TheNewsGuru

Tag: Democracy

  • Just as I need Nigeria, Nigeria needs me – Tinubu tells Lagos lawmakers

    Just as I need Nigeria, Nigeria needs me – Tinubu tells Lagos lawmakers

    “Just as I need Nigeria, Nigeria needs me,” said the National Leader of the All Progressives Congress, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

     

    Tinubu, who is a presidential aspirant, stated this on Wednesday during a one-day forum organised by the Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mudashiru Obasa, for serving Speakers and former Speakers and deputies in Ikeja GRA.

     

    According to him, he will be the courageous leader that Nigeria needs to tackle its challenges.

     

    At the event themed, ‘The legislature,changing times and Nigeria’s democratic journey,’ which was attended by 15 serving House of Assembly Speakers from APC-governed states, the presidential aspirant noted that he was the first state governor to grant autonomy to the House.

     

    He said, “We have the brilliance, the resources and the focus. We do not just know how to run the race and take care of the gear of progress. Nigeria needs drastic courageous changes that will bring revenue and I am that courageous one it needs. I was raised to be courageous and this has been working for me. I want to bring same to bear as president of Nigeria.”

     

    “In the face of tyranny, I have survived, struggled for democracy; I have endured the bush path, lived without a family, spent resources. To make Nigeria one is a task and who could do it? I am one. I am the first governor to grant autonomy to the House of Assembly. I survived non-allocation of local government funds. We didn’t suffer; we didn’t retrench. We made progress out of adversity.”

     

    Tinubu, who described himself as a thinker and a doer, posited that as a governor, he inherited N600m as Internally Generated Revenue with zero allocation from Federation Accounts Allocation Committee.

     

    “But we survived and today, Lagos is number one economy. That is why I am begging you to do me a favour so that I can do Nigeria a favour.

     

    “It is a very challenging time for us in the country and we need to decide the next leadership right. We need to intellectually assess the current situation, bring in a person with a clear vision and ability to deliver. Accelerated development of our country is all about thinking, doing and being courageous,” he added.

     

    Obasa described Tinubu as a talent hunter and the brain behind the legislative autonomy of the state.

     

    In his words: “I am standing here before you because Asiwaju is a talent hunter. He is someone that would support you, raise you to a point of leadership and give you room to excel. I can confirm that he is the brain behind the legislative autonomy that we enjoy today at the Lagos State House of Assembly and he did this far before the clamour for it by other states.”

     

    The Lagos State Governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, said the forum was held as part of wide consultations embarked on by the APC leader in his bid to win the support of the party members across various backgrounds and camps.

     

    He stated, “It is not by chance that you all are gathered here today. It is because we agree totally that you all are important stakeholders that need to be engaged and identified with separately from others.

     

    “You are the real foot soldiers who can go back to the hallowed chambers and pass the message to all members of your respective Houses of Assembly and your former colleagues in the legislature across states.”

  • A Call to responsible political followership – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

    A Call to responsible political followership – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

    By Sonnie Ekwowusi

     

    As we bemoan the complete collapse of the country’s security architecture as evidenced by the recent attempted hijack of a moving aircraft and the attack and bombing of the Abuja-Kaduna train by terrorists, the pertinent questions are: why is it that despite Nigeria’s flourishing human capital, kakistocracy (government by the least suitable citizens or incompetent citizens) still reigns supreme in Nigeria? Why has Nigerian democracy been churning out undisciplined rabble, men of cheap appetite, and thieves from their hideouts and entrusting them with the sacred duty of governing the affairs of their fellow men? Considering that God has richly endowed countless Nigerian men and women with sterling leadership qualities, why is Nigeria ruled by scallywags, misfits and the worst citizens? How did we get here? How did we find ourselves in the current sorry pass? Specifically, why was President Buhari returned to power in 2019 to continue to mess up things despite his disastrous outing in his first tenure?

    The answers to the above questions are crucial as Nigerians jostle to elect a new President in 2023. The mistakes of 2015 and 2019 must not be repeated. They were really and truly costly mistakes. There is nothing more monstrous, disgraceful and damaging than those mistakes. You and I are now suffering the tragedies befalling Nigeria as a result of those mistakes. Just imagine the monumental anarchy reigning supreme in virtually all parts of Nigeria at the moment. Therefore the people must exercise their sovereign power reposed in them in such a responsible way as to ensure that another incompetent, visionless or clueless President does not emerge in Nigeria in 2023. At the risk of sounding repetitive, sovereignty in our presidential democracy resides with the people. This is because political power does not derive its moral legitimacy from itself: it derives it from the people’s mandate. In fact, the value of democracy stands or falls with the fundamental values that it embodies and promotes. One of such fundamental values is respect for the will of the people. Since we need a shoe maker to make shoes, once said American philosopher cum educationist John Dewey, we equally need a shoe wearer to say where the shoe pinches. Going by this analogy, it is the Nigerian people who directly bear the full brunt of visionless leadership who should have the final say on who should be the President of Nigeria. Neither the PDP nor the APC nor Buhari nor Obasanjo should dictate to the people who should be their President in 2023. The Nigerian people are in a better position to determine who should be their President in 2023. According to Lord Acton, “the fate of every democracy, of every government based on the sovereignty of the people, depends on the choices it makes between these opposite principles, absolute power on one hand, and on the other, the restraints of legality and the authority of tradition”. The American founding fathers aptly recaptured this ageless truth when they said many years ago that, “governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”. By voluntarily entrusting a few elected people with the responsibility of governing their affairs, the people have not relinquished their power. In short, the people are the repository of political power.

