Strong passwords help protect your accounts and information on the web. But forgetting your password is like losing your keys—you can end up locked out of your own home.
It gets worse if your password gets compromised or stolen. Sometimes the thief will change your password so you can't get back into your own account—kind of like someone stealing your keys and then changing the lock.
If you've lost your Google password, you need a way to get back into your Google Account -- and back to all of your stuff in Gmail, Maps, Google+ and YouTube. To help you, Google needs to be able to tell that you’re the rightful account owner even if you don't have the right password.
There are a few easy steps you can take right now to make it easy for you—and no one else—to get into your Google Account if you forget or don’t know the password.
1. Add a recovery email address. By registering an alternate email address with your Google Account settings, you’re giving Google another way to reach you. If you forget your password, Google can send a link to that recovery email address so you can reset your password.
Google can also use that email address to let you know if we detect something suspicious happening with your account.
Setting up your recovery options can help you get back in if you get locked out of your Google Account
2. Add a phone number to your Google Account. Your mobile phone is the best way to regain access to your account if you forget your password. It's like the "fast lane" for account recovery: we text a code to the phone number you've registered with us, and you're back in business in no time.
Your phone is more secure and reliable than other means of recovering your account. Methods like “secret” questions (asking your mother’s maiden name or city where you were born) may have answers that are easy to remember, but they are also not that hard for bad guys to uncover.
And we’ve consistently seen that people who register a recovery phone are faster and more successful at getting their accounts back than those recovering their accounts via email.
You can also get a text message if Google detects that something suspicious is going on with your account. Giving a recovery phone number to Google won’t result in you being signed up for marketing lists or getting more calls from telemarketers.
3. Keep your recovery options up to date. It’s a good idea to check your recovery options every so often. For example, if you change your phone number after setting up your recovery options, take just a minute to update your recovery settings to match.
We'll remind you of your current settings every so often to make it easier for you to keep them up to date.
That’s it! You can either update your recovery options next time you’re prompted, or you can take two minutes to do it right now on our Account recovery options page.
For more advice on how to protect yourself and your family online, visit our Good to Know site, or check out some of the other posts in our series on staying safe and secure.
Taiwo Kola-Ogunlade, works in Google, Nigeria
Showing posts with label Viewpoint. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Viewpoint. Show all posts
Wednesday, 4 September 2013
Tuesday, 3 September 2013
The bitternes of Femi Aribisala (2)
A FITTING culmination to his political career in this period was the singular honour that was bestowed on him when he was selected to move in 1958, on the floor of the House of Representatives, the resolution which formally demanded Independence for Nigeria in 1960.
This was the resolution to which the British government was favourably disposed and thus acceded to. Chief Enahoro is often wrongly assumed to have moved this motion; his own motion for self-government in 1956 was, in fact, defeated by the opposition of the Northern People's Congress.
Chief Akintola's 1957 motion for independence in 1959, was, like Chief Enahoro's, unsuccessful because the British government refused to accede to it.
The second phase of Chief Fani-Kayode's political career commenced in 1960, when he entered the Western Nigeria legislature in August, 1960, as a member of the N.C.N.C. This phase, which lasted till the close of his political career which ended with annulment of the 1993 presidential election results, presents greater difficulty than the pre-independence phase, and, it must be conceded, is not as glorious.
However, it started well enough when within a few months he succeeded the late Chief Osadebay as the Leader of the Opposition in the Western Nigeria legislature in November, 1960, even though, he had just joined the N.C.N.C. a few months before.
This appointment was obviously in recognition of his effectiveness as a legislator and political leader. Within a short period, his dynamism and strong leadership revived the Western wing of the N.C.N.C. and restored their faltering morale. In 1962, when the pro-Awolowo faction of the A.G. sought to remove Chief Akintola as Premier, he saw this as an opportunity to bring the N.C.N.C. into the government of Western Nigeria and thus came to the assistance of the smaller embattled pro-Akintola faction of the A.G. by allying the Western wing of the N.C.N.C. to them.
When the pro-Awolowo faction sought, in May, 1962, to remove Chief Akintola by means, which at the time, were legally ambiguous and had no constitutional precedent, the N.C.N.C. legislators led by Chief Fani-Kayode joined the pro-Akintola A.G. legislators to forestall in the legislative chamber what appeared to them to be an unconstitutional method of removing the Premier, particularly as Chief Akintola had earlier filed a lawsuit.
A vindictive, intolerant, paranoid and partisan Federal Government, seeing an opportunity to break the back of their bogey, the pro-Awolowo faction, rushed in with indecent haste and doubtful constitutional legality to impose a state of emergency in Western Nigeria. When the so-called emergency ended in January 1963, Chief Akintola was asked by the Federal Government to form a government without the benefit of a new election which would have decided once and for all which faction really commanded a majority in the legislature.
When I took Chief Fani-Kayode up on this, he informed me that as of January 1963, when a coalition government of the pro-Akintola faction and the N.C.N.C. was formed, that alliance commanded a majority in the legislature. It is difficult to accept this as neither a vote of confidence in the Akintola government nor new regional elections were ever held.
It may be recalled , however, that Chief Akintola had pre-emptively challenged his attempted dismissal when he filed a lawsuit in May 1962. He was successful at the Federal Supreme Court, which then occupied the intermediate position the Court of Appeal presently occupies in the judicial hierarchy. The pro-Awolowo faction appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which was then the final Court of Appeal for Nigeria.
A powerful Board, which included some of England's finest jurists such as Lords Radcliffe, Devlin and Guest, held that Chief Akintola had been lawfully dismissed, as the novel procedure adopted by the pro-Awolowo faction was constitutional. It must be conceded that it was a failure of statesmanship on the part of Chiefs Akintola and Fani-Kayode that they did not immediately resign at this point, for their government had by that decision become illegal.
Of course, the Balewa-led coalition government of the N.P.C. and N.C.N.C. must also even take a greater portion of the blame for committing the constitutional abomination of nullifying this judgement by passing a law, which had retrospective effect from October 1, 1960, abolishing appeals to the Privy Council. This was done in order to sustain their allies in power. This singular action destroyed parliamentary democracy in the West, and subsequently, in Nigeria.
The primary motive which informed the actions of Chiefs Akintola and Fani-Kayode and their associates was the desire to take the Yoruba out of the cul-de-sac they believed that Chief Awolowo's rigidity had led them into. Both men had in 1959 evinced a preference for an alliance with N.P.C in order to prevent the political isolation of the Yoruba. Consequently, they also believed in reaching a consensus with the N.P.C in order to establish a working relationship with them.
This involved refraining from taking actions that the North might consider inimical to its interests - e.g. they wanted to put an end to the political activities of the A.G. in the North and thereby transform the party into a regional party.
Both men and their associates felt that as a result of the Yoruba's political isolation in opposition, some chauvinistic Igbo leaders had seized the opportunity to completely efface the Yoruba from the public services, while at the same time establishing Igbo hegemony in the country.
Mr. AKIN AJOSE ADEOGUN, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
This was the resolution to which the British government was favourably disposed and thus acceded to. Chief Enahoro is often wrongly assumed to have moved this motion; his own motion for self-government in 1956 was, in fact, defeated by the opposition of the Northern People's Congress.
Chief Akintola's 1957 motion for independence in 1959, was, like Chief Enahoro's, unsuccessful because the British government refused to accede to it.
The second phase of Chief Fani-Kayode's political career commenced in 1960, when he entered the Western Nigeria legislature in August, 1960, as a member of the N.C.N.C. This phase, which lasted till the close of his political career which ended with annulment of the 1993 presidential election results, presents greater difficulty than the pre-independence phase, and, it must be conceded, is not as glorious.
However, it started well enough when within a few months he succeeded the late Chief Osadebay as the Leader of the Opposition in the Western Nigeria legislature in November, 1960, even though, he had just joined the N.C.N.C. a few months before.
This appointment was obviously in recognition of his effectiveness as a legislator and political leader. Within a short period, his dynamism and strong leadership revived the Western wing of the N.C.N.C. and restored their faltering morale. In 1962, when the pro-Awolowo faction of the A.G. sought to remove Chief Akintola as Premier, he saw this as an opportunity to bring the N.C.N.C. into the government of Western Nigeria and thus came to the assistance of the smaller embattled pro-Akintola faction of the A.G. by allying the Western wing of the N.C.N.C. to them.
When the pro-Awolowo faction sought, in May, 1962, to remove Chief Akintola by means, which at the time, were legally ambiguous and had no constitutional precedent, the N.C.N.C. legislators led by Chief Fani-Kayode joined the pro-Akintola A.G. legislators to forestall in the legislative chamber what appeared to them to be an unconstitutional method of removing the Premier, particularly as Chief Akintola had earlier filed a lawsuit.
A vindictive, intolerant, paranoid and partisan Federal Government, seeing an opportunity to break the back of their bogey, the pro-Awolowo faction, rushed in with indecent haste and doubtful constitutional legality to impose a state of emergency in Western Nigeria. When the so-called emergency ended in January 1963, Chief Akintola was asked by the Federal Government to form a government without the benefit of a new election which would have decided once and for all which faction really commanded a majority in the legislature.
When I took Chief Fani-Kayode up on this, he informed me that as of January 1963, when a coalition government of the pro-Akintola faction and the N.C.N.C. was formed, that alliance commanded a majority in the legislature. It is difficult to accept this as neither a vote of confidence in the Akintola government nor new regional elections were ever held.
It may be recalled , however, that Chief Akintola had pre-emptively challenged his attempted dismissal when he filed a lawsuit in May 1962. He was successful at the Federal Supreme Court, which then occupied the intermediate position the Court of Appeal presently occupies in the judicial hierarchy. The pro-Awolowo faction appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which was then the final Court of Appeal for Nigeria.
A powerful Board, which included some of England's finest jurists such as Lords Radcliffe, Devlin and Guest, held that Chief Akintola had been lawfully dismissed, as the novel procedure adopted by the pro-Awolowo faction was constitutional. It must be conceded that it was a failure of statesmanship on the part of Chiefs Akintola and Fani-Kayode that they did not immediately resign at this point, for their government had by that decision become illegal.
Of course, the Balewa-led coalition government of the N.P.C. and N.C.N.C. must also even take a greater portion of the blame for committing the constitutional abomination of nullifying this judgement by passing a law, which had retrospective effect from October 1, 1960, abolishing appeals to the Privy Council. This was done in order to sustain their allies in power. This singular action destroyed parliamentary democracy in the West, and subsequently, in Nigeria.
The primary motive which informed the actions of Chiefs Akintola and Fani-Kayode and their associates was the desire to take the Yoruba out of the cul-de-sac they believed that Chief Awolowo's rigidity had led them into. Both men had in 1959 evinced a preference for an alliance with N.P.C in order to prevent the political isolation of the Yoruba. Consequently, they also believed in reaching a consensus with the N.P.C in order to establish a working relationship with them.
This involved refraining from taking actions that the North might consider inimical to its interests - e.g. they wanted to put an end to the political activities of the A.G. in the North and thereby transform the party into a regional party.
Both men and their associates felt that as a result of the Yoruba's political isolation in opposition, some chauvinistic Igbo leaders had seized the opportunity to completely efface the Yoruba from the public services, while at the same time establishing Igbo hegemony in the country.
Mr. AKIN AJOSE ADEOGUN, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
N/Delta environment degradation: When oil theft, illegal bunkering take centre stage
By Judith Ufford
WHEN we track the thieves, we arrest them and destroy the stolen products. We destroy, we destroy,” that was the refrain from Major General Bata Debiro, Commander, Operation Pulo Shield as he describes the operation of the agency against oil thieves and other illegal bunkering criminals in the Niger Delta creeks.
The silence in the Jasmine Hall, Eko Hotel and Suites, venue of the recently concluded conference on oil theft and illegal bunkering as the Major General spoke was more of disapproval than indifference. “There has to be a better way of getting this job done without hurting the environment further,” a participant whispered to no one in particular. This reporter heard and nodded in agreement.
It was obvious from the Major General’s tone and language that the problem at hand needed a different approach. This was the position of Dr. Ade Abolurin, Commandant General, Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps,NSCDC, but not before he made the hapless state of NSCDC public.
[caption id="attachment_412089" align="alignright" width="359"]
One of the illegal refinery site scuttled by operatives of JTF[/caption]
“We are helpless, handicapped and ill-equipped. Other stakeholders look down at the Corps as if we are not supposed to be there. We arrest trucks but our personnel are imprisoned and beaten. We are suffering in the hands of fellow stakeholders simply because we want to protect the people, “ he said.
Oil theft, he disclosed, is in the hands of a cartel. “It has been internationalised, it is no longer local because they have international contacts”. As he made his final summation, Dr. Abolurin noted that the problem of oil theft does not need military approach. He got a good applause for that remark. No, he wasn’t playing to the gallery. The audience saw enough from the Operation Pulo Shield documentary to know that there was urgent need to tackle the issue of oil theft in a more sustainable manner given the already devastated state of the Niger Delta environment.
Speaking earlier in an address of welcome, Special Adviser to the President on Niger Delta and Chairman, Presidential Amnesty Programme, Kingsley Kuku noted thus: “While several estimates have been made regarding the cost to the national economy in lost revenue and pipeline repair, no one has calculated the cost to the environment and the livelihood of the people of the Niger Delta. No one has calculated the cost of restoring the environment; but extrapolating from the cost of aquatic life in the Gulf of Mexico following the BP Gulf Coast spill of 2010, the cost to the Niger Delta will amount to more than one trillion dollars”.
Kuku found a ready ally in Mr. Nnimmo Bassey, an environmentalist, who hazarded a 30-year clean up plan in Ogoni land alone, adding that “the money from oil cannot restore the environment”. Bassey was of the view that given the present state of degradation of the Niger Delta region, no oil company should go offshore if they have not cleaned up onshore. According to him, it was important that the quantity of oil being stolen is known because “it’s no rocket science to meter the quantity of oil been produced”. In his summation, oil theft is from three angles: from collusion, agencies and illegal refineries.
International involvement
But transnational companies would swear they have nothing to do with it. In an April 2013 report by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, the company stated: ”Rising incidences of oil theft in Nigeria’s oil producing Niger Delta come at a significant environmental cost”.
In its sustainability report, the Anglo-Dutch oil major said its Nigerian unit, Shell Petroleum Development Company, SPDC, experienced 137 spills as a result of sabotage and theft last year, with the volume of oil lost amounting to 3.3 thousand tons.
“This was an increase in both volume and numbers from 2011, as the scale of oil theft in Nigeria reached unprecedented levels,” it stated in the report.
In an open letter published in the report, SPDC’s Managing Director, Mutiu Sunmonu, said the problem of oil theft in the Niger Delta has reached “unprecedented levels” and puts enormous strain on the company’s staff as well as costing the country billions of dollars a year in lost revenue.
He added that the Nigerian government puts the volume of oil stolen significantly above the 150,000 barrel a day estimate given by the United Nations in 2009.
“It may never be possible to assess the exact figures, but it’s clear that a well financed and highly organised criminal enterprise exists on a phenomenal scale...most of the stolen oil ends up in ocean-going tankers that transport it to refineries in other parts of West Africa, Europe and beyond,” Mr. Sunmonu said.
Cummulative annual spill
“We urgently need more assistance from the Nigerian government and its security forces, other governments and other organisations,” Mr. Sunmonu said. Whether they accept culpability or not the fact of the case is that a conservative waste/leakage/spill rate of 10% which amounts to a crude oil spill rate of 40,000 barrels per day, amounting to a cumulative annual spill volume of about 14.4 million barrels of crude oil spilt into the Niger Delta environment as a result of the crude oil theft enterprise has left the region more devastated than ever before.
This accounts for community leaders screaming themselves hoarse, demanding a more proactive approach to dealing with the problem. The devastation has left many Niger Delta communities further impoverished since their means of livelihood (fishing and farming) have been ruined by constant spills, leakages and actions of various security operatives.
It was against this backdrop that the conference decided that pipeline be encased in a minimum depth to protect them against vandalism; establish joint mini-refineries to absorb illegal refineries and engage local communities as well as fund the immediate clean up of the Niger Delta.
Conference also decided that security agencies have a role to play. The agencies were enjoined to enhance security sector collaboration with community participation, enhance intelligence gathering system with advance electronic and community input, stop the un systematic destruction of illegal oil theft facilities which compounds environmental damage.
WHEN we track the thieves, we arrest them and destroy the stolen products. We destroy, we destroy,” that was the refrain from Major General Bata Debiro, Commander, Operation Pulo Shield as he describes the operation of the agency against oil thieves and other illegal bunkering criminals in the Niger Delta creeks.
The silence in the Jasmine Hall, Eko Hotel and Suites, venue of the recently concluded conference on oil theft and illegal bunkering as the Major General spoke was more of disapproval than indifference. “There has to be a better way of getting this job done without hurting the environment further,” a participant whispered to no one in particular. This reporter heard and nodded in agreement.
It was obvious from the Major General’s tone and language that the problem at hand needed a different approach. This was the position of Dr. Ade Abolurin, Commandant General, Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps,NSCDC, but not before he made the hapless state of NSCDC public.
[caption id="attachment_412089" align="alignright" width="359"]
One of the illegal refinery site scuttled by operatives of JTF[/caption]“We are helpless, handicapped and ill-equipped. Other stakeholders look down at the Corps as if we are not supposed to be there. We arrest trucks but our personnel are imprisoned and beaten. We are suffering in the hands of fellow stakeholders simply because we want to protect the people, “ he said.
Oil theft, he disclosed, is in the hands of a cartel. “It has been internationalised, it is no longer local because they have international contacts”. As he made his final summation, Dr. Abolurin noted that the problem of oil theft does not need military approach. He got a good applause for that remark. No, he wasn’t playing to the gallery. The audience saw enough from the Operation Pulo Shield documentary to know that there was urgent need to tackle the issue of oil theft in a more sustainable manner given the already devastated state of the Niger Delta environment.
Speaking earlier in an address of welcome, Special Adviser to the President on Niger Delta and Chairman, Presidential Amnesty Programme, Kingsley Kuku noted thus: “While several estimates have been made regarding the cost to the national economy in lost revenue and pipeline repair, no one has calculated the cost to the environment and the livelihood of the people of the Niger Delta. No one has calculated the cost of restoring the environment; but extrapolating from the cost of aquatic life in the Gulf of Mexico following the BP Gulf Coast spill of 2010, the cost to the Niger Delta will amount to more than one trillion dollars”.
Kuku found a ready ally in Mr. Nnimmo Bassey, an environmentalist, who hazarded a 30-year clean up plan in Ogoni land alone, adding that “the money from oil cannot restore the environment”. Bassey was of the view that given the present state of degradation of the Niger Delta region, no oil company should go offshore if they have not cleaned up onshore. According to him, it was important that the quantity of oil being stolen is known because “it’s no rocket science to meter the quantity of oil been produced”. In his summation, oil theft is from three angles: from collusion, agencies and illegal refineries.
International involvement
But transnational companies would swear they have nothing to do with it. In an April 2013 report by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, the company stated: ”Rising incidences of oil theft in Nigeria’s oil producing Niger Delta come at a significant environmental cost”.
In its sustainability report, the Anglo-Dutch oil major said its Nigerian unit, Shell Petroleum Development Company, SPDC, experienced 137 spills as a result of sabotage and theft last year, with the volume of oil lost amounting to 3.3 thousand tons.
