Here is the Riggers’ Haven
By Sam Onimisi
Stress is no doubt the cause of some disease if it is not itself a disease. At the level of a symptom, it may be endured for a period, but not when it has blown to become a painful disease. A few days back, I had a day full of physical exertion, mental stress and emotional distress and returned home exhausted. I went straight to bed and not long after, I found myself in the midst of a group of people engaged in animated discussion over the fate of Nigeria. Unlike me, I discovered I could only listen and not a participant in the discussion. Being also a good listener, here is what I heard.
“This country is a riggers’ haven. Everything was rigged from inception in 1914. Lord Lugard didn’t consult anybody and didn’t seek our views before he decreed the amalgamation of what his concubine thereafter christened Nigeria. Therefore, the country and her name were rigged into existence. Lugard must have drawn the first map of the country after carrying out a detailed geographical survey. And he was able to prove that the country had two rivers namely, Niger and Benue as the most significant landmark features. If he was sensible enough, he ought to have corrected the whore who only saw ‘Niger area’ instead of Niger and Benue as conspicuously outlined in the map. He didn’t, and proceeded to accept the name Nigeria instead of Nibena. This name is now duplicated as another French territory goes by the name Niger, a close neighbor to Nigeria. The implication is that there are Nigerians and there are Nigeriens. If you cannot spot the difference, it is not anyone’s fault but the stupid colonialist, Lugard.
“All of Nigeria’s Constitutions were also rigged into existence. Are you looking amazed? See, the 1922 Clifford Constitution was the first in colonial times. Then Sir Richards became the Governor of Nigeria in 1943. Without consultation with Nigerian leaders, he went to London and submitted a constitutional proposal to the British Secretary of State for the Colonies and his proposals were passed into law in the British Parliament in 1946. No Nigerian drafted, debated or voted for the Richards Constitution, yet it was imposed on us. As if every colonial governor must impose his own laws, Sir John Macpherson became governor and made his own Macpherson Constitution of 1951. Then came Lord Littleton who also inaugurated his own little Constitution in 1954. On the eve of independence, series of Constitutional talks were held in Lagos and London, culminating in the 1960 Independence Constitution. The talks were superintended by colonial officials browbeating everyone into submission – or else they with-hold independence from us! Was this not how you got all these so-called pre-independence constitutions?”
“After independence, we had the 1963 Republican Constitution which had our leaders input even though still supervised by the overbearing colonial lords. In less than three years, the military took over government, suspended the constitution and ruled by autocratic decrees from 1966 to 1979. The military imposed the presidential system cum constitution, which has a close semblance of martial law obtained in military barracks. The still-born 1989 Babangida Constitution was dead on arrival. The 1999 Abdul Salam Constitution was a most guided secret, unveiled long after the 1999 general election. This, in a nutshell is the rigged constitutional history of Nigeria.”
“Even the Regions were so rigged into being such that one region was bigger than three others combined. Go and check out the Nigerian maps of 1946 to 1966. The first 12 states were created to abort Biafra and to that extent, and because it failed to achieve its aim, was a fraud. States or regions are supposed to be a voluntary evolution by federating units applying to join the Federal Union. Ours were decreed into existence wily nilly by fiat. So are our Local Government Councils; to the effect that states and local councils were lopsidedly created as gifts to loyal commanding officers and in favour of certain ethno religious zones. If not, which of them were approved through a referendum? Which of them were subjected to a plebiscite? N-o-n-e!!”
“Do you know that our educational policy of quota system was rigged into the 1999 Constitution? Even our national anthem was rigged in 1977 by Obasanjo’s military government; the Police system was rigged and decreed into a unitary force. You are still starring at me, unknown to you that all budgets are rigged in that they are bogusly inflated to take care of ministry officials? So you think that only elections are subject to rigging? Then, you are grossly mistaken! Since 1952 until 2007, general elections were consciously rigged so that losers become winners and vice-versa. As if we are averse to correct figures, none of our Census exercise answered to demographic principles – which was why they were always disputed. In enumeration exercises, figures are free to sky-rocket and tumble at will, and no religion and ethnic group must be identified; this is to enable everyone to appropriate any figure to suit every conceivable rigging devices. I call this practice ‘conspiratorial censuses.
“Whenever a Commission of Inquiry or Panel of Investigation is set-up, don’t submit any researched memorandum to them. It’s all a waste of time and efforts. Why? Because their recommendations precedes their findings as no one was expected to dig for facts. All the commission or Panel does is to work to a pre-determined answer: swindle the complainants as well as the culprits so that they can run away to be alive to fight a greater battle in future. That way, the commission or Panel will be commended for a job well done; and assured that their recommendations will be dutifully implemented and they are disbanded. Meanwhile, the Panels’ reports are dumped under the shelf to gather dust, while government awaits another opportunity to repeat the ritual ad-infinitum. Life continues – by accident or happenstance!”
“You don’t need to know how to drive a car to be licensed to drive in Nigeria. It could be delivered on your laps right in your bedroom. The process is rigged to enable you join the road slaughter spree; as long as the motor vehicle is moving, you are an international driver and we shall be wiser only after you begin to main or mangle every object on the road. Your licence is designed to kill! Welcome to the Riggers’ Haven where everything works to perfection – on the reverse.”
When I awoke at 5:30am the following morning, I realized that is was all a marathon dream. But then I asked myself a question which you may also ask yourself: is the dream as dreamt different from the real situation in Nigeria? Please send in your most treasured answer, dear readers.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Nation Building: the Panel Beater’s Approach
Nation Building: the Panel Beater’s Approach
By Sam Onimisi
So many important events are taking place at the same time such that a news hound like yours sincerely could not catch up with all of them at once. Until a phone call from a friend alerted me, I was not aware that President Goodluck Jonathan addressed the 16th Nigerian Economic Summit during which he made some disparaging remarks against the call for a Sovereign National Conference. What did he say? The President was reported to have said that Nigeria had gone beyond the call for the SNC and that our concern should be how to build a prosperous country. That was not all he said. He was also quoted as saying that the 1999 Constitution has prescribed how it can be changed and that attempts to change the law by other methods would be illegal. Having waited in vain for a whole week with the hope that the presidency will retract or correct the alleged statements, one is now free to believe that he was correctly quoted.
Let me declare some facts with which my locus standi on the issues raised by the president could be established. By God’s grace and through the auspices of the renown nationalist Chief Anthony Enahoro CFR, I was one of those Nigerians who participated in the Peoples National Conference of Pro-National Conference Organization (PRONACO) in 2004/2005. In fact, I served as its Secretary General and Chairman of its Committee on geo-political structure. PRONACO successfully produced an alternative constitution for Nigeria, far more suitable for the country’s plurality and designed to accommodate the heterogeneous nature of Nigeria in line with similar countries of the world. It must be noted that the subjects of constitution making and Sovereign National Conference are like Siamese twins as they are intricately interwoven. I suppose you now know why I could participate in the debate.
In the first place, no heterogeneous country on earth will ever go beyond a national conference of some sort - call it sovereign, independent or ethnic nationalities conference – until it has adopted a mutually agreeable formula of and for peaceful co-existence as a sovereign entity. Our ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and geo-graphical diversities are the sources of the divisive and centrifugal politics at play today. If past or pre-independence or post-independence constitutional conferences had succeeded and adequate, we would not be experiencing the intermittent ethno-religious and inter-regional combustion which now characterize our polity. It only means that past constitutions which culminated in the 1999 constitution have failed to reassure the federating units of Nigeria of their glorious destiny to which they aspire.
Secondly, the constitution is the fundamental law of any country to which all other laws are subject and subordinated, including the laws enacted by the Parliament. Therefore, it is dangerous for a multi-ethnic country such as Nigeria to delegate its constitution – making to an Assembly, the members of whose election were universally acclaimed to have been rigged. Beside, law-making as the business of the Parliament is different from Constitution making. It is a universal democratic practice to delegate the business of constitution making to a Constituent Assembly to make the fundamental law which law-makers will be elected to operate and adhere to. A mono-ethnic nation may concede constitution making to her law makers, since differences such as language; culture, ethnicity and religion are non-existent. Not a polygeny such as Nigeria!
More-over, all constitutional making process from independence to date has been flawed or disabled in that there were no equity or equality in participation; representation were more of artificial or arbitrary entities such as Regions or States than organic beings like ethnic nationalities. Even if we are to concede constitution-making to a select group of people, their product must be subjected to the views and choices of the populace through a referendum. Any Constitution that emerged from a referendum has obtained a democratic seal of approval or acceptance of the people. Which of the past constitutions up to 1999 passed this test? None!! And that is one of the reasons why the call for a national conference will not abate until one is held or the PNC of PRONACO is adopted. Again, there is no where in multi-ethnic countries where law-makers Assembly is a panacea to all constitutional problems. You now know why the call for a National Conference?
Through a national conference, ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and geographical grievances are tabled and thoroughly discussed and debated. Disagreements are subjected to the moral uprightness of participants and votes are taken to ascertain the voice of the majority; stalemates are resolved by consensus of give-and-take such that there are no walk-outs, until the conference ends. Whatever was agreed was the voice and choice of all which everyone is bound to believe in and defend. No one goes home with unresolved grievances or unanswered questions. This much I can testify of the PRONACO’s Peoples National Conference cum Constitution of 2005.
No good citizen has any problem with building a prosperous country; but they want to know what constitutes a prosperous country. The assumption that Nigeria has come far and had gone beyond constitutional talks is not based on realism. Those countries that have gone beyond talks are making waves in the economic, scientific and technological spheres of their national life. That we are still engaged in the battle of zoning is one pointer that rather than going beyond, we are going under into the precipice. Why pretend to have attained a height yet out of reach?