    But unfortunately, the Nigerian people are not living up to their bidding as sovereigns in presidential democracy. To begin with, most Nigerian voters are not politically enlightened enough to evaluate the political issues at stake and the character of the candidates running for political posts before casting their votes on Election Day. My learned friend, Andy, strongly argues, and I agree with him, that the level of political illiteracy and stupidity is so high in Nigeria that if perchance President Buhari presents himself for re-election in 2023 some voters would still sheepishly and blindly vote for him on Election Day. So, the Nigerian people are their own enemies otherwise why should the ordinary Nigerians who gossip on WhatsApp, Face-book, Twitter and other social media platforms that Nigeria has been captured by political fraudsters, thieves and never-do-wells still be discussing the possibility of any the fraudsters, thieves or never-do-wells emerging as President of Nigeria in 2023. What is wrong with some of us in Nigeria? Having seen the monumental ruin which has overtaken Nigeria as a result of President Buhari’s misrule, why are some of us still beating the drum for the emergence of Tinubu, Rochas Okorocha, Wike, Emefiele, Orji Uzo Kalu, Fayose or Amaechi as the President of Nigeria in 2023? I repeat: what is really wrong with some of us in Nigeria? Are these drummers suffering from a kind of political spell or what? In common parlance, it is said that a people get the kind of leaders they deserve, meaning that an irresponsible political followership begets an irresponsible political leadership, or, put differently, a failed political followership begets a failed political leadership. In fact, there is a correlation between political leadership and political followership. Political leadership is a co-efficient of political followership. Quality leadership is a functional relation of a quality followership.

    Ebenebe, for instance, is comparatively an unknown town tucked away in the Awka North Local Government Area of Anambra State. The town has an estimated population of about 45,897. Prior to the last Anambra Governorship Election, Ebenebe was comparatively an obscured town hardly spoken about and hardly mentioned in conversations. But the town shut into the limelight during the last-concluded Anambra Governorship Election. How? The Ebenebe women defiantly rejected the N5, 000 bribe offered to each of them by one of the political parties to vote against their consciences. The Ebenebe women voters, like most Nigerian voters, are poor, hungry and dejected. But they preferred to vote according to the consciences: they voted for Professor Chukwuma Soludo who later won the Governorship Election. Instead of accepting the N5, 000 bribe offered to each of them to vote against their consciences, the women stood their ground and voted in accordance with their consciences. A video clip clearly showing the women publicly rejecting the N5, 000 bribe was making the rounds at that time. The Ebenebe women have demonstrated that money cannot buy the consciences of voters during elections. The Nigerian voters should emulate the uncommon integrity of the Ebenebe women voters. If the Nigerian voters cannot vote out the clueless, thieves and vagabonds in power, then they should stop complaining that their leaders are making a show of their stupidity and wickedness in power. If Nigeria were a country in which the voters vote with their heads and hearts during elections, President Buhari would not have come to power in 2015 let alone be returned to power in 2019 despite his disastrous outing in his first tenure.

    So the Nigerian voters should learn to vote wisely on Election Day. Prior to casting their votes they must first sit down and ask themselves the following basic questions: Why should I vote for a candidate who is so clueless that he doesn’t have the foggiest idea that the essence of wielding power is to render service to the people? Why should I vote for a physically-derailed and mentally-exhausted old man who uses political power to convert the State into his personal fiefdom? Why should I vote for an old man who is only interested in using political power in foisting his ethnic and religious hegemony? Why should I vote for a bigot who is shamelessly interested in giving key political appointments only to people from his own part of the country in violation of the Federal Character Principle enshrined in our Constitution? Why should I vote for an old political misfit who uses political power to oppress the downtrodden?

    The choice is before us. Either we choose the path of liberating principles and vote wisely in 2023 in order to advance the truths and ideals which will strengthen our democracy or choose the path of perfidy by allowing thieves, scallywags and never-do-wells to hijack the political leadership once more to the ruin of our country.

  • Charles Soludo takes over as Governor of Anambra State from Willie Obiano

    Charles Soludo takes over as Governor of Anambra State from Willie Obiano

    Prof. Charles Chukwuma Soludo has taken over as the Governor of Anambra State, assuming the reins of leadership of the State from now former Governor Willie Obiano.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Prof. Soludo took the oath of office on Thursday, March 17, 2022, to become the 6th democratically elected Governor of Anambra.

    He was sworn in as the new Governor of Anambra State along with his Deputy, Dr Onyekachukwu Ibezim by Hon. Justice Onochie Manasseh Anyachebelu, Chief Judge of the State.

    Governor Soludo took over the reins of power from former Governor Obiano, who served the State for eight years, and whose tenure ended today.

    Soludo is a world-renowned economist, who formally served as Chief Economic Adviser to Chief Olusegun Obasanjo when he [Obasanjo] was president of Nigeria.

    Soludo later became the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) before veering into politics proper.

    With an admirable background in the national economy and a stunning academic profile, the new Governor is coming into office with high expectations from the people of Anambra State and Nigerians across the federation.

    Soludo urged not to repeat Obiano’s mistakes

    Meanwhile, the incoming Governor of Anambra State, Prof. Charles Soludo has been urged by a lawmaker in the State, Dr Timothy Ifedioranma not to repeat the mistakes of his predecessor, Dr Willie Obiano.

    Ifedioranma, representing Njikoka Constituency I, under the platform of All Progressives Congress in the Anambra State House of Assembly, made the call while assessing the performance of the outgoing administration of Obiano, on Thursday in Awka.

    The lawmaker said that Obiano had good intentions but the actions behind the good intentions were not properly carried out. He lamented that Obiano’s legacy projects were carried out at the expense of other sectors of the state.

    “We are grateful for the International Airport, it has made travelling easy for residents but the fact is that the airport project crippled other sectors of the economy and state.

    “An example is the state of our roads, they are in bad shape. Now we have an airport but we do not have a road to that airport.

    “Another one is that we can have an international convention centre that is not of that magnitude and that will not gulp close to N10 billion.

    “We can have 5,000 instead of the 10,000 seating capacity that was built so that the funds can be channelled to other important projects.

    “Governance is about the welfare and security of people. Obiano began well during his first tenure in the aspect of security but he ended poorly and somebody has to say it.