“This was an increase in both volume and numbers from 2011, as the scale of oil theft in Nigeria reached unprecedented levels,” it stated in the report.
In an open letter published in the report, SPDC’s Managing Director, Mutiu Sunmonu, said the problem of oil theft in the Niger Delta has reached “unprecedented levels” and puts enormous strain on the company’s staff as well as costing the country billions of dollars a year in lost revenue.
He added that the Nigerian government puts the volume of oil stolen significantly above the 150,000 barrel a day estimate given by the United Nations in 2009.
“It may never be possible to assess the exact figures, but it’s clear that a well financed and highly organised criminal enterprise exists on a phenomenal scale...most of the stolen oil ends up in ocean-going tankers that transport it to refineries in other parts of West Africa, Europe and beyond,” Mr. Sunmonu said.
Cummulative annual spill
“We urgently need more assistance from the Nigerian government and its security forces, other governments and other organisations,” Mr. Sunmonu said. Whether they accept culpability or not the fact of the case is that a conservative waste/leakage/spill rate of 10% which amounts to a crude oil spill rate of 40,000 barrels per day, amounting to a cumulative annual spill volume of about 14.4 million barrels of crude oil spilt into the Niger Delta environment as a result of the crude oil theft enterprise has left the region more devastated than ever before.
This accounts for community leaders screaming themselves hoarse, demanding a more proactive approach to dealing with the problem. The devastation has left many Niger Delta communities further impoverished since their means of livelihood (fishing and farming) have been ruined by constant spills, leakages and actions of various security operatives.
It was against this backdrop that the conference decided that pipeline be encased in a minimum depth to protect them against vandalism; establish joint mini-refineries to absorb illegal refineries and engage local communities as well as fund the immediate clean up of the Niger Delta.
Conference also decided that security agencies have a role to play. The agencies were enjoined to enhance security sector collaboration with community participation, enhance intelligence gathering system with advance electronic and community input, stop the un systematic destruction of illegal oil theft facilities which compounds environmental damage.
The bitternes of Femi Aribisala
A GREEK proverb warns: "don't hear one and judge two". This sensible aphorism would appear to have been ignored by Mr. Femi Aribisala in his article of August 21, 2013, in which he bitterly assailed the contribution, character and person of the late Chief R.A. Fani-Kayode in the following terms : "....Like father, like son: That was 48 years ago.
Today, Femi Fani-Kayode, the 53-year-old son of 'Fani-Power,' continues in the mischievous tradition of his father: throwing dangerous missiles at the innocent.' " Furthermore, the said Mr. Aribisala also made what I thought were wildly inaccurate and dangerous statements about the true nature of Nigeria's federalism.
I first had the opportunity of meeting the late Chief R.A. Fani-Kayode when I joined the law firm of Fani-Kayode and Sowemimo sometime in 1990. I found him to be a man of elegance and great charm.
Though, he was in semi-retirement and hardly ventured out to the law courts at the time I got to know him, it was, nevertheless, obvious that he possessed an acute analytical mind, a profound knowledge of the law and was very meticulousness in his approach to solving a legal issue.
This was, without doubt, the consequence of an extremely fine intellect which had been refined by a first-rate legal education. I thought, however, that this superlative approach was undermined somewhat by the belligerence and biting sarcasm of his forensic style. In the discharge of his professional duties to his clients, he displayed a high degree of commitment, determination and discipline, which he also expected from his juniors, to who he made himself very accessible.
A legal scholar of Downing College, Cambridge University (like his illustrious father before him), he took his M.A. in 1945 - barely missing a first, he was third on the list in the law tripos - and the LL.B. (which was a masters degree in law at Cambridge), in 1946. A prizeman of the Middle Temple, he was called to the English Bar in 1947.
He rapidly rose to become one of the great commanding figures at the Nigerian Bar by 1960. Sir Olumuyiwa Jibowu, desiring to take him out of politics, had offered him an appointment to the High Court Bench in 1957. In recognition of his abilities, Chief Fani-Kayode was conferred with the rank of Queen's Counsel in August 1960, making him the third Nigerian to be so honoured - Chiefs H.O. Davies and F.R.A. Williams had earlier taken silk in 1958.
While the late Chief R.A. Fani-Kayode's legal attainments are generally regarded as incontrovertible, his political career has been the subject of some controversy. His political career can be divided into two phases: First, the period between 1954, when he first entered Parliament, and 1959, when he, as official A.G. candidate for Ife, lost his seat to the late Chief Michael Omisade, who, though he ran as an independent, had the support of the then Ooni of Ife, the late Sir Adesoji Aderemi, who, ironically, was an inveterate A.G. supporter.
Sir Adesoji was at this time involved in a bitter feud with the late Chief Fani-Kayode who was also the Chairman of the Ife District Council. The quarrel arose as a result of differences over the running of the affairs in the District. Till his death, Chief Fani-Kayode believed that Chief Awolowo betrayed him and covertly worked to ensure that he lost to Omisade. Prior to this, there had been what was primarily a personality clash between both men. From this clash arose Chief Fani-Kayode's bitter resentment of Chief Awolowo and the A.G. This explained his political conduct from 1960.
Whilst he was in the AG Chief Fani-Kayode contributed immensely to the organisation and expansion of that party into other regions, and the forging of its political alliances, particularly in the then Benue and Plateau provinces of the Northern Region. His work, and that of others, assisted in transforming the A.G. into a powerful nationalist movement which played a central role in the struggle for independence.
At this material period, he was idealistic, a nationalist and a progressive who emphasised militant Black racial pride (which culminated in the publication of his book Blackism in 1960), which pre-dated the Black Power Movement of the 1960s in the U.S.A..
During this period, he also nurtured the Youth Wing of the A.G., which he also moulded into a militant organisation. He was arrested at least once and arraigned before Magistrate F.O. Lucas on account of the violent activities of some members of this organisation who took direct action against British businesses. He was also the Assistant Federal Secretary of the A.G., and in that respect played a pivotal role, with the Federal Secretary, the late Chief Ayo Rosiji, in the organisation and administration of the A.G.
He, along with Chiefs Awolowo, S.O. Ighodaro, E.O. Eyo, Adeyemi Lawson and S.G. Ikoku, represented the A.G. at the 1957 London Constitutional Conference.
Chief Fani-Kayode also represented the A.G. as its counsel at the proceedings of the Minorities Commission, headed by Sir Henry Willink, between 1957 and 1958. He, along with Chief F.R.A. Williams, Mr. Justice Fatayi Williams and Chief T.A.B. Oki, representing the government of Western Nigeria, employed their considerable legal abilities at the various sittings of the Commission around the country, as they vainly sought - in the face of narrow-minded and selfish opposition by the N.P.C. and N.C.N.C., which was abetted by the hostility of the British colonial authorities - to argue the government of Western Nigeria and the Action Group's brief, which advocated the creation of more regions, in order to grant the right of self-determination to the Minority ethnic nationalities; to protect Minority rights and preserve the integrity of the ethnic nationalities; and to achieve the creation of an authentic federation where one of the regions (i.e. the Northern Region) would not be larger in area and population than the others put together, in a cynical attempt to ensure that that region could thereby bend the Federal Government to its will and thus dominate the entire country in perpetuity.
This enlightened brief which sought to ensure an equitable and suitable form of political association for a Nigeria of mutually distrustful and antagonistic ethnic nationalities with often divergent aspirations and interests, would, without doubt, have secured for us a finer quality of national life and prevented the past and present tragedies which continues to afflict this nation on account of the deliberate failure to address the "ethnic nationalities question." The valiant attempt by Chief Fani-Kayode and his colleagues pre-dated the present struggle - by the Resource Control Movement and those clamouring for the creation of an authentic federation - to re-negotiate the terms of our association by about 42 years.
Mr. AKIN AJOSE ADEOGUN, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
Today, Femi Fani-Kayode, the 53-year-old son of 'Fani-Power,' continues in the mischievous tradition of his father: throwing dangerous missiles at the innocent.' " Furthermore, the said Mr. Aribisala also made what I thought were wildly inaccurate and dangerous statements about the true nature of Nigeria's federalism.
I first had the opportunity of meeting the late Chief R.A. Fani-Kayode when I joined the law firm of Fani-Kayode and Sowemimo sometime in 1990. I found him to be a man of elegance and great charm.
Though, he was in semi-retirement and hardly ventured out to the law courts at the time I got to know him, it was, nevertheless, obvious that he possessed an acute analytical mind, a profound knowledge of the law and was very meticulousness in his approach to solving a legal issue.
This was, without doubt, the consequence of an extremely fine intellect which had been refined by a first-rate legal education. I thought, however, that this superlative approach was undermined somewhat by the belligerence and biting sarcasm of his forensic style. In the discharge of his professional duties to his clients, he displayed a high degree of commitment, determination and discipline, which he also expected from his juniors, to who he made himself very accessible.
A legal scholar of Downing College, Cambridge University (like his illustrious father before him), he took his M.A. in 1945 - barely missing a first, he was third on the list in the law tripos - and the LL.B. (which was a masters degree in law at Cambridge), in 1946. A prizeman of the Middle Temple, he was called to the English Bar in 1947.
He rapidly rose to become one of the great commanding figures at the Nigerian Bar by 1960. Sir Olumuyiwa Jibowu, desiring to take him out of politics, had offered him an appointment to the High Court Bench in 1957. In recognition of his abilities, Chief Fani-Kayode was conferred with the rank of Queen's Counsel in August 1960, making him the third Nigerian to be so honoured - Chiefs H.O. Davies and F.R.A. Williams had earlier taken silk in 1958.
While the late Chief R.A. Fani-Kayode's legal attainments are generally regarded as incontrovertible, his political career has been the subject of some controversy. His political career can be divided into two phases: First, the period between 1954, when he first entered Parliament, and 1959, when he, as official A.G. candidate for Ife, lost his seat to the late Chief Michael Omisade, who, though he ran as an independent, had the support of the then Ooni of Ife, the late Sir Adesoji Aderemi, who, ironically, was an inveterate A.G. supporter.
Sir Adesoji was at this time involved in a bitter feud with the late Chief Fani-Kayode who was also the Chairman of the Ife District Council. The quarrel arose as a result of differences over the running of the affairs in the District. Till his death, Chief Fani-Kayode believed that Chief Awolowo betrayed him and covertly worked to ensure that he lost to Omisade. Prior to this, there had been what was primarily a personality clash between both men. From this clash arose Chief Fani-Kayode's bitter resentment of Chief Awolowo and the A.G. This explained his political conduct from 1960.
Whilst he was in the AG Chief Fani-Kayode contributed immensely to the organisation and expansion of that party into other regions, and the forging of its political alliances, particularly in the then Benue and Plateau provinces of the Northern Region. His work, and that of others, assisted in transforming the A.G. into a powerful nationalist movement which played a central role in the struggle for independence.
At this material period, he was idealistic, a nationalist and a progressive who emphasised militant Black racial pride (which culminated in the publication of his book Blackism in 1960), which pre-dated the Black Power Movement of the 1960s in the U.S.A..
During this period, he also nurtured the Youth Wing of the A.G., which he also moulded into a militant organisation. He was arrested at least once and arraigned before Magistrate F.O. Lucas on account of the violent activities of some members of this organisation who took direct action against British businesses. He was also the Assistant Federal Secretary of the A.G., and in that respect played a pivotal role, with the Federal Secretary, the late Chief Ayo Rosiji, in the organisation and administration of the A.G.
He, along with Chiefs Awolowo, S.O. Ighodaro, E.O. Eyo, Adeyemi Lawson and S.G. Ikoku, represented the A.G. at the 1957 London Constitutional Conference.
Chief Fani-Kayode also represented the A.G. as its counsel at the proceedings of the Minorities Commission, headed by Sir Henry Willink, between 1957 and 1958. He, along with Chief F.R.A. Williams, Mr. Justice Fatayi Williams and Chief T.A.B. Oki, representing the government of Western Nigeria, employed their considerable legal abilities at the various sittings of the Commission around the country, as they vainly sought - in the face of narrow-minded and selfish opposition by the N.P.C. and N.C.N.C., which was abetted by the hostility of the British colonial authorities - to argue the government of Western Nigeria and the Action Group's brief, which advocated the creation of more regions, in order to grant the right of self-determination to the Minority ethnic nationalities; to protect Minority rights and preserve the integrity of the ethnic nationalities; and to achieve the creation of an authentic federation where one of the regions (i.e. the Northern Region) would not be larger in area and population than the others put together, in a cynical attempt to ensure that that region could thereby bend the Federal Government to its will and thus dominate the entire country in perpetuity.
This enlightened brief which sought to ensure an equitable and suitable form of political association for a Nigeria of mutually distrustful and antagonistic ethnic nationalities with often divergent aspirations and interests, would, without doubt, have secured for us a finer quality of national life and prevented the past and present tragedies which continues to afflict this nation on account of the deliberate failure to address the "ethnic nationalities question." The valiant attempt by Chief Fani-Kayode and his colleagues pre-dated the present struggle - by the Resource Control Movement and those clamouring for the creation of an authentic federation - to re-negotiate the terms of our association by about 42 years.
Mr. AKIN AJOSE ADEOGUN, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
Sunday, 1 September 2013
LG autonomy is it
By BEN ETAGHENE
THE debate on whether there should be local government council autonomy has been on for some over two decades and if care is not taken, it may become an elastic issue comparable with the two–legged discourse over the tenure requirement for the president. But at the end of the day, the status quo will remain for the latter. The Americans for close to 50 years had been embroiled with a similar predicament without any acceptable alternative solution.
However, in the case of financial autonomy for the LGs, it had once been tried. That was during the Second Republic without any appreciable result, hence the National Union of Teachers', NUT's, interventionist appeal to the National Assembly, NASS, in the current debate not to leave the running of primary schools under the authority of the local governments. That previous poor performance of the LGs, also led to the present joint state/local proviso in the Constitution. The argument for the Federal Government to take over primary schools administration with the involvement of the state governments lacks merit in our search for true federalism.
The recent recommendation by members of the House of Representatives on the constitutional review favoured the granting of financial autonomy to the third tier of government. Though the Senate in its wisdom recommended contrary stance but these variant positions have to be harmonized later in a joint session. The Senate has taken a conservative view while the Reps took a pragmatic stance (both) which the need of the time with a progressive review will streamline. It is most desirable that the country should move towards modernism, efficiency and transparency. This can’t easily be achieved at this level without the grant of financial autonomy to the third tier of government.
At the moment the Federal Government is too large and too rich. The states are moderately rich based on what accrue to them at their monthly allocation from the federation account. This makes almost all of them, including the LGs, to be overtly dependent on the oil money. There is a cry in many quarters for a sort of devolution of powers to other tiers of government as a necessary option. And yet the suggestion of an autonomy to the local governments with direct fund allocations from the federation account at this point in time cannot be waved off. It is a decsion whose time has come as it promises some form of palliative relief to the Federal Government.
For too long has the LG remained an appendage of the state government and perform at the dictates of the governor. Across the country, there is no single LG that can be credited with good performance. No roads, no water, no welfare benefits, no medical facilities, no jobs, et al. There is a hidden spirit of laissez-faire and compromise between the LG chairmen and their governors who dish out to the former according to the dictate of their whims rather than what the Constitution allocates to them. The LGs often cite paucity of funds as being responsible for their low level of performance.
They are thus handicapped because after payment of staff salaries, the balance of what is given to them is shared between the chairmen and their councilors. The governors cannot check them because they are partners in the act. In other instances there are no local government elections. The governors appoint caretaker committee chairmen to run the councils- an illegality.
The caretaker committee is alien to the 1999 Constitution. These are of public knowledge yet nobody has had the gut to check them. Breaking the law with impunity in this regard raises the vital question about the type of democracy operational in the country. The prevailing situation only serve to mildly reduce people to the level of docility. This is not the Nigeria we knew growing up. Something has to give way. And our psychologists owe the society a duty to explain the factors behind this new attitude.
A change is urgently needed and it must start with the LGs’ financial autonomy. So our national lawmakers in Abuja, including those who relish in calling the National Assembly a parliament, must appreciate the importance of this aspect of their present assignment. Although granting autonomy may be a climax in line of agitation, but ultimately it will end as an anti-climax. Therefore, how they manage the new era status becomes the crucial test.
We have seen the recklessness of most past chairmen of the local government council bosses. The unemployment figure among the youth is staggering, yet most of them prefer to behave like czars who lavished public funds on themselves and on few friends. In the little town where I live down South, there is this funny tale of our past LG boss who came to office with one wife. But two years later, he became known with five wives with one in Lagos and another in Abuja, while three live in different mansions owned by him in town. His predecessor owns two streets with several houses in different towns.
So, against this backdrop, I am advocating for financial autonomy for the LGAs. By this position, one is unaware of the hard road to real federalism. We cannot give the LGAs a holistic autonomy. But with a well controlled regimentation and stringent recruitment a new era could evolve.
Mr. Etaghene, Editorial Director of The Bulletin, wrote from Delta State.
THE debate on whether there should be local government council autonomy has been on for some over two decades and if care is not taken, it may become an elastic issue comparable with the two–legged discourse over the tenure requirement for the president. But at the end of the day, the status quo will remain for the latter. The Americans for close to 50 years had been embroiled with a similar predicament without any acceptable alternative solution.
However, in the case of financial autonomy for the LGs, it had once been tried. That was during the Second Republic without any appreciable result, hence the National Union of Teachers', NUT's, interventionist appeal to the National Assembly, NASS, in the current debate not to leave the running of primary schools under the authority of the local governments. That previous poor performance of the LGs, also led to the present joint state/local proviso in the Constitution. The argument for the Federal Government to take over primary schools administration with the involvement of the state governments lacks merit in our search for true federalism.
The recent recommendation by members of the House of Representatives on the constitutional review favoured the granting of financial autonomy to the third tier of government. Though the Senate in its wisdom recommended contrary stance but these variant positions have to be harmonized later in a joint session. The Senate has taken a conservative view while the Reps took a pragmatic stance (both) which the need of the time with a progressive review will streamline. It is most desirable that the country should move towards modernism, efficiency and transparency. This can’t easily be achieved at this level without the grant of financial autonomy to the third tier of government.
At the moment the Federal Government is too large and too rich. The states are moderately rich based on what accrue to them at their monthly allocation from the federation account. This makes almost all of them, including the LGs, to be overtly dependent on the oil money. There is a cry in many quarters for a sort of devolution of powers to other tiers of government as a necessary option. And yet the suggestion of an autonomy to the local governments with direct fund allocations from the federation account at this point in time cannot be waved off. It is a decsion whose time has come as it promises some form of palliative relief to the Federal Government.
For too long has the LG remained an appendage of the state government and perform at the dictates of the governor. Across the country, there is no single LG that can be credited with good performance. No roads, no water, no welfare benefits, no medical facilities, no jobs, et al. There is a hidden spirit of laissez-faire and compromise between the LG chairmen and their governors who dish out to the former according to the dictate of their whims rather than what the Constitution allocates to them. The LGs often cite paucity of funds as being responsible for their low level of performance.
They are thus handicapped because after payment of staff salaries, the balance of what is given to them is shared between the chairmen and their councilors. The governors cannot check them because they are partners in the act. In other instances there are no local government elections. The governors appoint caretaker committee chairmen to run the councils- an illegality.
