The Crawling Giant

By Luke Onyekakeyah

The Nigerian condition has been the subject of conversation among writers, policymakers, and market men and women. There is no where the subject is not broached or discussed and often solutions are proffered, from the rational to the mundane. This is to be applauded because a culture of debate is to be preferred to silence as it is a national asset. Indeed, it is the duty of the ruling elite within the state sphere to distil the feedback from the citizenry and turn it into an outcome that is healthy for the polity.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: Aug 9, 2013
• ISBN: 9781477277799

Luke Onyekakeyah

Dr. Luke Onyekakeyah had his primary and secondary education respectively at St. John Bosco’s Primary School, Owu-Amakohia, Ikeduru and St. Peter Claver’s Seminary, Okpala, Imo State. He graduated from the University of Lagos with B.A. (Hons) degree Geography in the Second Class (Upper Division). He also attended the University of Jos where he obtained M. Sc. degree in Environmental & Resource Planning. He was senior lecturer at the Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Enugu and Imo State University, Owerri. While at the Enugu State University, he enrolled for his Ph.D. degree in Water Resources Management at the Awka Campus of the University, now Nnamdi Azikiwe University. He later completed the program at the Pacific Southern University, Los Angeles (USA). A fellow of several professional bodies, Dr. Onyekakeyah has traveled to about 30 countries and has global perspective on issues. He is currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Guardian newspaper in Lagos. A columnist and analyst, Dr. Onyekakeyah maintains a weekly column in The Guardian on burning national and international issues. He combines strong academic background with cutting-edge journalism in his incisive commentaries. He is happily married with five children.

Book preview

CONTENTS

Foreword

Introduction

Acknowledgements

Chapter One

Politics

Chapter Two

Governance

Chapter Three

Economy/Corruption

Chapter Four

Oil And Gas

Chapter Five

Education

Chapter Six

Infrastructure

About The Author

Appendix 1: Politics

Appendix 2: Governance

Appendix 3: Economy/Corruption

Appendix 4: Oil And Gas

Appendix 5: Education

Appendix 6: Infrastructure

FOREWORD

44363.jpg he Nigerian condition has been the subject of conversation among writers, policymakers, and market men and women. There is no where the subject is not broached or discussed and often solutions are proffered, from the rational to the mundane. This is to be applauded because a culture of debate is to be preferred to silence as it is a national asset. Indeed, it is the duty of the ruling elite within the state sphere to distil the feedback from the citizenry and turn it into an outcome that is healthy for the polity.

From independence to-date, the country has remained in the throes of nation-building with no epochal breakthrough. States are created at the whims and caprices of every successive leadership with consequent identity problems. Infrastructures are not improved and extant ones are allowed to decay while attempts at revamping them are turned into conduits of primitive accumulation. Corruption, though a symptom of profound systemic dysfunction, has assumed a concrete reality. Big culprits, often from the state sphere, are hardly ever convicted or subject to naming and shaming. In 1966, the military putschists said there action was against ten-per centers and all those who had turned the country into an object of ridicule. Today, it is the case of celebrated ‘stolen billions’. Contracts are over-invoiced and infrastructures are hardly designed to last. Lighting up the country has remained a national jinx. Efforts at breaking it are frustrated by vested interests.

The knowledge industry has also been bastardized by fluctuating policies of minders of the sector. Incessantly, strike, justified and unjustified, has reared its head. As a result, academic timetables are hardly adhered to. Public schools are underfunded while private institutions are proliferated with unenforced standards to an extent that none of the country’s higher institutions is ranked among the best global hundred.

Politics is an unedifying canvas of absurdities. Globally, democratizing countries have their problems. Elections are not free and fair, freedom of expression are stifled; political opponents are assassinated; internal democracy is undermined within the party structures and processes; incumbents manipulate their tenure for elongation; census figures are not reliable; conflicting constitutional provisions; violation of the rule of law and preponderance of corruption. These grey areas associated with transition countries characterized Nigeria’s politics.

The pathologies of the Nigerian condition captured above constitutive the subject of many scholarly outputs and have spurned many epithets, such as The Crippled Giant; Dysfunctional Country; What A Country and ‘stolen billions’. They are the subject of this work, The Crawling Giant. It is yet another engagement with the Nigerian condition. It ex-rays the problems confronting the country—politics, governance, economy, corruption, oil and gas, education and infrastructure with a streak of patriotism and eagerness for some miracle.

Nigeria’s independence in October 1960 in the words of its founding fathers was ‘a great day’, a day of freedom, political freedom and every other thing was expected to be added unto the polity. Fifty-two years after, this dream has not been actualized. Writers upon writers have bemoaned this state of affairs and this author joins the band of lamenters who are desirous of change. Nigeria’s problem is not insurmountable if only its leadership can learn the lessons of failure; shun primordial sentiments and single-mindedness and move the country forward. This seems to be the message of this work. Incumbent state actors and aspirant leadership would find it invaluable.

Sylvester Odion Akhaine, PhD (London)

Senior Lecturer, Dept. of Political Science,

Lagos State University, Lagos.

INTRODUCTION

44356.jpg he activities marking the amalgamation of Northern and Southern Nigeria kicked off on February 5, 2013. By 2014, Nigeria will be 100 years old as one united political entity. The country got her independence on October 1, 1960. It was a very remarkable day, which was elaborately celebrated by men, women and school children, with feasts and dances. Nigerians saw independence as a great historic landmark; a day of freedom from colonial bondage. Nigeria’s Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, in his Independence Day speech, called it the day Nigerians have been eagerly looking forward; our great day; a wonderful day. There was nothing in the wildest imagination of anyone that Nigeria was not going to record great strides in different fields of human endeavor and also take her rightful place on the global arena. Being endowed with abundant human and natural resources, with a great deal of wealth, a tremendous leap forward was expected. Nigeria was ahead of countries like Brazil, Malaysia, Singapore and Korea in the early 60s. The expectations were very high. The country’s founding fathers had great vision. A potential giant was born.