    “If he had ended his administration in the first tenure, I would have scored his performance 80 per cent but his last tenure was a disaster. So many other sectors suffered because he was pursuing his legacy projects.

    “So, I need to tell him the feelings of my constituents as an elected member of the state Assembly.

    “My advice to the incoming governor, Prof. Soludo, is that he should not make the same mistakes his predecessor made so that at the end of his tenure, he will be remembered for good,” he said.

  • Contents and malcontents of democracy – By Owei Lakemfa

    Contents and malcontents of democracy – By Owei Lakemfa

    By Owei Lakemfa

    I had the privilege of being invited by the Nigerian Guild of Editors led by Mustapha Isa to be a panellist in their March 3, 2022 Town Hall Meeting in Abuja. Their focus was ‘Agenda Setting For Sustainable Democratic Culture’.

    My argument is that democracy is a system of government by popular representation based on the vote of the electorate in which the will of the people prevails.

    However, a major issue of democracy is that it is not value-free. There are some that will argue, for instance, that China which holds regular elections, has perhaps the largest parliament in the world, a judiciary and one of the largest press in the universe, is not a democracy because, in their view, the Chinese processes are not ‘free and fair’ and its parliament, judiciary and press are not free from the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

    On the other hand, the Chinese can argue that whereas Western democracy is more about motions and form, Chinese democracy has content because it solves the basic problems of its people, including successfully feeding 22 per cent of the world’s population, providing healthcare and almost wiping out poverty, illiteracy and hunger.

    It is difficult to say if, today, Nigeria is a democracy. But what is not in doubt is that at independence on October 1, 1960, it began as one. That was when it adopted the British parliamentary democracy. But that form of democracy has its problems: the Prime Minister is a parliamentarian voted only by his constituency and becomes the country’s leader only because his peers asked him to lead. So he may not even be known across the country prior to becoming the Prime Minister. Another drawback is that it has limitless tenure. Sir Robert Walpole was Prime Minister for 20 years and 315 days and William Pit spent about 19 years.

    In the Second Republic, we turned presidential. The challenge of the American presidential system is that you need to be rich or funded by the rich to be able to win elections even to the Congress. So in a sense, American democracy is the ‘government of the rich, by the rich for the rich’. Just as China will tell you that it has ‘democracy with Chinese characteristics’, so does America have its own ‘democracy with American characteristics’.

    That is why in its 2016 elections, Hillary Clinton with 65,845,063 lost to Donald Trump with 62,980,160 votes. America can explain this magic based on electoral votes, but for some around the world, it is illogical that in a democracy, the candidate with 2.9 million more votes loses the elections. That is more than the population of European countries like Albania, Lithuania, Slovania, Latvia, Estonia, Montenegro, Malta and Iceland!

    But luckily for Nigeria when it adopted the America presidential system, it discarded the electoral college system. But is Nigeria a democracy? Or better put: is a democracy a democracy because it holds periodic elections even if criminally flawed?

    Nigeria is a party-based democracy, so a fundamental issue is party membership and funding and we know that here, party funding is mainly by individuals most of whose wealth is questionable.

    So in practice, most of those funding the parties are making investments from which they hope to harvest rich dividends; it is like an elegant ‘Yahoo, Yahoo’ (internet fraud) business.

    Another major issue is that in a democracy, members pay dues to their political party. But in Nigeria, parties pay people to be members and fund them to participate in membership activities, including voting at party conventions. As long as this method of funding parties continues, the money will always come mainly from those in power with access to public funds.

    As a result of these, the main parties are owned and controlled by money bags and their friends who end up not only hijacking the party, but also state power.

    President Muhammadu Buhari as Military Head of State in 1984/85 jailed politicians for enriching their parties through contracts and loans. So, why can we not do the same today, especially when most funds now come directly from state coffers?

    My position is that we cannot talk about democracy with this system of party funding and ownership. There is no reason whatsoever why every Kobo given to a political party, spent on it or by it should not be declared and people jailed for violations.

    Since our democracy is party-based, political parties must themselves be based on democracy not on the whims and caprices of an individual who can dissolve elected party organs and sack all members of the party.

    We must hold parties to their constitution and basic democratic principles. A situation where a caretaker committee spends half the tenure of an elected party leadership should not be tolerated as it corrodes the basis of democracy.

    Party democratic structures must be maintained; allowing governors who cross-carpet to automatically take over party structures as happened in Cross River, Edo and Zamfara states is a setback for democracy. There must be respect for the electoral process rather than allow it to be hijacked by touts and cultists.

    The electoral process must be defended rather than allow candidates decide the outcome of elections as was rampant in 2019. There is also the need to reject what Mr. Femi Falana, the learned silk, characterised as the ‘tribunalisation’’ of elections with the courts appointing elected officers as was the case in Imo State.

    Also, our democracy should hold the elected accountable to their programmes and electoral promises rather than turn it into a circus show.

    The media should in accordance with the Constitution, carry out ‘oversight’ functions on annual budgets that have over the years been opaque and also expose funds expended on legislators in whatever form, including salaries, allowances, and constituency projects. The executive and parliamentary roles must be differentiated; it is not the duty of law makers to build roads or schools. It is a bastardisation of the system.

    Also, journalists have the sacred duty of protecting and defending fundamental human rights, ensuring government obeys court orders as in the case of Ibrahim El-Zakzaki, fighting corruption and pushing hard against dictatorial tendencies.

    It is said that the most complicated operation in Nigeria is separating the public office holder from his seat; but it must be done.

    My final take is that politics or democracy in the country should not be run like a criminal enterprise; it must be cleansed and the media has a major role to play in this cleansing even if it will require the country building mega prisons to contain violators of the country’s life. Strong structures on which the political and democratic system can be built, must be put in place or we bid goodbye to democracy.