The Yoruba West detested undue interference in their regional affairs and vehemently fought it with ‘operation we tie’ from 1962 – 1966. The Tiv now of Benue State fought the same battle around the same time. From President Jonathan’s Niger Delta, Isaac Adaku Boro rebelled against unitarism in 1966, a fight which Ken Saro Wiwa continued with his pen and for which an amalgam of freedom fighters known as the Movement for Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) took up the gauntlet. The Igbo East kicked against domination and fought a three-year Civil War through the banner of Biafra to retain their ethnic national autonomy and their identity. The Hausa/Fulani of the North West loves an Islamic empire and have spinned innumerable riots and mayhem across the county, through the Maitatsine, Sharia, the Taliban, the Al-Queda to the Boko-Haram to drum it into our skull that they want their internal Islamic autonomy. The Middlebelt ethnic nationalities of Central Nigeria have resisted religious and cultural imposition and subjection since the 1950’s up till the recent Fulani invasion of Berom land. The Kanuri nation of Borno Kingdom in the North East wants to uphold their cultural and religious heritage by which they could be identified and respected. Has the 1999 Constitution granted all these? Eleven years of its operation has seen a huge harvest of discontent, disagreement and disintegration on a fast lane. Could anyone still say that we have gone beyond talks?
The reason for a National Conference is because Nigerians do not believe in the legitimacy of the National Assembly as elected, and from whom they withheld their mandate. In this case, what is needed is an All Ethnic Independent National Conference to resolve our constitutional incongruity, since the National Assembly and a Constituent Assembly may not co-exist! The purpose? To distil our differences into a collective and fundamental law known as the Constitution from which none shall have an excuse to dishonor. And to utilize our centripetal energy for the building of a true nation whose prosperity will be the business of all. The subsisting unitary constitution is a panel beater’s work and by the time amendments are made to it by the disabled law makers, what you have is an ugly rickety patchwork of no use to anyone; and by which no enduring prosperity or prosperous nation can ever be built!
By Sam Onimisi
So many important events are taking place at the same time such that a news hound like yours sincerely could not catch up with all of them at once. Until a phone call from a friend alerted me, I was not aware that President Goodluck Jonathan addressed the 16th Nigerian Economic Summit during which he made some disparaging remarks against the call for a Sovereign National Conference. What did he say? The President was reported to have said that Nigeria had gone beyond the call for the SNC and that our concern should be how to build a prosperous country. That was not all he said. He was also quoted as saying that the 1999 Constitution has prescribed how it can be changed and that attempts to change the law by other methods would be illegal. Having waited in vain for a whole week with the hope that the presidency will retract or correct the alleged statements, one is now free to believe that he was correctly quoted.
Let me declare some facts with which my locus standi on the issues raised by the president could be established. By God’s grace and through the auspices of the renown nationalist Chief Anthony Enahoro CFR, I was one of those Nigerians who participated in the Peoples National Conference of Pro-National Conference Organization (PRONACO) in 2004/2005. In fact, I served as its Secretary General and Chairman of its Committee on geo-political structure. PRONACO successfully produced an alternative constitution for Nigeria, far more suitable for the country’s plurality and designed to accommodate the heterogeneous nature of Nigeria in line with similar countries of the world. It must be noted that the subjects of constitution making and Sovereign National Conference are like Siamese twins as they are intricately interwoven. I suppose you now know why I could participate in the debate.
In the first place, no heterogeneous country on earth will ever go beyond a national conference of some sort - call it sovereign, independent or ethnic nationalities conference – until it has adopted a mutually agreeable formula of and for peaceful co-existence as a sovereign entity. Our ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and geo-graphical diversities are the sources of the divisive and centrifugal politics at play today. If past or pre-independence or post-independence constitutional conferences had succeeded and adequate, we would not be experiencing the intermittent ethno-religious and inter-regional combustion which now characterize our polity. It only means that past constitutions which culminated in the 1999 constitution have failed to reassure the federating units of Nigeria of their glorious destiny to which they aspire.
Secondly, the constitution is the fundamental law of any country to which all other laws are subject and subordinated, including the laws enacted by the Parliament. Therefore, it is dangerous for a multi-ethnic country such as Nigeria to delegate its constitution – making to an Assembly, the members of whose election were universally acclaimed to have been rigged. Beside, law-making as the business of the Parliament is different from Constitution making. It is a universal democratic practice to delegate the business of constitution making to a Constituent Assembly to make the fundamental law which law-makers will be elected to operate and adhere to. A mono-ethnic nation may concede constitution making to her law makers, since differences such as language; culture, ethnicity and religion are non-existent. Not a polygeny such as Nigeria!
More-over, all constitutional making process from independence to date has been flawed or disabled in that there were no equity or equality in participation; representation were more of artificial or arbitrary entities such as Regions or States than organic beings like ethnic nationalities. Even if we are to concede constitution-making to a select group of people, their product must be subjected to the views and choices of the populace through a referendum. Any Constitution that emerged from a referendum has obtained a democratic seal of approval or acceptance of the people. Which of the past constitutions up to 1999 passed this test? None!! And that is one of the reasons why the call for a national conference will not abate until one is held or the PNC of PRONACO is adopted. Again, there is no where in multi-ethnic countries where law-makers Assembly is a panacea to all constitutional problems. You now know why the call for a National Conference?
Through a national conference, ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and geographical grievances are tabled and thoroughly discussed and debated. Disagreements are subjected to the moral uprightness of participants and votes are taken to ascertain the voice of the majority; stalemates are resolved by consensus of give-and-take such that there are no walk-outs, until the conference ends. Whatever was agreed was the voice and choice of all which everyone is bound to believe in and defend. No one goes home with unresolved grievances or unanswered questions. This much I can testify of the PRONACO’s Peoples National Conference cum Constitution of 2005.
No good citizen has any problem with building a prosperous country; but they want to know what constitutes a prosperous country. The assumption that Nigeria has come far and had gone beyond constitutional talks is not based on realism. Those countries that have gone beyond talks are making waves in the economic, scientific and technological spheres of their national life. That we are still engaged in the battle of zoning is one pointer that rather than going beyond, we are going under into the precipice. Why pretend to have attained a height yet out of reach?
The Yoruba West detested undue interference in their regional affairs and vehemently fought it with ‘operation we tie’ from 1962 – 1966. The Tiv now of Benue State fought the same battle around the same time. From President Jonathan’s Niger Delta, Isaac Adaku Boro rebelled against unitarism in 1966, a fight which Ken Saro Wiwa continued with his pen and for which an amalgam of freedom fighters known as the Movement for Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) took up the gauntlet. The Igbo East kicked against domination and fought a three-year Civil War through the banner of Biafra to retain their ethnic national autonomy and their identity. The Hausa/Fulani of the North West loves an Islamic empire and have spinned innumerable riots and mayhem across the county, through the Maitatsine, Sharia, the Taliban, the Al-Queda to the Boko-Haram to drum it into our skull that they want their internal Islamic autonomy. The Middlebelt ethnic nationalities of Central Nigeria have resisted religious and cultural imposition and subjection since the 1950’s up till the recent Fulani invasion of Berom land. The Kanuri nation of Borno Kingdom in the North East wants to uphold their cultural and religious heritage by which they could be identified and respected. Has the 1999 Constitution granted all these? Eleven years of its operation has seen a huge harvest of discontent, disagreement and disintegration on a fast lane. Could anyone still say that we have gone beyond talks?
The reason for a National Conference is because Nigerians do not believe in the legitimacy of the National Assembly as elected, and from whom they withheld their mandate. In this case, what is needed is an All Ethnic Independent National Conference to resolve our constitutional incongruity, since the National Assembly and a Constituent Assembly may not co-exist! The purpose? To distil our differences into a collective and fundamental law known as the Constitution from which none shall have an excuse to dishonor. And to utilize our centripetal energy for the building of a true nation whose prosperity will be the business of all. The subsisting unitary constitution is a panel beater’s work and by the time amendments are made to it by the disabled law makers, what you have is an ugly rickety patchwork of no use to anyone; and by which no enduring prosperity or prosperous nation can ever be built!
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Electoral Act 2010: A Looming Legislative Robbery
Electoral Act 2010: A Looming Legislative Robbery
By Sam Onimisi
Unless there is an amendment of the Electoral Act 2010, the result of the 2011 general election and future elections would have been rigged before they are held. This is how and why. Section 87, sub-section 1-11 is the main problem I have with the electoral act. It stipulated that political parties seeking to nominate candidates for elections shall hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions. The obvious reasons for this provision are two: to ensure that all aspirants are given equal opportunity of being voted for by members of the Party; and to restore internal democracy within the political parties.
By the reason of the exploits of political god-fathers who often take delight in imposing their favoured acolytes on parties, and the consequent uproar and discord such impositions engendered, often leading to factionalization and instability, no one ordinarily should have any objection to this provision. But many are of the opinion that although god-fathers may be defeated through this law, money-bags would have been granted a blank cheque to underwrite the outcome of party primaries. More often than not, god-fathers doubles as moneybags and so, nothing will change as what is taken away from them by the right hand gets back to them through the left hand. So, where is the equal opportunity and what is the value of money-procured internal democracy? This leads us to the next question. What is the motive of the framers or the sponsors of this section of the law? Could it have been the freedom of choice of the party members and the electorate? Ostensibly so.
However, after an earnest study of the contextual framework of the National Assembly and the amendments to the Electoral Law, I am constrained to doubt the motive of the lawmakers and more inclined to believe that Section 87 as amended, is entirely a self-serving and an anti-democratic provisions inserted in the interest of the ruling party. You ask me why? The 2007 general election was acclaimed as the worst electoral heist ever in the history of this country and the culprits – Prof Maurice Iwu and his INEC and the beneficiaries (which includes most members of the National Assembly) never showed any repentance. They infact, did their worst to justify themselves through the manner they perverted subsequent bye-elections. And so, if they have an opportunity to make laws an election, won’t they do so with their self or party interest at heart? Have they ever regretted their action?
If we had prevented the National Assembly from amending the 2006 Electoral Act by reason of their aforesaid disability, perhaps we could have been saved from the quagmire we are saddled with. But how could we have done so? They are also amending the 1999 Constitution and there is no doubt that a lot of self-serving provisions will be inserted. How shall we react to it – knowing well that the effect will be worse on the polity? The entire project of amendment either to the Electoral Act or to the Constitution were deliberately delayed to deprive us the needed time to react or reject their proposed amendments before the next election were due. Those who are today insisting that May 29 is sacrosanct as the handing over date knew before now that there was a need to amend the 2006 Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution, didn’t they? What national emergency or disaster that prevented them from acting on time except selfish and party interests? Which left me with no option than to conclude that the amendments as contained in the Electoral Act 2010 are devoid of national interest and to that extent, are entirely otiose?