But Nigeria’s expectation was aborted quickly with the outbreak of political crisis in the country, which led to the first military coup on January 14, 1966. Many of the country’s prominent leaders were killed in the putsch. That set the stage for military intervention that led to series of coups and counter coups. Altogether, Nigerians witnessed seven coups and counter coups from January 1966 to November, 1983. All through this period, the country was in the throes of military dictatorship that more than any other thing set the stage for the present woes. During those dark years of military rule, there was more of plundering and looting than development.

Thus, for a period of thirty-three years, Nigeria remained stagnant; the foundation led by the colonial masters was left to disintegrate. Whatever progress Nigeria recorded in more than fifty-two years of independence was minuscule compared with the huge amount of money that accrued to the country during the period. The economy was bastardized; it took a plunge for the worse. Agriculture which formed the backbone of the economy at independence was abandoned in preference to oil diseconomy. The political situation remained unstable. Socially, the majority of the people were emasculated. The over three-decade period saw Nigeria being overtaken by countries she had hitherto superseded. Today, Nigeria is nowhere near Brazil and the Asian Tigers. Nigeria has been left crawling from far behind these countries.

After the long years of locust, following a fierce pro-democracy movement, a new political dispensation emerged in 1999, when the military handed power to a civilian democratic government. Like what happened at independence, Nigerians heaved a sigh of relief, hoping to see a new beginning. Unfortunately, this hope seems to be dashed, as the Nigerian situation went from bad to worse on daily basis. The new crop of political elite appears not to reckon with the stark backwardness of the country that needs urgent redemption.

More than a decade into democratic governance, there is lethargy in the land. The economy has taken a nosedive with ravaging mass poverty and unemployment. Pervasive corruption has overwhelmed the country. The safety of lives and property are not assured even as armed militancy is commonplace across the various ethnic nationalities. There is systemic failure occasioned by poor leadership. The country is drifting thro and fro and no one knows where it is heading.

This book is a critical analysis of issues and concerns of the Nigerian situation from 2005 and 2012, published in my weekly column in The Guardian. There are accounts from the birth through the crawling stages of the giant. Nigeria is the crawling giant. The book is meant to provide a hilarious reference to the ugly past assuming that something happens and the giant wakes up. Whether it will rise is a matter of conjecture.

I had thought of a fitting title that captures the past, present and future of Nigeria and settled at The Crawling Giant. A crawling baby rises but something is wrong when a giant is crawling. There is opportunity for change. This will require fundamental restructuring of the present warped political, social and economic structures. The challenge is on the leadership to spearhead this change so that the giant can rise to occupy its rightful position in the scheme of things. The leaders, politicians, experts, policy makers, academicians and researchers will find this book invaluable.

Luke Onyekakeyah, PhD

The Guardian Editorial Board

Lagos, February, 2013

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

44349.jpg here can be no writing without inspiration from the Almighty God. I am grateful to God for the inspiration to write this book. I must appreciate the opportunity given to me by The Guardian, for providing the platform from which I made these contributions in the newspaper. I say a big thank you. I am indebted to Bayo Ogunmupe of The Guardian and Chris Uba of Business World, editors, who painstakingly proofread the manuscript at short notice. Thanks a lot. Thanks to members of the The Guardian Editorial Board whose incisive weekly discussions and analysis of developments in Nigeria and the world sharpened by intellect. And, to Grace Mbanugo, Matthew Ozah and Kemi Obadimeji, who fished out past issues of The Guardian and re-typed some of the texts I say thank you. Dr. Sylvester Odion Akhaine graciously accepted to write the Foreword at very short notice despite his tight engagements for which I am most grateful. The Librarian, Titilayo Modupe Oba, painstakingly prepared the index entries and made useful corrections. To her I am very grateful. Finally, I thank my publishers, Authorhouse, for undertaking to publish this book. The useful advice, friendliness, diligence and patience of the staff while I was working on the manuscript really encouraged me. My wife and children gave me invaluable support while doing this work.

CHAPTER ONE

POLITICS

The Crawling Giant

44346.jpg he Encarta Dictionary defines a giant as somebody extraordinarily accomplished, somebody or something larger than usual. If it’s a human being, he’s much taller, bigger and stronger. A giant has much powerful strength than is usual. Its immense size and power confers on it absolute advantage against opponents that are dead scared to dare it. The story is well known of Goliath, the Philistine giant, who terrified Israel at the battle field for days as no one dared to confront him until the young David dared him as recorded in 1 Samuel 17.

Giants were known to confront even the gods. Greek mythology records that because of its immense size and strength, a giant confronted Zeus and other gods at Mount Olympus. Robert Wadlow, one of the tallest persons in history with more than 8 ft (2.72m) in height and weighed 439 Ib. (199 kg), was an irrefutable giant. That’s giants as it applies to humans.

If you apply giant to a country, it means a country that has recorded extraordinary accomplishments; a country that’s much larger than usual, a country that’s a leading force, a signpost, which others look at for direction. Such a country is a world power. All the countries recognized as world powers today are giants.

And to further consolidate their already larger than usual size and strength, they formed economic and military alliances that confers on them super power status. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one such super power alliances that lead the world. You dare not face NATO in battle without dire consequences.

Having defined what a giant is, let’s now look at the other side of the coin, which captures the subject of this discourse. I’m now talking of a situation where a giant is crawling! It’s not common to have a crawling giant. But if, for whatever reason, a giant is found to be crawling, something unusual must have happened to him.

The most likely reason could be that the giant is in the war front crawling towards the enemy position. The giant may not be said to be crawling in the real sense of the word because his action at that moment is in the realm of warfare. A crawling giant in this sense is dangerous. His maneuvering is geared towards getting the better part of the enemy and dealing the deadliest blow on him.