  • Ministers and their report cards – By Dakuku Peterside

    Ministers and their report cards – By Dakuku Peterside

    By Dakuku Peterside

    Last week this column focused on the legacy of elected political office holders as we wind up a political era and transit to a new one. This week, we will focus on political appointees. After nearly three and seven years respectively of service to the nation, it is time to reflect on the performance and value addition of our ministers and heads of parastatals . To hold our ministers and heads of Departments and Agencies, appointees of the President, accountable is a fundamental element of participatory democracy.

    In our clime, the power these officeholders exercise, and the impact of their actions and inactions are too significant to be ignored in the power equation. This situation is more noticeable when you have a charismatic and efficient leader as a minister or head of parastatal. They galvanise their ministries or Agencies to achieve their mandates and improve the quality of lives of people and the country’s development.

    Three critical assumptions, though misleading, are common in our country. One, ministers are only accountable to the President and not the people. Second, only the President sets the minister’s target, and he alone can assess their performance.. The third is that whether ministers perform or not, the credit, blame or condemnation goes to Mr President, who appointed them to act on his behalf.

    Under proper scrutiny and contextualization, these assumptions are not the absolute truth in American-style democracy, which we copied without effort to adapt to our cultural context. Ministers are mentioned in the constitution, and they derive their powers from it, and the people approve them through the legislature to serve them. The third is that the fund they spend for all activities flows from a national purse or our commonwealth.

    The import is that they owe their primary loyalty to the country and the constitution from where they derive their powers before whoever appointed them. Ministers cannot hide under these fallacious and illogical assumptions to dodge the accountability responsibility distinct from accounting. Every Ministry exists for the public good; it is thus consequential that ministers and heads of parastatals explain and justify what they did with public funds to advance the public interest. Anything short of that is democratically unacceptable.Ministers and heads of departments and agencies are the instrumentalities through which government functions and performs its duties. The government implements all its policies through the ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs)with their civil service structure that is supposed to be apolitical and designed to serve the government of the day.The minister’s role is crucial in shaping an efficient and effective ministry that is fit for purpose and delivers good dividends of democracy to the people. We can safely conclude that the sum of the output of government ministries, departments and agencies (headed by ministers and heads of parastatals as political appointees) roughly corresponds with the total productivity of government in terms of structures and infrastructures, policy creation and execution, and procedural and operational efficiencies of the socio-economic and political ecosystem. Based on the above, the principal function of the minister or head of parastatal is to organise, manage and direct all material and human resources available to the Ministry or agency to achieve their set mandate in line with the dominant ideology, goals and aspirations of the government in power. They must see themselves as the voices of the government they represent and, in a democratic society, the voice of the people and the voiceless.

    This present government appointed 36 and 42 ministers during the first and second term respectively . It also appointed heads of parastatals or agencies under each of these ministries. How have they performed in the past three or seven years, depending on when they were appointed? What indices of development have they credited? How have their works impacted the quality of lives of the people they serve? What are their scorecards? Answers to these questions will highlight the efficacies or lack thereof of the ministers and heads of parastatals and the ministries and agencies they supervised. Typically, the presidency that appointed the ministers ought to have a template for assessing the ministers at periodic intervals and at the end of their tenure. In spite of their political character, it might be better to assess ministers more like departmental CEOs with clear targets and performance indicators.

    The ministerial mandate challenges the individual appointee’s creativity, energy, and managerial capacity. In acknowledgement of this, at the mid-term ministerial performance review retreat held in October 2021, nine priorities and presidential legacies were identified and commitments made by the ministers. We are yet to see these commitments impact significantly on the macro economy, poverty reduction, food sufficiency, power, education and health outcomes. As leaders, ministers should start reflecting on the legacy they are leaving for posterity. This last year before the general election allows them time to complete whatever they consider legacy projects or programmes, concentrate on a few projects that will create significant impact, or change course and at least accomplish a good for the people. Failure to make good use of the time left may be tantamount to a lost opportunity, and history does not forgive mediocrity.

    Today, a cursory survey of our serving ministers indicates that a tiny percentage made a significant impact. Others are anonymous, and a few interested contractors remember them as ministers who are always sleeping on duty. The staff may remember a few others of their various ministries as passers-by who added no value but colluded with contractors to pillage our commonwealth.

    We still reminisce about ministers that did great work in Nigeria in the recent past. We have had ministers remembered for innovative policies and who made a difference; we remember Ngozi Okonji Iwela for securing debt cancellation for Nigeria and creative management of the economy, Akinwumi Adesina for innovative agriculture policies that served the poor, amongst others. So, if a minister wants to be in this league of much-loved ministers in Nigeria, now is the time to create the legacy, and history will be kind to them.

    The Heads of parastatals are not left out. That parastatals spend trillions of Naira yearly to provide services – regulatory, advocacy, projects and therefore deserve public scrutiny. These services are the backbone of the entire ecosystem and, if not correctly performed, will result in inefficiencies and non competitiveness across all the sectors of the economy and poor quality of life for all. The major sectors of the economy, from maritime, telecommunication to banking, are regulated by these agencies to ensure they function well and do not crash the system. Unfortunately, only a few of these parastatals and agencies are functioning optimally and fulfilling their mandates.

    Some of the Heads are performing exceptionally, and the impact of these parastatals are felt across board. We owe much gratitude to such heads, and history will favourably judge them. Some of these heads of parastatals are showing outstanding leadership in transforming an almost moribund administrative system they met when they were appointed into a modern organisational system that is technology- driven and vision-oriented. However, most of the heads of parastatals had performed below expectation and had not made any positive changes to the system they inherited; instead, they had left it worse than before they took office. To these heads of parastatals, I sincerely hope they will use this year to reflect on the tasks at hand and map out ways to improve.