Now, let us look into the costs - the financial implementation of the Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2010. To conduct or hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions throughout the country is a gargantuan project which could be under taken by only a few political parties. If the secret motive is to limit access of participation by opposition parties, then it has been achieved ab ini tio! If the sinister motive is to restrain or constrain the growth of democracy, then it has been accomplished by these provisions of the Act. To conduct primaries to nominate thousands of councilors, hundreds of local council chairmen, thousands of state legislators, hundreds of candidates for the National Assembly, hundreds of governorship aspirants and perhaps scores of presidential candidates is so cost - prohibitive that the expected benefit – internal party democracy – pales into an exercise in delusion. Mark you, it doesn’t end in primaries. Congresses, conventions, special conventions and National Conventions must be held for the ratification of the candidates with the highest numbers of votes cast. Why must this process be adopted?
My submission is that the sponsors of the Bill had ulterior motive and were never interested in internal party democracy. They are interested only in the envisaged victory of the party in power and their assured return to the National Assembly. Except the PDP, and perhaps to some extent, the ANPP and the ACN, no other party has the financial resources to implement. Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2010. Meaning that 60 out of the 63 political parties will not be able to present candidates for all elective offices in 2011. The Anambra State bye-election of early this year where the PDP alone had over 30 aspirants for whom primaries were attempted; an exercise that the party couldn’t accomplish but ended up imposing a candidate, is a pointer to the utter confusion this section of the Electoral Act will generate.
Meanwhile, members of the National Assembly, the entirety of who are elected on the platform of the PDP, ANPP and ACN, have made so much money in the almost four years since their election in 2007; that they can underwrite the expenses of their primaries and defeat their challengers within their parties or opponents from other parties with no financial strain at all. What with their quarterly income package of N35 million per House member and N45 million per Senate member respectively. By April 2011 when election may be held, each House member would have earned N560 million as against the sum of N720 million per Senate members; and this means that for four legislative years, the 360 member of the House of Representatives would have earned N201.6 billion while the 109 Senators would have raked in some N78.5 billion – giving a total of N280.1 billion!! Am I not conservative in my estimation? Now hear Prof. Itse Sagay, a legal luminary and professor of law: “A Senator earns N240 million in salaries and allowances while his House of Representatives counterpart earns about N204 million per annum.” Compared to law-makers in the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain, we have the following picture:-
UK Parliamentarian - $102,000 = N14.28million per annum
US Senator - $174,000 = N24.36million per annum
Nigerian Senator - $1.7million = N240million per annum
So when you hear our legislators talking of ‘internal democracy’ or ‘equal opportunity’ for aspirants, these are the dummies sold to Nigerians to enable the 469 ‘honourables’ and ‘distinguished’ individuals secure return tickets to the National Assembly. Since this advantage is obtained by causa falsa, it is secured by fraud and it ought not to stand, unless and until legitimized through a referendum. Otherwise, it stands as legislative robbery! T-u-f-e-n-e-v-e!!
By Sam Onimisi
Unless there is an amendment of the Electoral Act 2010, the result of the 2011 general election and future elections would have been rigged before they are held. This is how and why. Section 87, sub-section 1-11 is the main problem I have with the electoral act. It stipulated that political parties seeking to nominate candidates for elections shall hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions. The obvious reasons for this provision are two: to ensure that all aspirants are given equal opportunity of being voted for by members of the Party; and to restore internal democracy within the political parties.
By the reason of the exploits of political god-fathers who often take delight in imposing their favoured acolytes on parties, and the consequent uproar and discord such impositions engendered, often leading to factionalization and instability, no one ordinarily should have any objection to this provision. But many are of the opinion that although god-fathers may be defeated through this law, money-bags would have been granted a blank cheque to underwrite the outcome of party primaries. More often than not, god-fathers doubles as moneybags and so, nothing will change as what is taken away from them by the right hand gets back to them through the left hand. So, where is the equal opportunity and what is the value of money-procured internal democracy? This leads us to the next question. What is the motive of the framers or the sponsors of this section of the law? Could it have been the freedom of choice of the party members and the electorate? Ostensibly so.
However, after an earnest study of the contextual framework of the National Assembly and the amendments to the Electoral Law, I am constrained to doubt the motive of the lawmakers and more inclined to believe that Section 87 as amended, is entirely a self-serving and an anti-democratic provisions inserted in the interest of the ruling party. You ask me why? The 2007 general election was acclaimed as the worst electoral heist ever in the history of this country and the culprits – Prof Maurice Iwu and his INEC and the beneficiaries (which includes most members of the National Assembly) never showed any repentance. They infact, did their worst to justify themselves through the manner they perverted subsequent bye-elections. And so, if they have an opportunity to make laws an election, won’t they do so with their self or party interest at heart? Have they ever regretted their action?
If we had prevented the National Assembly from amending the 2006 Electoral Act by reason of their aforesaid disability, perhaps we could have been saved from the quagmire we are saddled with. But how could we have done so? They are also amending the 1999 Constitution and there is no doubt that a lot of self-serving provisions will be inserted. How shall we react to it – knowing well that the effect will be worse on the polity? The entire project of amendment either to the Electoral Act or to the Constitution were deliberately delayed to deprive us the needed time to react or reject their proposed amendments before the next election were due. Those who are today insisting that May 29 is sacrosanct as the handing over date knew before now that there was a need to amend the 2006 Electoral Act and the 1999 Constitution, didn’t they? What national emergency or disaster that prevented them from acting on time except selfish and party interests? Which left me with no option than to conclude that the amendments as contained in the Electoral Act 2010 are devoid of national interest and to that extent, are entirely otiose?
Now, let us look into the costs - the financial implementation of the Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2010. To conduct or hold primaries for aspirants to all elective positions throughout the country is a gargantuan project which could be under taken by only a few political parties. If the secret motive is to limit access of participation by opposition parties, then it has been achieved ab ini tio! If the sinister motive is to restrain or constrain the growth of democracy, then it has been accomplished by these provisions of the Act. To conduct primaries to nominate thousands of councilors, hundreds of local council chairmen, thousands of state legislators, hundreds of candidates for the National Assembly, hundreds of governorship aspirants and perhaps scores of presidential candidates is so cost - prohibitive that the expected benefit – internal party democracy – pales into an exercise in delusion. Mark you, it doesn’t end in primaries. Congresses, conventions, special conventions and National Conventions must be held for the ratification of the candidates with the highest numbers of votes cast. Why must this process be adopted?
My submission is that the sponsors of the Bill had ulterior motive and were never interested in internal party democracy. They are interested only in the envisaged victory of the party in power and their assured return to the National Assembly. Except the PDP, and perhaps to some extent, the ANPP and the ACN, no other party has the financial resources to implement. Section 87 of the Electoral Act 2010. Meaning that 60 out of the 63 political parties will not be able to present candidates for all elective offices in 2011. The Anambra State bye-election of early this year where the PDP alone had over 30 aspirants for whom primaries were attempted; an exercise that the party couldn’t accomplish but ended up imposing a candidate, is a pointer to the utter confusion this section of the Electoral Act will generate.
Meanwhile, members of the National Assembly, the entirety of who are elected on the platform of the PDP, ANPP and ACN, have made so much money in the almost four years since their election in 2007; that they can underwrite the expenses of their primaries and defeat their challengers within their parties or opponents from other parties with no financial strain at all. What with their quarterly income package of N35 million per House member and N45 million per Senate member respectively. By April 2011 when election may be held, each House member would have earned N560 million as against the sum of N720 million per Senate members; and this means that for four legislative years, the 360 member of the House of Representatives would have earned N201.6 billion while the 109 Senators would have raked in some N78.5 billion – giving a total of N280.1 billion!! Am I not conservative in my estimation? Now hear Prof. Itse Sagay, a legal luminary and professor of law: “A Senator earns N240 million in salaries and allowances while his House of Representatives counterpart earns about N204 million per annum.” Compared to law-makers in the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain, we have the following picture:-
UK Parliamentarian - $102,000 = N14.28million per annum
US Senator - $174,000 = N24.36million per annum
Nigerian Senator - $1.7million = N240million per annum
So when you hear our legislators talking of ‘internal democracy’ or ‘equal opportunity’ for aspirants, these are the dummies sold to Nigerians to enable the 469 ‘honourables’ and ‘distinguished’ individuals secure return tickets to the National Assembly. Since this advantage is obtained by causa falsa, it is secured by fraud and it ought not to stand, unless and until legitimized through a referendum. Otherwise, it stands as legislative robbery! T-u-f-e-n-e-v-e!!
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Are we not all Tribalists
Are we not all Tribalists
By Mas Damisa
Until a research is conducted by whosoever will, I make bold to assert that Nigerians have the shortest memory among humans and if not then they are about the most presumptuous. I am as guilty as anyone else, and here is how. The person who named the country is herself not a Nigerian as no one was a Nigerian until she did so and though, no effort was made to obtain our consent yet, we all assumed that we are Nigerians. We assume that Nigeria is a nation and yet, Nigeria has no properties of nationhood. A nation is a people united by common descent, culture or language and inhabiting a particular territory or state. Does Nigeria answer to this description of a nation? A nation is not so called just because it is a sovereign state; and so any country whose only factor of nationhood is a common territory is only a pseudo-nation or at best, a geographical expression. Instead of one language, we have over 300, instead of one culture we have hundreds, instead of one territory, we have an amalgamated territory; rather than having common descent, we have hundreds. And so, where is the Nigerian nation? The lingua franca of English is a borrowed or rather, an imposed language, and not one of our own. What do you call a so-called nation which is not united by common descent, culture and a native language common to it? Are we not more known abroad as Nigerians and by foreigners? When twenty Nigerians from twenty ethnic groups meets in London, with what language do they communicate? If they communicate in English, are they Englanders or Londoners? These twenty Nigerians are neither united in Nigeria nor in London as they have nothing in common except their humanity. When they arrive Nigeria, they will continue their communication in English devoid of any feature of commonality. Which is why Nigerians have little or no sense of nationalism and with very few nationalists?