Second, it might be that the giant is incapacitated by natural forces that are far beyond his control. Those who used to know the giant when active would shake their heads in awe, having known him as insurmountable in the past. This scenario is possible as nature takes ultimate toll on all creatures. History is replete with empires that rose and fell; tyrants that stood like colossus and later fell. In the wild, the only force that threatens elephants is natural force.

The third circumstance that could make a giant crawl is possibly deadly injury in battle. If that could happen, it means the battle was so fierce and debilitating that the enemy gained the upper hand. This scenario is not common except something unusual happened.

The fourth and possibly the worst circumstance that could make a giant crawl is self-inflicted injury, in which case only the giant is to blame for his fate. A crawling giant in this context is one that failed to recognize its position in the scheme of things. Rather than rising and occupying its rightful position, this unfortunate giant embarked on wastage of its God-given powers. The prodigality instinct of this giant on the ground drove him to squander his means and opportunities in reckless spending.

And like the story of the prodigal son, it got to a point when he wasted all his inheritance and was in danger of losing his life. It was at that point that he came back to his senses, made a drastic decision to brave the shame and humiliation of a wasted youth to go back home. He was lucky that the home front was still intact and could still accommodate him. I want to stress that it’s not all prodigal sons that have the opportunity for a second chance. Many prodigal sons that misused their opportunities never had a second chance to start all over again. They perish in their foolishness.

The fore going is the story of Nigeria at 51. This weekend, Nigeria will turn 51 years since she gained independence from Britain on October 1, 1960. I’ve deliberately refused saying that Nigeria will celebrate 51 years of independence because there’s nothing to celebrate for a crawling giant at 51. In the past, during these anniversaries, some used to argue that if there was nothing else to celebrate, it’s the fact that the country is still intact as it was at independence. Nigeria is intact with wounds and bandages all over her body from machete cuts, gun-shot wounds, shrapnel from bomb explosions, etc.

A situation where Nigerians don’t feel at ease outside their state or local government of origin cannot be said to convey a sense of a united one Nigeria. Those projecting a false picture of unity are not helping matters. It’s better to appreciate a problem and then look for ways of tackling it than denying that the problem exists. For as long as there’s denial and the impression is created that all is well, when, in fact, the country is in severe stress, it amounts to self delusion.

The woes currently besieging Nigeria are multifarious. It’s bad to the extent that the authorities appear overwhelmed and don’t know where to begin to tackle the problems. The reason is simple. All the decisions taken by the leadership on behalf of the country since independence are faulty! That’s why things are the way they are. Because of those bad decisions, things were allowed to degenerate from day-one at independence. These problems didn’t start today. They have festered unabatedly over the years, graduating from near insignificance to the present overwhelming amorphous complexity.

Arguably, few people at independence actually believed in one Nigeria. Entrenched ethnic sentiment was rife. Even if that wasn’t the case, the leadership did nothing to address the issue of ethnic cleavages by impressing it upon the citizens that wherever they lived is their home. The civil war that broke out in May 1967, served as the springboard for the ruining of Nigeria. The splitting of Nigeria into twelve states in the wake of the civil war as a war strategy served as the factor that finally ruined Nigeria.

I have always argued that while it might have been expedient to split the country into twelve states in 1967 as a war strategy rather than for development purpose, at the end of the war in 1970, the war-induced state structure should have been abolished and the country returned to the pre-war four-regional structure. Those who argue that the creation of states has brought development in Nigeria are not sincere. They also don’t know how countries like China, Israel, Japan and others that don’t have the state structure but something similar to our pre-war provinces have remained on the development fast track till date.

What would have served as the foundation for Nigeria’s development was dismantled early enough. The result is that cities in the country that used to have pipe-borne water at independence no longer have it today. The railway system that was functional and efficient at independence is now history. Agriculture that used to be the back-bone of the country’s economy before the civil war is now a story. Our educational system is a sham. The country’s economy is destitute without oil.

Politically, we’re most unstable and unpredictable now than in 1960. On human development index, we’re ranked with the poorest of the poor countries in the world. Corruption, cheating, avarice, greed and all forms of wicked inclinations remain the bane of Nigeria. The political maneuvering that engendered ethnic hatred against Easterners in 1967, particularly in Northern Nigeria, is rearing its ugly head once again. It’s sad that Nigeria, which didn’t fight any gorilla war to gain independence, is in this mess.

Today, Nigeria is a crawling giant on account of deadly injuries it has inflicted on itself. Where do we go from here? The country should retrace its steps. That is the only way out. All the political and economic structures that have failed the country should be dismantled for a better and more progressive arrangement. It’s better to start life afresh like the prodigal son than to perish in self-inflicted destitution.

The Guardian, September 27, 2011

44336.png

What Tafawa Balewa Said On Independence Day

44342.jpg s Nigeria marked her 50th Independence Day Anniversary (Golden Jubilee) on 1st October 2010, it is appropriate to reflect on the high points of the speech delivered by Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa on that auspicious day in the light of the present circumstances of the country. Sadly enough, most of the country’s founding fathers, who diligently fought for independence from the British colonial masters, have passed on but with evergreen memory in our hearts. But some iconic figures like Chief Anthony Enahoro, who is still alive never ceases to bemoan the objectionable turn of events in the country. He has consistently said on many occasions that what we have today is not the Nigeria of their dream.

On Nigeria’s Independence Day, Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa delivered a remarkable speech, which gives insight into what the expectations were 50 years ago. He began by declaring, Today is Independence Day. He called it a day every Nigerian has been eagerly looking forward. He called it our great day, a wonderful day. What is in a great day? Every organic entity has a day that is distinguished from other days. A day that is a landmark, which sets the stage for good things to come. A day to remember, probably, without which other good things wouldn’t come to fulfillment.

The Independence Day was a great day in the sense that it was expected to mark the beginning of wonderful things in the life of Nigeria. A country under colonial government as Nigeria was before 1st October, 1960 was hamstrung and unable to exercise power to realize her dreams. Only freedom would propel her to realize her potentials. The great day marked the day Nigeria was expected to begin setting her own agenda and pursuing same to attain acceptable status among the comity of nations. That the country could now act independently with focused drive to excel was worth celebrating. That was why the Prime Minister called it a wonderful day.