    Based on my experience, the challenges of managing an MDA or parastatal in Nigeria is enormous. You are up against landmines and deeply entrenched interests. Any head of parastatal must be focused, determined ,proactive and have a knack for efficiency and achieving goals to make any meaningful improvement to the system. In some parastatals, the combination of unskilled and unmotivated human resources, an almost religious reliance on path dependency ,and nearly non-existent modern technology to drive the processes and increase productivity make it nearly impossible to achieve meaningful results. Transforming a parastatal is a science and an art. I have documented my own experience of changing NIMASA in the four years

    I was saddled with the responsibility of steering its ship in my seminal book with the title “Strategic Turnaround: Story of A Government Agency published in 2021. Waziri Adio , who served as Executive Secretary of NEITI, also did in his memoir,”The Arc of the possible” . If you need some new insight into strategically repositioning a parastatal in Nigeria, read these books and you may find useful lessons from them.

    Ultimately, the quality and effectiveness of Ministers and Heads of parastatals are critical to the government’s overall performance as all policies are executed through the instrumentality of Ministries, Departments, and Agencies. Ministers and heads of parastatals should admit as a reality that they face three assessments: the assessment of Mr President who appointed them and at whose pleasure they serve, the public who they are assigned to serve and history, which keeps records. Of all three verdicts, that of history is most striking and sticky. If the verdict is to be believed, Nigerians do not reckon with most of our ministers. But it is not too late to improve. This year will make a turning point in creating legacies for the ministers and heads of parastatals. A stitch in time, they say, saves nine.

  • Exit talks of political office holders – By Dakuku Peterside

    Exit talks of political office holders – By Dakuku Peterside

    By Dakuku Peterside

    The beauty of democracy lies in the transient nature of political power. The fact that power is contested periodically and those who wield power submit to such a contest in a free and fair election, where other candidates struggle for power with them, is the essence of democracy. This mechanism ensures that elected political office holders go back to the electorate to account for their stewardship. With the assent to the electoral act by Mr President, most political office holders in Nigeria are at the eve year of a general election and must be reflecting on their time in office and deciding whether they have done enough in line with their goals and aspirations before taking office, and how to use the last year before the election to accomplish whatever goals are left.

    It is time to reflect on the legacy they are bequeathing posterity and the name they are making for themselves. It is a time to reflect on how well they have served the people – for, in a democracy, power is mellowed by service, a service to the land, people, and country. On the 29th of May 2023, 13 months from now, most of the Governors and all legislators will be leaving office. Barring any unforeseen act of nature. This is the reality of life and public office.

    It is only natural that political office holders want to do something that will outlive them or that people will remember them for.

    Legendary Mahatma Gandhi can still be remembered for his pro-poor people policies. Lee Kwan Yew laid the foundation for a modern

    Singapore, a first-world nation, by investing in people. Paul Kagame ended the genocide and leads a United and prosperous Rwanda. Nearer home, Obafemi Awolowo is remembered for his legacy on education, which gave the southwest a significant advantage.

    These leaders mentioned above have one thing in common – a towering legacy that is their “lovemark”, and citizens of their countries of various generations adore them for their extraordinary leadership and commitment to the growth and development of their people.

    Legacy is born through unique individual actions and projects that positively impact peoples’lives and mark an epoch in the peoples’ history. Legacies are tangible, concrete and easily identifiable by all as remarkably changing the fortunes of a people. Great political leaders create grand visions for their people, galvanise all human and material resources available to them to actualise these visions and develop policies, projects, and actions that are catalysts to achieving the collective vision. The impact of these policies, projects, and activities become their legacies and often are as important as the ecosystem they build.

    In Nigeria today, there are three classes in terms of legacies among the Governors: Governors that point to essential infrastructures ,white- elephant projects, and projects for aesthetics rather than transformational value. Governors who did nothing but have enough excuses to fill the Atlantic Ocean as to why they did absolutely nothing for their people.

    Governors that have left their names in gold in the minds of their citizens based on articulation and implementation of transformational policies and programmes that bring about real impact and improvement in the lives of citizens. They built projects that impacted many people and different parts of the state and created pro-human capacity development ecosystems that improved the quality and value of human existence in their states.

    Based on the yardstick articulated above, any critical mind can determine where each state governor falls in these classifications. A self-appraisal by each governor of their leadership and contribution to the development of their states will help determine which class he belongs in the above typology. What the governor and his people do after such appraisal is left for them, but we hope this self-scrutiny will help every stakeholder use this last year before elections to push to achieve something. Granted, in most cases, the legacy of our Governors has been a mixed one and not necessarily what they would have wished. However, it is better to do something about it now than miss the opportunity to make an impact despite resource and environmental limitations.

    A cursory appraisal of most Nigerian Governors shows that some have done relatively well in improving the quality of life of their people in line with the Sustainable Development Goals, SDG. Although not meeting the target for development stated in the SDG, some governors improved education standards and outcomes, some healthcare outcomes – especially rural healthcare and healthcare for children and the elderly, and radically improved basic infrastructure that facilitates growth (roads, power,clean water, and basic sanitation system). To these governors, Nigerians and citizens of their states owe them immense gratitude, and we hope they will complete some of these impactful projects before their tenor ends. .

    To the governors who, although faced enormous security challenges and limited resources and yet worked hard to protect the lives and properties of people in the state, we owe them immense gratitude and posterity will not forget the excellent work they did. At the dawn of security and peace across Nigeria, posterity will remember and talk about your sacrifices and good leadership at a time of unprecedented uncertainties and risk.

    To the governors who have done little or nothing that significantly impacts human growth , we advise them to use this last year to remove their name from infamy by delivering impactful dividends of democracy to their citizens. It is time to rethink their strategy with the mindset of legacy.

    We also have three classes for legislators. Those who said nothing and may be attended a few sessions and were almost incognito in the hallowed chambers, and funny enough, legislators in this class are significant. Secondly, those who made hollow speeches and had no impact, perhaps, are more interested in contracts, which seems to constitute the majority. Third group are those who pushed for legislation that impacted the people and will be remembered for positive contributions.