All calls to patriotism is hollow as we don’t have a nation to pledge loyalty to. So all pretends at patriotism to Nigeria is empty and has no basis. Is that not why public office holders pays little or no regard to their oath of allegiance? We have a geographical space that accommodates all of us, that is all there is about Nigeria; and we were forced to remain together not by necessity or by choice but by brute force. That force was reinforced by the Civil War, which has failed woefully to unite us a nation. We live a lie as a nation but exist in reality as a country where everyone clings to his ethnic nationality although we make it an article of faith to deny it. And we carried this denial to the ridiculous level of refusing to mention or show case our ethnic nationalities in our Constitution.
Again, the Constitution we claim to be our own is not ours as no one saw it before it was imposed on us in 1999. Even now, there is supposed to be an on-going process of amendments to the Constitution. But making laws is one thing, making a Constitution is another. A Constituent Assembly is superior to and different from a Legislature in the business of constitution making. Those pretending to represent us at the National Assembly at the moment are products of a deeply flawed election and are therefore holding on to an illegitimate mandate. If the mandate is illegitimate, then all laws or amendments made are not derived from our consent and so, are worse than illegality. Any wonder why public functionaries obeyed our Constitution more in the breech than in adherence.
The hundreds of ethnic nationalities which our Constitution refused to recognize or accommodate are superior to the artificial and arbitrary States and Local Councils listed in the 1999 Constitution. A ethnic nation is a group of people having a common national or cultural tradition and denoting origin by birth or descent rather than by present nation-state. Rather than these ethnic nationalities being the building blocks and serving as the Federating Units of the country, we created structures called states which lack the ingredients of a state. It is amusing therefore to hear one Nigerian calling another ethnic bigot or a tribalist, or a Nigerian claiming to be detribalized. Yet, there is no Nigerian who is not from one tribe or ethnic group or the other, but they all pretend about it even though it exudes all they do or stand for in practical terms.
A tribe is a social division in a traditional society, consisting of related or linked families or communities with a common culture and dialect. It is not a crime to own up to your tribe and how do you commit crime of a tribalist in a country that lacks nationhood? Do you now see when one tribal jingoist is calling another an ethnic bigot, all there is to do is laugh your heart out? We are all tribal and ethnic citizens in the polygeny called Nigeria and we should stop pretending about it! Some people pretend that they are higher and above their ethnic nations yet add no value to the country in any shape or form. Why? Because his assumed high culture has found no application or expression except in the small circle of his tribesmen.
The 36 states as they exist lacks a common culture and in many cases, lacks a common language. Yet the ethnic nationalities has their distinct culture and language; they have distinct customs, institutions and achievement and many are numerically strong enough to be entirely independent if they so choose. The trouble with Nigeria which expresses itself in our political interplay is that we have involuntarily been forced to bury our differences without first of all, creating mutually acceptable alternative to fill the vacuum. The ethnic nations and tribes have refused to vanish because we have had no viable replacement. Our languages have refused to die because English is not our language and therefore is not an alternative. As English – Nigerians, we are neither here nor there. No one respects you just because you speak English. If you are Nigerian, what is your language? We have refused to turn what looks like a liability now into an asset. Our diversities that would have been a source of strength have become a deathly weakness. All ethnic nations are territorial as well but here in Nigeria, ownership of land is transferred to the state, leaving the land owners suspended in the air.
What can we do to build a nation to which we can belong, or to be loyal and patriotic to the country? How do we get united inspite of our different tongues and tribes? Why are we afraid to discuss and examine our differences? Kindly answer these questions before you call me or the next person a tribalist. For now, are we not all tribalists?
By Mas Damisa
Until a research is conducted by whosoever will, I make bold to assert that Nigerians have the shortest memory among humans and if not then they are about the most presumptuous. I am as guilty as anyone else, and here is how. The person who named the country is herself not a Nigerian as no one was a Nigerian until she did so and though, no effort was made to obtain our consent yet, we all assumed that we are Nigerians. We assume that Nigeria is a nation and yet, Nigeria has no properties of nationhood. A nation is a people united by common descent, culture or language and inhabiting a particular territory or state. Does Nigeria answer to this description of a nation? A nation is not so called just because it is a sovereign state; and so any country whose only factor of nationhood is a common territory is only a pseudo-nation or at best, a geographical expression. Instead of one language, we have over 300, instead of one culture we have hundreds, instead of one territory, we have an amalgamated territory; rather than having common descent, we have hundreds. And so, where is the Nigerian nation? The lingua franca of English is a borrowed or rather, an imposed language, and not one of our own. What do you call a so-called nation which is not united by common descent, culture and a native language common to it? Are we not more known abroad as Nigerians and by foreigners? When twenty Nigerians from twenty ethnic groups meets in London, with what language do they communicate? If they communicate in English, are they Englanders or Londoners? These twenty Nigerians are neither united in Nigeria nor in London as they have nothing in common except their humanity. When they arrive Nigeria, they will continue their communication in English devoid of any feature of commonality. Which is why Nigerians have little or no sense of nationalism and with very few nationalists?
All calls to patriotism is hollow as we don’t have a nation to pledge loyalty to. So all pretends at patriotism to Nigeria is empty and has no basis. Is that not why public office holders pays little or no regard to their oath of allegiance? We have a geographical space that accommodates all of us, that is all there is about Nigeria; and we were forced to remain together not by necessity or by choice but by brute force. That force was reinforced by the Civil War, which has failed woefully to unite us a nation. We live a lie as a nation but exist in reality as a country where everyone clings to his ethnic nationality although we make it an article of faith to deny it. And we carried this denial to the ridiculous level of refusing to mention or show case our ethnic nationalities in our Constitution.
Again, the Constitution we claim to be our own is not ours as no one saw it before it was imposed on us in 1999. Even now, there is supposed to be an on-going process of amendments to the Constitution. But making laws is one thing, making a Constitution is another. A Constituent Assembly is superior to and different from a Legislature in the business of constitution making. Those pretending to represent us at the National Assembly at the moment are products of a deeply flawed election and are therefore holding on to an illegitimate mandate. If the mandate is illegitimate, then all laws or amendments made are not derived from our consent and so, are worse than illegality. Any wonder why public functionaries obeyed our Constitution more in the breech than in adherence.
The hundreds of ethnic nationalities which our Constitution refused to recognize or accommodate are superior to the artificial and arbitrary States and Local Councils listed in the 1999 Constitution. A ethnic nation is a group of people having a common national or cultural tradition and denoting origin by birth or descent rather than by present nation-state. Rather than these ethnic nationalities being the building blocks and serving as the Federating Units of the country, we created structures called states which lack the ingredients of a state. It is amusing therefore to hear one Nigerian calling another ethnic bigot or a tribalist, or a Nigerian claiming to be detribalized. Yet, there is no Nigerian who is not from one tribe or ethnic group or the other, but they all pretend about it even though it exudes all they do or stand for in practical terms.
A tribe is a social division in a traditional society, consisting of related or linked families or communities with a common culture and dialect. It is not a crime to own up to your tribe and how do you commit crime of a tribalist in a country that lacks nationhood? Do you now see when one tribal jingoist is calling another an ethnic bigot, all there is to do is laugh your heart out? We are all tribal and ethnic citizens in the polygeny called Nigeria and we should stop pretending about it! Some people pretend that they are higher and above their ethnic nations yet add no value to the country in any shape or form. Why? Because his assumed high culture has found no application or expression except in the small circle of his tribesmen.
The 36 states as they exist lacks a common culture and in many cases, lacks a common language. Yet the ethnic nationalities has their distinct culture and language; they have distinct customs, institutions and achievement and many are numerically strong enough to be entirely independent if they so choose. The trouble with Nigeria which expresses itself in our political interplay is that we have involuntarily been forced to bury our differences without first of all, creating mutually acceptable alternative to fill the vacuum. The ethnic nations and tribes have refused to vanish because we have had no viable replacement. Our languages have refused to die because English is not our language and therefore is not an alternative. As English – Nigerians, we are neither here nor there. No one respects you just because you speak English. If you are Nigerian, what is your language? We have refused to turn what looks like a liability now into an asset. Our diversities that would have been a source of strength have become a deathly weakness. All ethnic nations are territorial as well but here in Nigeria, ownership of land is transferred to the state, leaving the land owners suspended in the air.
What can we do to build a nation to which we can belong, or to be loyal and patriotic to the country? How do we get united inspite of our different tongues and tribes? Why are we afraid to discuss and examine our differences? Kindly answer these questions before you call me or the next person a tribalist. For now, are we not all tribalists?
Saturday, October 16, 2010
33 Chilean Miners in Nigeria?
33 Chilean Miners in Nigeria?
By Sam Onimisi
The resilience and political strength of a country could be measured by their response to a natural disaster or at a period of a national emergency. And the type of response by the leaders elicit similar response from the populace. In fact, it is during such adverse periods that the virtues of leadership are made fully manifest and its quality truly exposed or laid bare. The South American Country of Chile had the misfortune of a mining accident which submerged 33 miners for 69 days. In ordinary circumstances of a third world country, those unfortunate miners should be considered dead. For one thing, that accident was a peculiar one in which the gold miners of Chile had no experience. For another, Chile is not known for her technological advancement that could be relied upon to respond to the extraordinary situation at hand.
There were apparently two choices before the authorities in Chile. They had the option to seek for help from advanced countries such as the United States or any Western European Countries to rescue the miners. They could also had given up on the helpless miners and tagged the accident as the will and an act of God over which mortals have no say. And the poor miners could have perished; perhaps the 33 could have died one after the other until they all perish. But the Chilean political and industrial leaders rose up to the occasion. Their president assembled the best of Chilean technologists and mining experts who devised means of keeping the trapped miners alive, healthy, cheerful and hopeful while designing the best method and means of rescuing them from the bottomless pit, as it were. Within 60 days or so, a capsule was designed which could go down to the pit to pick one miner at a time at a rate of one miner per hour. And in 33 hours, all the miners were rescued alive. The story is well told by most news and broadcasting media world wide.