The question to ask is has the Independence Day succeeded in serving as the springboard for Nigeria to be a truly free and robust economic power? If Tafawa Balewa were to be alive today, he would certainly be disappointed with the unprecedented turn of events in the country. And that is why some prominent Nigerians have even publicly expressed disappointment that the great day probably came at the wrong time. They think it would have been delayed for another twenty years or more, in which case, we wouldn’t have experienced the destructive civil war and the adventurism of the hatchet military juntas that ruined the country.

Prime Minister Balewa further said by the attainment of independence Nigeria has acquired her rightful status. He said, But now we have acquired our rightful status and feel sure that history will show that the building of our nation proceeded at the wisest pace. The rightful status simply refers to the fact that Nigeria had gained her independence and was now in a position to accomplish her dreams (if any). But the most interesting part of the statement is where Balewa said, . . . history will show that the building of our nation proceeded at the wisest pace.

The great day marked a call to duty for the Nigerian leadership to build a new nation. This appears to contradict Balewa’s remark that Nigeria now stands well built upon firm foundations. Which foundation one may ask? As a new nation at the threshold of establishing the structures upon which to build the nation, the only foundation at that point was the land, the natural endowments that constitute the potential assets of the country. Certainly, Balewa recognized that Nigeria was endowed with huge human and natural resources of which a nation founded upon such should consider herself built upon a strong foundation.

The issue, however, is whether or not what Balewa predicted 50 years ago has come to pass? Has Nigeria moved at the wisest pace? Has history shown that the building of the nation based upon a wise utilization of the abundant natural endowments has been remarkable? Apart from crude oil, which so far has been exploited to the detriment of the country, all the other major natural resources of the country remain largely untapped. If there is anything Nigeria should be noted for, it is the fact that she has remained a potentially great country for fifty years without actualization.

Every speech by Nigerian leaders at every occasion latches on the acclaimed Nigeria’s abundant human and material resources as the basis of our greatness. But we have seen during the past 50 years that Nigeria is far from being great merely on the basis of latent and untapped resources. The world doesn’t reckon with potentially great nations. Rather it is nations that have actualized their potentials that count. History has proved Balewa’s predictions wrong because we have neither been able to build anything on the firm foundation nor shown wisdom in managing the crude oil resource that practically is the only thing to show in 50 years.

Balewa affirmed 50 years ago that Nigeria would be fully capable of managing our own affairs both internally and as a nation. To what extent is this true in the light of the present circumstances? Beginning with constitutional development, which Balewa rightly thought was the main instrument of self-government, is it not appalling that 50 years later, the country still has no widely accepted constitution? The existing constitution, which was a product of military adventurism, is flawed in many respects. Its provisions do not satisfy the yearnings and aspirations of Nigerians. Shortly after independence in 1960, it became obvious that Nigeria isn’t even capable of managing her own internal affairs. The failure of the country to organize free, fair and credible elections was one factor that plunged the new nation into a fratricidal civil war in 1966.

Ever since then, organizing elections in the country has remained a Herculean task. There is still no established system for conducting elections in the country. All the elections conducted in Nigeria in recent history in 1959, 1979, 1983, 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2007 have the same things in common—rancor, acrimony and bad blood. The 2011 election, which is supposed to usher in a new dawn, is already in tantrum. The preparation for the election is starting barely three months to the actual voting date because after 50 years, Nigeria has no official voters’ register. The country is starting afresh to register voters. What ought to have been done 50 years ago and then updated on a continuous basis is being done at jubilee! How do all these show that we are capable of managing our own affairs? Perhaps, the greatest failure is that Nigeria is still struggling to attain nationhood at 50. Balewa must have thought that by now, Nigeria would be one big united nation of people sharing common goals, ideals and aspirations. Maybe the only thing to celebrate 50 years later is that Nigeria is still under one government.

Balewa recognized at independence what he called the awe-inspiring task confronting us at the very start of our nationhood. He thought that we were destined to move with quite dignity to our place on the world stage But as if he knew what the future holds for Nigeria 50 years later, he said, Recent events have changed the scene beyond recognition. So that we find ourselves today being tested to the utmost, we are called upon immediately to show that our claims to responsible government are well-founded. What a prophetic utterance?

Certainly at 50, Nigeria is confronted with awe-inspiring tasks. The economy is in doldrums. Basic infrastructure services are in tatters. Electricity and water are luxury. There is nothing to write home about roads, railway, schools and hospitals. Poverty, disease and mortality are high. Unemployment, armed robbery and kidnapping are the order of the day. Corruption is pervasive. Nigeria’s reckoning in virtually every aspect of human development index is appalling. The damage done to the country in the past 50 years is enormous. And as Balewa said, Nigeria must show the world that our claim to responsible government is well-founded and sustainable.

The Guardian, September 28, 2010

44304.png

2007 Polls: Nigeria Must Survive

44277.jpg he process leading to the conduct of the 2007 general elections appears to be getting headway and narrowing down to the point of determination. Up till now, there has been no official announcement cancelling the elections. That means the elections will hold as scheduled. The main election scheduled for April 14 and 21, i.e., the next two Saturdays of this month has finally come upon us. Unfortunately, up till now, some people still doubt if the elections will hold. This is because of the unprecedented unending litigations confronting the polls from left, right and center.

Next is the seemingly unprepared posture of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The doubters may be right given that in the history of general elections in this country, no election has witnessed this kind of unending intra-party crisis over who bears the parties flags at the polls.

It is ridiculous that five months after the party primaries were conducted and just three days to the actual poll, some parties, in some states, still have no clear candidates to represent them at the polls. The turmoil and intra-party litigations was sparked off by the undemocratic conduct of the party primaries. I had lamented at the wake of the exercise that they were in most cases mere selection of favored candidates. The voting by the delegates at those primaries was of little or no consequence.