    Very few Nigerians can convincingly link our current legislators with transformational bills. Unfortunately, Nigerians may remember them more for “budget padding” and other negative vices than consequential legislation. Even the Petroleum Industry Act and the Electoral Act amendment bill have been drowned by stories of budget padding and hollow presentations on the floor of the chambers. This is a period of self-reflection by my former colleagues, our esteemed lawmakers. What legacies have the “red and green” chambers collectively and individually made in the past three years? What legacies have they bequeathed their constituencies?

    Although one year may seem short, it is still long enough for the legislative chambers and legislators to leave a befitting legacy for the country. Are there aspects of our democracy that need fixing? Are there excesses of the executives that the legislature must curtail? Are there humanist laws that they can pass to improve our governance and benefit society? The legislature and the legislators must improve on the primary function of lawmaking and provide oversight on executives’ actions. The legislators are the true representative of the people and are the people’s voice. Democracy fails when the people’s representatives abandon the people and serve themselves.

    The appointed ministers and Heads of Agencies are not left out. This period of exit talks allows them for self and public assessment. What definable legacy has each minister and head parastatals provided? Have they been innovative and offered new ways of working that add more value to the people and the system? Or has it been a harvest of excuses and failures? Some ministers have spent up to seven years in office in this administration. Have they written their names in gold by the amount of positive impact they have made to the system?

    Verdict of history beacons – not skewed personal assessment, the chattering of praise singers or paid media promotion- will define the epoch of our times. The exit period affords all, for the umpteenth time,opportunity to sharpen their efforts and provide a tangible and concrete legacy for the people. It is time to critically look at the policies, projects and activities, decide which ones are viable and will have the most significant impact, and try and finish it within the year. Adopt the Pareto principle of focusing on the best 20% projects or activities that will provide 80% impact.

    It is not time to lose focus and engage in numerous activities that cannot be achieved given time and resource constraints or will not have any meaningful impact. Leadership requires focus and commitment to accomplishing the desired objective for the people’s interest. Now is the time to show leadership across the political spectrum.

    The truth is that exit talks have started. It is high time our political office holders reflected on their imminent exit and how they wish to be remembered – the legacy they are bequeathing. It is time for political office holders to ask themselves fundamental self reflecting questions: What achievements do I want to be remembered for? What stories do I want people to tell about me when I quit office, and what name do I want to make for myself and my children? If all public office holders did was the primordial accumulation of wealth and enjoyment of the perks of public office, they should hide their faces in shame forever. No leader has ever been remembered positively for bloated ego, selfishness, primitive accumulation, or corruption. Leaders are recognised for their values, trust in people, innovative solutions to problems, and the legacy policies and projects that benefit the majority. Leaders in the ilk of Awolowo had sleepless nights fighting for the good of their people. Today, his name is revered. Nobody remembers those leaders who enriched themselves at the expense of all.

    History will ultimately decide whether political office holders have a legacy or not, whether they are leaving their states and constituencies better or worse than they met it. They have 12 months to choose how they want history to record them. Nobody is remembered for filthy, mundane, ludicrous wealth but a real commitment to people. Leaders must use this exit talk time well, and everybody will be better for it.

  • Has democracy failed Nigerians?, By Dakuku Peterside

    Has democracy failed Nigerians?, By Dakuku Peterside

    By Dakuku Peterside

     

    Globally, citizens of countries with democratic profiles are beginning to question the efficacy of democracy—especially democracy’s capacity to deliver the development agenda. A survey conducted by Pew Research shows that across 34 countries, a median of 52 per cent of those interviewed is dissatisfied with democracy. The dissatisfaction cuts across citizens of matured democracies of the UK, the US, France, and Japan. A similar report was filed

    by Afrobarometer, a Pan African independent research network in Ghana. Its recent survey of citizens of 34 African countries under democratic regimes discovered a “democratic disappointment gap”.

     

    This increasing loss of confidence is partially responsible for the convening of a global democracy summit on December 9 -10, this year by President Biden of the USA with the objective of “defending against authoritarianism, fighting corruption, and promoting human rights as well as set agenda for democratic renewal and to tackle threats faced by democracy”. Nigeria was one of 17 African countries and 111 countries globally invited to the summit.

    The Carnegie foundation described Nigeria as one nation where democracy is backsliding in its analysis of invited participants. This development has redirected us to pertinent questions about the potency of democracy to deliver development in Nigeria: Is there a Nigerian democracy? Is it really backsliding? Has it failed Nigerians? And if it has failed, what should be done to arrest the situation?

     

    Democracy is a universal concept that embodies fundamental principles and doctrines that make it unique as a form of government. It relies on the idea of the supremacy of the people. The first aspect of democracy is that the people have the right to choose and decide who will govern them through periodic elections and hold the officeholders accountable for the power they derived from the people. It presupposes that it is the fundamental right of citizens to vote or be voted for in a free and fair election.

     

    The second aspect of democracy is that principles govern it, without which it becomes an aberration and a folly of indescribable proportion even with the first aspect (periodic election to choose leaders). These principles include the rule of law, fundamental human rights, liberty, and accountability, and it is only the combination of these two aspects that makes democracy worthwhile.

    Analysing how Nigeria fares in these two critical aspects of democracy indicate that we do not measure up to them. On the first, periodic elections, as imperfect as it has been, I believe we have made progress. The second, deepening the pillars of democracy, my verdict is negative.

     

    Democracy, the way it is practised in Nigeria today, is a hybrid. It is a combination of civil rule, militarism, and ethnic jingoism. There is no national consensus on what democracy should be in Nigeria or should do for Nigeria. No shared national vision binds citizens and the state ,and no common aspiration. In the absence of shared national aspiration, democracy is just a word, a concept borrowed “to fulfil all righteousness”.

    Recent experiences, especially economic frustration and insecurity have made some Nigerians question the western-style democracy we adopted and doubt whether it can deliver sustainable development. This “trust deficit” is exacerbated by persistent conflict, high cost of governance, corruption, poverty, indiscipline, inefficiency, insecurity, high-level unemployment, and divisiveness that pervades the land.