The caretaker committee is alien to the 1999 Constitution. These are of public knowledge yet nobody has had the gut to check them. Breaking the law with impunity in this regard raises the vital question about the type of democracy operational in the country. The prevailing situation only serve to mildly reduce people to the level of docility. This is not the Nigeria we knew growing up. Something has to give way. And our psychologists owe the society a duty to explain the factors behind this new attitude.
A change is urgently needed and it must start with the LGs’ financial autonomy. So our national lawmakers in Abuja, including those who relish in calling the National Assembly a parliament, must appreciate the importance of this aspect of their present assignment. Although granting autonomy may be a climax in line of agitation, but ultimately it will end as an anti-climax. Therefore, how they manage the new era status becomes the crucial test.
We have seen the recklessness of most past chairmen of the local government council bosses. The unemployment figure among the youth is staggering, yet most of them prefer to behave like czars who lavished public funds on themselves and on few friends. In the little town where I live down South, there is this funny tale of our past LG boss who came to office with one wife. But two years later, he became known with five wives with one in Lagos and another in Abuja, while three live in different mansions owned by him in town. His predecessor owns two streets with several houses in different towns.
So, against this backdrop, I am advocating for financial autonomy for the LGAs. By this position, one is unaware of the hard road to real federalism. We cannot give the LGAs a holistic autonomy. But with a well controlled regimentation and stringent recruitment a new era could evolve.
Mr. Etaghene, Editorial Director of The Bulletin, wrote from Delta State.
2015 Presidency: Jonathan and Anenih’s homilies
By SUFUYAN OJEIFO
THE recent celebrations of the 80th birthday of the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, BoT, of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP and Iyasele of Esanland, Chief Anthony Anenih, have left in their trail useful lessons across the political divides, the most important being that political leaders should eschew bitterness and embrace forgiveness, which is needed to pull all men of great influence and goodwill together to work in the interest of national security, development and unity.
That was the homily Anenih delivered on Sunday, August 4, this year, at the lunch reception held at the International Conference Centre, ICC, Abuja, shortly after his birthday thanksgiving church service at Our Lady Queen Catholic Church, Area 3, Garki, which had in attendance former President Olusegun Obasanjo, whose relationship with Anenih went awry after the 2007 “coup”, masterminded by Obasanjo, which ousted Anenih from office as Chairman of the BoT.
Obasanjo had taken over the position, from which he resigned in 2012, prompting the PDP leadership to bring back Anenih to succeed him. For about five years, there was no love lost between the two leaders. I cannot confirm if there were efforts by either of them to reach out to each other for appeasement, reconciliation and forgiveness. Such feeling of animosity is understandable within the context in which power and brinksmanship were deployed in an attempt to dismantle cherished political reputation and truncate dreams that had taken decades to build and nurture.
There is no doubt that some people may find it easy to remain calm and overlook the shenanigans of the recent past suffered in the hands of some others, but to forgive is something that is divine and perhaps very difficult to accomplish. It takes extraordinary large-heartedness bolstered by the grace of God to do so in a world of boundless malevolence. It is against this backdrop that Anenih’s act of forgiving Obasanjo for his (Anenih’s) unjustifiable hurried ouster as BoT chair in 2007 is commendable.
The Anenih forgiveness, in this instant case, comes across as very genuine. For a man whose inscrutability is reinforced by his few words, coming up to talk about forgiving Obasanjo during his short remarks, speaks so much about what the development means to him. Those who are close to him attest to the fact that he does not bear the burden of malice for too long in so much as those who offend him realise it and beg for forgiveness. He is always quick to forgive and forget. To have taken about five years to thaw the ice must be that the other side did not make genuine overtures.
But now that something had led to the other and both have put the past behind, for it is also possible that Obasanjo might have been holding something against Anenih, the “birthday boy” ensured that he preached the message of forgiveness to his audience so that those present would know that he was not preaching what he could not practise.
He, as a matter of fact, said he visited Obasanjo a few months back, in company with some members of the BoT of the PDP, at his Hilltop Mansion in Abeokuta, to explore the potentials of reconciliation among members and leaders of the PDP for greater cohesion within the party and to carry critical stakeholders outside the party on board of government’s development plan.
For him to have anchored his homily on the forgiveness that has taken place between him and Obasanjo, in order to drive home the point that leaders of Nigeria, both past and present, should forgive one another and work together in the national interest, remains the strongest hint ever, amid the intriguing political interactions, that there are unlimited possibilities that leaders of the nation can drive to achieve better understandings in the flourish of nationalistic fervour. Peace and selflessness, deducing from his position, are key in this regard.
Read Anenih: “If you look round, you will know that Nigeria is here. We must forget the past and move forward. I was thrilled when I saw former President Olusegun Obasanjo in the Church today (August 4, 2013). For him to be here is to me forgiveness. I want to appeal to IBB, Abdusalami, Danjuma, Obasanjo that Nigeria needs peace. If they can give us peace and Jonathan is genuinely advised, he will move forward; if these men come together and advise Jonathan, Boko Haram will die…. Nigeria is turn-by-turn.
We should wait for our time. Jonathan is there now, it will get to another person; we should talk less. Let us put our hands behind the President. Time flies. Today he is the one, tomorrow it will be your turn.’’ This is no doubt good proposition to support Jonathan to complete his constitutionally circumscribed two terms of office, which is expected to end in 2019.
But then, there is a place for reciprocity in the socio-political mix way beyond the rigors of protocols. Reaching out at the social and political levels helps to nurture and deepen bonds as well as weaken fault lines of ethnicity, religion and other primordial considerations that tend to negatively emphasize our diversities. I must on this score commend former President Ibrahim Babangida who has devoted his post-military presidency years to touch base with friends, associates and explore new frontiers of relationships across the nation deploying the platform of social engagements.
This is a demonstrated commitment to dismantle the age-long culture of erecting barriers and fostering cleavages, which President Goodluck Jonathan spoke against in his speech at the birthday reception. To him, time has come to sidestep our primordial cleavages and begin to sing the song of unity. He showed how passionate he is to his preachment when he urged leaders of the nation to set shining examples in patriotism as Anenih has done.
In fact, he urged political leaders, stakeholders and elders to stop making provocative statements capable of dividing the country even as he underscored the need for statements that would build the nation. For him, it was unfortunate that some highly inflammable statements were coming from elders, who witnessed the Civil War. His plea that elders should sing the song of unity in this country fittingly redefined the texture and character of the event as transcending the realm of festivities to the sphere of politics.
Perhaps, the greatest tribute to have come the way of Anenih on that day was Jonathan’s description of him as a leader who has remained very relevant in the political landscape: “…To pass through one winter is a tug of war, to cross 80 is worth celebrating. 80 years of bad health is like punishment to the body. For all the period I have known Anenih, he has been very vibrant. To be relevant politically for all these years is not easy. It is not easy for a politician to stay on top for a long time.
I see something in him which is a little advice I will give to all of us. Tony Anenih has shown that he is a nationalist. He has not shown that he belongs to one tribe, or one religion. So in spite of the challenges of politics, the unpredictable political environment, he continues to stand tall.” These words must remain indelible in the minds of Anenih, his loyalists as well as acquaintances and it is hoped that the import of the words to other leaders of the nation would not be lost.
In addition, one hopes that Jonathan would genuinely seek the guidance-cum-cooperation of his predecessors and hugely commit himself to his development agenda that will transform the nation and rekindle the belief of Nigerians in our nation. He should set the example of sacrifice by leading the process of reconciliation and overtures that will soothe frayed nerves and galvanise quantum nationwide support for his administration. He has the capacity to build national consensus around critical development issues as well as nurture a common front in a determined effort to chart a trajectory to a destination of greatness for the nation. History will not forget him and posterity will judge him positively if he can now incrementally walk his talk.
Perhaps, as a starter, what lesson would appear to have been learnt and, which is now manifesting positively in the PDP is the craving for reconciliation and forgiveness as gleaned from Anenih’s homily. I see that Obasanjo has now taken up the gauntlet to intervene in the lingering stand-off between some PDP governors and the party leadership as well as the presidency. The process is on-going, even though, it has not been smooth, at all. The good thing, at least, is that parties to the conflict are now talking in formal or structured settings.
It is expected that before long, lasting peace will return to the PDP fold, especially before the 2015 election year, otherwise, the party may be forced by the opposition to come down the wire in the sets of polls that will hold. The party leaders and the presidency must act expeditiously and in good faith to put their house in order as forewarned is forearmed. If the party and the Federal Government act expeditiously and achieve positive results, historians and watchers of developments in the party should be charitable to anchor the development on the impact of the homilies by Jonathan and Anenih on the latter’s 80th birthday reception and the subsequent positive moves.
· Ojeifo, journalist/publisher, sent this piece from Abuja.
THE recent celebrations of the 80th birthday of the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, BoT, of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP and Iyasele of Esanland, Chief Anthony Anenih, have left in their trail useful lessons across the political divides, the most important being that political leaders should eschew bitterness and embrace forgiveness, which is needed to pull all men of great influence and goodwill together to work in the interest of national security, development and unity.
That was the homily Anenih delivered on Sunday, August 4, this year, at the lunch reception held at the International Conference Centre, ICC, Abuja, shortly after his birthday thanksgiving church service at Our Lady Queen Catholic Church, Area 3, Garki, which had in attendance former President Olusegun Obasanjo, whose relationship with Anenih went awry after the 2007 “coup”, masterminded by Obasanjo, which ousted Anenih from office as Chairman of the BoT.
Obasanjo had taken over the position, from which he resigned in 2012, prompting the PDP leadership to bring back Anenih to succeed him. For about five years, there was no love lost between the two leaders. I cannot confirm if there were efforts by either of them to reach out to each other for appeasement, reconciliation and forgiveness. Such feeling of animosity is understandable within the context in which power and brinksmanship were deployed in an attempt to dismantle cherished political reputation and truncate dreams that had taken decades to build and nurture.
There is no doubt that some people may find it easy to remain calm and overlook the shenanigans of the recent past suffered in the hands of some others, but to forgive is something that is divine and perhaps very difficult to accomplish. It takes extraordinary large-heartedness bolstered by the grace of God to do so in a world of boundless malevolence. It is against this backdrop that Anenih’s act of forgiving Obasanjo for his (Anenih’s) unjustifiable hurried ouster as BoT chair in 2007 is commendable.
The Anenih forgiveness, in this instant case, comes across as very genuine. For a man whose inscrutability is reinforced by his few words, coming up to talk about forgiving Obasanjo during his short remarks, speaks so much about what the development means to him. Those who are close to him attest to the fact that he does not bear the burden of malice for too long in so much as those who offend him realise it and beg for forgiveness. He is always quick to forgive and forget. To have taken about five years to thaw the ice must be that the other side did not make genuine overtures.
But now that something had led to the other and both have put the past behind, for it is also possible that Obasanjo might have been holding something against Anenih, the “birthday boy” ensured that he preached the message of forgiveness to his audience so that those present would know that he was not preaching what he could not practise.
He, as a matter of fact, said he visited Obasanjo a few months back, in company with some members of the BoT of the PDP, at his Hilltop Mansion in Abeokuta, to explore the potentials of reconciliation among members and leaders of the PDP for greater cohesion within the party and to carry critical stakeholders outside the party on board of government’s development plan.
For him to have anchored his homily on the forgiveness that has taken place between him and Obasanjo, in order to drive home the point that leaders of Nigeria, both past and present, should forgive one another and work together in the national interest, remains the strongest hint ever, amid the intriguing political interactions, that there are unlimited possibilities that leaders of the nation can drive to achieve better understandings in the flourish of nationalistic fervour. Peace and selflessness, deducing from his position, are key in this regard.
Read Anenih: “If you look round, you will know that Nigeria is here. We must forget the past and move forward. I was thrilled when I saw former President Olusegun Obasanjo in the Church today (August 4, 2013). For him to be here is to me forgiveness. I want to appeal to IBB, Abdusalami, Danjuma, Obasanjo that Nigeria needs peace. If they can give us peace and Jonathan is genuinely advised, he will move forward; if these men come together and advise Jonathan, Boko Haram will die…. Nigeria is turn-by-turn.
We should wait for our time. Jonathan is there now, it will get to another person; we should talk less. Let us put our hands behind the President. Time flies. Today he is the one, tomorrow it will be your turn.’’ This is no doubt good proposition to support Jonathan to complete his constitutionally circumscribed two terms of office, which is expected to end in 2019.
But then, there is a place for reciprocity in the socio-political mix way beyond the rigors of protocols. Reaching out at the social and political levels helps to nurture and deepen bonds as well as weaken fault lines of ethnicity, religion and other primordial considerations that tend to negatively emphasize our diversities. I must on this score commend former President Ibrahim Babangida who has devoted his post-military presidency years to touch base with friends, associates and explore new frontiers of relationships across the nation deploying the platform of social engagements.
This is a demonstrated commitment to dismantle the age-long culture of erecting barriers and fostering cleavages, which President Goodluck Jonathan spoke against in his speech at the birthday reception. To him, time has come to sidestep our primordial cleavages and begin to sing the song of unity. He showed how passionate he is to his preachment when he urged leaders of the nation to set shining examples in patriotism as Anenih has done.
In fact, he urged political leaders, stakeholders and elders to stop making provocative statements capable of dividing the country even as he underscored the need for statements that would build the nation. For him, it was unfortunate that some highly inflammable statements were coming from elders, who witnessed the Civil War. His plea that elders should sing the song of unity in this country fittingly redefined the texture and character of the event as transcending the realm of festivities to the sphere of politics.
Perhaps, the greatest tribute to have come the way of Anenih on that day was Jonathan’s description of him as a leader who has remained very relevant in the political landscape: “…To pass through one winter is a tug of war, to cross 80 is worth celebrating. 80 years of bad health is like punishment to the body. For all the period I have known Anenih, he has been very vibrant. To be relevant politically for all these years is not easy. It is not easy for a politician to stay on top for a long time.
I see something in him which is a little advice I will give to all of us. Tony Anenih has shown that he is a nationalist. He has not shown that he belongs to one tribe, or one religion. So in spite of the challenges of politics, the unpredictable political environment, he continues to stand tall.” These words must remain indelible in the minds of Anenih, his loyalists as well as acquaintances and it is hoped that the import of the words to other leaders of the nation would not be lost.
In addition, one hopes that Jonathan would genuinely seek the guidance-cum-cooperation of his predecessors and hugely commit himself to his development agenda that will transform the nation and rekindle the belief of Nigerians in our nation. He should set the example of sacrifice by leading the process of reconciliation and overtures that will soothe frayed nerves and galvanise quantum nationwide support for his administration. He has the capacity to build national consensus around critical development issues as well as nurture a common front in a determined effort to chart a trajectory to a destination of greatness for the nation. History will not forget him and posterity will judge him positively if he can now incrementally walk his talk.
Perhaps, as a starter, what lesson would appear to have been learnt and, which is now manifesting positively in the PDP is the craving for reconciliation and forgiveness as gleaned from Anenih’s homily. I see that Obasanjo has now taken up the gauntlet to intervene in the lingering stand-off between some PDP governors and the party leadership as well as the presidency. The process is on-going, even though, it has not been smooth, at all. The good thing, at least, is that parties to the conflict are now talking in formal or structured settings.
It is expected that before long, lasting peace will return to the PDP fold, especially before the 2015 election year, otherwise, the party may be forced by the opposition to come down the wire in the sets of polls that will hold. The party leaders and the presidency must act expeditiously and in good faith to put their house in order as forewarned is forearmed. If the party and the Federal Government act expeditiously and achieve positive results, historians and watchers of developments in the party should be charitable to anchor the development on the impact of the homilies by Jonathan and Anenih on the latter’s 80th birthday reception and the subsequent positive moves.
· Ojeifo, journalist/publisher, sent this piece from Abuja.
Obi and his Awka developmental battles
I REMEMBER few years ago when Awka people, particularly the ones in Diaspora were spitting out fire, thunder and brimstone on Governor Peter Obi of Anambra State for allegedly neglecting their kingdom. They accused him of taking developmental issues that concerned Awka town unserious. I’m quite aware that some groups threatened to ‘shut down’ the government house if the helmsman refuses to repent of his ‘sins’ and fix Awka to exude the light of capital territory which it is called. I occassionally stumbled on newspaper publications where they were blowing hot; stressing why the area should be like Enugu or Owerri if not better.
Of course, no right thinking person should cast aspersions on the people who are not only fighting for their own democracy dividend but a place where Anambrarians can truly call their state’s capital.
During that period, some individuals such as I who come from the age-long marginalised people of Awka-North opened wide our voices in plea to the government with a hope that we would be remembered equally. We girded up our loins in all facets. I remember communities of Amanuke, Urum, Ugbene, Ugbenu, Isuaniocha, and others, all in Awka-North cried out blood, and perhaps, still crying to be ‘consoled’. At least, if not for any other thing, we share certain things in common, and during the Nigeria–Biafra civil war, some Awka people took solace in Amanuke and others.
While all these were going on, some respected Awka sons and daughters were calm but not quiet! They watched the drama unfold, scene after scene; perhaps, to see what the climax would look like. In a society where there are weak people, Igbo adage supports the need to have strong ones so there would be enough characters to suit different occasions.
Fortunately, Awka kingdom is favoured with illustrious sons and daughters who hold key positions in the government; two of who are Sen. Ben Obi, the Special Adviser to the President on Inter-Party Affairs; Hon.EmekaNwogbo, representing Awka North and South at the House of Representatives and others. In every state, there are always people drawing the attention of the government to their locality; and Anambra is no exception.
Mr. Peter Obi from day one signed 177 pacts with different towns in Anambra state and every community wants to be favoured more. He is not a spirit and your ‘hook can catch him when you fix his favourite bait’! And that perhaps is what EmekaNwogbo and other illustrious sons of Awka kingdom have mastered. The duo belong to same political party and as such understand themselves.
The face of Awka capital territory has changed very significantly today. One with prior knowledge of the area who visits it now will know for sure that angels have began treading on their soil. Mr. Obi is angry. May be the fire and brimstone they rained on him have hit his eyes, and he is now taking revenge on the roads and other developmental areas.
He has ransacked all the nooks and crannies of Awka, creating roads. Apart from Onitsha, Awka can today boast of the best network of roads in the state unlike before. All the gutters of the existing roads have been fixed. The AuthurEzeavenue which gained notoriety because of the ravaging effect of flooding has lost its potency. Lives over the years, were lost to flooding there, while few rescued.
Gov. Obi did not stop at that. He has clamped down on the schools in the area. There is no public school in Awka which does not boast of receiving government’s attention. Particularly, Capital City Secondary School, Awka which gained notoriety for housing some bad eggs due to its prior dilapidated nature, is today a unique citadel of learning through the instrumentality of the government and EmekaNwogbo who descended on the school like thunder and lightening!
Even though it is a responsibility of every government to her people, at least for the social contract, this Obi-led government deserves commendation, even as I remind him about Awka-North.
*Mr. Obinna, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Awka, Anambra State.
Of course, no right thinking person should cast aspersions on the people who are not only fighting for their own democracy dividend but a place where Anambrarians can truly call their state’s capital.
During that period, some individuals such as I who come from the age-long marginalised people of Awka-North opened wide our voices in plea to the government with a hope that we would be remembered equally. We girded up our loins in all facets. I remember communities of Amanuke, Urum, Ugbene, Ugbenu, Isuaniocha, and others, all in Awka-North cried out blood, and perhaps, still crying to be ‘consoled’. At least, if not for any other thing, we share certain things in common, and during the Nigeria–Biafra civil war, some Awka people took solace in Amanuke and others.