For me, it serves the parties right in the ensuing crisis. They asked for it. The electorate has a basis to make more informed and rational choice at the polls. If a party can’t keep its house in order, can it afford to keep the Nigeria house in order? From what I saw in the 1979 and 1983 general elections, litigation at the electoral tribunal or the courts was more of inter-party contest. It was understandable that a candidate from one party would contest the outcome of an election against another candidate from another party. Besides, the contests were after the elections had been held. The parties in the 1979/1983 had little headache electing their flag bearers for the different political offices.

I never witnessed a situation where members of the same party were neck-deep in court over who should bear the party’s flag at the polls. Once the party primaries were over, whatever misgivings were resolved within the party amicably. It ended there and everyone worked for the party’s success at the polls. Since politics is a game of give and take, those who were compromised were later compensated with juicy appointments. But if the party lost the election, every Tom, Dick and Harry in the party lost.

Today, the situation is different. Party supremacy has waned. Granted that some parties did not follow due process in selecting their flag bearers, those that were edged out should take it easy and allow peace to reign. An intra party squabble is capable of sparking electoral crisis across the states. It is needless taking the party to court when the same party will sponsor selected candidates. But I must add that parties that refused to be democratic in electing their flag bearers are inviting court litigation. You don’t blame an individual for seeking redress in court to correct the injustice. It is clear that all over the country, where these misgivings have manifested, the affected parties run the risk of losing the election in those states.

Taking the party to court, for me, amounts to absolute insubordination. If an individual feels deeply aggrieved by the way and manner his party has conducted the primaries and edged him out, the right thing to do is to quit and join another party, instead of fomenting trouble. It is political immaturity to remain in a party whose ideals and conduct is not in tandem with ones ideals. The peace and stability of this nation are more important than the electoral ambition of an individual or party. That is why I am saying that politicians should take the whole thing easy and allow Nigeria to survive this election.

The next issue threatening the election borders on the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in the whole electoral process. Nigerians are not amused by the way INEC is playing the role of an umpire and contestant at the same time. INEC is an umpire in this election and not a contestant.

The Chambers English Dictionary defines umpire as "a third person called in to decide a dispute or a deadlock; an arbitrator: an impartial person chosen to supervise the game, enforce the rules, and decide disputes’’. The job of INEC is essentially that of an unbiased referee in a football pitch. The referee is there just to supervise the game, enforce the rules and decide disputes without taking sides.

Imagine what would happen in a football pitch where a team fields a player but the referee disallows him. The team would most likely take the matter to the football governing body, FIFA (serving as the court in this case), for settlement. Now, imagine that FIFA decides that the referee should allow the player but instead of complying with FIFA’s decision, the referee still insists that the player is disqualified! In that case, wouldn’t FIFA have any other option than to remove the referee for professional misconduct?

Viewed from that angle, what would INEC lose if any of the candidates the courts have cleared were allowed to contest the election? Why is it appealing against the court verdicts? I am not saying that corrupt persons should go scot-free. They should be voted out. Nigerians are not fools. The people know who is corrupt and who is not. Contesting election is not the same thing as winning it. It should be left to the people under a democracy to vote out the corrupt politicians.

INEC, in a way, is spoiling its own broth. The task it has at hand is enormous. There are more critical issues that should occupy its attention. Going to court should be totally out of the card. Past elections in this country have been marred by logistics problems. The country is too large to be taken for granted. We don’t have the infrastructure to handle rapid delivery of electoral materials. Distributing electoral materials to the nooks and crannies of the country is an uphill task. Timely delivery of materials to ensure that voting takes place within the stipulated time is crucial. Counting of the votes and having the results transmitted to the appropriate quarters presents another challenge.

Furthermore, appointing credible electoral personnel to supervise the election and ensuring that everything goes on smoothly is very important. Above all, INEC has the ultimate duty to ensure that the election is credible, free and fair. This should be uppermost in its agenda. If the election succeeds, it serves as legacy for INEC. It is also in the national interest to do the right thing. But if INEC fails, it stands to bear the blame. Given the enormity of the task, it is advisable that INEC should reconsider not to expend its energy and resources on litigation but, instead, concentrate in conducting this poll.

We have had electoral umpires like Justice Ovie Whisky (1979) and Professor Humphrey Nwosu (1993). These men succeeded and did not plunge the nation into crisis. Professor Maurice Iwu has a date with history.

Nigeria is at the crossroads. The whole world is watching. This election is not the only one taking place in Africa this year. Eight other countries are also conducting polls. Ours is historic because it is transitional. Moving from one civilian government to another is something we have never achieved in nearly 50 years of our national independence. There is no doubt that we have the capacity to conduct this election and break the jinx of having truncated transition always.

Elsewhere around the world, elections are conducted without much rancor. Some nations at war have been known to conduct successful elections. For instance, in 2005, the authorities in the Palestinian Territory conducted successful elections despite the spate of violence in that enclave that saw the election of Mahmoud Abbass as president. Similarly, less than two years ago, the authorities in the war-torn Liberia successfully conducted a historic election that ushered in a woman president, Mrs. Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. Perhaps, the greatest of all was the election conducted last year in war-torn Iraq, under the barrel of the gun that produced that country’s leaders of post-2003 invasion. Despite the escalation of anarchy in that devastated country, the authorities were able to organize and conduct a credible election.

Nigeria is not fighting a war. If the enumerated countries could conduct elections, why can’t the authorities in Nigeria organize a succession election? The challenge is before INEC, President Olusegun Obasanjo and the politicians. Politicians should learn their lessons and allow peace to reign. Nigeria must survive, no matter what any individual or group may think otherwise.

The Guardian, April 10, 2007

44262.png

Reforming the Presidency

44268.jpg he inability of Nigeria to have an enduring legacy for the election of the president is a political bottleneck that will for a long time keep this country crawling instead of advancing. As the date of the 2007 presidential election draws nearer, there is a heightened feeling across the country about who becomes the next president. The door will soon be thrown open and whistle blown for the start of the political contests at all levels. Contestants will soon take over the political centre stage.