    It is the truth that the way we practice democracy in Nigeria today has failed to assist Nigerians maximise individual potentials or the country accomplish national development agenda. The reasons vary: from the greedy political elite that is not driven by principles or vision to expensive governance structures that are self-serving, and from indiscipline to cultural misfit. Like a rocking chair, we have moved from parliamentary democracy to an American-style presidential system searching for what works for us.

    The problem is squarely that of the appropriateness of our democracy model. No serious attempt has ever been made to work out a democracy model that fits, serves, or recognises our unique cultural attributes. Worse still, our political elite has failed to adopt a management approach to democracy over time. The elementary principle of envisioning the common good, setting a strategic plan, making effective decisions, and mobilising resources to achieve a shared goal are not in consideration.

     

    Different countries adopt various models of democracy to suit their context and cultural environment. For example, Rwanda increased women participation in governance and incorporated a cultural practice known as Imihigo, a decentralisation policy where district mayors commit to development targets. Because of its belief that a nation has only one common goal, China adopted a one-party system with bureaucratic control emphasising efficiency and economic growth.

    Singapore adopted a democratic approach that emphasises equality of all and economic prosperity, and it has a unique parliament made up of single-member constituencies, group representation constituencies, and nominated members of parliament. On its part, South Korea evolved a robust free democracy that allows for freedom of speech, and its constitution provides a single tenure for the President that is non-renewable and a legislature in which seats are by a combination of persons elected via popular vote and allocation. Malaysia, on the other hand, created a Muslim democracy that is distinctively not theocratic. All these countries are a relative success because they adapted democracy to fit into their culture. To make Nigerians have faith in democracy and its ability to deliver development is not just about periodic election but addressing the structure and cultural fit of our model of democracy to make it work. It is also essential to pay attention to the cultural peculiarities of different sections that make up the country. True democracy is that form of democracy adapted to the circumstance and cultural context and delivers the greatest good to the highest number of persons measured by material prosperity.

    It is pertinent to note that Nigeria adopted the US Presidential system without adapting it to our cultural context – must Nigeria have a bicameral legislature? Why should Nigeria have too many cost centres at the Local, state, and federal levels that deliver no value? Why should Nigeria have a bogus governance structure? Is there a need for full-time legislature rather than part-time legislature? Why should Nigeria have a 1999 constitution that many people do not accept its authority? Why should Nigeria have a federal structure that is more unitary in nature? These are fundamental questions that can help us define what we want from democracy and determine whether the model of democracy we practice can guarantee an optimal level of development.

     

    Is democracy backsliding in Nigeria? From the context of economic prosperity and individual liberty, history answers an emphatic yes. At the inception of the newly independent nation, Nigeria, in 1960, there were high hopes both within and outside Nigeria that this young parliamentary democracy would be the beacon of hope for restoring the dignity of the black man. Although that dispensation had its challenges, it maintained some democratic manifestations that made some politicians look like angels compared to today’s political actors. There was a semblance of sanity. The government at the time guaranteed security and safety, and most people observed the rule of law. Democracy was in the ascendancy in Nigeria.

    However, the military incursion into Nigerian governance upended democracy. With this goes all the democratic precepts and principles in Nigerian politics ever since democracy has been in decline and needs a radical rethink to work in Nigeria again. A significant consideration in assessing the appropriateness of Nigerian democracy is the influence of over four decades of military rule. The military has handed down all our constitutions since 1979; each has ended up necessitating elaborate amendments, and each one has contents bordering on impunity and reckless disregard for some marginalised groups. The judiciary and legislature are left weak by the executive despite the separation of powers.

     

    Has democracy failed Nigerians? A series of overlapping security, political and economic crises have left Nigeria facing its worst instability since the end of the Biafran war in 1970. With

    experts warning that large parts of the country are in effect becoming ungovernable, fears that the conflicts in Africa’s most populous Nation were bleeding over its borders were underpinned by claims that armed Igbo secessionists in the country’s south-east were now cooperating with militants fighting for an independent state in the anglophone region of neighbouring Cameroon.

    The mounting insecurity from banditry in the north-west, jihadist groups such as Boko Haram in the north-east, violent conflict between farmers and pastoralists across large swathes of Nigeria’s “middle belt,” is driving a brain drain of young Nigerians. Those security issues are in addition to a series of other problems, including rising levels of poverty, violent crime, and corruption amid an increasing sense that the central government, in many places, is struggling to govern.

    The most significant measure of the efficacy of democracy is its ability to raise the people’s standard of living marked by a minimum level of development. The inability of Nigerian democracy to bridge the gap between inequality and poverty has heightened the lack of faith in democracy. All vital statistics from 1998 to date have not matched our expected progress in deepening democracy, making it difficult to accept a correlation between democracy and development.

    What should be done to reverse the situation? We should re- examine our democracy to make it fit for purpose. For Nigerians to evolve a democracy that works for Nigeria, the critical consideration is the match between form and cost. That match must be such that the practice of democracy leaves enough resources for the development and sustenance of services in a way that guarantees orderly and peaceful existence.

    It is on record that the recurrent expenditure of the Nigerian governments (states and federal) outweighs capital expenditure at a ratio of more than 80:20. The current form of democracy and democratic institutions have too much implicit and explicit cost that it leaves no money for development, and there is absolutely no incentive to invest in sustainable development initiatives.

    Nigeria’s current federal democracy is unitarist, which has hindered the adequate provision of security and safety for citizens. The ability of the state to guarantee security is central to the thriving of democracy. Unless people are free to go about their everyday life unmolested, they cannot enjoy the freedom which is the crucial

    instrument of democracy. Not even the ritual of voting and elections can credibly occur in an insecure environment.