Now the political and technological profile of Chile went up several notches higher than hitherto. The whole of Chile is celebrating the achievement as a family, with everyone supporting every efforts made by government in the process. Today, Chile emerged from the disaster a more cohesive, united and stronger nation the world is bound to respect and honour. No one accused the employers of those miners of any crime. The victims were not blamed for negligence either. The authorities did not resign to fate and God was not left alone to come down and save the miners. There were no high sounding but hollow promises by government officials. The people of Chile were spared the embarrassing charade of shameless officials sounding off and teaching us what ought to have been done but which was not done. No brash and thoughtless orders were issued with immediate effect by authorities. No mining company was closed down and no scapegoats were made. Neither the Police nor the armies were seen harassing the people for causing the accident. Opposition parties in Chile viewed the accident in the same way as the ruling party viewed it. All that everyone was concerned with was how to rescue the trapped miners and they achieved just that. They called upon God but put their brains to work for the physical salvation of their fellow Chileans. To keep 33 miners alive for 69 days and get them rescued without a single casualty from a mining pit of over 500 meters underground is a feat unparalleled in the annals of mining industry world wide. All hail C-h-i-l-e !.
Here in Nigeria, a man-made disaster happened on October 1, 2010. A group of cowards employed some street urchins who planted bombs in two cars and smoked life out of 12 innocent Nigerians during a festive day. Scores of citizens were wounded in addition to several cars that were completely damaged. Rather than the whole country mourning the dead and united to fetch out and deal with the culprits according to the law, governance was paralyzed as leaders began to trade blames on security lapses and incompetence. Partisan political brickbats were immediately deployed to rubbish the Presidency, demean the country as a pack of hungry and blood thirsty hounds in a wilderness and those who basked on being addressed as elder-statesmen suddenly sank to the level of juvenile delinquents. Some called on the president to resign immediately while others accused him of playing with the destiny and peace of the country. None of them has any idea or proffered any of what to do. The victims mattered so little before these leaders and all that seemed to bother them was how to convert the unfortunate and tragic incident into an opportunity to showcase their supremacy of experience over and above the president. Of course, a natural disaster such as the one in Chile is not the same as the man-made terrorist activities and politically motivated bomb blasts in Nigeria. The only common ground is that both incidents are national emergencies which involved threats to and actual loss of lives - in the case of Nigeria. But why the difference in the reaction of leaders in the two countries?
Ours is a country of many nationalities without any agreement on integration into one nationality. As our tribes, tongues and cultures differs, so our world view on most issues of concern; all of which goes to define our divergent approach to matters of common interest. Our response to the 1 October bomb blasts reflects our differences but these differences are often denied by our leaders for selfish and exploitative purposes. Whenever it is suggested that all ethnic nations should come together to discuss and agree on terms of co-habitation as common citizens, such protagonists were labeled as tribalists. Yet, the tribalist in our leaders gets exposed when in times of national emergency, most of them races back to take refuge in their various ethnic groups, which is somehow more secure and reassuring than the pseudo nation called Nigeria. No single leader invests the same faith in Nigeria as he/she invests in his ethnic nationality. Which is why they could not speak with one voice when the country finds herself in troubled waters. Were the 33 miners to be Nigerians, all we could have done was to pray for the repose of their souls since they were already buried alive; we would then assume that it was the will of God or Allah that they translate into heaven or al-Janah with their eyes wide open in consciousness. At least, our Pastors and Imams would have found a spiritual consolation to explain why we must allow the 33 to rest in perfect peace, deep down in the pit. Is our faith in Nigeria not defined by and depends on our share of the oil income from the Federation Accounts? Does it mean that if the witch called petroleum dries today, the boy called Nigeria will die tomorrow? I am sure your own answer will be more correct than mine.
By Sam Onimisi
The resilience and political strength of a country could be measured by their response to a natural disaster or at a period of a national emergency. And the type of response by the leaders elicit similar response from the populace. In fact, it is during such adverse periods that the virtues of leadership are made fully manifest and its quality truly exposed or laid bare. The South American Country of Chile had the misfortune of a mining accident which submerged 33 miners for 69 days. In ordinary circumstances of a third world country, those unfortunate miners should be considered dead. For one thing, that accident was a peculiar one in which the gold miners of Chile had no experience. For another, Chile is not known for her technological advancement that could be relied upon to respond to the extraordinary situation at hand.
There were apparently two choices before the authorities in Chile. They had the option to seek for help from advanced countries such as the United States or any Western European Countries to rescue the miners. They could also had given up on the helpless miners and tagged the accident as the will and an act of God over which mortals have no say. And the poor miners could have perished; perhaps the 33 could have died one after the other until they all perish. But the Chilean political and industrial leaders rose up to the occasion. Their president assembled the best of Chilean technologists and mining experts who devised means of keeping the trapped miners alive, healthy, cheerful and hopeful while designing the best method and means of rescuing them from the bottomless pit, as it were. Within 60 days or so, a capsule was designed which could go down to the pit to pick one miner at a time at a rate of one miner per hour. And in 33 hours, all the miners were rescued alive. The story is well told by most news and broadcasting media world wide.
Now the political and technological profile of Chile went up several notches higher than hitherto. The whole of Chile is celebrating the achievement as a family, with everyone supporting every efforts made by government in the process. Today, Chile emerged from the disaster a more cohesive, united and stronger nation the world is bound to respect and honour. No one accused the employers of those miners of any crime. The victims were not blamed for negligence either. The authorities did not resign to fate and God was not left alone to come down and save the miners. There were no high sounding but hollow promises by government officials. The people of Chile were spared the embarrassing charade of shameless officials sounding off and teaching us what ought to have been done but which was not done. No brash and thoughtless orders were issued with immediate effect by authorities. No mining company was closed down and no scapegoats were made. Neither the Police nor the armies were seen harassing the people for causing the accident. Opposition parties in Chile viewed the accident in the same way as the ruling party viewed it. All that everyone was concerned with was how to rescue the trapped miners and they achieved just that. They called upon God but put their brains to work for the physical salvation of their fellow Chileans. To keep 33 miners alive for 69 days and get them rescued without a single casualty from a mining pit of over 500 meters underground is a feat unparalleled in the annals of mining industry world wide. All hail C-h-i-l-e !.
Here in Nigeria, a man-made disaster happened on October 1, 2010. A group of cowards employed some street urchins who planted bombs in two cars and smoked life out of 12 innocent Nigerians during a festive day. Scores of citizens were wounded in addition to several cars that were completely damaged. Rather than the whole country mourning the dead and united to fetch out and deal with the culprits according to the law, governance was paralyzed as leaders began to trade blames on security lapses and incompetence. Partisan political brickbats were immediately deployed to rubbish the Presidency, demean the country as a pack of hungry and blood thirsty hounds in a wilderness and those who basked on being addressed as elder-statesmen suddenly sank to the level of juvenile delinquents. Some called on the president to resign immediately while others accused him of playing with the destiny and peace of the country. None of them has any idea or proffered any of what to do. The victims mattered so little before these leaders and all that seemed to bother them was how to convert the unfortunate and tragic incident into an opportunity to showcase their supremacy of experience over and above the president. Of course, a natural disaster such as the one in Chile is not the same as the man-made terrorist activities and politically motivated bomb blasts in Nigeria. The only common ground is that both incidents are national emergencies which involved threats to and actual loss of lives - in the case of Nigeria. But why the difference in the reaction of leaders in the two countries?
Ours is a country of many nationalities without any agreement on integration into one nationality. As our tribes, tongues and cultures differs, so our world view on most issues of concern; all of which goes to define our divergent approach to matters of common interest. Our response to the 1 October bomb blasts reflects our differences but these differences are often denied by our leaders for selfish and exploitative purposes. Whenever it is suggested that all ethnic nations should come together to discuss and agree on terms of co-habitation as common citizens, such protagonists were labeled as tribalists. Yet, the tribalist in our leaders gets exposed when in times of national emergency, most of them races back to take refuge in their various ethnic groups, which is somehow more secure and reassuring than the pseudo nation called Nigeria. No single leader invests the same faith in Nigeria as he/she invests in his ethnic nationality. Which is why they could not speak with one voice when the country finds herself in troubled waters. Were the 33 miners to be Nigerians, all we could have done was to pray for the repose of their souls since they were already buried alive; we would then assume that it was the will of God or Allah that they translate into heaven or al-Janah with their eyes wide open in consciousness. At least, our Pastors and Imams would have found a spiritual consolation to explain why we must allow the 33 to rest in perfect peace, deep down in the pit. Is our faith in Nigeria not defined by and depends on our share of the oil income from the Federation Accounts? Does it mean that if the witch called petroleum dries today, the boy called Nigeria will die tomorrow? I am sure your own answer will be more correct than mine.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
MEND’s Mendacious Claims
MEND’s Mendacious Claims
By Sam Onimisi
Mr. Henry Okah, the self-proclaimed leader of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) has claimed responsibility for the October 1, 2010 bombing of Abuja. He also claimed that the President, Goodluck Jonathan, through a presidential aide, urged him to declare that Northern political figures were behind the blasts. Beyond the claims of Henry Okah and the denials of the Presidency, Nigerians must dig deep to know the brains behind the blast and their motives. We must nut allow the political class alone to do the claims and counter claims, or else the truth may never be known.
If Henry Okah is resident at far away South Africa, how was he connected to the bomb blasts in Abuja? Is Okah a fugitive or a businessman? What is his residency status in that Country? If he was a part of the amnesty plan of the late President Yar’ Adua, at what point did he fall out? Is he in position to control or command a militia while domiciled abroad? Who are his foot soldiers in Nigeria and how does he communicate with them? Why did Okah choose a faceless interview with Aljazeera TV instead of a video taped one, given the wide reach of the Arabian broad-casting network? Perhaps we should leave these questions for the security agencies handling the investigation. But can we afford to overlook the political implication and consequence of the blasts? In my humble view, we cannot and should not, if only to establish the truth and for the sake of a peaceful polity.
Now, we all know that since the implementation of the amnesty programme began, the Niger Delta has been relatively peaceful, except for isolated skirmishes which are normal in the aftermath of war and disorder. We also know that the skirmishes were confined to Niger Delta and between the various militant groups. Given the successful rehabilitation of the first batches of the militants, there seems to be no reason why MEND would want to revive the fight, and escalate it to Abuja. Even at the heat of the crisis between 2007 and 2009, Henry Okah was not a significant force in the struggle, except as arms supplier. I mean to say that he was not one of the commanders of MEND.