While all these were going on, some respected Awka sons and daughters were calm but not quiet! They watched the drama unfold, scene after scene; perhaps, to see what the climax would look like. In a society where there are weak people, Igbo adage supports the need to have strong ones so there would be enough characters to suit different occasions.
Fortunately, Awka kingdom is favoured with illustrious sons and daughters who hold key positions in the government; two of who are Sen. Ben Obi, the Special Adviser to the President on Inter-Party Affairs; Hon.EmekaNwogbo, representing Awka North and South at the House of Representatives and others. In every state, there are always people drawing the attention of the government to their locality; and Anambra is no exception.
Mr. Peter Obi from day one signed 177 pacts with different towns in Anambra state and every community wants to be favoured more. He is not a spirit and your ‘hook can catch him when you fix his favourite bait’! And that perhaps is what EmekaNwogbo and other illustrious sons of Awka kingdom have mastered. The duo belong to same political party and as such understand themselves.
The face of Awka capital territory has changed very significantly today. One with prior knowledge of the area who visits it now will know for sure that angels have began treading on their soil. Mr. Obi is angry. May be the fire and brimstone they rained on him have hit his eyes, and he is now taking revenge on the roads and other developmental areas.
He has ransacked all the nooks and crannies of Awka, creating roads. Apart from Onitsha, Awka can today boast of the best network of roads in the state unlike before. All the gutters of the existing roads have been fixed. The AuthurEzeavenue which gained notoriety because of the ravaging effect of flooding has lost its potency. Lives over the years, were lost to flooding there, while few rescued.
Gov. Obi did not stop at that. He has clamped down on the schools in the area. There is no public school in Awka which does not boast of receiving government’s attention. Particularly, Capital City Secondary School, Awka which gained notoriety for housing some bad eggs due to its prior dilapidated nature, is today a unique citadel of learning through the instrumentality of the government and EmekaNwogbo who descended on the school like thunder and lightening!
Even though it is a responsibility of every government to her people, at least for the social contract, this Obi-led government deserves commendation, even as I remind him about Awka-North.
*Mr. Obinna, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Awka, Anambra State.
Saturday, 31 August 2013
RESPONSE TO DEPORTATION: A cure worse than the disease
By Akin Osuntokun
As the cliché goes, all this would have been laughable if it is not so tragic. In the heat of the subsisting venom and vitriol, it seems nobody now cares that the first set of “deportees” from Lagos were no other than Yoruba indigenes of Oyo and Osun states. I say this because this knowledge is not reflected in the way and manner protagonists have been conducting the debate on the so-called “deportation” of Igbo from Lagos.
This precedent completely nullifies the presumption and dangerous peg of tribalism on which the mutual trade in personal and ethnic slurs, derision, denigration, demonisation, and hubris has been hoisted. It tells us that Governor Babatunde Fashola’s action was not motivated and informed by ethnic calculations neither was it intended and directed against any particular group or nationality.
It is a detribalised act but it is not a good policy. It is a joke carried too far. It is a conduct unbecoming of any government that aspires to be taken seriously. It fails miserably on the template of cost-benefit analysis. It is an instance in which the cost - in distraction, goodwill and reputation- has far outweighed any conceivable benefit from the forceful relocation of a few pathetic destitute. It also underscores the predilection of Nigerians for political theatre and excitement at the expense of calm and fruitful introspection; for heat and passion over and above light and reason; for mutual recrimination over cooperation and consensus.
In the first place, there was no need for ethnic casus belli. The ill-starred destitute were not relocated as Igbo but as indigenes of Anambra State. It was done in replication of the precedence of Oyo and Osun states where similar victims were earlier repatriated. They received the short end of the stick not as Yoruba but as indigenes of specific states. It was then left to the government of those states to respond and take up the challenge of accepting or rejecting the folly of the Lagos government.
I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that any litigation initiative on the case is a wrap up, open and shut case against Lagos State. Rather than political grandstanding, the affected governor of Anambra State, Mr. Peter Obi, for instance, should have proceeded to the courts and seize an opportunity to make the destitute of today the multi-millionaires of tomorrow – in consequent hefty damages that would accrue to those hapless Nigerians through judicial penalty and sanction. Quite significantly, it also poses the unique utility of testing the Nigerian Constitution on the key and basic question of citizenship.
How then did the unbecoming nuisance of repatriating some unfortunate citizens of Nigeria from one state to another transmogrify into a virulent diatribe across the ethnic divide bringing out the worst in the protagonists? It will be difficult for any thinking Nigerian not to admire and identify with Professor Chinua Achebe, but it was his grating remarks in the Biafra evocative book, There Was a Country, and the debate it spawned that served as the dress rehearsal for the present turn of events.
[caption id="attachment_408386" align="alignnone" width="412"]
Deportees from Lagos[/caption]
In the book, the civil war was relived all over again with the attendant ripping open of old wounds and injuries. The story was told from a partisan point of view where blames and villainy are liberally attributed to the other side in counterpoise to the exhortation of heroic Igbo exceptionalism. The thematic backdrop was of a martyrdom suffered by a people whose surpassing excellence had incurred the envy and spite of fellow Nigerians. There was the account of how within the decades of the 1930s through to the 1960s, the Igbo caught up and excelled the Yoruba in education and modernisation.
Yet I do not begrudge Achebe. The indomitable Sir Ahmadu Bello was the one who counselled that if you do not blow your trumpet, nobody would blow it for you. The modernisation rivalry among the component units of Nigeria, especially between the Igbo and Yoruba, is the stuff of which social progress and advancement is made. Nigeria will be the better for it. But there is also the pernicious strain, which is neither good for the Igbo nor fair to the rest of Nigeria.
It has been repeatedly stated along the following lines- “the military coup of 1966 presented a pretext to carry out a plan that had been laid out years before. It was a plan that aimed at a total extermination of the Igbo or, at least, their containment. The pogrom and the brutal war that followed was the final solution to the perceived Igbo problems in Nigeria.
When Anthony Enahoro travelled round the globe arguing that starvation was a weapon of war, he was following the script for the total extermination of the Igbo. When Benjamin Adekunle boast ed to foreign reporters, ‘I want to see no Red Cross, no Caritas, no World Council of Churches, no pope, no missionary and no UN delegation; I want to prevent even one Ibo from having even one piece to eat before their capitulation; we shoot at everything that moves and, when our troops march into the centre of Ibo territory, we shoot at everything even at things that do not move’, he was following the same script.”
Could there indeed have been a plan by the rest of Nigeria…laid out years before….. aimed at a total extermination of the Igbo? Recent political history of Nigeria does not bear out this preposterous and extravagant claim. Such conspiracy would have required at the minimum an entrenched and long-standing political rapport between the governments and peoples of the northern and western regions.
On the contrary, the first lesson in politics and most successful political currency among the Yoruba (until the advent of the nascent APC) is to swear fidelity to the political canon of everlasting defiance and resistance of the Hausa-Fulani standard bearers of feudalism and hegemony. If there was any relationship between the two blocs, it was that of adversity, mutual suspicion and disdain.
Incidentally, it was the NCNC –as it evolved to become the eastern regional denominated party – that went into alliance with the Northern People’s Congress, NPC, (having spurned overtures from the Action Group, AG, of the Western Region) to form the Federal Government at independence. And in the post-independence years, the adversity and hostility between the West and the North only deepened with the northern backed factionalisation of the AG and the imprisonment of Chief Obafemi Awolowo.
In the century before British colonialism, the long-drawn war to checkmate the expansion of the Sokoto Caliphate into the Oyo Empire served as the singular presage to the unhappy relations between the Yoruba and the inheritors of the caliphate within Nigeria. Thus, it is difficult and improbable to impute any logic to the suggestion of a grand conspiracy between the Yoruba dominated western region and the Caliphate-dominated northern region.
If ever there was such a conspiracy, western region could not have been part of it. Neither, for that matter, could the northern region.
If we were not to stand guilty of seeing ghosts where none exists, it was the chain of events set in motion by the western regional crisis of 1962 leading to the military coup of January 15 1966 that culminated in the civil war. It is possible that the coup was not a product of Igbo conspiracy but, in politics, perception can be more important than reality. And in the interim between January and July 1966, this perception was reinforced by two inadvertent events.
The coup-makers were not tried and punished (court-martialled by the army authorities) as they should; and the Ironsi government, perhaps, in good faith, legislated the abolition of the regions and the unification of Nigeria under the unitary rule of the military – whose hierarchy was disproportionately skewed in favour of officers of Igbo origin. I do not need to be an apologist for the northern region to propose that no group can be dispossessed of power in the summary and traumatic manner that functionaries and officers of northern extraction were wiped out in the January 1966 coup and not react in a bitter riposte commensurate with its capacity to exact revenge.
Beyond the leveling up of scores in the counter coup, was the subsequent gross violation and pogrom of the Igbo resident in the North a product of conspiracy? Without a shade of doubt it was. But it was a conspiracy that did not antedate 1966. As a matter of fact, the original objective (from which it deviated at the instance of the British High Commissioner in Lagos) of the July 1966 counter coup was to terminate in a secession of the North from Nigeria and not remain to pursue any hidden agenda. Nothing exemplifies the lack of a Nigeria wide or even a northern conspiracy against the Igbo than the incoherence and sheer ineptitude that characterised the conduct of the Nigerian government towards the Eastern Region in the months leading to the civil war. Remember the Aburi debacle?
Yet, I was not of any mind to join this hoopla until I read a rejoinder by Mr. Femi Aribisala. One virtue I have always urged on Femi Fani-Kayode (a close friend and a brother) is to exercise a sense of proportion and moderation in his all too frequent public interventions. Alas, how successful I have been in this regard is plain to all those who have followed him!
Fani-Kayode is gifted at working himself into a storm in a tea cup on virtually any issue that catches his fancy; and has a provocative penchant for overstating his advocacy. Subtlety and diplomacy are not his strong points. And he has been duly admonished and upbraided in sundry responses. Now the other Femi (Mr. Aribisala) is an academic and a pastor and he is 61years old. He took umbrage and has published a rejoinder to the younger Femi and it is a cure worse than the disease.
His words: “Power-power, Fani-Igbo: I was having private lessons in mathematics at the home of a colleague, Enitan Abiodun, when we heard the noise of a crowd outside. We rushed to the veranda to see Chief Femi Fani-Kayode (alias Fani-Power), then deputy governor of the Western Region, standing on the seat of a moving convertible. He was surrounded by a mob, which was shouting and hailing him. On hearing the noise, Enitan’s mother rushed to the veranda shouting ‘Awo!’ only to discover that the people outside were not supporters of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, but those of his arch-enemies.
“The shout of ‘Awo!’ by Mrs. Abiodun brought the procession to a screeching halt. ‘Who said that? Who said that?’ demanded the mob, enraged. “‘Fani-power’ turned and looked up at us. His eyes were the usual blood-shot red. At the time, many claimed it was because he regularly smoked Indian hemp. Fani-Kayode pointed to our building and identified to his thugs that the offending shout came from our direction. We did not know that the floor of the convertible he was standing in was loaded with empty bottles. His thugs reached for the bottles and rained them down on us as we all scrambled back inside the house for dear life.
Like father, like son: that was 48 years ago. Today, Femi Fani-Kayode, the 53-year-old son of ‘Fani-Power,’ continues in the mischievous tradition of his father.”
Pray, what civic etiquette does one learn from this kind of admonition, reeking, as it does, of pure and unadulterated malice? Why should one hide under the cover of an opportunistic moment to vent personal animus with reckless abandon? So what was the whole uproar against Mr. Fani-Kayode about if those who criticise are themselves a worse advertisement on the ethics of public engagement?
Mr. Aribisala has published quite a number of peculiar and controversial sermons on Christianity, which many Christians will find grossly offensive, for example, “God is the servant of man”; yet it will not be proper to wonder whether such behaviour might be attributable to what his parents did or did not do 50 years ago. The hallmark of a true and genuine man of God is charity and temperance towards all, not unrestrained anger and bile; the measure of good character and learning is sobriety and comportment when others are losing their cool in bitterness and outrage; an elder, according to Yoruba adage, is quick to hear and learn but slow and hesitant to speak and join a cacophony. As a pastor, academic and elder, how does Aribisala fare on each score?
*Osuntokun is a former MD of News Agency of Nigeria, NAN
As the cliché goes, all this would have been laughable if it is not so tragic. In the heat of the subsisting venom and vitriol, it seems nobody now cares that the first set of “deportees” from Lagos were no other than Yoruba indigenes of Oyo and Osun states. I say this because this knowledge is not reflected in the way and manner protagonists have been conducting the debate on the so-called “deportation” of Igbo from Lagos.
This precedent completely nullifies the presumption and dangerous peg of tribalism on which the mutual trade in personal and ethnic slurs, derision, denigration, demonisation, and hubris has been hoisted. It tells us that Governor Babatunde Fashola’s action was not motivated and informed by ethnic calculations neither was it intended and directed against any particular group or nationality.
It is a detribalised act but it is not a good policy. It is a joke carried too far. It is a conduct unbecoming of any government that aspires to be taken seriously. It fails miserably on the template of cost-benefit analysis. It is an instance in which the cost - in distraction, goodwill and reputation- has far outweighed any conceivable benefit from the forceful relocation of a few pathetic destitute. It also underscores the predilection of Nigerians for political theatre and excitement at the expense of calm and fruitful introspection; for heat and passion over and above light and reason; for mutual recrimination over cooperation and consensus.
In the first place, there was no need for ethnic casus belli. The ill-starred destitute were not relocated as Igbo but as indigenes of Anambra State. It was done in replication of the precedence of Oyo and Osun states where similar victims were earlier repatriated. They received the short end of the stick not as Yoruba but as indigenes of specific states. It was then left to the government of those states to respond and take up the challenge of accepting or rejecting the folly of the Lagos government.
I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that any litigation initiative on the case is a wrap up, open and shut case against Lagos State. Rather than political grandstanding, the affected governor of Anambra State, Mr. Peter Obi, for instance, should have proceeded to the courts and seize an opportunity to make the destitute of today the multi-millionaires of tomorrow – in consequent hefty damages that would accrue to those hapless Nigerians through judicial penalty and sanction. Quite significantly, it also poses the unique utility of testing the Nigerian Constitution on the key and basic question of citizenship.
How then did the unbecoming nuisance of repatriating some unfortunate citizens of Nigeria from one state to another transmogrify into a virulent diatribe across the ethnic divide bringing out the worst in the protagonists? It will be difficult for any thinking Nigerian not to admire and identify with Professor Chinua Achebe, but it was his grating remarks in the Biafra evocative book, There Was a Country, and the debate it spawned that served as the dress rehearsal for the present turn of events.
[caption id="attachment_408386" align="alignnone" width="412"]
Deportees from Lagos[/caption]In the book, the civil war was relived all over again with the attendant ripping open of old wounds and injuries. The story was told from a partisan point of view where blames and villainy are liberally attributed to the other side in counterpoise to the exhortation of heroic Igbo exceptionalism. The thematic backdrop was of a martyrdom suffered by a people whose surpassing excellence had incurred the envy and spite of fellow Nigerians. There was the account of how within the decades of the 1930s through to the 1960s, the Igbo caught up and excelled the Yoruba in education and modernisation.
Yet I do not begrudge Achebe. The indomitable Sir Ahmadu Bello was the one who counselled that if you do not blow your trumpet, nobody would blow it for you. The modernisation rivalry among the component units of Nigeria, especially between the Igbo and Yoruba, is the stuff of which social progress and advancement is made. Nigeria will be the better for it. But there is also the pernicious strain, which is neither good for the Igbo nor fair to the rest of Nigeria.
It has been repeatedly stated along the following lines- “the military coup of 1966 presented a pretext to carry out a plan that had been laid out years before. It was a plan that aimed at a total extermination of the Igbo or, at least, their containment. The pogrom and the brutal war that followed was the final solution to the perceived Igbo problems in Nigeria.
When Anthony Enahoro travelled round the globe arguing that starvation was a weapon of war, he was following the script for the total extermination of the Igbo. When Benjamin Adekunle boast ed to foreign reporters, ‘I want to see no Red Cross, no Caritas, no World Council of Churches, no pope, no missionary and no UN delegation; I want to prevent even one Ibo from having even one piece to eat before their capitulation; we shoot at everything that moves and, when our troops march into the centre of Ibo territory, we shoot at everything even at things that do not move’, he was following the same script.”
Could there indeed have been a plan by the rest of Nigeria…laid out years before….. aimed at a total extermination of the Igbo? Recent political history of Nigeria does not bear out this preposterous and extravagant claim. Such conspiracy would have required at the minimum an entrenched and long-standing political rapport between the governments and peoples of the northern and western regions.
On the contrary, the first lesson in politics and most successful political currency among the Yoruba (until the advent of the nascent APC) is to swear fidelity to the political canon of everlasting defiance and resistance of the Hausa-Fulani standard bearers of feudalism and hegemony. If there was any relationship between the two blocs, it was that of adversity, mutual suspicion and disdain.
Incidentally, it was the NCNC –as it evolved to become the eastern regional denominated party – that went into alliance with the Northern People’s Congress, NPC, (having spurned overtures from the Action Group, AG, of the Western Region) to form the Federal Government at independence. And in the post-independence years, the adversity and hostility between the West and the North only deepened with the northern backed factionalisation of the AG and the imprisonment of Chief Obafemi Awolowo.
In the century before British colonialism, the long-drawn war to checkmate the expansion of the Sokoto Caliphate into the Oyo Empire served as the singular presage to the unhappy relations between the Yoruba and the inheritors of the caliphate within Nigeria. Thus, it is difficult and improbable to impute any logic to the suggestion of a grand conspiracy between the Yoruba dominated western region and the Caliphate-dominated northern region.
If ever there was such a conspiracy, western region could not have been part of it. Neither, for that matter, could the northern region.
If we were not to stand guilty of seeing ghosts where none exists, it was the chain of events set in motion by the western regional crisis of 1962 leading to the military coup of January 15 1966 that culminated in the civil war. It is possible that the coup was not a product of Igbo conspiracy but, in politics, perception can be more important than reality. And in the interim between January and July 1966, this perception was reinforced by two inadvertent events.
The coup-makers were not tried and punished (court-martialled by the army authorities) as they should; and the Ironsi government, perhaps, in good faith, legislated the abolition of the regions and the unification of Nigeria under the unitary rule of the military – whose hierarchy was disproportionately skewed in favour of officers of Igbo origin. I do not need to be an apologist for the northern region to propose that no group can be dispossessed of power in the summary and traumatic manner that functionaries and officers of northern extraction were wiped out in the January 1966 coup and not react in a bitter riposte commensurate with its capacity to exact revenge.
Beyond the leveling up of scores in the counter coup, was the subsequent gross violation and pogrom of the Igbo resident in the North a product of conspiracy? Without a shade of doubt it was. But it was a conspiracy that did not antedate 1966. As a matter of fact, the original objective (from which it deviated at the instance of the British High Commissioner in Lagos) of the July 1966 counter coup was to terminate in a secession of the North from Nigeria and not remain to pursue any hidden agenda. Nothing exemplifies the lack of a Nigeria wide or even a northern conspiracy against the Igbo than the incoherence and sheer ineptitude that characterised the conduct of the Nigerian government towards the Eastern Region in the months leading to the civil war. Remember the Aburi debacle?
