the toughest presidential elections ever. I pray for an election that is very competitive and credible, hopefully in continuation of the tradition that we have established since 2011.

Although Jonathan has not officially declared his intention, I can bet my wristwatch on it that he will seek re-election. As far as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is concerned, Jonathan’s candidacy is settled. It is the APC that has a heavyweight battle in its hands, with Maj. Gen. Muhammadu Buhari and former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar eyeing the ticket. Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso of Kano is also interested. Senator Bukola Saraki may be interested. I am not ready to discuss Hon. Aminu Waziri Tambuwal until I see a broom in his hand.

It would appear the strongest candidate in the APC is Buhari. Without disrespect to other aspirants, Buhari easily stands out for many reasons. No one has successfully maligned his integrity. His lifestyle exudes discipline and modesty. President Olusegun Obasanjo put this to the test when he probed the Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund headed by Buhari from 1994-1999. Nothing was found on him. The first panel found nothing. Dissatisfied, Obasanjo set up another panel. The result still came out negative.

In public service experience, Buhari has it more than any other APC member. He was a military governor of what are today six states; he was minister of petroleum resources; he was military head of state; and he was PTF chairman. That is a rich pedigree. In 2003, he won 12 million votes virtually all by himself. In 2011, he also won 12 million votes without a discernible political structure beyond the street appeal. I don’t see any APC aspirant who has a more seductive CV. In Buhari, APC has a man of character, experience and significant street following. I say this without prejudice to the qualities and pedigrees of the other APC aspirants.

If Buhari’s uniqueness is so obvious, why are the APC kingmakers not too enthusiastic about him? An APC chieftain told me recently: “We cannot win with Buhari -and we cannot win without him.” To strip that statement naked, he was simply saying the party needs Buhari’s support base to win but Buhari himself cannot win as a candidate. Several arguments have been developed against Buhari, notably about his age, the perception of him as a religious extremist, his failures at the poll at three previous attempts, the need for young blood in a hi-tech world, and his promise not to run again after the 2011 poll -for which some are now calling his integrity to question.

In truth, there are some fears that are not openly expressed. There is a latent fear among the political elite that a Buhari presidency would endanger them. He may choose to prosecute the very persons who helped him to power -if only to prove a point that he cannot tolerate corruption. Many Nigerians are already questioning the company Buhari is keeping, believing that his character risks contamination. Traditional rulers are afraid that the goodies that flow uninvited into their palaces may cease, while the political class cannot imagine how miserable their lives could be under Buhari. They don’t say that openly, though.

In the South-west, which could make a Buhari presidency possible, the unspoken word is that a vice-presidential slot, even though attractive, may end up meaning nothing. Some think the North simply wants power back -every other position is irrelevant. It is feared by some politicians that if Buhari becomes president, it is one of this trusted associates that will be running the show, no matter who is vice-president. References are often made to the Second Republic when Alhaji Umaru Dikko, a minister, was effectively an alternate president to Alhaji Shehu Shagari.

The fear of a perceived aggressive and vindictive “northernisation agenda” is also being raised in hushed tones by many Yoruba leaders, with frequent references to how former President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua filled the most important positions in his government with appointees from the Katsina-Kano axis, and how he stopped picking Obasanjo’s calls three months after assuming office. There is a fear that Buhari may “cage” Asiwaju Bola Tinubu as soon as he gets to Aso Rock. All these things are being whispered, of course. But the fear is real.

Meanwhile, in Jonathan’s circle, Buhari is also feared. But the fear is not so much about Buhari defeating the president in the contest -they think, rightly or wrongly, that they have mastered a way of defeating him. They believe the best moment for Buhari was in 2011 and having failed, he has lost the momentum. A minister told me last week that the greatest worry about a Buhari candidacy is post-election violence. “Buhari’s supporters are one-dimensional and fanatical. The only thing they want to hear is that their man has won, if not there will be trouble,” he said.

In the APC, those who don’t want Buhari are secretly wishing that he would make his “crowd” available to whoever is picked as the party’s candidate. That means, for instance, that if Atiku picks the ticket, Buhari should hop on his campaign train and market him to his supporters across the Northern states. Interesting. If his supporters are indeed one-dimensional, then Buhari raising anyone else’s hands will not pacify them. To them, it is Buhari or nothing. It is also feared that if Buhari does not get the ticket, he may defect to another party to run. If that happens, the opposition should officially declare Jonathan as the run-away winner of the 2015 poll.

I am excited, as a journalist and analyst, watching the 2015 intrigues unfold day by day. I am eagerly awaiting the twists and the turns. I want to witness all the drama, hopefully without any tragic subplot. With PDP and its allies likely to control 22 states heading into 2015 -leaving APC with just 14 states -the opposition should be clear about one thing: they are not going into the elections as favourites. It is going to be titanic battle. Their performance will rely heavily on how they manage the presidential primary and its fall-outs. APC came out of their June national convention a bit fractured.

Going forward, APC should know that it is in their interest to realistically manage their Buhari fears. Any misstep will be their doom. Meanwhile, PDP seems to be in rude health, and they too will be watching the Buhari scenario with a combination of anxiety and amusement. Let the game begin!

Eid-El-Kabir Message to the Nation From Pres. Jonathan

By President Goodluck Jonathan

Dear Compatriots,

I greet and felicitate with all our countrymen and women of the Islamic faith as we celebrate this year’s Eid-El-Kabir.

I also congratulate all believers who have successfully undertaken the Hajj this year as enjoined by Prophet Mohammed (May Peace Be Upon Him).

As they conclude the rites of the Hajj and prepare to return home, let us all join them in offering special prayers for greater security, peace, unity and progress in our dear country as well as for the peaceful and successful conduct of next year’s general elections.

With this week’s issuance of a formal notice of the impending general elections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), another national campaign season is now truly upon us and I urge all political leaders in the country to place the overriding interest of the well-being and progress of our fatherland above all other considerations in the coming campaigns and elections.

My administration has done its sincere best in the past four years to implement its agenda for national transformation and move our country forward on several fronts.

I thank the many individuals, stakeholders, groups, associations, non-governmental organisations, unions and political leaders from across the country who have, in recognition and appreciation of our efforts and commitment to repositioning our dear nation for more rapid growth and development, urged me to seek a second term in office.

In deciding on an appropriate response to such calls, I will place the greater interests of national harmony, cohesion, unity, security, political stability, progress, equity, justice and fairness above any personal ambition or sectional agenda.

I urge all other political leaders in the country to do the same. Let us all rise above unedifying, unpatriotic and selfish personal interests and divisive sectional agenda in the coming national elections.

Let us also commit ourselves more to the sustenance of democracy and political stability which are essential prerequisites for the advancement of good governance, inclusive economic growth and rapid development.

In spite of the significant progress we have made in the past four years, our dear nation continues to face critical challenges in some areas. I am convinced however that if we persevere and continue to build diligently on what the present administration has achieved, we will surely overcome all hindrances and fully establish a stronger, more united and prosperous nation that meets the aspirations and yearnings of all of our people.

As we celebrate the Eid-El-Kabir, let us also rededicate and commit ourselves to the Holy Prophet’s injunctions of piety, honesty, charity and generosity to the less privileged, impartial leadership and true justice for all.

These virtues and lessons will surely stand our nation in good stead as we continue our journey towards the fulfillment of our founding fathers’ vision of a great nation.

May Allah’s blessings be upon all our compatriots who have undertaken the Hajj this year and on our dear country.

I wish all Nigerians currently in the Holy Land a safe journey back home.

Happy Eid-El-Kabir to you all!

Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, GCFR

President, Federal Republic of Nigeria