What is possible or discernible is that Henry Okah may have become jobless since the cessation of the crisis. Since no one has any more use for his weapons, his gun running enterprise has dried up, or so it seems. It is also possible that as an arms merchant, patronage for his business has dwindled and profits has also nosedived and so, he could no longer support his life of luxury and opulence. Meaning that if he wants to continue to maintain his high taste for comfort, he is a willing candidate for hire by those who wants political power by all means. Together, they (I mean Henry and his patrons) could easily assemble some malcontents who would assume the pseudonym and nomenclature of MEND. In this case, Henry Okah may actually be the foreign-based agent of a group based in Nigeria whose primary aim is to intimidate the rest of us to surrender power to them – with little or no contest.
If that is the case, it is futile to blame President Jonathan either for sponsoring the terrorists and even idiotic for calling him a spokesman of the terrorists. This is because the President is bent on contesting for power and has made it public. He could not, in the wildest of imagination assemble terrorists to disrupt the electoral process in which he is a beneficiary. That he rushed to exonerate MEND may be an indiscretion or a product of his vast knowledge of the characters in the Niger Delta struggle and the security facts at his disposal or both. Until the bomb blasts, there were two running security breaches for which Hausa/Fulani Islamic militants were responsible: the Jos ethno-religious massacre and the Boko Haram heinous activities in the North East/North West axis. It is remarkable that the Northern G-15 never saw an opportunity to ask the Governors of those zones to resign, except that they wanted a state of emergency declared in Plateau State, they were completely silent on the Boko Haramites’ terrorism. So, if Henry Okah is to be held out as a Niger Deltan who doesn’t want Jonathan to run for the Presidency, his opponents in the race has the Boko Haram and Jos massacre as their disqualification. The October 1 bomb blasts may very well be an extension of the zoning war of the PDP in which one side decided to take the fight to his opponents –using familiar but fake tools for disguise!
I am reminded that some months ago, we had a ‘Cabal’ in the Federal Executive Council that held Nigeria captive to their group interest, using the illness of our late President as a shield. I have also not forgotten as you remember, that a faceless voice was video-taped by BBC who was purported to be the voice of our President but whose face was meant to be a forbidden sight to behold. May be a new MEND of the Cabal felt that if BBC with its world acclaimed reputation was discredited and disgraced by the purported Yar’Adua interview, a different channel with near similar reputation such as Aljazeera TV should be used for the supposed Henry Okah’s faceless interview. E-e-m-m-m, do you understand? Of course, Dokpesis’s A.I.T. also have a world-wide reach as Aljazeera. When I asked why they did not fetch out Henry Okah for the interview, then I was reminded why N.T.A was not used for the infamous Yar’Adua audio-video interview. I s-e-e!!
In a recent Press statement by the Presidential Campaign Organization of Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, Alh, Atiku Abubakar, Gen. Aliyu Gusau and Dr. Abubakar Saraki, the quartet recalled that on 1st September 2010 (exactly one month to the bomb blasts), Dr. Dokpesi’ had raised alarm that attempts will be made on his own life, among other allegations. Fortunately or unfortunately, the bomb blasts could not locate Dokpesi as he was not anywhere near the scene of the blasts. But if High Chief Dokpesi had a premonition of attempts on his own life, is the lives of other Nigerians not worth the effort of A.I.T. to have sought out Henry Okah for a video interview? Or is it that his alarm was a red-herring as a camouflage for what he knew was to come? You see, questions are loaded with answers and there may be as many answers as there are respondents. Whoever arranged the controversial Yar’Adua audio-video BBC interview could also have arranged the Henry Okah audio-video Aljazeera interview. If the arrangers are not the same, it is not for you and me to tell. I suppose that job belongs to the investigating authorities. All we care for is that the mendacious claims of MEND must be verified and the instigators visited with appropriate punishment as a deterrent.
By Sam Onimisi
Mr. Henry Okah, the self-proclaimed leader of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) has claimed responsibility for the October 1, 2010 bombing of Abuja. He also claimed that the President, Goodluck Jonathan, through a presidential aide, urged him to declare that Northern political figures were behind the blasts. Beyond the claims of Henry Okah and the denials of the Presidency, Nigerians must dig deep to know the brains behind the blast and their motives. We must nut allow the political class alone to do the claims and counter claims, or else the truth may never be known.
If Henry Okah is resident at far away South Africa, how was he connected to the bomb blasts in Abuja? Is Okah a fugitive or a businessman? What is his residency status in that Country? If he was a part of the amnesty plan of the late President Yar’ Adua, at what point did he fall out? Is he in position to control or command a militia while domiciled abroad? Who are his foot soldiers in Nigeria and how does he communicate with them? Why did Okah choose a faceless interview with Aljazeera TV instead of a video taped one, given the wide reach of the Arabian broad-casting network? Perhaps we should leave these questions for the security agencies handling the investigation. But can we afford to overlook the political implication and consequence of the blasts? In my humble view, we cannot and should not, if only to establish the truth and for the sake of a peaceful polity.
Now, we all know that since the implementation of the amnesty programme began, the Niger Delta has been relatively peaceful, except for isolated skirmishes which are normal in the aftermath of war and disorder. We also know that the skirmishes were confined to Niger Delta and between the various militant groups. Given the successful rehabilitation of the first batches of the militants, there seems to be no reason why MEND would want to revive the fight, and escalate it to Abuja. Even at the heat of the crisis between 2007 and 2009, Henry Okah was not a significant force in the struggle, except as arms supplier. I mean to say that he was not one of the commanders of MEND.
What is possible or discernible is that Henry Okah may have become jobless since the cessation of the crisis. Since no one has any more use for his weapons, his gun running enterprise has dried up, or so it seems. It is also possible that as an arms merchant, patronage for his business has dwindled and profits has also nosedived and so, he could no longer support his life of luxury and opulence. Meaning that if he wants to continue to maintain his high taste for comfort, he is a willing candidate for hire by those who wants political power by all means. Together, they (I mean Henry and his patrons) could easily assemble some malcontents who would assume the pseudonym and nomenclature of MEND. In this case, Henry Okah may actually be the foreign-based agent of a group based in Nigeria whose primary aim is to intimidate the rest of us to surrender power to them – with little or no contest.
If that is the case, it is futile to blame President Jonathan either for sponsoring the terrorists and even idiotic for calling him a spokesman of the terrorists. This is because the President is bent on contesting for power and has made it public. He could not, in the wildest of imagination assemble terrorists to disrupt the electoral process in which he is a beneficiary. That he rushed to exonerate MEND may be an indiscretion or a product of his vast knowledge of the characters in the Niger Delta struggle and the security facts at his disposal or both. Until the bomb blasts, there were two running security breaches for which Hausa/Fulani Islamic militants were responsible: the Jos ethno-religious massacre and the Boko Haram heinous activities in the North East/North West axis. It is remarkable that the Northern G-15 never saw an opportunity to ask the Governors of those zones to resign, except that they wanted a state of emergency declared in Plateau State, they were completely silent on the Boko Haramites’ terrorism. So, if Henry Okah is to be held out as a Niger Deltan who doesn’t want Jonathan to run for the Presidency, his opponents in the race has the Boko Haram and Jos massacre as their disqualification. The October 1 bomb blasts may very well be an extension of the zoning war of the PDP in which one side decided to take the fight to his opponents –using familiar but fake tools for disguise!
I am reminded that some months ago, we had a ‘Cabal’ in the Federal Executive Council that held Nigeria captive to their group interest, using the illness of our late President as a shield. I have also not forgotten as you remember, that a faceless voice was video-taped by BBC who was purported to be the voice of our President but whose face was meant to be a forbidden sight to behold. May be a new MEND of the Cabal felt that if BBC with its world acclaimed reputation was discredited and disgraced by the purported Yar’Adua interview, a different channel with near similar reputation such as Aljazeera TV should be used for the supposed Henry Okah’s faceless interview. E-e-m-m-m, do you understand? Of course, Dokpesis’s A.I.T. also have a world-wide reach as Aljazeera. When I asked why they did not fetch out Henry Okah for the interview, then I was reminded why N.T.A was not used for the infamous Yar’Adua audio-video interview. I s-e-e!!
In a recent Press statement by the Presidential Campaign Organization of Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, Alh, Atiku Abubakar, Gen. Aliyu Gusau and Dr. Abubakar Saraki, the quartet recalled that on 1st September 2010 (exactly one month to the bomb blasts), Dr. Dokpesi’ had raised alarm that attempts will be made on his own life, among other allegations. Fortunately or unfortunately, the bomb blasts could not locate Dokpesi as he was not anywhere near the scene of the blasts. But if High Chief Dokpesi had a premonition of attempts on his own life, is the lives of other Nigerians not worth the effort of A.I.T. to have sought out Henry Okah for a video interview? Or is it that his alarm was a red-herring as a camouflage for what he knew was to come? You see, questions are loaded with answers and there may be as many answers as there are respondents. Whoever arranged the controversial Yar’Adua audio-video BBC interview could also have arranged the Henry Okah audio-video Aljazeera interview. If the arrangers are not the same, it is not for you and me to tell. I suppose that job belongs to the investigating authorities. All we care for is that the mendacious claims of MEND must be verified and the instigators visited with appropriate punishment as a deterrent.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Mother as the Breadwinner
Mother as the Breadwinner
By Victoria Egberipou
The moment a woman gets married to a man, she gets married to the entire family of her husband – to a large extent, to the extended family. So is the African tradition, so is the practice and held to a high esteem. On the part of the man too, the same applies. The woman’s family- parents, siblings and extended relatives now share same relationship with their son in-law as they have with their daughter.
As soon as a marriage is contracted between two people the family responsibilities become a shared one between the couple. These responsibilities sometimes are not only those within the immediate family but could also include those from the parents in-laws, siblings of both or either parties. It could be very overwhelming sometimes with the prevailing trend of the dwindling economy and this on the whole tells on the general welfare of the family.
Be that as it may, I do not intend to dwell on these general effects it could have on the family or the man who ordinarily is expected to bear the brunt of these demands on the family resources. I have rather chosen to look at a situation where the woman is the breadwinner in the family.
Now, what do we mean by the word “Breadwinner”.
I could define a “Breadwinner” to mean that person in the small group or in a family who takes the responsibility of providing financial support both in small and great measure to all other members of the group or of the family.
The Oxford Advanced Leaner’s Dictionary defines “Breadwinner” thus; “A person who supports their family with the money they earn”.