Yet, I was not of any mind to join this hoopla until I read a rejoinder by Mr. Femi Aribisala. One virtue I have always urged on Femi Fani-Kayode (a close friend and a brother) is to exercise a sense of proportion and moderation in his all too frequent public interventions. Alas, how successful I have been in this regard is plain to all those who have followed him!
Fani-Kayode is gifted at working himself into a storm in a tea cup on virtually any issue that catches his fancy; and has a provocative penchant for overstating his advocacy. Subtlety and diplomacy are not his strong points. And he has been duly admonished and upbraided in sundry responses. Now the other Femi (Mr. Aribisala) is an academic and a pastor and he is 61years old. He took umbrage and has published a rejoinder to the younger Femi and it is a cure worse than the disease.
His words: “Power-power, Fani-Igbo: I was having private lessons in mathematics at the home of a colleague, Enitan Abiodun, when we heard the noise of a crowd outside. We rushed to the veranda to see Chief Femi Fani-Kayode (alias Fani-Power), then deputy governor of the Western Region, standing on the seat of a moving convertible. He was surrounded by a mob, which was shouting and hailing him. On hearing the noise, Enitan’s mother rushed to the veranda shouting ‘Awo!’ only to discover that the people outside were not supporters of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, but those of his arch-enemies.
“The shout of ‘Awo!’ by Mrs. Abiodun brought the procession to a screeching halt. ‘Who said that? Who said that?’ demanded the mob, enraged. “‘Fani-power’ turned and looked up at us. His eyes were the usual blood-shot red. At the time, many claimed it was because he regularly smoked Indian hemp. Fani-Kayode pointed to our building and identified to his thugs that the offending shout came from our direction. We did not know that the floor of the convertible he was standing in was loaded with empty bottles. His thugs reached for the bottles and rained them down on us as we all scrambled back inside the house for dear life.
Like father, like son: that was 48 years ago. Today, Femi Fani-Kayode, the 53-year-old son of ‘Fani-Power,’ continues in the mischievous tradition of his father.”
Pray, what civic etiquette does one learn from this kind of admonition, reeking, as it does, of pure and unadulterated malice? Why should one hide under the cover of an opportunistic moment to vent personal animus with reckless abandon? So what was the whole uproar against Mr. Fani-Kayode about if those who criticise are themselves a worse advertisement on the ethics of public engagement?
Mr. Aribisala has published quite a number of peculiar and controversial sermons on Christianity, which many Christians will find grossly offensive, for example, “God is the servant of man”; yet it will not be proper to wonder whether such behaviour might be attributable to what his parents did or did not do 50 years ago. The hallmark of a true and genuine man of God is charity and temperance towards all, not unrestrained anger and bile; the measure of good character and learning is sobriety and comportment when others are losing their cool in bitterness and outrage; an elder, according to Yoruba adage, is quick to hear and learn but slow and hesitant to speak and join a cacophony. As a pastor, academic and elder, how does Aribisala fare on each score?
*Osuntokun is a former MD of News Agency of Nigeria, NAN
Wednesday, 31 July 2013
The blind leading the blind
RECENTLY, Ralph Uwazurike, the leader of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), called for a one day sit-at-home.
I was deeply disturbed that people, especially in Onitsha, heeded his call. But then, the masses barely think, and consequently, are susceptible to political manipulation.
No wonder, Adolf Hitler once told an aide, “never worry about what to tell the people because you can tell them anything and they will believe, and the bigger the lie, the more believable it is to them”. It also partially explains why the masses, irrespective of their number, strength and righteous anger, cannot get anything done, unless, they are directed strategically, that is, led. Ralph Uwazurike is an uninformed activist who is strategically misdirecting the Igbo masses.
I once met Ralph Uwazurike. He was in Washington, DC with Chukwuemeka Ojukwu for the opening of the Biafran “House”. Eager to assess this then emergent secessionist activist, I listened to him very attentively and observed him very closely.
After the event, I penned my opinion of him thus:“Uwazurike is not a sober and reflective crusader on a planned mission with carefully articulated strategies and objectives. He is an impetus man dabbling recklessly into an issue with potentially momentous consequences. He lacks both charisma and oratorical flourishes.
He is neither a scholar nor an intellectual; a philosopher nor a deep thinker; a sophisticate nor a cosmopolite. He is a homespun boyish looking man, with an air of arrogance or the self-importance of a parvenu gloating in his new found prominence.”
They were to cut the tape, declaring the Biafran “House” open. They were about four hours late. Tired of waiting for them, Prof. Elekwachi of the Biafran Foundation proceeded to cut the tape and declare the Biafran “House” open. About 30 minutes later, Ojukwu, his wife, Bianca, and Uwazurike arrived.
Ojukwu spoke first. He apologised profusely for their lateness. Uwazurike made no apology for his lateness. Evidently, not happy that the Biafran “House” was declared open before their arrival, he said, “you could have gone ahead and done whatever you wanted but whatever you did in the absence of Ojukwu and I was useless”.
I was stunned and offended by his bare-faced imprudence. I though it was insensitive and insolent. Even, if it was the President of the United States of America who kept his maids and houseboys waiting for four hours, he would have been polite enough to offer them an apology, no matter how understated.
So, who is this boorish upstart thrust into the limelight by prattling his neo-Biafran nonsense who thinks he could keep more than 100 men and women, some of them older than him, waiting for more than four hours and not only refuses to apologise for his lateness, but also, had the temerity to term whatever they did in his absence useless.
I was dismayed by his delusion of grandeur and false feeling of indispensability. He continued, “Initially, I did not know what I was doing, but, as democracy allows self expression, I decided to express myself”. So, I started talking about Biafra, and as people started listening to me, I continued.
I believe that up till now, he still does not know what he is doing. He needs to stop “talking about Biafra,” and first of all, endeavour to know what he is doing. He needs to be tutored on the history of Nigeria and her social and political temperament, the strengths and weaknesses of the Igbo nation, and the principles of Nonviolence (which, according to him, informs his activism). And then, the absurdity of his neo-Biafranism will crystallize to him.
Nigeria is not breaking up because the generality of Nigerians, despite their vociferous denunciations of Nigeria for her multiple woes, are committed to a united Nigeria. The early attempt to create Biafra was the pipe-dream of someone who in his studied disdain for reason and caution scorned the advice of his father and Nnamdi Azikiwe and railroaded his self-appointed Consultative Assembly into assenting to his secessionist bid.
Unlike the masses that were whipped into a paranoiac frenzy by Ojukwu’s propaganda and falsehood, the politically perceptive Igbo were opposed to Biafra. Like Sir Louis Odumwgwu Ojukwu (before his death) and Nnamdi Azikiwe, the Igbo political class was opposed to Biafra. However, intimidated by Ojukwu’s broad-stroke labelling and chastisement of anyone who disagreed with him as saboteur, they grudgingly conceded, “you can declare Biafra at your earliest possible convenience.” It was not a heartfelt, firm endorsement but the reluctant consent of an intimidated Assembly.
Since those nightmare days when the Igbo defeated, battered and tattered stumbled out of the last vestiges of Biafra, we have made enormous progress across the whole spectrum of the Nigerian social life and gained the respect and confidence of other Nigerians.
Uwazurike is undermining the credibility of the Igbo. He is portraying the Igbo as subversive, unreliable and troublous elements and implacable, irredeemable rebels.
Igbo land is landlocked with large tracts of infertile land and a population density three times that of Yoruba land. But countervailing these disadvantages are the Igbo’s admirable qualities of courage, determination, hard-edged work ethic and enterprising vigor. Our boundless resourceful energies and effervescent entrepreneur spirit are unyieldingly spilling beyond the confines of our regional borders, and have thus, driven us to every nook and cranny of Nigeria. Operating within an expanded frontier – one Nigeria - is to our advantage.
Although MASSOB operatives are sometimes armed and violent, Uwazurike professes that he is guided by the principles of Nonviolence Civil Disobedience in his struggle for the actualization of his Sovereign State of Biafra. To appreciate the incongruity of this method with the Nigerian political environment and his agitation for Biafra, he needs to read the writings of major proponents of nonviolent protest: David Thoreau, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
The Igbo masses, like the masses, universally, are not politically savvy, and therefore need to be directed strategically. The man, Ralph Uwazurike, arrogating to himself the role of directing them, admittedly, does not know what he is doing. Is that not a classic case of the metaphorical blind leading the blind?
Mr. TOCHUKWU EZUKANMA, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
I was deeply disturbed that people, especially in Onitsha, heeded his call. But then, the masses barely think, and consequently, are susceptible to political manipulation.
No wonder, Adolf Hitler once told an aide, “never worry about what to tell the people because you can tell them anything and they will believe, and the bigger the lie, the more believable it is to them”. It also partially explains why the masses, irrespective of their number, strength and righteous anger, cannot get anything done, unless, they are directed strategically, that is, led. Ralph Uwazurike is an uninformed activist who is strategically misdirecting the Igbo masses.
I once met Ralph Uwazurike. He was in Washington, DC with Chukwuemeka Ojukwu for the opening of the Biafran “House”. Eager to assess this then emergent secessionist activist, I listened to him very attentively and observed him very closely.
After the event, I penned my opinion of him thus:“Uwazurike is not a sober and reflective crusader on a planned mission with carefully articulated strategies and objectives. He is an impetus man dabbling recklessly into an issue with potentially momentous consequences. He lacks both charisma and oratorical flourishes.
He is neither a scholar nor an intellectual; a philosopher nor a deep thinker; a sophisticate nor a cosmopolite. He is a homespun boyish looking man, with an air of arrogance or the self-importance of a parvenu gloating in his new found prominence.”
They were to cut the tape, declaring the Biafran “House” open. They were about four hours late. Tired of waiting for them, Prof. Elekwachi of the Biafran Foundation proceeded to cut the tape and declare the Biafran “House” open. About 30 minutes later, Ojukwu, his wife, Bianca, and Uwazurike arrived.
Ojukwu spoke first. He apologised profusely for their lateness. Uwazurike made no apology for his lateness. Evidently, not happy that the Biafran “House” was declared open before their arrival, he said, “you could have gone ahead and done whatever you wanted but whatever you did in the absence of Ojukwu and I was useless”.
I was stunned and offended by his bare-faced imprudence. I though it was insensitive and insolent. Even, if it was the President of the United States of America who kept his maids and houseboys waiting for four hours, he would have been polite enough to offer them an apology, no matter how understated.
So, who is this boorish upstart thrust into the limelight by prattling his neo-Biafran nonsense who thinks he could keep more than 100 men and women, some of them older than him, waiting for more than four hours and not only refuses to apologise for his lateness, but also, had the temerity to term whatever they did in his absence useless.
I was dismayed by his delusion of grandeur and false feeling of indispensability. He continued, “Initially, I did not know what I was doing, but, as democracy allows self expression, I decided to express myself”. So, I started talking about Biafra, and as people started listening to me, I continued.
I believe that up till now, he still does not know what he is doing. He needs to stop “talking about Biafra,” and first of all, endeavour to know what he is doing. He needs to be tutored on the history of Nigeria and her social and political temperament, the strengths and weaknesses of the Igbo nation, and the principles of Nonviolence (which, according to him, informs his activism). And then, the absurdity of his neo-Biafranism will crystallize to him.
Nigeria is not breaking up because the generality of Nigerians, despite their vociferous denunciations of Nigeria for her multiple woes, are committed to a united Nigeria. The early attempt to create Biafra was the pipe-dream of someone who in his studied disdain for reason and caution scorned the advice of his father and Nnamdi Azikiwe and railroaded his self-appointed Consultative Assembly into assenting to his secessionist bid.
Unlike the masses that were whipped into a paranoiac frenzy by Ojukwu’s propaganda and falsehood, the politically perceptive Igbo were opposed to Biafra. Like Sir Louis Odumwgwu Ojukwu (before his death) and Nnamdi Azikiwe, the Igbo political class was opposed to Biafra. However, intimidated by Ojukwu’s broad-stroke labelling and chastisement of anyone who disagreed with him as saboteur, they grudgingly conceded, “you can declare Biafra at your earliest possible convenience.” It was not a heartfelt, firm endorsement but the reluctant consent of an intimidated Assembly.
Since those nightmare days when the Igbo defeated, battered and tattered stumbled out of the last vestiges of Biafra, we have made enormous progress across the whole spectrum of the Nigerian social life and gained the respect and confidence of other Nigerians.
Uwazurike is undermining the credibility of the Igbo. He is portraying the Igbo as subversive, unreliable and troublous elements and implacable, irredeemable rebels.
Igbo land is landlocked with large tracts of infertile land and a population density three times that of Yoruba land. But countervailing these disadvantages are the Igbo’s admirable qualities of courage, determination, hard-edged work ethic and enterprising vigor. Our boundless resourceful energies and effervescent entrepreneur spirit are unyieldingly spilling beyond the confines of our regional borders, and have thus, driven us to every nook and cranny of Nigeria. Operating within an expanded frontier – one Nigeria - is to our advantage.
Although MASSOB operatives are sometimes armed and violent, Uwazurike professes that he is guided by the principles of Nonviolence Civil Disobedience in his struggle for the actualization of his Sovereign State of Biafra. To appreciate the incongruity of this method with the Nigerian political environment and his agitation for Biafra, he needs to read the writings of major proponents of nonviolent protest: David Thoreau, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
The Igbo masses, like the masses, universally, are not politically savvy, and therefore need to be directed strategically. The man, Ralph Uwazurike, arrogating to himself the role of directing them, admittedly, does not know what he is doing. Is that not a classic case of the metaphorical blind leading the blind?
Mr. TOCHUKWU EZUKANMA, a commentator on national issues, wrote from Lagos.
Tuesday, 30 July 2013
The Police and Nigerian politicians
THERE is no doubt that the Nigeria Police Force has suffered a fate worse than death in the course of our tortuous journey of nation-building so far.
Starting from the time after the attainment of our political independence till date, the police in Nigeria has almost always been at the receiving end of the antics of Nigerian politicians, whether in uniform or in mufti.
For instance, in the first republic, during the Awolowo-Akintola political struggle for supremacy in the Western region that later snowballed into grave regional crisis, the Nigeria Police Force had received more than its fair share in bearing the brunt of that crisis.
Consequently, not a handful of its officers deployed at the time to quell the raging crisis lost their precious lives for a cause they obviously knew nothing about.
Arguably, even those who narrowly escaped death by the whiskers and with various degrees of injuries did not in any way receive compensation.
Understandably, however, though the Police was not alone in suffering this fate, yet the fact that they were attacked and killed while maintaining law and order at the behest of the then political leaders at the time and without necessarily receiving compensation afterwards, clearly shows the extent to which politicians could go in using men of the Nigeria Police to achieve their individual and group interest.
Similarly, apart from the pre-civil war exploitation of the Nigeria Police during which time they were used by the political leaders in military uniform for the ostensible purpose of bringing back the Biafran secessionist enclave into the Nigeria fold and which invariably occasioned unavoidable death of almost thousands of them, the series of events masterminded by civilian politicians in the wake of the post-civil war period of the second republic politicking further made nonsense of the value rate and respect for the Nigeria Police.
Of course, recalling the litany of grueling storms weathered by men of the Nigeria Police in the hands of both the civilian and military politicians during the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida who himself was by no means less manipulative of the Force, there can hardly be enough to say about General Sani Abacha’s side of the same story of manipulation of the Police.
For example, one still recalls the extent to which the likes of Chief Arthur Eze, the celebrated moneybag and friend of the presidency, enjoyed the use and protection of men of the Nigeria police while haughtily flaunting his seemingly unbridled desire to impose upon the people of Anambra the person of Mrs. Joy Emodi as the civilian Governor of the state, via the feigned democratic ambience created at the time by his principal, General Sani Abacha.
But granted that the foregoing transpired during the military rule which in itself is an aberration, one had expected that the return of democratic leadership in 1999 would have either brought to an end or greatly reduced to the minimum the manipulative tendencies of Nigerian politicians towards men of the Nigeria Police Force.
Unfortunately, the singular incident of abduction of Governor Chris Nwabueze Ngige of Anambra state on July 10, 2003 by a former Assistant Inspector General of Police, now late Mr. Raphael Ige, with full detachment of Police and under the watchful eyes of President Olusegun Obasanjo-led Federal Government shows that the exploitation of men of the Nigeria Police by politicians in an apparently democratic setting is one that has exposed the helplessness and the plight of this set of regimented fellow compatriots, who rather than criticism deserve our sympathy at all times.
To therefore blame the Nigeria Police or any of its men whenever politicians are locking horns with one another over their selfish interest that is often devoid of any connection with issues of welfare of the masses is, to say the least, the most uncharitable thing any keen observer of the politics of policing Nigeria would do.
Today, irrespective of the relatively giant strides recorded so far in our various attempts to widen the democratic space in virtually all ramifications, we are still confronted with this dangerous politics of policing Nigeria with its attendant consequences.
Incidentally, the Ombatse group in Nasarawa state which was alleged to be responsible for the killing of scores of police and State Security Service officers is increasingly reported as being squarely enmeshed in the struggle for power with the Governor, Mr. Tanko Al-Makura, over the latter’s rumoured 2015 second term ambition and his alleged desire to dismantle all forms of quasi-political structure of the group, perceived or imagined, deemed to constitute possible threats or a cog in the wheel of the realisation of his ambition.
And much as the veracity of all the media reports flying around in this regard is yet to be ascertained, it is outrageous that the precious lives of men of the Nigeria Police Force could be so cheaply taken in the twinkling of an eye on the grounds of alleged political ambition of the Governor and attempts to scuttle it by a group of individuals perceive to be his new political detractors. This ugly development is not only preposterous but also deplorable.
At this juncture, the obvious need be stated that it is in no way less appalling that what we are beginning to see in Rivers state can hardly go for an entirely different scenario short of a replica of the political picture of in Nasarawa state.
In fact, be it Governor Amaechi’s alleged disrespect to President Goodluck Jonathan or his rumoured Vice-presidential ambition that brought about the raging crisis in Rivrers state or, perhaps, Honourable Nyesom Wike’s speculated 2015 gubernatorial aspiration that is fueling it, one thing both sides will do well to eschew is this usually bad attitude of Nigerian politicians or their proclivities to blame the hapless men of the Nigeria Police Force for their political misfortune or any form of setback arising from their poor political calculation.
PASCHAL ONYIORAH a journalist, wrote from Abuja.
Starting from the time after the attainment of our political independence till date, the police in Nigeria has almost always been at the receiving end of the antics of Nigerian politicians, whether in uniform or in mufti.
For instance, in the first republic, during the Awolowo-Akintola political struggle for supremacy in the Western region that later snowballed into grave regional crisis, the Nigeria Police Force had received more than its fair share in bearing the brunt of that crisis.
Consequently, not a handful of its officers deployed at the time to quell the raging crisis lost their precious lives for a cause they obviously knew nothing about.
Arguably, even those who narrowly escaped death by the whiskers and with various degrees of injuries did not in any way receive compensation.
Understandably, however, though the Police was not alone in suffering this fate, yet the fact that they were attacked and killed while maintaining law and order at the behest of the then political leaders at the time and without necessarily receiving compensation afterwards, clearly shows the extent to which politicians could go in using men of the Nigeria Police to achieve their individual and group interest.