I am particularly concerned about the office of the president. There are already news about declarations and counter declarations making the rounds about people who want to contest the election. Who becomes the next president is the most important matter of this time. The whims and caprices of that person, at least for the next four years, will determine the nation’s future. People are afraid that a person with questionable character, who cannot steer the ship of state, might hijack the presidency by hook or crook. This is because there is no barrier as to who becomes the president. It is a free for all comers affair.

The presidency has been wrongly made the political powerhouse of this nation. Albeit, in our system, we have states, which are supposed to thread along different development pathways but what we have witnessed is that the states replicate whatever is being done at the federal level. The governors, irrespective of their party, imitate the style of whoever is the president. There is no single state doing things differently may be as a result of different party ideology. Parties in this country don’t operate based on manifestoes. They have no ideology. Consequently, whatever the president does at the centre seems to be the model for the whole country. This is why no state is particularly different from the rest. The social and economic condition in all the states is practically the same.

The presidential aspirants are basing their right to contest on the constitutional provision that every Nigerian has the right to contest for the exalted position. This unqualified right or freedom is the bane of Nigeria’s underdevelopment. Since such an important post has no condition attached for who occupies it, every Tom, Dick and Harry is free to contest once a Nigerian. The precedents, character or capability of the individuals are disregarded. This is tantamount to self-destruction for a country burdened and overwhelmed by leadership crisis.

The office of the president in our clime is like a job without requirements for applicants. That being the case, any one is free to apply whether or not he is suitable for the job. The worst is that the person who finally gets the job is the one that has the power to bulldoze through the management to capture the post. Is there any company run like that anywhere in the world? If companies were run that way, not even one would survive. But that is exactly how this country is being run. Is it therefore surprising that the situation is awkward nearly 50 years after independence? Why is it so easy for individuals whose records are clearly tainted to still aspire to power? We are operating a faulty system, which is why the country lags behind. Not until there is effective check on individuals who occupy the presidency would there be headway for the country.

I have been thrilled by the recent happenings in some African countries. For instance, from the Republic of Benin came reports that the country’s incumbent long-term President, Mathieu Kerekou was disqualified from contesting the 2006 presidential race due to old age, among other reasons. Mr. Kerekou was president of Togo for 30 out of 34 years of that country’s independence. He is now more than 70 years of age. This is above the constitutional age limit in Togo for anyone seeking the post of president. Left to Mr. Kerekou and given the sit-tight draconian spirit, for which African leaders are notorious, he would have re-contested the polls and would have possibly won for another five-year term.

But thanks to the foresight and resolve of that country’s lawmakers who took wise steps to put checks by introducing strict conditions for prospective presidential aspirants. Thus, for anyone to seek to occupy the elevated seat, he/she must first do some self-screening and must be seen to be above board in the public eye. At the end of the polls, Mr. Yayi Boni, a technocrat and former head of the West African Development Bank emerged as the new president. Viewed from that angle, Republic of Benin may have better prospects for the future.

Similarly, in South Africa, the unfolding drama involving the former Deputy Vice President, Mr. Jacob Zuma presents a remarkable turn of events for someone who anticipated a smooth ride to the presidency but is facing hurdles. It also shows the honor that is accorded to the office of the president and the high level of integrity expected of the person who should occupy the office. Mr. Zuma, until recently, was considered to be the likely successor of President Thabo Mbeki, who steps down in 2009, until he dragged his reputation to the mud in a series of scandals. He is currently standing criminal trial on charges of rape and corruption. Many think that he has rubbished himself by getting involved in matters that border on integrity and reputation.

Undoubtedly, the greatest problem facing Nigeria as a country is lack of effective leadership. All the other problems in this country stem from this singular factor. The office of the president is sacred and those that occupy it must command high integrity, wisdom and be transparently clean. This country will remain an object of caricature until a formula for selecting a good leader is applied. A nation that will develop is the one that is advancing. Like in a battlefield, the army that wins is the one that is advancing. When an army keeps retreating, the enemy will overrun and capture its territory. That amounts to a fall. Anything that has no eternal quality is better forgotten. The question we should ask is how long shall the weak structures we have put in place last? Have adequate provisions been made to ensure their continuity into the future? How long shall the constitution we are operating last? Are we leaving a document that will stand the test of time or are we just toying with the country’s future? The American constitution has lasted for more than two hundred years and is still as effective as it was at the beginning. It is perpetually valid.

The Obasanjo administration has since 1999 been pursuing reforms in virtually every sector of the economy but nothing is being done to reform the presidency. Yet this is the arrowhead that bears all the other problems in the land. Considering that the number one problem in this country is leadership, it would have served this nation better if the entire efforts were directed on how to produce a good leader. While it is reasonable to reform what might have been bastardized, the truth is that no amount of reforms would change this country without a good leader. Good leadership is all that we need and the country will have a turn around.

A political reform should streamline a number of issues. Who is qualified to be the president? What qualities should he/she possess? What conditions must a prospective president meet? There must be laid down conditions like those set for any job post, yet, the presidency is greater than a job position in a company. The conditions must border on good leadership qualities, patriotism, critical thinking, education, transparency, and precedents, among others. I don’t care where the president comes from. I don’t care if the president is a woman. What is important and uppermost is the individual who meets the required conditions.

All the debate on zoning the presidency is a waste unless a zone in question is able to produce a capable individual that meets the conditions. Once there is a sincere and drastic reform of the presidency with set conditions, only persons that meet the requirements will contest. Not until this is constitutionally provided, it would be foolhardy to seek to stop any person who has ambition to contest including those, who in the public eyes have committed atrocities against the state. Any attempt to do that might lead to unnecessary political turmoil. The only way to edge out those that have stolen the wealth of the nation, committed murder and have succeeded in putting the masses in poverty is to reform the presidency.

The Guardian, April 4, 2006

44232.png

What if there is no Third Term?