Here we want to consider the woman, the mother or the wife as the Breadwinner. You will agree with me that the woman is actually responsible for adding all the beauty, warmth the laughs and the building of a home. Without her the home is not complete. God made it so, it all takes great understanding, determination and maturity which comes gradually with her daily experiences to help her bring in that beauty and warmth. God has made her naturally or divinely a homemaker, an encourager, confidant, mother and supporter to her husband and children. Thus, fulfilling God’s design and desire for her life as a woman. But sometimes in addition to all of these, she finds herself to be the “Breadwinner” in her family.
Some women carry out these responsibilities and see it as great burden and suffer self pity, anger and sometimes degenerate to total disregard for her husband and his family. These groups of women are those who would have the resources but bluntly refuse to be generous to her family. This is because she feels the man has not made enough efforts, too choosy with jobs, not making efforts at all or has ill-luck with getting employed. Thus she would not give him any comfort. Well, this is not our major area of focus for now.
The situation is different where the woman sees herself as being destined to carry the bulk of the responsibility of catering for the family and taking over the duties of the man. This category of women find fulfillment in surrendering all she has in order to make her family happy including her husband. She sees it as service to humanity within and with all her resources.
An important questions here before going further is, why would a woman become the Breadwinner to her family?
Some of the reasons for a woman or mother becoming the Breadwinner in her family are; where the man loses his job or never had one, as a result of failed business ventures, failed health or accident which could result in temporary or permanent disability, death, or separation - thus single parenting. When a man is no longer able to provide for his family financially, the feeling of inadequacy and frustration sets in, the man feels as if his manhood is in question. He loses confidence that he might no longer have grip over his family and “ceases” to be the head of his family.
Our concern is on the woman who now assumes the position of the “head of the family”. So, to the woman who never foresaw or bargained for these conditions naturally sometimes “looses” her joy, feels frustrated and helpless even though most women try to pretend to the world that everything is alright. This could be a helpless situation whereby if care is not taken she really gets out of touch with herself emotionally, spiritually, psychologically, giving room for heated argument in the home over trivial issues, increasing stress both for herself, the husband, the dependants and the children.
It might be of interest to know that from chats with a few mothers who had at one time or the other found themselves in this kind of situation, some did not see it as a pride that they are carrying the family responsibilities and well able to cope with the resources available to them. They also understand that if the man is able to provide for the family needs, it only makes for better welfare for the family and possibly makes room for investments. These women feel the pain that the man feels, the feeling of lack of fulfillment, the incompleteness because the man feels incomplete.
These women hardly express these feelings verbally but all the same, it is there. They silently bear the pain of not being able to give the children the best of education, live in better accommodation, possibly own a house of their own and have good mobility, and the list of desires is endless. They are more tolerant, matured, persevere, and I personally choose to call these ones “women of faith”.
Considering the different temperament, we are aware of those who naturally would not tolerate seeing the man not able to carry out his duties of providing for his family. These women do their best at working hard and meeting the needs of the husband and the children but they lack self-control.
Part of the reasons why women in the later group would behave the way they do is as a result of the perception of her husband family concerning her predicaments.
They find it difficult to believe that their son is financially handicapped. They would accuse the woman of having taken over their son’s attention. Her in-laws sometimes pretend not to know the contributions of the woman, talk more of bearing the entire burden. She is not shown any appreciation – thus she feels the pains. The prayers encouragement and other support she gets come from her own family, they appreciate her and her effort and would rather not bother her with any additional liabilities if they could. They encourage her to be submissive to her husband and to use whatever abilities, resources and privileges God has given her, for the benefit of her children and husband.
Anyhow we assess the whole scenario, it should be known that when a man steps up to take the lead in his family in terms of providing for them, the wife supports him and each falls into their roles and there is harmony.
Everyone, man or woman should always remember that the foundation of the two people counts. One would want to point out that with true love being the sole reason for the union and not material possession, hasty decisions, or attractive financial status of either of them, then the story would be different.
From the standpoint of a wife, mother and once a breadwinner, I would say it is actually a very difficult and trying time for any woman. But whoever finds herself in this situation should know that it does not last forever. The more you make yourself and remain a source of encouragement to your spouse, the higher his hopes and you should expect more love.
In conclusion, make sure to recognize the enormous blow this predicament has on your husband’s ego. Reassuring him of your love for him is healing. Always look at the brighter side in every challenge in life. Take it in good faith and see it as God’s opportunity of drawing us closer to himself. See God’s hand in any or every situation you find yourself in, and He will see you through.
By Victoria Egberipou
The moment a woman gets married to a man, she gets married to the entire family of her husband – to a large extent, to the extended family. So is the African tradition, so is the practice and held to a high esteem. On the part of the man too, the same applies. The woman’s family- parents, siblings and extended relatives now share same relationship with their son in-law as they have with their daughter.
As soon as a marriage is contracted between two people the family responsibilities become a shared one between the couple. These responsibilities sometimes are not only those within the immediate family but could also include those from the parents in-laws, siblings of both or either parties. It could be very overwhelming sometimes with the prevailing trend of the dwindling economy and this on the whole tells on the general welfare of the family.
Be that as it may, I do not intend to dwell on these general effects it could have on the family or the man who ordinarily is expected to bear the brunt of these demands on the family resources. I have rather chosen to look at a situation where the woman is the breadwinner in the family.
Now, what do we mean by the word “Breadwinner”.
I could define a “Breadwinner” to mean that person in the small group or in a family who takes the responsibility of providing financial support both in small and great measure to all other members of the group or of the family.
The Oxford Advanced Leaner’s Dictionary defines “Breadwinner” thus; “A person who supports their family with the money they earn”.
Here we want to consider the woman, the mother or the wife as the Breadwinner. You will agree with me that the woman is actually responsible for adding all the beauty, warmth the laughs and the building of a home. Without her the home is not complete. God made it so, it all takes great understanding, determination and maturity which comes gradually with her daily experiences to help her bring in that beauty and warmth. God has made her naturally or divinely a homemaker, an encourager, confidant, mother and supporter to her husband and children. Thus, fulfilling God’s design and desire for her life as a woman. But sometimes in addition to all of these, she finds herself to be the “Breadwinner” in her family.
Some women carry out these responsibilities and see it as great burden and suffer self pity, anger and sometimes degenerate to total disregard for her husband and his family. These groups of women are those who would have the resources but bluntly refuse to be generous to her family. This is because she feels the man has not made enough efforts, too choosy with jobs, not making efforts at all or has ill-luck with getting employed. Thus she would not give him any comfort. Well, this is not our major area of focus for now.
The situation is different where the woman sees herself as being destined to carry the bulk of the responsibility of catering for the family and taking over the duties of the man. This category of women find fulfillment in surrendering all she has in order to make her family happy including her husband. She sees it as service to humanity within and with all her resources.
An important questions here before going further is, why would a woman become the Breadwinner to her family?
Some of the reasons for a woman or mother becoming the Breadwinner in her family are; where the man loses his job or never had one, as a result of failed business ventures, failed health or accident which could result in temporary or permanent disability, death, or separation - thus single parenting. When a man is no longer able to provide for his family financially, the feeling of inadequacy and frustration sets in, the man feels as if his manhood is in question. He loses confidence that he might no longer have grip over his family and “ceases” to be the head of his family.
Our concern is on the woman who now assumes the position of the “head of the family”. So, to the woman who never foresaw or bargained for these conditions naturally sometimes “looses” her joy, feels frustrated and helpless even though most women try to pretend to the world that everything is alright. This could be a helpless situation whereby if care is not taken she really gets out of touch with herself emotionally, spiritually, psychologically, giving room for heated argument in the home over trivial issues, increasing stress both for herself, the husband, the dependants and the children.
It might be of interest to know that from chats with a few mothers who had at one time or the other found themselves in this kind of situation, some did not see it as a pride that they are carrying the family responsibilities and well able to cope with the resources available to them. They also understand that if the man is able to provide for the family needs, it only makes for better welfare for the family and possibly makes room for investments. These women feel the pain that the man feels, the feeling of lack of fulfillment, the incompleteness because the man feels incomplete.
These women hardly express these feelings verbally but all the same, it is there. They silently bear the pain of not being able to give the children the best of education, live in better accommodation, possibly own a house of their own and have good mobility, and the list of desires is endless. They are more tolerant, matured, persevere, and I personally choose to call these ones “women of faith”.
Considering the different temperament, we are aware of those who naturally would not tolerate seeing the man not able to carry out his duties of providing for his family. These women do their best at working hard and meeting the needs of the husband and the children but they lack self-control.
Part of the reasons why women in the later group would behave the way they do is as a result of the perception of her husband family concerning her predicaments.
They find it difficult to believe that their son is financially handicapped. They would accuse the woman of having taken over their son’s attention. Her in-laws sometimes pretend not to know the contributions of the woman, talk more of bearing the entire burden. She is not shown any appreciation – thus she feels the pains. The prayers encouragement and other support she gets come from her own family, they appreciate her and her effort and would rather not bother her with any additional liabilities if they could. They encourage her to be submissive to her husband and to use whatever abilities, resources and privileges God has given her, for the benefit of her children and husband.
Anyhow we assess the whole scenario, it should be known that when a man steps up to take the lead in his family in terms of providing for them, the wife supports him and each falls into their roles and there is harmony.
Everyone, man or woman should always remember that the foundation of the two people counts. One would want to point out that with true love being the sole reason for the union and not material possession, hasty decisions, or attractive financial status of either of them, then the story would be different.
From the standpoint of a wife, mother and once a breadwinner, I would say it is actually a very difficult and trying time for any woman. But whoever finds herself in this situation should know that it does not last forever. The more you make yourself and remain a source of encouragement to your spouse, the higher his hopes and you should expect more love.