Similarly, apart from the pre-civil war exploitation of the Nigeria Police during which time they were used by the political leaders in military uniform for the ostensible purpose of bringing back the Biafran secessionist enclave into the Nigeria fold and which invariably occasioned unavoidable death of almost thousands of them, the series of events masterminded by civilian politicians in the wake of the post-civil war period of the second republic politicking further made nonsense of the value rate and respect for the Nigeria Police.
Of course, recalling the litany of grueling storms weathered by men of the Nigeria Police in the hands of both the civilian and military politicians during the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida who himself was by no means less manipulative of the Force, there can hardly be enough to say about General Sani Abacha’s side of the same story of manipulation of the Police.
For example, one still recalls the extent to which the likes of Chief Arthur Eze, the celebrated moneybag and friend of the presidency, enjoyed the use and protection of men of the Nigeria police while haughtily flaunting his seemingly unbridled desire to impose upon the people of Anambra the person of Mrs. Joy Emodi as the civilian Governor of the state, via the feigned democratic ambience created at the time by his principal, General Sani Abacha.
But granted that the foregoing transpired during the military rule which in itself is an aberration, one had expected that the return of democratic leadership in 1999 would have either brought to an end or greatly reduced to the minimum the manipulative tendencies of Nigerian politicians towards men of the Nigeria Police Force.
Unfortunately, the singular incident of abduction of Governor Chris Nwabueze Ngige of Anambra state on July 10, 2003 by a former Assistant Inspector General of Police, now late Mr. Raphael Ige, with full detachment of Police and under the watchful eyes of President Olusegun Obasanjo-led Federal Government shows that the exploitation of men of the Nigeria Police by politicians in an apparently democratic setting is one that has exposed the helplessness and the plight of this set of regimented fellow compatriots, who rather than criticism deserve our sympathy at all times.
To therefore blame the Nigeria Police or any of its men whenever politicians are locking horns with one another over their selfish interest that is often devoid of any connection with issues of welfare of the masses is, to say the least, the most uncharitable thing any keen observer of the politics of policing Nigeria would do.
Today, irrespective of the relatively giant strides recorded so far in our various attempts to widen the democratic space in virtually all ramifications, we are still confronted with this dangerous politics of policing Nigeria with its attendant consequences.
Incidentally, the Ombatse group in Nasarawa state which was alleged to be responsible for the killing of scores of police and State Security Service officers is increasingly reported as being squarely enmeshed in the struggle for power with the Governor, Mr. Tanko Al-Makura, over the latter’s rumoured 2015 second term ambition and his alleged desire to dismantle all forms of quasi-political structure of the group, perceived or imagined, deemed to constitute possible threats or a cog in the wheel of the realisation of his ambition.
And much as the veracity of all the media reports flying around in this regard is yet to be ascertained, it is outrageous that the precious lives of men of the Nigeria Police Force could be so cheaply taken in the twinkling of an eye on the grounds of alleged political ambition of the Governor and attempts to scuttle it by a group of individuals perceive to be his new political detractors. This ugly development is not only preposterous but also deplorable.
At this juncture, the obvious need be stated that it is in no way less appalling that what we are beginning to see in Rivers state can hardly go for an entirely different scenario short of a replica of the political picture of in Nasarawa state.
In fact, be it Governor Amaechi’s alleged disrespect to President Goodluck Jonathan or his rumoured Vice-presidential ambition that brought about the raging crisis in Rivrers state or, perhaps, Honourable Nyesom Wike’s speculated 2015 gubernatorial aspiration that is fueling it, one thing both sides will do well to eschew is this usually bad attitude of Nigerian politicians or their proclivities to blame the hapless men of the Nigeria Police Force for their political misfortune or any form of setback arising from their poor political calculation.
PASCHAL ONYIORAH a journalist, wrote from Abuja.
Honour for Cross River State civil servants
THE Civil Service in Nigeria is a creation of the British colonial system with a fusion of Western administration and African traditional values. According to available records, it has passed through four distinct phases, namely the first phase (1914-1946); the second (1946-1966); the third (1966-1979) and the fourth (1979-date)
In plain words, the first phase, accordiing to Cross River State Brochure on the Celebration of 2013 Civil Service Day is generally regarded as the era of administrative unitarism; the second, viewed as the era of decolonization; the third, a period of new federalism and the fourth regarded as the era of New Dawn, which has witnessed an avalanche of reforms, mostly fronted by leaders of the current democratic journey, which began in 1999
Some of these reforms are in the establishment of National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, NEEDS, whose version at the state level is, State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, SEEDS and the National Health Insurance Scheme, NHIS.
Other reforms are SERVICOM, budgeting through the instruments of Medium Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF and MTSS, Due Process and the New Contributing Pension Scheme, which states governments are maximizing largely in order to regulate and better the lots of the Civil Service.
No doubt, this steady transmutation points to the fact that the potpourri of civil service in Nigeria, spanning nearly a century, has become expedient to reflect on the expedition with a view to consolidating its gains, but without neglecting the challenges associated with its transformation.
Cross River State where Senator Liyel Imoke is superintending, is not left out. It recently marked the Civil Service Day, in line with the proclamation of the first Biennial Conference of African Ministers of the Civil Service, which held in 1994 in Tangiers, Morocco with a resolve to set aside every June 23 in order to commemorate the African Day of Administration and Civil Service.
The commemoration of the day in Cross River State was with pomp as eminent personalities within and outside the state Civil Service graced the day. Lectures on topical issues like strengthening citizen participation and responsibility, enhancing accountability, transparency and integrity, enhancing access to information and empowering Manpower Development Institute, MDIs, to build capacity for service improvement, were delivered by erudite scholars.
Yet, the most exhilaration moment of the celebration was the presentation of Excellent Performance Awards by the Government to deserving workers, Ministry, Department and Agency. These acts are in line with the commitment of the Cross River State government to reward excellence, enhance welfare through prompt payments of salaries and other entitlements and create conducive working environment for all categories of its workforce.
Senator Imoke, at the occasion, reiterated the resolve of government to reciprocate every positive gesture of the workforce through punctuality, discipline and hard work, irrespective of their grade level. He charged the workers, who turned up in large numbers to mark the day, to shun acts inimical to the service, such as truancy, improper dressing, bribery and corruption.
Top in the list of Best Performing Ministry in terms of comportment, general administrative competence and productivity was the State Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources; the Cross River Broadcasting Corporation, CRBC, came second, while the Office of Auditor General for Local Government emerged third.
Directorate Staff Awardees were Mr Egbe Vincent of the State Ministry of Women Affairs (first), Mrs Monica Henshaw of CRBC (second) and Mrs Oju, V.M of Communication Technology Development Department (third). The Non-Directorate Staff Awardees were Egbe Odoma George, Office of Head of Service (first), Mr Ukpai Ukpai of the Ministry of Information (second) and Ochang Thomas Otafu of the Office of Secretary to the State Government, came third.
Each benefitting MDA got a plaque, while each award winning staff was decorated with official crest of the state government by the Governor, in addition to cash and gift items. Egbe Vincent, for instance, got a generating set and N50,000; Henshaw got a video camera, while Oju got a hair dryer and its accessories.
Other gifts were cassava grinding machine for Egbe Odoma; a double door Thermocool refrigerator for Ukpai and sewing and weaving machine for Ochang.
In her welcome address at the occasion, the Head of Service, Mrs Mary-Theresa Ikwen, Mini, said the motivation sprung from the need to remind everyone that the Civil Service was an indispensable institution for the efficient and effective running of government and to reflect on successes, failures, problems and challenges recorded so far in the service.
It was also an occasion to re-examine and refocus civil servants towards the improvement of the service through positive attitudinal change, commitment to assigned responsibilities and duties as well as improved service delivery to the public.
Some achievements recorded by the government through the instrumentality of the service, according to Head of Service of Cross River State are, industrial harmony between government and industrial unions in the state, capacity building for workers were a total of 17 training workshop were conducted for workers in 2012 alone. The state also recorded the convocation of 350 graduates from MDI and establishment of ultra-modern ICT laboratory in MDI for internet connectivity and training opportunities.
On staff welfare scheme, Mrs Ikwen noted that 200 housing units had been built and handed over to benefitting workers on owner-occupier basis of the phase 1 programme; distributed brand new Kia Rio and Lifan saloon cars to beneficiaries and acquired household items by civil servants through collaboration of her office with private sector partners.
In terms of general administration of the service, the Head of Service said the Cross River State government has successfully set up five standing committees, viz: Monitoring, Manpower Needs Assessment, Capacity-Building, Performance Committees to help reposition the state service, among others. In addition, she mentioned the establishment of Human Resource Desk Offices in 98 MDAs and 74 computers and flash drives distributed to Human Resource Desk Officers to enhance their performance.
Mr. OTEI OHAM is a staff of the Cross River State Ministry of Information.
In plain words, the first phase, accordiing to Cross River State Brochure on the Celebration of 2013 Civil Service Day is generally regarded as the era of administrative unitarism; the second, viewed as the era of decolonization; the third, a period of new federalism and the fourth regarded as the era of New Dawn, which has witnessed an avalanche of reforms, mostly fronted by leaders of the current democratic journey, which began in 1999
Some of these reforms are in the establishment of National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, NEEDS, whose version at the state level is, State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy, SEEDS and the National Health Insurance Scheme, NHIS.
Other reforms are SERVICOM, budgeting through the instruments of Medium Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF and MTSS, Due Process and the New Contributing Pension Scheme, which states governments are maximizing largely in order to regulate and better the lots of the Civil Service.
No doubt, this steady transmutation points to the fact that the potpourri of civil service in Nigeria, spanning nearly a century, has become expedient to reflect on the expedition with a view to consolidating its gains, but without neglecting the challenges associated with its transformation.
Cross River State where Senator Liyel Imoke is superintending, is not left out. It recently marked the Civil Service Day, in line with the proclamation of the first Biennial Conference of African Ministers of the Civil Service, which held in 1994 in Tangiers, Morocco with a resolve to set aside every June 23 in order to commemorate the African Day of Administration and Civil Service.
The commemoration of the day in Cross River State was with pomp as eminent personalities within and outside the state Civil Service graced the day. Lectures on topical issues like strengthening citizen participation and responsibility, enhancing accountability, transparency and integrity, enhancing access to information and empowering Manpower Development Institute, MDIs, to build capacity for service improvement, were delivered by erudite scholars.
Yet, the most exhilaration moment of the celebration was the presentation of Excellent Performance Awards by the Government to deserving workers, Ministry, Department and Agency. These acts are in line with the commitment of the Cross River State government to reward excellence, enhance welfare through prompt payments of salaries and other entitlements and create conducive working environment for all categories of its workforce.
Senator Imoke, at the occasion, reiterated the resolve of government to reciprocate every positive gesture of the workforce through punctuality, discipline and hard work, irrespective of their grade level. He charged the workers, who turned up in large numbers to mark the day, to shun acts inimical to the service, such as truancy, improper dressing, bribery and corruption.
Top in the list of Best Performing Ministry in terms of comportment, general administrative competence and productivity was the State Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources; the Cross River Broadcasting Corporation, CRBC, came second, while the Office of Auditor General for Local Government emerged third.
Directorate Staff Awardees were Mr Egbe Vincent of the State Ministry of Women Affairs (first), Mrs Monica Henshaw of CRBC (second) and Mrs Oju, V.M of Communication Technology Development Department (third). The Non-Directorate Staff Awardees were Egbe Odoma George, Office of Head of Service (first), Mr Ukpai Ukpai of the Ministry of Information (second) and Ochang Thomas Otafu of the Office of Secretary to the State Government, came third.
Each benefitting MDA got a plaque, while each award winning staff was decorated with official crest of the state government by the Governor, in addition to cash and gift items. Egbe Vincent, for instance, got a generating set and N50,000; Henshaw got a video camera, while Oju got a hair dryer and its accessories.
Other gifts were cassava grinding machine for Egbe Odoma; a double door Thermocool refrigerator for Ukpai and sewing and weaving machine for Ochang.
In her welcome address at the occasion, the Head of Service, Mrs Mary-Theresa Ikwen, Mini, said the motivation sprung from the need to remind everyone that the Civil Service was an indispensable institution for the efficient and effective running of government and to reflect on successes, failures, problems and challenges recorded so far in the service.
It was also an occasion to re-examine and refocus civil servants towards the improvement of the service through positive attitudinal change, commitment to assigned responsibilities and duties as well as improved service delivery to the public.
Some achievements recorded by the government through the instrumentality of the service, according to Head of Service of Cross River State are, industrial harmony between government and industrial unions in the state, capacity building for workers were a total of 17 training workshop were conducted for workers in 2012 alone. The state also recorded the convocation of 350 graduates from MDI and establishment of ultra-modern ICT laboratory in MDI for internet connectivity and training opportunities.
On staff welfare scheme, Mrs Ikwen noted that 200 housing units had been built and handed over to benefitting workers on owner-occupier basis of the phase 1 programme; distributed brand new Kia Rio and Lifan saloon cars to beneficiaries and acquired household items by civil servants through collaboration of her office with private sector partners.
In terms of general administration of the service, the Head of Service said the Cross River State government has successfully set up five standing committees, viz: Monitoring, Manpower Needs Assessment, Capacity-Building, Performance Committees to help reposition the state service, among others. In addition, she mentioned the establishment of Human Resource Desk Offices in 98 MDAs and 74 computers and flash drives distributed to Human Resource Desk Officers to enhance their performance.
Mr. OTEI OHAM is a staff of the Cross River State Ministry of Information.
Civilian JTF vs Boko Haram: Concern, hope in embattled restive city
MAIDUGURI (AFP) - Gripping a machete he claimed was stained with blood, a 24-year-old civilian manned a checkpoint in one of Nigeria's most dangerous cities, looking for members of a violent Islamist group.
Vigilante groups have emerged with the encouragement of the military in the northeastern city of Maiduguri, the original home base of Boko Haram Islamists, and their arrival has been both welcomed and fraught with potential trouble.
[caption id="attachment_406641" align="alignnone" width="412"]
A female vigilante frisks two women passengers of a motorized rickshaw on July 19, 2013 in Maiduguri, where Boko Haram has carried out most of its deadly attacks.[/caption]
The city has been devastated by insurgent attacks and military raids that are estimated to have claimed hundreds of civilian lives.
An unregulated, untrained and crudely armed civilian force may prove to be the last thing the city's imperilled residents need. Civilian gangs have in the past served as political enforcers around the country.
In early July, an example of the risks occurred when vigilantes burned a politician's home in Maiduguri, accusing him of links to Boko Haram.
But some have voiced support for the new Maiduguri militia, including the military, which has described the vigilantes as a useful new tool in the battle against Boko Haram.
"We have cleansed the city of Boko Haram vampires," said Abubakar Mallam, head of the so-called "Civilian JTF", a name that nods to the military's Joint Task Force (JTF).
The vigilantes' claims that all Boko Haram members have been chased from Maiduguri is likely an exaggeration.
Boko Haram, which says it wants to create an Islamic state in northern Nigeria, was founded in Maiduguri more than a decade ago and its fighters have been embedded among the population.
However, a military offensive launched in May and the formation of the vigilante groups have coincided with a decline in attacks within the city and in Islamist strongholds across the northeast.
The violence has by no means ended though, particularly in more remote areas of the region.
At least three schools have been attacked in northeastern Nigeria by suspected Boko Haram members, and at the weekend, a vigilante raid and reprisal attack by Boko Haram members left at least 20 people dead in the village of Dawashe.
Members of the Civilian JTF said their month-old campaign has yielded results because they have a key advantage over the regular security forces.
"We know them. They lived among us," Dauda Bukar, a vigilante in the Umarari area of Maiduguri, told AFP.
Aside from machetes, the civilian guardsmen were seen carrying axes, clubs and bows and arrows while patrolling the streets of the dusty city, where the desert climate often brings an unbearable afternoon heat.
They have claimed raids on houses where alleged Boko Haram members live, arresting insurgents before handing them over to the military.
Members have also claimed to have carried out summary executions.
-- Anything for peace --
Vigilante leaders say the force was formed following a gruesome June 11 attack by presumed Boko Haram members in Maiduguri's Hausari neighbourhood.
The Islamists arrived disguised as a funeral procession. They stopped, opened the coffin, pulled out kalashnikovs and began firing indiscriminately on civilians, killing 15 people.
Military officials said they were trying to both document and train the militia and were even seeking to coordinate operations.
"We support, we commend and we appreciate the efforts of the... Civilian JTF," military spokesman in Maiduguri Lieutenant Colonel Sagir Musa told AFP.
A state government official who requested anonymity acknowledged that a vigilante group in a conflict-scarred city would invariably "commit some rights violations", but that so far its emergence had been positive.
"The Civilian JTF may bark and hurl abusive language at people (but) Boko Haram shoot, bomb and slaughter their victims," the official said.
He also insisted that the ruling party in Borno state, of which Maiduguri is the capital, has deliberately avoided collaborating with the force to guard against accusations that the fighters have a political agenda.
Maiduguri residents have for months been caught between waves of brutal Boko Haram attacks and the heavy-handed tactics used by the military.
The insurgents' alleged crimes have included suicide blasts, gun raids and abductions, while the military has been accused of arbitrary killings, razing homes and torture.
There is evidence that both sides have committed crimes against humanity, according to Human Rights Watch, which has estimated that 3,600 people have died in the conflict since 2009.
Most of the northeast, including Maiduguri, has been under a state of emergency since May 14 while the military has pursued a campaign against the Islamists.
One community leader said anything, even an illegal civilian militia, was welcomed if it helped restore peace.
"For now, we have to bear with them," said Husseini Hala, who heads Maiduguri's lawyers union. "Compared to what the insurgents are doing, their own (abuses) are insignificant."
Vigilante groups have emerged with the encouragement of the military in the northeastern city of Maiduguri, the original home base of Boko Haram Islamists, and their arrival has been both welcomed and fraught with potential trouble.
[caption id="attachment_406641" align="alignnone" width="412"]
A female vigilante frisks two women passengers of a motorized rickshaw on July 19, 2013 in Maiduguri, where Boko Haram has carried out most of its deadly attacks.[/caption]The city has been devastated by insurgent attacks and military raids that are estimated to have claimed hundreds of civilian lives.
An unregulated, untrained and crudely armed civilian force may prove to be the last thing the city's imperilled residents need. Civilian gangs have in the past served as political enforcers around the country.
In early July, an example of the risks occurred when vigilantes burned a politician's home in Maiduguri, accusing him of links to Boko Haram.
But some have voiced support for the new Maiduguri militia, including the military, which has described the vigilantes as a useful new tool in the battle against Boko Haram.
"We have cleansed the city of Boko Haram vampires," said Abubakar Mallam, head of the so-called "Civilian JTF", a name that nods to the military's Joint Task Force (JTF).
The vigilantes' claims that all Boko Haram members have been chased from Maiduguri is likely an exaggeration.
Boko Haram, which says it wants to create an Islamic state in northern Nigeria, was founded in Maiduguri more than a decade ago and its fighters have been embedded among the population.
However, a military offensive launched in May and the formation of the vigilante groups have coincided with a decline in attacks within the city and in Islamist strongholds across the northeast.
The violence has by no means ended though, particularly in more remote areas of the region.
At least three schools have been attacked in northeastern Nigeria by suspected Boko Haram members, and at the weekend, a vigilante raid and reprisal attack by Boko Haram members left at least 20 people dead in the village of Dawashe.
Members of the Civilian JTF said their month-old campaign has yielded results because they have a key advantage over the regular security forces.