44205.jpg hat if after all the hullabaloo, rancor and acrimony about the Third Term agenda, President Obasanjo, the centre of attraction in this drama, being human and rational, decides to uphold his cherished national and international reputation and integrity and declares that he is not interested in any Third Term agenda? What would happen next? Is this reasoning inconceivable? Is it impossible? Certainly, not. Nothing should be ruled out yet. Anything can happen and the president will back out. He has done it before in 1979 when he disappointed the same political sycophants pushing him to succeed himself.

Everything is possible and as humans we have limit. The forces that shape human history have not ceased to operate. After all, President Obasanjo has not told the nation that he is going for a Third Term. At the same time, he has not said that he is not going either. In fact, going by his recent utterances, I am inclined to believe that he would leave honorably. Albeit, this is not categorical, what the president has succeeded in doing so far is keeping the nation in a dangerous breath taking suspense. Whether or not he is going for a Third Term will soon unfold.

The clamor for and against this singular political Third Term mission, for me, is skewed against the proponents. Apart from the few political jobbers, praise singers and sycophants in the ruling PDP, who for personal selfish interests are bent on sailing the president through the turbulent Third Term waters, the majority of Nigerians and the international community are against it. Media opinion polls show that Nigerians are flatly against the Third Term. President Obasanjo is a Nigerian. He has his sensibilities. He has his personal wishes and desires. He has paddled through Nigeria’s turbulent political waters in the past. I believe he knows the dangers of misadventure. He understands Nigeria’s geo-politics as well as Nigeria’s position in global politics. He knows the possible consequences of his actions and decisions on the nation. As a former military commander, he knows when to retreat. It is unmilitary for civilians to dictate to a military commander when to retreat or not.

The present uncertainty hanging over the nation should be viewed from two angles. This is to avoid putting the country off balance should the Third Term agenda fails. One angle is to picture President Obasanjo tinkering with the constitution in his favor, as he is now doing and ignoring all patriotic advice not to cling to power beyond 2007. If this happens, the country will continue to grope in the present direction being led by the president. The thrust of Obasanjo’s administration would be the ongoing reforms, which many Nigerians don’t have an inkling of where and how they stand to benefit and when it would end. Mind you, the reforms could go on forever without end. Should this happen, Nigerians will have no opportunity to assess the extent of what has been achieved. Whether or not the reforms are succeeding, what remains to be done and how long that would take is a matter of conjecture. These will be shrouded in secrecy while the public will continue to be fed with unending propaganda about the magical wand the reforms are doing on the economy.

This scenario can never make for good governance. The absence of entrenched political philosophy for governance is the undoing of this country. It would have been better if President Obasanjo had declared that he is going for a Third Term. Such a declaration would make us know the direction we are going. It would also afford the ruling PDP the opportunity to review its manifesto, if they have one. By reviewing their political agenda for the past seven years, they would be able to assess where they have succeeded or failed. This period ought to be used to map out new strategies for dealing with the myriad of problems facing the nation. Unfortunately, this is not being done. What is the PDP’s agenda for the nation?

This is just part of my worry. My main worry on the other hand is that the Third Term agenda, for whatever reason, would probably fail. President Obasanjo could unexpectedly declare that he has no intention to continue in power, beyond 2007. Should this happen, who will take the mantle of leadership after him? Where will he come from? Will the new president come from the north or south? Will he be selected on the basis of the six geo-political zones? Shall we try a woman president as other nations are doing?

The north appears hell-bent to recapture their political power birth right, which they voluntarily relinquished to the South-West in the wake of the annulled June 12, 1993 election won by the late Chief M.K.O. Abiola The South-East wants the presidency at all cost considering that they have not had full tenure, coupled with the post war mind abuse and perceived marginalization. The South-South, which has not tasted nor been worried in the past about who occupied the coveted position, is beating its chest in anguish and anger. Having woken up from decades of slumber to realize that the oil wealth is being taken from their domain also wants the presidency at all cost. Their compatriots have already taken up arms in the Niger Delta creeks.

The contention about which geo-political entity should produce the next president would be too vicious that some people would seek for the return of Obasanjo, who by then would have retired to his Ota Farmstead. This problem of political succession must certainly arise now or in the future whenever President Obasanjo steps down. This partly might be the fear of the President for not coming out openly to declare his intention. He may be watching the situation and how it goes. Bat that should not be the case because he must certainly step down one day and someone else will be president. When he stepped down in 1979, the country did not disintegrate, as President Shehu Shagari was sworn into power. It is therefore not true that apart from Obasanjo, there is no other presidential material in the country. The truth is that the right caliber of men and women who should be president have not shown up. Several reasons keep them out including the fear of losing their integrity. At any point, ad-hoc maneuvering takes precedence. Nigerians know how to muddle through any situation. This keeps the nation groping endlessly without bearing.

There are 33 registered political parties. Less than a year to the general elections, nothing is being heard from these parties. There are no candidates yet from the other parties. Only the PDP is showing up for the presidential election. We are not witnessing political realignments to counter the ruling party. There are no debates going on. The country is faced with teething problems ranging from mismanagement of the county’s wealth, mass poverty, mass illiteracy, mass unemployment, decadent infrastructure, collapse of the energy sector, maladministration, mounting corruption, among others. No party has come up with a concrete workable agenda on how to tackle these problems.

Under normal circumstances, it is in the process of debates by the presidential candidates that Nigerians would be able to identify who is a credible candidate. Debates by the presidential aspirants would give insight into the viability of the ongoing reforms and expose the pitfalls. It appears that the other parties have covertly given in to the PDP to remain in power. That will be very unfortunate for a county that is struggling to unshackle itself from the tyranny of economic saboteurs.