In conclusion, make sure to recognize the enormous blow this predicament has on your husband’s ego. Reassuring him of your love for him is healing. Always look at the brighter side in every challenge in life. Take it in good faith and see it as God’s opportunity of drawing us closer to himself. See God’s hand in any or every situation you find yourself in, and He will see you through.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Intimidation by Consensus
Intimidation by Consensus
By Sam Onimisi
It is no longer news that a seventeen-man wise men is working to ensure that a consensual candidate emerge from among the several Presidential aspirants from the North. The purpose is to stop or defeat President Goodluck Jonathan in the forthcoming PDP primaries and to retain power in the North according to their reading of the so-called gentleman’s rotational agreement of the Party. The contenders, former President Ibrahim Babangida, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar (both of who spent 8 years each on the job), perennial National Security Adviser Mohammed Aliyu Gusau, and Governor Abubakar Saraki – all of the PDP. If it is a PDP Committee, the wise men may not reckon with General Muhammadu Buhari of CPC, Alh. Shekarau of ANPP and Ex-EFCC Chief Nuhu Ribadu of ACN. If it is a bi-partisan committee, then they have about eight contenders to deal with, if Alh. Bashir Tofa is not a joking aspirant. This is no doubt an intimidating list.
The first task is to assume that the wise men will limit themselves to the PDP Candidates if the purpose is to defeat President Jonathan in the primaries. And then to extend their search to other parties, if inspite of the gang-up, Jonathan emerge victorious in the primaries. What is the combined weight of the four PDP Northern contenders when stacked against Goodluck? Formidable! Not so much for their electability but much more for their potentials for mischief – and this is so because in every gang-up, the major aim is to harm or destroy the chances of the common opponent. In this instance, the driving force of the gang-up is regional interest, which when stripped of its niceties translates to Hausa/Fulani Islamic interest. Don’t bother about the frenzied denial that is bound to trail this assertion, for it is all part of the game of deceit in politics.
Admittedly, any group of individuals is free to propagate regional interest of any religious hue, provided it does no harm to the corporate interest of the country. The danger lies in the fact that in the pursuit of personal or group interest, recourse is often made to the highly emotive question of religion as most of the Northern aspirants treats the Presidency as their zonal patrimony; and how previous administrations have used it to cause disunity among the multi-religious citizens of Nigeria. So, when we refer to a gang-up and their potential for mischief, what we are saying is the likelihood that those champions of religious or regional interest may be so carried away by personal or group greed that they may not be able to draw a line between reason and remonstrance. Not that they actually represent the North or the regions yearnings and aspirations, but that is what they project that has become the public perception of power rotation or zoning.
The leading Presidential aspirants are all military or Para-military men. Gen. Ibrahim Babangida is well-known for his pride as a practitioner of violence and example abound throughout his eight years reign as military President. Gen. Mohammed Aliyu Gusau is an Intelligence Czar whose smooth operation or modus operandi entails state violence. Alh. Atiku Abubakar was a Customs Officer and in his hay-days in the PDP, was the arrow head of the violent wing of the Party. Now that he is more or less outside the mainstream of the Party, his desperation may know no bound-that is, in his quest to pick-up the Party’s ticket. As for Governor Abubakar Saraki, he is overwhelmed by his antecedent as a son of a ruthless political godfather whose stock-in-trade is monopoly as evident in their total capture of Kwara State. The older Saraki is obsessed by the ambition of having his son as president of Nigeria and his daughter as governor of Kwara State. But is this country Saraki & Saraki Nigeria Unlimited?
Outside the PDP, General Muhammadu Buhari, a former military head of state and Presidential candidate-in-waiting of the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC has left no one in doubt that his party is poised as successor to PDP, come 2011. Having failed twice in the past (2003 and 2007), there is the possibility that he gets desperate this third time, as it may be his last chance, given his age and record of failure in the past. Nuhu Ribadu retired as Assistant Inspector General of Police and Chairman of EFCC. The difference between the army and the police is the type of weapon they carry, both of which is deployed to the same effect against their perceived enemy.
Given the background of these Northern Presidential contestants who are in four different parties, it will be pretty difficult though not impossible for the North to come up with a consensus candidate. Since the candidate must come from one party, it means that the voting masses of the North will be asked to change party loyalty to regional allegiance. And because the North is now polarized by zoning, the pro-zoning section may have to recourse to a more homogenous issue in their part of the North if the masses is to be carried along. Of course, that issue is religion. Meanwhile, the North has always been a hotbed of ethno-religious mayhem – a challenge to which even previous heads of state from the region directly or indirectly helped to pose. In recent times and on several occasions, it has manifested itself through eruptions of the local chapter of the dreaded Al-queda, the Taliban or the Boko Haram extremists – from whom nothing soothing is expected.
By their status as retired senior public office holders, we have a right to expect that the aforementioned contestants or the consensus candidate will be a responsible person(s) who will not employ the emotive issue of religion or manipulate it for personal advantage. But this is mere expectation for which there is no guarantee beyond verbal assurance from the mouth and not necessarily of the heart. Having witnessed what they did with religion while in office, there is little or no hope that they will not employ it again to intimidate their opponents and by consequence, harm the polity. Whichever party produced the consensus Northern candidate, the prospect for trouble remains the same.
Given the condemnable showing of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta, MEND (or is it a fake version of it?) in Abuja during the 50th Independence Anniversary, they may very well supply the balance of terror if they choose to counter-act or confront the Northern Islamic militants for electoral advantage. If this will not check the intimidation by consensus, neither will Prof. Jega’s reputation as a radical do the trick – which leaves us with the question: what type of election do we expect in 2011?
By Sam Onimisi
It is no longer news that a seventeen-man wise men is working to ensure that a consensual candidate emerge from among the several Presidential aspirants from the North. The purpose is to stop or defeat President Goodluck Jonathan in the forthcoming PDP primaries and to retain power in the North according to their reading of the so-called gentleman’s rotational agreement of the Party. The contenders, former President Ibrahim Babangida, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar (both of who spent 8 years each on the job), perennial National Security Adviser Mohammed Aliyu Gusau, and Governor Abubakar Saraki – all of the PDP. If it is a PDP Committee, the wise men may not reckon with General Muhammadu Buhari of CPC, Alh. Shekarau of ANPP and Ex-EFCC Chief Nuhu Ribadu of ACN. If it is a bi-partisan committee, then they have about eight contenders to deal with, if Alh. Bashir Tofa is not a joking aspirant. This is no doubt an intimidating list.
The first task is to assume that the wise men will limit themselves to the PDP Candidates if the purpose is to defeat President Jonathan in the primaries. And then to extend their search to other parties, if inspite of the gang-up, Jonathan emerge victorious in the primaries. What is the combined weight of the four PDP Northern contenders when stacked against Goodluck? Formidable! Not so much for their electability but much more for their potentials for mischief – and this is so because in every gang-up, the major aim is to harm or destroy the chances of the common opponent. In this instance, the driving force of the gang-up is regional interest, which when stripped of its niceties translates to Hausa/Fulani Islamic interest. Don’t bother about the frenzied denial that is bound to trail this assertion, for it is all part of the game of deceit in politics.
Admittedly, any group of individuals is free to propagate regional interest of any religious hue, provided it does no harm to the corporate interest of the country. The danger lies in the fact that in the pursuit of personal or group interest, recourse is often made to the highly emotive question of religion as most of the Northern aspirants treats the Presidency as their zonal patrimony; and how previous administrations have used it to cause disunity among the multi-religious citizens of Nigeria. So, when we refer to a gang-up and their potential for mischief, what we are saying is the likelihood that those champions of religious or regional interest may be so carried away by personal or group greed that they may not be able to draw a line between reason and remonstrance. Not that they actually represent the North or the regions yearnings and aspirations, but that is what they project that has become the public perception of power rotation or zoning.
The leading Presidential aspirants are all military or Para-military men. Gen. Ibrahim Babangida is well-known for his pride as a practitioner of violence and example abound throughout his eight years reign as military President. Gen. Mohammed Aliyu Gusau is an Intelligence Czar whose smooth operation or modus operandi entails state violence. Alh. Atiku Abubakar was a Customs Officer and in his hay-days in the PDP, was the arrow head of the violent wing of the Party. Now that he is more or less outside the mainstream of the Party, his desperation may know no bound-that is, in his quest to pick-up the Party’s ticket. As for Governor Abubakar Saraki, he is overwhelmed by his antecedent as a son of a ruthless political godfather whose stock-in-trade is monopoly as evident in their total capture of Kwara State. The older Saraki is obsessed by the ambition of having his son as president of Nigeria and his daughter as governor of Kwara State. But is this country Saraki & Saraki Nigeria Unlimited?
Outside the PDP, General Muhammadu Buhari, a former military head of state and Presidential candidate-in-waiting of the Congress for Progressive Change, CPC has left no one in doubt that his party is poised as successor to PDP, come 2011. Having failed twice in the past (2003 and 2007), there is the possibility that he gets desperate this third time, as it may be his last chance, given his age and record of failure in the past. Nuhu Ribadu retired as Assistant Inspector General of Police and Chairman of EFCC. The difference between the army and the police is the type of weapon they carry, both of which is deployed to the same effect against their perceived enemy.
Given the background of these Northern Presidential contestants who are in four different parties, it will be pretty difficult though not impossible for the North to come up with a consensus candidate. Since the candidate must come from one party, it means that the voting masses of the North will be asked to change party loyalty to regional allegiance. And because the North is now polarized by zoning, the pro-zoning section may have to recourse to a more homogenous issue in their part of the North if the masses is to be carried along. Of course, that issue is religion. Meanwhile, the North has always been a hotbed of ethno-religious mayhem – a challenge to which even previous heads of state from the region directly or indirectly helped to pose. In recent times and on several occasions, it has manifested itself through eruptions of the local chapter of the dreaded Al-queda, the Taliban or the Boko Haram extremists – from whom nothing soothing is expected.
By their status as retired senior public office holders, we have a right to expect that the aforementioned contestants or the consensus candidate will be a responsible person(s) who will not employ the emotive issue of religion or manipulate it for personal advantage. But this is mere expectation for which there is no guarantee beyond verbal assurance from the mouth and not necessarily of the heart. Having witnessed what they did with religion while in office, there is little or no hope that they will not employ it again to intimidate their opponents and by consequence, harm the polity. Whichever party produced the consensus Northern candidate, the prospect for trouble remains the same.
Given the condemnable showing of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta, MEND (or is it a fake version of it?) in Abuja during the 50th Independence Anniversary, they may very well supply the balance of terror if they choose to counter-act or confront the Northern Islamic militants for electoral advantage. If this will not check the intimidation by consensus, neither will Prof. Jega’s reputation as a radical do the trick – which leaves us with the question: what type of election do we expect in 2011?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