"We know them. They lived among us," Dauda Bukar, a vigilante in the Umarari area of Maiduguri, told AFP.
Aside from machetes, the civilian guardsmen were seen carrying axes, clubs and bows and arrows while patrolling the streets of the dusty city, where the desert climate often brings an unbearable afternoon heat.
They have claimed raids on houses where alleged Boko Haram members live, arresting insurgents before handing them over to the military.
Members have also claimed to have carried out summary executions.
-- Anything for peace --
Vigilante leaders say the force was formed following a gruesome June 11 attack by presumed Boko Haram members in Maiduguri's Hausari neighbourhood.
The Islamists arrived disguised as a funeral procession. They stopped, opened the coffin, pulled out kalashnikovs and began firing indiscriminately on civilians, killing 15 people.
Military officials said they were trying to both document and train the militia and were even seeking to coordinate operations.
"We support, we commend and we appreciate the efforts of the... Civilian JTF," military spokesman in Maiduguri Lieutenant Colonel Sagir Musa told AFP.
A state government official who requested anonymity acknowledged that a vigilante group in a conflict-scarred city would invariably "commit some rights violations", but that so far its emergence had been positive.
"The Civilian JTF may bark and hurl abusive language at people (but) Boko Haram shoot, bomb and slaughter their victims," the official said.
He also insisted that the ruling party in Borno state, of which Maiduguri is the capital, has deliberately avoided collaborating with the force to guard against accusations that the fighters have a political agenda.
Maiduguri residents have for months been caught between waves of brutal Boko Haram attacks and the heavy-handed tactics used by the military.
The insurgents' alleged crimes have included suicide blasts, gun raids and abductions, while the military has been accused of arbitrary killings, razing homes and torture.
There is evidence that both sides have committed crimes against humanity, according to Human Rights Watch, which has estimated that 3,600 people have died in the conflict since 2009.
Most of the northeast, including Maiduguri, has been under a state of emergency since May 14 while the military has pursued a campaign against the Islamists.
One community leader said anything, even an illegal civilian militia, was welcomed if it helped restore peace.
"For now, we have to bear with them," said Husseini Hala, who heads Maiduguri's lawyers union. "Compared to what the insurgents are doing, their own (abuses) are insignificant."
Monday, 29 July 2013
The metaphor of Abia Tower
TWO coloured birds sat complacently atop the Abia Tower this cloudy Sunday evening. They were chatting away happily, oblivious of the chaos of motorists below the height of about 100 meters.
The gigantic concrete tower stands at the middle of the Port-Harcourt/Enugu Expressway at the interjection into Umuahia metropolis. Beyond its towering height and aesthetic grandeur, there is a quite significant meaning and message in the edifice.
The imposing tower, built in Gothic cathedral designs with a concave metallic arch, is the first structure that welcomes one into the Abia state capital. With a certain reassuring air, it announces this hospitality with a bold inscription: Welcome to Abia ; God’s Own State.
There are four of this inscription facing the four directions of the road, all written in bold white letters on a background of black metallic plates. The walls are painted in pink and light yellow colours which glow with the translucent lights overlooking the ground from the height.
I see the tower as the first brand ambassador of Abia State and it has consistently lived up to this billing with the warmth and friendliness conjured into its magical designs – a quality it transmits to visitors and residents alike as they behold its majestic heights. It embraces everyone and quickly introduces the people and the style of the incumbent leadership.
Since 1991 when the tower was built, it has remained a landmark structure with some architectural elegance around it. There is an effort, perhaps unconscious, to re-enact the surreal Gothic designs with its galloping pillars and the hollowness of its interior. A ring of iron bars encircles and secures it and there is a staircase that leads to the first elevation where a greenery of flowers has been laid out like a farm around it.
There is a clear effort to create an enduring and beautiful statute. But, there is obviously no intention to have the tower speak in political tunes or stand as a fore-runner to the style of a current political leadership. All former leaders before Governor Theodore Orji saw it as only what it is - a statute, a tower. They could not see the potential in the concrete object as a great image-maker for the state and for the manner of leadership.
Indeed, the Abia tower is an embodiment of the Abia story – a journey through stagnation and then revival. It is an epical monument capturing a dispensation in the people’s movement. Though a mere object of cement and gravel, it projects the message that is Governor Orji’s travails and triumph in the corridors of power. It celebrates the revival and the rebirth that are the governor’s stewardship.
Before 2007 when Governor Orji came on board, the tower was a statement of stagnation. In very unmistakable terms, it told the story of the style and manner of leadership of Governor Orji’s predecessor. The tower was weather-beaten, dirty, dilapidated and literally abandoned.
Happy and well-fed spiders built a mast of cobwebs around its concave parapets. The paintings wore out and the smooth surfaces peeled. The surroundings remained unkempt and overgrown with the inner pavement transforming into a defecation point for hoodlums and motor parks boys around the place. Some letters of the bold inscription cleaned off and the walls cracked with neglect. It was a shoddy sight which provided a parallax view of the eight-years of Abia’s stagnation.
In year 2000, when I accompanied some tourists, journalists and movie-makers to attend the eight-day UgwuAbia cultural festival, the Abia tower was an eyesore. It was a demeaning testimony of neglect and stagnation and it spoke volumes about the style of the government of the day.
Thank God! Today, there is a new Abia tower. Quite cleverly, Governor Orji saw an opportunity in the tower to tell the message of his vision and the giant political strides. Upon ascension to office in 2007, he quickly renovated the tower and has consistently maintained it as a treasure for the state. Since then, the towering structure has continued to wear a new and sparkling look.
It has recovered its charm and mystique. With the new paintings, the bold inscription has come alive. On the ground and around the surroundings, there is a beautiful greenery dotted with flowers. And in place of the old garbage is a beautiful arcade which has added to the beauty of the landscape of this inroad into Umuahia.
Indeed, the Abia tower of today speaks eloquently of the new Abia. The new, beautiful outlook, in abstract forms, represent the rebirth and the attendant changes that have come with the liberation. It is a testimony of Governor Orji’s transformation efforts transmuted in a concrete structure.
This transformation has seen to the laying of a fresh foundation for Abia, an enterprise under which he converted Abia into a huge construction site. There are many sides to the message of the new tower. The first is the testimony of the two coloured birds.
The sense of order and tranquility conjured by the uniformity of the design and the paintings represent the new society of law and order which is the current status of Abia. This air of peace evokes the memory of the governor’s pragmatic struggle to create a society of law and order out of the chaos of the past.
The Abia tower, precisely, is a concrete metaphor about the renaissance that is Orji’s mission.
Mr. AGODWIN ADINDU, a social critic, wrote from Aba, Abia State.
The gigantic concrete tower stands at the middle of the Port-Harcourt/Enugu Expressway at the interjection into Umuahia metropolis. Beyond its towering height and aesthetic grandeur, there is a quite significant meaning and message in the edifice.
The imposing tower, built in Gothic cathedral designs with a concave metallic arch, is the first structure that welcomes one into the Abia state capital. With a certain reassuring air, it announces this hospitality with a bold inscription: Welcome to Abia ; God’s Own State.
There are four of this inscription facing the four directions of the road, all written in bold white letters on a background of black metallic plates. The walls are painted in pink and light yellow colours which glow with the translucent lights overlooking the ground from the height.
I see the tower as the first brand ambassador of Abia State and it has consistently lived up to this billing with the warmth and friendliness conjured into its magical designs – a quality it transmits to visitors and residents alike as they behold its majestic heights. It embraces everyone and quickly introduces the people and the style of the incumbent leadership.
Since 1991 when the tower was built, it has remained a landmark structure with some architectural elegance around it. There is an effort, perhaps unconscious, to re-enact the surreal Gothic designs with its galloping pillars and the hollowness of its interior. A ring of iron bars encircles and secures it and there is a staircase that leads to the first elevation where a greenery of flowers has been laid out like a farm around it.
There is a clear effort to create an enduring and beautiful statute. But, there is obviously no intention to have the tower speak in political tunes or stand as a fore-runner to the style of a current political leadership. All former leaders before Governor Theodore Orji saw it as only what it is - a statute, a tower. They could not see the potential in the concrete object as a great image-maker for the state and for the manner of leadership.
Indeed, the Abia tower is an embodiment of the Abia story – a journey through stagnation and then revival. It is an epical monument capturing a dispensation in the people’s movement. Though a mere object of cement and gravel, it projects the message that is Governor Orji’s travails and triumph in the corridors of power. It celebrates the revival and the rebirth that are the governor’s stewardship.
Before 2007 when Governor Orji came on board, the tower was a statement of stagnation. In very unmistakable terms, it told the story of the style and manner of leadership of Governor Orji’s predecessor. The tower was weather-beaten, dirty, dilapidated and literally abandoned.
Happy and well-fed spiders built a mast of cobwebs around its concave parapets. The paintings wore out and the smooth surfaces peeled. The surroundings remained unkempt and overgrown with the inner pavement transforming into a defecation point for hoodlums and motor parks boys around the place. Some letters of the bold inscription cleaned off and the walls cracked with neglect. It was a shoddy sight which provided a parallax view of the eight-years of Abia’s stagnation.
In year 2000, when I accompanied some tourists, journalists and movie-makers to attend the eight-day UgwuAbia cultural festival, the Abia tower was an eyesore. It was a demeaning testimony of neglect and stagnation and it spoke volumes about the style of the government of the day.
Thank God! Today, there is a new Abia tower. Quite cleverly, Governor Orji saw an opportunity in the tower to tell the message of his vision and the giant political strides. Upon ascension to office in 2007, he quickly renovated the tower and has consistently maintained it as a treasure for the state. Since then, the towering structure has continued to wear a new and sparkling look.
It has recovered its charm and mystique. With the new paintings, the bold inscription has come alive. On the ground and around the surroundings, there is a beautiful greenery dotted with flowers. And in place of the old garbage is a beautiful arcade which has added to the beauty of the landscape of this inroad into Umuahia.
Indeed, the Abia tower of today speaks eloquently of the new Abia. The new, beautiful outlook, in abstract forms, represent the rebirth and the attendant changes that have come with the liberation. It is a testimony of Governor Orji’s transformation efforts transmuted in a concrete structure.
This transformation has seen to the laying of a fresh foundation for Abia, an enterprise under which he converted Abia into a huge construction site. There are many sides to the message of the new tower. The first is the testimony of the two coloured birds.
The sense of order and tranquility conjured by the uniformity of the design and the paintings represent the new society of law and order which is the current status of Abia. This air of peace evokes the memory of the governor’s pragmatic struggle to create a society of law and order out of the chaos of the past.
The Abia tower, precisely, is a concrete metaphor about the renaissance that is Orji’s mission.
Mr. AGODWIN ADINDU, a social critic, wrote from Aba, Abia State.
Needless Rivers crisis
THE ongoing political brouhaha in Rivers State is assuming a perilous dimension that should be halted before it snowballs into complete breakdown of law and order.
The foiled impeachment attempt on the Speaker of the state House of Assembly, Hon. Otelemaba Amachree by only five members out of the 32-member assembly is the latest in the dance of shame going on in the oil-rich state.
The crisis in Rivers State, though unnecessary, is beginning to assume a more embarrassing and dangerous turn, with the supporters of both sides now confronting and attacking each other openly.
After the violence had ensued, some lawmakers were seriously injured, making the House of Representatives to hurriedly pass a resolution mandating the National Assembly to take over the duties of the state assembly while the Senate too decided to probe the entire saga.
The turmoil in the state is believed to be a calculated attempt at creating a scenario that could lead to the collapse of the political ambition of the Governor, Rotimi Amaechi, perhaps through impeachment, for rivaling President Goodluck Jonathan’s quest to come back to the Aso Rock Villa in 2015.
Before this impeachment drama, earlier efforts by the five recalcitrant legislators to make their colleague lawmakers see reasons why the governor should be removed had failed, hence the latest conspiracy.
What is, however, saddening is that these young men, who are supposed to be bastion of democracy by virtue of being law makers, should find themselves in this illegality and mess.
The leader of the five anti-Amaechi lawmakers, Evans Bipi - who ordinarily should have been arrested by now in a sane clime - kept insisting that he remained the authentic Speaker, having led four other members Assembly to hatch the plot, running afoul of the constitution, which stipulates that for the impeachment of any elected official to be valid, ‘not less than two-thirds of the members of the House must vote in its favour’.
For me, I don’t see any big deal why Amaechi should become targets of all sorts of political bashing because of a feeling that he posed a political threat.
With the growing violence and acrimony in Rivers State, many observers are beginning to feel that the next general elections may not be free, fair and credible.
Critical appraisals of the unfolding scenario in these last few weeks indicate that there is every likelihood of an unseen, powerful hand behind the travails of Amaechi.
The non-recognition of his re-election by the-powers-to-be as the Chairman, Nigeria Governors’ Forum could be the fall-out of his refusal not to re-contest as NGF Chairman when his party told him so, as well as his opposition to the running of the Sovereign Wealth Fund, Excess Crude Account and call for complete transparency and accountability in the payment of petrol subsidy, among others could also be his ‘offence’.
Is it transfer of aggression or how does one refer to the experience of the four Northern states governors; Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano), Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu (Niger), chairman of the Northern States Governors’ Forum on a solidarity visit to Amaechi, who were allegedly pelted with stones by protesters ?
The Vanguard reported that the attack was sponsored as “thousands of Nyesom Wike’s loyalists stormed the airport, protesting the visit of the four northern governors. The protesters literarily took over the exit gate of the VIP lounge of the airport, singing anti-Amaechi songs. Some of the placards they carried read: ‘Northern governors leave Rivers State alone!’ ‘Amaechi must go’, ‘Rivers money for Rivers people’ ...”
Therefore, if the speculation is true that the needless crises in Rivers is borne out of politics, Jonathan should ensure that a stop is put to this and work harder to win the hearts of the people by putting more efforts in the areas of security, power and unemployment.
Amaechi too could leave the PDP and look for another platform where he could realise his ambition, if his membership of the party that had already ostracised him, will continue to cause him nightmare.
The way it is, the current political situation in the state is being worsened by bitter political infighting, ethnic, enmity and religious conflicts going on in other parts of the country, almost on a daily basis.
In another twist, THE PUNCH reported that contrary to her earlier denials of involvement in the political crisis rocking Rivers State, wife of President Goodluck Jonathan, Patience had opened up on the crisis rocking the state.
Dame Patience Jonathan allegedly told 16 bishops from the South-South, who visited her at the Presidential Villa, Abuja that her misunderstanding with Governor Amaechi, started about four years ago in Anyugubiri in Okrika when she appealed to him to engage her people in dialogue instead of demolishing a part of their community.
She had accused Amaechi as “hot tempered,” ignored her advice and went ahead to sack the chairman of the local government for holding a reception in her honour.
According to her, “Amaechi did not only stop at those, he imposed a curfew on the community, which is where she hails from and all her pleas with the governor to lift the curfew fell on deaf ears”.
Irrespective of what is brewing the crisis, one thing that is certain is that any nation that is serious about the welfare of its people, its image and attainment of development will realize that it cannot go far under an atmosphere like ours, where peace and order remain an illusion.
Mr. ADEWALE KUPOLUYI wrote from Federal Varsity of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State.
The foiled impeachment attempt on the Speaker of the state House of Assembly, Hon. Otelemaba Amachree by only five members out of the 32-member assembly is the latest in the dance of shame going on in the oil-rich state.
The crisis in Rivers State, though unnecessary, is beginning to assume a more embarrassing and dangerous turn, with the supporters of both sides now confronting and attacking each other openly.
After the violence had ensued, some lawmakers were seriously injured, making the House of Representatives to hurriedly pass a resolution mandating the National Assembly to take over the duties of the state assembly while the Senate too decided to probe the entire saga.
The turmoil in the state is believed to be a calculated attempt at creating a scenario that could lead to the collapse of the political ambition of the Governor, Rotimi Amaechi, perhaps through impeachment, for rivaling President Goodluck Jonathan’s quest to come back to the Aso Rock Villa in 2015.
Before this impeachment drama, earlier efforts by the five recalcitrant legislators to make their colleague lawmakers see reasons why the governor should be removed had failed, hence the latest conspiracy.
What is, however, saddening is that these young men, who are supposed to be bastion of democracy by virtue of being law makers, should find themselves in this illegality and mess.
The leader of the five anti-Amaechi lawmakers, Evans Bipi - who ordinarily should have been arrested by now in a sane clime - kept insisting that he remained the authentic Speaker, having led four other members Assembly to hatch the plot, running afoul of the constitution, which stipulates that for the impeachment of any elected official to be valid, ‘not less than two-thirds of the members of the House must vote in its favour’.
For me, I don’t see any big deal why Amaechi should become targets of all sorts of political bashing because of a feeling that he posed a political threat.
With the growing violence and acrimony in Rivers State, many observers are beginning to feel that the next general elections may not be free, fair and credible.
Critical appraisals of the unfolding scenario in these last few weeks indicate that there is every likelihood of an unseen, powerful hand behind the travails of Amaechi.
The non-recognition of his re-election by the-powers-to-be as the Chairman, Nigeria Governors’ Forum could be the fall-out of his refusal not to re-contest as NGF Chairman when his party told him so, as well as his opposition to the running of the Sovereign Wealth Fund, Excess Crude Account and call for complete transparency and accountability in the payment of petrol subsidy, among others could also be his ‘offence’.
Is it transfer of aggression or how does one refer to the experience of the four Northern states governors; Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano), Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) and Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu (Niger), chairman of the Northern States Governors’ Forum on a solidarity visit to Amaechi, who were allegedly pelted with stones by protesters ?
The Vanguard reported that the attack was sponsored as “thousands of Nyesom Wike’s loyalists stormed the airport, protesting the visit of the four northern governors. The protesters literarily took over the exit gate of the VIP lounge of the airport, singing anti-Amaechi songs. Some of the placards they carried read: ‘Northern governors leave Rivers State alone!’ ‘Amaechi must go’, ‘Rivers money for Rivers people’ ...”
Therefore, if the speculation is true that the needless crises in Rivers is borne out of politics, Jonathan should ensure that a stop is put to this and work harder to win the hearts of the people by putting more efforts in the areas of security, power and unemployment.
Amaechi too could leave the PDP and look for another platform where he could realise his ambition, if his membership of the party that had already ostracised him, will continue to cause him nightmare.
The way it is, the current political situation in the state is being worsened by bitter political infighting, ethnic, enmity and religious conflicts going on in other parts of the country, almost on a daily basis.
In another twist, THE PUNCH reported that contrary to her earlier denials of involvement in the political crisis rocking Rivers State, wife of President Goodluck Jonathan, Patience had opened up on the crisis rocking the state.
Dame Patience Jonathan allegedly told 16 bishops from the South-South, who visited her at the Presidential Villa, Abuja that her misunderstanding with Governor Amaechi, started about four years ago in Anyugubiri in Okrika when she appealed to him to engage her people in dialogue instead of demolishing a part of their community.
She had accused Amaechi as “hot tempered,” ignored her advice and went ahead to sack the chairman of the local government for holding a reception in her honour.
According to her, “Amaechi did not only stop at those, he imposed a curfew on the community, which is where she hails from and all her pleas with the governor to lift the curfew fell on deaf ears”.
Irrespective of what is brewing the crisis, one thing that is certain is that any nation that is serious about the welfare of its people, its image and attainment of development will realize that it cannot go far under an atmosphere like ours, where peace and order remain an illusion.