The likely thing to happen at the end would be a disorderly power transfer to a consensus candidate who might be least qualified to govern the country. Such a candidate may not be any of the individuals presently warming up for the presidency. The candidate might be selected on political expediency rather than ability or vision to steer the ship of state. The candidate would be selected based on the whims and caprices of politicians. Consequently, we shall return to square one without an acceptable pragmatic framework to govern the country and move it forward. When a visionless president takes power, we will continue to wobble without focus. It is expedient for right thinking Nigerians to consider the two sides of the coin to avoid being caught unawares. Whichever way, the problems of this country must be tackled in order to move Nigeria forward in the positive direction.

The Guardian, March 7, 2006

44199.png

Dilemma of the Ruling PDP

44173.jpg he ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) is in a succession dilemma of unimaginable dimension. The party never anticipated that such would ever be the case given its overbearing influence on the political arena. But this has become obvious as a result of miscalculated strategy of self-succession by the incumbent President Olusegun Obasanjo.

When President Obasanjo, about three years ago, surreptitiously hatched the unconstitutional tenure elongation plan popularly called Third Term, he erroneously believed that no power would stop him from accomplishing the scheme. By believing that in Nigeria, anything goes, even as corruption flourishes, he probably believed that he could buy any one over with money. The history, conscience, integrity, worth and aspirations of Nigerians were disregarded. While it may be possible to buy an individual over with money, it is not easy to buy the spirit man, that invisible force of the creator that is superior to the mortal body.

Unfortunately, the Obasanjo’s grand scheme did not recognize this powerful invisible force that controls human actions. The mentality of the tenure elongation schemers was that the PDP is in power, in control, in the majority in the National Assembly and has all the financial resources to hand-carry the plan through, even through the roughest tides. Indeed, everything seen or imagined appeared to favor the agenda. The invisible factors appeared not to have been factored into the scheme. Incidentally, those are the forces that direct the course of human history.

The schemers of the odious plan knew that the masses of Nigerians are suffering. But that meant little or nothing to them. After all, what does a hungry man need other than food? Just give him food for his stomach and then lead him by the nose and he will sheepishly follow you. He will certainly do anything you want him to do. These were the calculations, the projections and expectations of the tenure elongation supporters.

But man’s intelligence is limited. The schemers of the now failed agenda failed to consider the other side of the coin; they did not ask themselves the question: What if the Third Term failed? I posed this critical question in this column at the height of the debacle, when everything seemed to be pointing in favor of the evil agenda. I remember saying that nothing should be ruled out and anything could happen and the much-taunted Third Term might fail and go into the annals of history.

The PDP stalwarts behind the grand plan failed to take a moment to think of what would happen if the plan failed. If they had done that, they would not have found themselves in this dilemma. But they were moving in one way traffic without retrospection. The forces that shape human history are dynamic and operate at all times. These invisible forces are invincible. They determine what happens in the physical realm irrespective of what any man thinks. Moreover, the dynamism of the Nigerian politics should not be taken for granted.

In a country where we claim to be practicing democracy, the vital power belongs to the people and not to a cabal. Any right thinking person cannot brush this truth aside.

A cabal may succeed in foisting anything on the people but it cannot last forever. The people would at the most auspicious time rise in one accord to say no to oppression and suppression. History is replete with these tendencies. It is the dogged and unwavering stance of the people and other extraneous forces that interplayed to bring the tenure elongation plan down. That was the anti-climax of a misdirected and myopic agenda.

The Third Term agenda beclouded the PDP power schemers and made them forget themselves. They failed to put alternatives on the drawing board just in case the obvious happened as it did. If they had taken a strategic step to consider other alternatives, they would not have had any problem when the Third Term collapsed. It was thoughtless that the PDP put all its eggs in one basket. Who does not know that it is risky and dangerous to do that? It was irrational. For one thing, the party built all its hope around the incumbent President Obasanjo. They saw him or he saw himself as the only credible candidate the party could put forward to record success at the 2007 polls. There was no other candidate on the chessboard. The mantra was like it is Obasanjo or no one else.

President Obasanjo was very conscious of this garb of unflinching confidence reposed on him by his party men. He had no choice than to yield to the pressure against his personal integrity and record. He maintained stoic silence while the country drifted to anarchy. His indifference created tension in the land and forced Nigerians to rise like one man against the heinous Third Term plan.

Suddenly, and unexpectedly, against all expectations, the Third Term plan came crumbling on the floor of the National Assembly dominated by PDP lawmakers. The Senate first threw the bill out when it failed to scale the second reading. Subsequently, the House of Representatives followed suite and passed a motion to discontinue with the debate. That marked the final death nail on the evil scheme. There were allegations that some lawmakers deceptively took bribe to vote for Third Term only to turn around to vote against it to the chagrin of the schemers. Who is to blame for the failure of an agenda that was in all ramifications evil and anti-people? The lesson from this is in line with the Scripture that says, He who trusts in money will fall (Proverbs 11:28). The collapse of the Third Term has put the PDP in a dilemma. Without any other presidential candidate outside Obasanjo to bear the party’s flag for the 2007 polls, the party suddenly found itself fumbling between ad-hoc measures.

First, President Obasanjo called for reconciliation of its erstwhile party henchmen that made the party what it is. At the height of the high-handedness and bad blood among its leadership, many of the founding members of the party were edged out unceremoniously. That was tantamount to self-annihilation. Record shows that out of the 34-founding members of the party, only about 4 were still in the fold! The rest have gone haywire against the party. These hitherto party stalwarts turned dissidents, stood by the corner to watch the destructive infighting. Some effectively and openly plotted for the collapse of the party. Many others have ganged up to found new political parties, all in an effort to pull down the PDP. A house divided against itself cannot stand. President Obasanjo’s call for reconciliation has fallen on deaf ears. Many view it with disdain.

It is good to reconcile enemies but in this case, is it because the Third Term failed that olive branch is now being extended to the hitherto disgruntled members? If the Third Term had succeeded, would there have been call for reconciliation? What is the object of this move? Is it to use these men to capture power that would engender bad blood and acrimony once again? A leopard does not change its skin. The PDP has hurriedly constituted a committee to appraise all the serving PDP governors