Mr. ADEWALE KUPOLUYI wrote from Federal Varsity of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Ogun State.
Sunday, 28 July 2013
Senate did not vote on marriage age (RIGHT OF REPLY)
Senator ENYI ABARIBE is Chairman, Senate Committe on Information, Media and Public Affairs.
THE Senate last week voted on the report of its Constitution Review Committee and at the end of it all, it once again achieved a milestone in altering the 1999 Constitution to bring the document in line with the general aspirations of the Nigerian people.
However, while the Senate appreciates and welcomes the healthy debate that ensued within the public on some aspects of the sections that were voted on, which it sees as a veritable feedback that signals the public acceptance and overwhelming followership of the happenings in the hallowed chambers, it is nonetheless bothered by negative commentaries which suggest a deliberate misinformation and distortion of what actually transpired on the floor when the distinguished senators voted on the each section of the report by its constitution amendment committee.
For the avoidance of doubt, at no time did the senators vote, neither did they ever deliberate on any clause that has to do with marriage age. They also did not vote to introduce any new law on underage marriage. The senators only voted to amend some clauses in the articles that were already in the Constitution.
It is pertinent for the public to know that the section up for amendment had to do with persons qualified to renounce Nigerian citizenship.
The 1999 Constitution as amended in Section 29 (which has suddenly become a hot issue for both informed and uninformed interpretation in the press and social media), states in section 1 S29(1): "Any citizen of Nigeria of full age who wishes to renounce his Nigerian citizenship shall make a declaration in the prescribed manner for the renunciation".
S29(4): "For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, (a) 'full age' means the age of eighteen years and above;
(b) 'any woman who is married shall be deemed to be of full age'.
The prevailing view of the committee before the initial vote was that Section 29(4)(a) was gender neutral but with section 29(4)(b) specifically mentioning "woman" , it now looked discriminatory and as such is in conflict with section 42 of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination of any form. The committee thus sought for it to be expunged from the Constitution.
Senators, therefore, voted earlier to expunge that sub-section and it scaled through by 75 votes. Note that under the Constitution, to amend any clause you will need 2/3 of the members of the Senate which translates to 73 votes.
However, the revisiting of the voting on that section was to take care of objections raised by Distinguished Senator Ahmad Sani Yerima, among others. He pointed out that removing the clause 29(4)(b) contradicts section 61 of the second schedule of the Constitution which restricts the National Assembly from considering matters relating to Islamic and Customary law.
Revisiting the section was pure and simple a pragmatic approach. It had to be so, considering that the Senate as the representative of the people represents all interests and all shades of opinion.
Therefore, a fresh vote was called and even though those who wanted that section expunged were more in number, they failed to muster the needed votes to get it through. What it meant was that majority of senators voted to remove it but they were short of the 2/3 majority or (73) required to alter an article of the Constitution.
Had voting in constitutional amendment not been based on the mandatory two-third or (73) votes of senators at the seating, perhaps the issue would have been rested by now, but be that as it may the outcome of the voting remains the position of the Senate. S29(4)(b) still remains part of the Constitution.
What is important is for the issue to be put in its proper perspective.
This clarification has become necessary because of the willful and deliberate act to distort and misinform the general public on what was neither discussed nor contemplated by the distinguished senators.
At no time was marriage as a section of the Constitution discussed or voted for. The National Assembly in 2003 had passed "The Child Rights Act" which specifically took care of the fears being expressed in a cross section of the media. The Act clearly states in section 21: "No person under the age of 18 years is capable of contracting a valid marriage, and accordingly, any marriage so contracted is null and void and of no effect whatsoever".
22. 1. "No parent, guardian or any other person shall betroth a child to any person"
2. A betrothal in contravection of subsection (1) of this section is null and void.
Therefore, under the Childs Right Act the lawful age of marriage is 18years.
The Constitution does not provide for many rules of human engagement such as marriage and only makes provision for specialised laws to take care of such matters. That is why the National Assembly now made a specialised legislation to address the matter of lawful age for marriage as seen above.
In fact, section 23 of the Childs Right Act provides stiff penalties:
A person (a) who marries a child; or
(b) to whom a child is betrothed ; or
(c) who promotes the marriage of a child; or
(d) who betroths a child commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N500,000 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira) or imprisonment for a term of five years or to both such fine and imprisonment.
It was the Senate of this Federal Republic that made this law which is still operative in some states. The snag in any case is that the Child Right Act does not automatically apply across the country. It has to be domesticated on state by state basis by the respective Houses of Assembly. Up to date 12 states are yet to domesticate or adopt the law. It is with respect to those states that the advocacy on age of marriage should be directed since it was the National Assembly that passed the law in the first place.
The essence of this further clarification is to remind all that the Senate in its wisdom passed that law, which has become operative in most states with the exception of the remaining 12.
The Senate has done its best with utmost concern for national interest and its leadership has ably navigated its affairs with high level of integrity, sense of responsibility and fairness to all Nigerians.
It would have made a whole lot of sense had the various commentators displayed the capacity to reason and do due diligence to the issue before rushing to conclude that the Senate did what was not even before it.
Senator ENYI ABARIBE is Chairman, Senate Committe on Information, Media and Public Affairs.
THE Senate last week voted on the report of its Constitution Review Committee and at the end of it all, it once again achieved a milestone in altering the 1999 Constitution to bring the document in line with the general aspirations of the Nigerian people.
However, while the Senate appreciates and welcomes the healthy debate that ensued within the public on some aspects of the sections that were voted on, which it sees as a veritable feedback that signals the public acceptance and overwhelming followership of the happenings in the hallowed chambers, it is nonetheless bothered by negative commentaries which suggest a deliberate misinformation and distortion of what actually transpired on the floor when the distinguished senators voted on the each section of the report by its constitution amendment committee.
For the avoidance of doubt, at no time did the senators vote, neither did they ever deliberate on any clause that has to do with marriage age. They also did not vote to introduce any new law on underage marriage. The senators only voted to amend some clauses in the articles that were already in the Constitution.
It is pertinent for the public to know that the section up for amendment had to do with persons qualified to renounce Nigerian citizenship.
The 1999 Constitution as amended in Section 29 (which has suddenly become a hot issue for both informed and uninformed interpretation in the press and social media), states in section 1 S29(1): "Any citizen of Nigeria of full age who wishes to renounce his Nigerian citizenship shall make a declaration in the prescribed manner for the renunciation".
S29(4): "For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, (a) 'full age' means the age of eighteen years and above;
(b) 'any woman who is married shall be deemed to be of full age'.
The prevailing view of the committee before the initial vote was that Section 29(4)(a) was gender neutral but with section 29(4)(b) specifically mentioning "woman" , it now looked discriminatory and as such is in conflict with section 42 of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination of any form. The committee thus sought for it to be expunged from the Constitution.
Senators, therefore, voted earlier to expunge that sub-section and it scaled through by 75 votes. Note that under the Constitution, to amend any clause you will need 2/3 of the members of the Senate which translates to 73 votes.
However, the revisiting of the voting on that section was to take care of objections raised by Distinguished Senator Ahmad Sani Yerima, among others. He pointed out that removing the clause 29(4)(b) contradicts section 61 of the second schedule of the Constitution which restricts the National Assembly from considering matters relating to Islamic and Customary law.
Revisiting the section was pure and simple a pragmatic approach. It had to be so, considering that the Senate as the representative of the people represents all interests and all shades of opinion.
Therefore, a fresh vote was called and even though those who wanted that section expunged were more in number, they failed to muster the needed votes to get it through. What it meant was that majority of senators voted to remove it but they were short of the 2/3 majority or (73) required to alter an article of the Constitution.
Had voting in constitutional amendment not been based on the mandatory two-third or (73) votes of senators at the seating, perhaps the issue would have been rested by now, but be that as it may the outcome of the voting remains the position of the Senate. S29(4)(b) still remains part of the Constitution.
What is important is for the issue to be put in its proper perspective.
This clarification has become necessary because of the willful and deliberate act to distort and misinform the general public on what was neither discussed nor contemplated by the distinguished senators.
At no time was marriage as a section of the Constitution discussed or voted for. The National Assembly in 2003 had passed "The Child Rights Act" which specifically took care of the fears being expressed in a cross section of the media. The Act clearly states in section 21: "No person under the age of 18 years is capable of contracting a valid marriage, and accordingly, any marriage so contracted is null and void and of no effect whatsoever".
22. 1. "No parent, guardian or any other person shall betroth a child to any person"
2. A betrothal in contravection of subsection (1) of this section is null and void.
Therefore, under the Childs Right Act the lawful age of marriage is 18years.
The Constitution does not provide for many rules of human engagement such as marriage and only makes provision for specialised laws to take care of such matters. That is why the National Assembly now made a specialised legislation to address the matter of lawful age for marriage as seen above.
In fact, section 23 of the Childs Right Act provides stiff penalties:
A person (a) who marries a child; or
(b) to whom a child is betrothed ; or
(c) who promotes the marriage of a child; or
(d) who betroths a child commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine of N500,000 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira) or imprisonment for a term of five years or to both such fine and imprisonment.
It was the Senate of this Federal Republic that made this law which is still operative in some states. The snag in any case is that the Child Right Act does not automatically apply across the country. It has to be domesticated on state by state basis by the respective Houses of Assembly. Up to date 12 states are yet to domesticate or adopt the law. It is with respect to those states that the advocacy on age of marriage should be directed since it was the National Assembly that passed the law in the first place.
The essence of this further clarification is to remind all that the Senate in its wisdom passed that law, which has become operative in most states with the exception of the remaining 12.
The Senate has done its best with utmost concern for national interest and its leadership has ably navigated its affairs with high level of integrity, sense of responsibility and fairness to all Nigerians.
It would have made a whole lot of sense had the various commentators displayed the capacity to reason and do due diligence to the issue before rushing to conclude that the Senate did what was not even before it.
Senator ENYI ABARIBE is Chairman, Senate Committe on Information, Media and Public Affairs.
Perspectives on the 2013 DBIR retreat
THE Nigerian oil industry has continued to play a significant role in the nation’s drive towards economic growth and development.
Nigeria remains Africa’s leading oil producer and major crude oil exporter in the world. Although herpetroleum reserves, production and exports constitute only a small proportion of the world total, the contribution of the sector to the national economy is quite tremendous.
The sector has become the mainstay of the economy, pivoting other sectors and accounting for well over 90 per cent of the country’s foreign exchange earnings and well over 80 per cent of consolidated government revenues.
There is no gainsaying the fact that all the three tiers of government in Nigeria predicate their development agenda on revenue derived from oil and are therefore vulnerable to the vagaries in the international prices of oil. Indeed, it is to be noted that oil resources are not infinite, and the fear is already there that Nigeria's oil assets may dry out in less than 50 years.
The question has always been asked: Without oil, does Nigeria and by extension the component states have a future? No, if we maintain our current attitude of rent seeking from an enclave economy. Yes, if we look beyond the ephemeral oil present and diversify the economy.
It is gratifying to note that Delta is already looking inward and thinking ahead of the possibility of Nigeria without oil. The Governor of Delta State, Dr. Emmanuel Eweta Uduaghan, has successfully synchronized this into his Three-Point Agenda in the form of Delta Beyond Oil, DBO.
In point of fact, for His Excellency, the DBO is essentially ‘…an economic agenda; that will develop other areas of the economy, different from oil and gas but using the current funds coming from oil and gas to develop the other areas of the economy, especially in the areas of agriculture and solid minerals’.
The DBO initiative is also geared towards unleashing the alternative sources of revenue for the economy of the state, especially in terms of development of the dormant mineral resources, which the state is endowed with. The state is guarded by the fact that oil wealth is the catalyst that engenders corruption, kills creativity and also fuels low national productivity. This, as it were, has created what is called the resource curse.
In an event of the depletion of Nigerian oil resources, Delta State is one of the few states that can survive the fiscal fall-out. It is instructive to note that the Delta State Government through the Delta State Board of Internal Revenue, DBIR, is already factoring tax into the DBO mantra. This understanding underscored the theme of the 2013 DBIR retreat tagged: "Delta Beyond Oil: Implications and the Role of DBIR", which took place recently at the state capital, Asaba between May 13 and 17.
The excitement of the Governor was palpable when he declared the retreat open. He gave an expose of the concept of DBO and gingered participants by soliciting their perception of DBO. He also enjoined participants to be forward looking by being game changers in the new Delta Beyond Oil. The Chairman of the DBIR Joel-Onowakpo Thomas, in his welcome address, appreciated the Governor’s proactive thinking by approving the 2013 retreat. The Chairman was unequivocal about the Governor’s commitment to the needs of the Board and assured His Excellency of the Board’s unwavering commitment to the Delta Beyond Oil initiative.
At the plenary and technical sessions, the array of papers presented at the retreat was a clear manifestation of the fact that the Board is endowed with the right human capital to drive the renewed quest for tax to be a decisive variable in the new DBO. The utility of tax and taxation was laid bare while also dissecting the implications and the role of DBIR in the DBO.
Projections were made on vision of Delta when oil wells dry out and how Delta State can use the available oil resources to invest and prepare itself for the eventual non-oil economy period. The importance of a non-oil revenue base was emphasized as the way forward in diversification of the state’s economy through innovative strategies.
Taxation was noted as top on the agenda to solve the problem of dwindling oil revenues because a ‘life without tax is a lie’. ‘The very act of taxation has profoundly beneficial effects in fostering better and accountable government ‘.
One of the most basic advantages of taxes is that they allow the government to spend money for basic operations and stimulate economic growth through infrastructural development. Taxes also redistribute wealth between tax payers and individuals who receive government assistance. Instead of consecutive borrowing with its attendant accumulation of debt, it is salutary to look inward and employ tax as a veritable means of revenue generation.
What to note is that the 2013 DBIR retreat was for the Board and staff a time for sober reflection and introspection about their place in DBO. Right from the inception of the Uduaghan’s administration, it was noted that there has been a steady increase in IGR. This, to all intents and purposes, is a strong indication that Deltans are already tuned to adjust to the new dawn.
Their enthusiasm is propelled by the visible mega projects which are partly funded by tax payers in the state. The focus of the Delta State government on massive infrastructures such as the dualisation of the Asaba-Ughelli road, the Asaba International Airport and the expansion of the airport at Warri as well as the on-going Independent Power Plant at Oghara are loud indications that the state is prepared to provide enabling environment for industrialisation and its attendant diversification of the revenue base of the state.
The presence of up and running small and medium scale industries will engender taxation and by extension, increase in revenue for the state and less dependence on oil revenue. There is no doubt that Delta state is already at the next level as far it has elected to free itself from the petroleum incubus.
Mr. MIKE OSUJI, a commentator on national issues, wrote fromWarri, Delta State.
Nigeria remains Africa’s leading oil producer and major crude oil exporter in the world. Although herpetroleum reserves, production and exports constitute only a small proportion of the world total, the contribution of the sector to the national economy is quite tremendous.
The sector has become the mainstay of the economy, pivoting other sectors and accounting for well over 90 per cent of the country’s foreign exchange earnings and well over 80 per cent of consolidated government revenues.
There is no gainsaying the fact that all the three tiers of government in Nigeria predicate their development agenda on revenue derived from oil and are therefore vulnerable to the vagaries in the international prices of oil. Indeed, it is to be noted that oil resources are not infinite, and the fear is already there that Nigeria's oil assets may dry out in less than 50 years.
The question has always been asked: Without oil, does Nigeria and by extension the component states have a future? No, if we maintain our current attitude of rent seeking from an enclave economy. Yes, if we look beyond the ephemeral oil present and diversify the economy.
It is gratifying to note that Delta is already looking inward and thinking ahead of the possibility of Nigeria without oil. The Governor of Delta State, Dr. Emmanuel Eweta Uduaghan, has successfully synchronized this into his Three-Point Agenda in the form of Delta Beyond Oil, DBO.
In point of fact, for His Excellency, the DBO is essentially ‘…an economic agenda; that will develop other areas of the economy, different from oil and gas but using the current funds coming from oil and gas to develop the other areas of the economy, especially in the areas of agriculture and solid minerals’.
The DBO initiative is also geared towards unleashing the alternative sources of revenue for the economy of the state, especially in terms of development of the dormant mineral resources, which the state is endowed with. The state is guarded by the fact that oil wealth is the catalyst that engenders corruption, kills creativity and also fuels low national productivity. This, as it were, has created what is called the resource curse.
In an event of the depletion of Nigerian oil resources, Delta State is one of the few states that can survive the fiscal fall-out. It is instructive to note that the Delta State Government through the Delta State Board of Internal Revenue, DBIR, is already factoring tax into the DBO mantra. This understanding underscored the theme of the 2013 DBIR retreat tagged: "Delta Beyond Oil: Implications and the Role of DBIR", which took place recently at the state capital, Asaba between May 13 and 17.
The excitement of the Governor was palpable when he declared the retreat open. He gave an expose of the concept of DBO and gingered participants by soliciting their perception of DBO. He also enjoined participants to be forward looking by being game changers in the new Delta Beyond Oil. The Chairman of the DBIR Joel-Onowakpo Thomas, in his welcome address, appreciated the Governor’s proactive thinking by approving the 2013 retreat. The Chairman was unequivocal about the Governor’s commitment to the needs of the Board and assured His Excellency of the Board’s unwavering commitment to the Delta Beyond Oil initiative.
At the plenary and technical sessions, the array of papers presented at the retreat was a clear manifestation of the fact that the Board is endowed with the right human capital to drive the renewed quest for tax to be a decisive variable in the new DBO. The utility of tax and taxation was laid bare while also dissecting the implications and the role of DBIR in the DBO.
Projections were made on vision of Delta when oil wells dry out and how Delta State can use the available oil resources to invest and prepare itself for the eventual non-oil economy period. The importance of a non-oil revenue base was emphasized as the way forward in diversification of the state’s economy through innovative strategies.
Taxation was noted as top on the agenda to solve the problem of dwindling oil revenues because a ‘life without tax is a lie’. ‘The very act of taxation has profoundly beneficial effects in fostering better and accountable government ‘.
One of the most basic advantages of taxes is that they allow the government to spend money for basic operations and stimulate economic growth through infrastructural development. Taxes also redistribute wealth between tax payers and individuals who receive government assistance. Instead of consecutive borrowing with its attendant accumulation of debt, it is salutary to look inward and employ tax as a veritable means of revenue generation.
What to note is that the 2013 DBIR retreat was for the Board and staff a time for sober reflection and introspection about their place in DBO. Right from the inception of the Uduaghan’s administration, it was noted that there has been a steady increase in IGR. This, to all intents and purposes, is a strong indication that Deltans are already tuned to adjust to the new dawn.
Their enthusiasm is propelled by the visible mega projects which are partly funded by tax payers in the state. The focus of the Delta State government on massive infrastructures such as the dualisation of the Asaba-Ughelli road, the Asaba International Airport and the expansion of the airport at Warri as well as the on-going Independent Power Plant at Oghara are loud indications that the state is prepared to provide enabling environment for industrialisation and its attendant diversification of the revenue base of the state.
The presence of up and running small and medium scale industries will engender taxation and by extension, increase in revenue for the state and less dependence on oil revenue. There is no doubt that Delta state is already at the next level as far it has elected to free itself from the petroleum incubus.
Mr. MIKE OSUJI, a commentator on national issues, wrote fromWarri, Delta State.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)