    In conclusion, it is evident that we need to have a conversation about our current constitution to “ culturize” it and make it workable . This is not achievable before 2023 but must be on the table if we are serious about democracy . We should be intentional in evolving a democracy that aims at the sustainable development of Nigeria. This new democratic model, no matter what it is, must speak to the aspirations and hopes of Nigerians. This model will not cherry-pick some facets of democracy and leave out its principles and spirit, and it must be wholistic and quintessentially and uniquely Nigerian – our democracy! . A model that plagiarised American democracy with little or no modifications to fit our context is already structurally deficient. No matter how you practice it, you will always come out short.

     

  • Violating electorates’ right of choice endangers our democracy – Osinbajo

    Violating electorates’ right of choice endangers our democracy – Osinbajo

    Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) has said that democracy remains the best system of establishing governments because it guarantees respect for the fundamental rights of individuals to choose their leaders.

    Prof. Osinbajo stated this on Thursday in Ibadan, Oyo State capital where he chaired a roundtable discussion, which was held in honour of the late governor of the state, Senator Abiola Ajimobi, and in commemoration of his posthumous 72nd birthday.

    Speaking on the theme of the Roundtable, Election Security and Good Governance in Nigeria, the VP noted that democracy as a “ system of governance guarantees the accountability of the elected to the electorate. As the electorate determine in every electoral cycle by their free choice whether the mandate given was properly utilized.”

    Referencing the timeless quote by the late US President Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address in 1863, Prof. Osinbajo submitted that “man has not yet developed a fairer and more just system of establishing governments than that the government be a government of the people by the people for the people.”

    “This right of choice of leaders as given by democracy is not just a fundamental civil and political right, but it also separates man from animals for whom might confers the right to leadership,” he added.

    He said, “the major issue, therefore, is how to ensure that right of free choice is not defeated or corrupted. Once that right of free choice is violated, the basis of democracy and its product, good governance, is undermined.

    “I am sure some of the conversation today will look at this fundamental point…how can we protect the vote, how do we ensure that every vote counts; how do we protect the government of the people, by the people, and for the people; and ensure, as Lincoln famously prayed at Gettysburg, that it does not perish from the earth?”

    Prof. Osinbajo described the late governor Ajimobi as “an exceptional communicator and a natural bridge builder, who attained early success in the oil and gas industry, and then emerged as an astute politician, Senator of the Federal Republic, and two-term governor of Oyo State.”

    The VP added that the late Senator Abiola Ajimobi was “a remarkable human being, an extraordinarily gifted man, astute politician, accomplished public intellectual and administrator in his own right.”

    The Vice President also commissioned the Senator Abiola Ajimobi Resource Center built by the Senator Abiola Ajimobi Foundation at the Institute for Peace and Strategic Studies (IPSS), University of Ibadan, Oyo State.

    The former Chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Professor Attahiru Jega, was the lead speaker, among other distinguished panels of discussants.

    Other dignitaries at the event hosted by the late Senator Ajimobi’s wife, Mrs. Florence Ajimobi included the Deputy Governors of Oyo and Osun states: Rauf Olaniyan and Benedict Gboyega Alabi; Minister of Sports and Youth Development Sunday Dare, traditional rulers, and top government officials.

  • Anambra Guber: Ihiala LGA’s rescheduled election dangerous to democracy – Carl Umegboro

    Anambra Guber: Ihiala LGA’s rescheduled election dangerous to democracy – Carl Umegboro

    By Carl Umegboro

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) owes explanations to the public for failure to send or assign officials to conduct a scheduled poll at Ihiala Local Government Area on 6th November which deprived the indigenes and residents’ rights from exercising their civic responsibility like other LGAs. The alleged security threat given as reason is weak and absurd. The exclusion saga is similar to the plot against Anambra International Cargo Airport which was slated for inauguration a week preceding the election but frustrated with flimsy excuses using a designated federal agency. President Muhammadu Buhari must ensure that his appointees live up to expectation particularly on election matters which is essential in any democracy.

    If INEC could fail to assign officials to a whole LGA for a poll scheduled for one state, it suggests that the umpire under the present management cannot be trusted for a general election in 2023. Believably, the schemers had plotted to use Ihiala LGA as a ground for evil plots against sacred wishes of Anambra people. Had it been the machines malfunctioned, it would be a genuine reason for not conducting the election in some polling units, but not for a whole LGA. The alleged ‘security threat’ is baseless, unfounded and incredible.
    For INEC to deliberately fail to assign electoral officials and materials throughout the scheduled day of the poll to a whole local government area suggests that there was a conspiracy between the umpire and some politicians to use the LGA for a sinister motive. It is indeed sad and unbelievable that such a thing could happen in this present time when everyone had looked up to INEC for a credible, free and fair election, However, it must be noted that Anambra people will resist any attempt by any persons to impose or frustrate their legitimate mandate as their next governor. The ‘magic’ that transpired in Imo state in 2020 which ended up having a fourth position sworn in as governor cannot survive in Anambra state. This must be noted.

    INEC Collation officer for Ihiala LGA had on Sunday announced that no election was held across all the wards in the LGA on account of no availability of electoral officers and materials to the area, and at the end, the Commission claimed it was as a result of ‘security threats’ and rescheduled the poll thereby making an election that would have produced a winner instantly inconclusive. Even, by the failure to conduct the election on the same day as scheduled, the credibility of the election will be affected as people already know the outcome, and most likely, many may not even bother to go to vote on the rescheduled date which could affect the true bidding of the people.

    As a result, there must be explanations on why and how a LGA that is not even within an island but across a federal highway and adjacent to Ozubulu, Nnewi where elections held freely could be excluded with the claim of security threat, sadly in an election that only held in one state out of the thirty-six states of the federation with over 40,000 security personnel on ground deployed from all security agencies. INEC shouldn’t stop at the ‘makeup’ allegation of ‘security threat’ but from where to warrant suspension of a whole LGA on the scheduled date? The Commission must explain the nature of the threats and the towns in the LGA. Otherwise, it clearly shows it was a premeditated action to maneuver the outcome of the poll. So, INEC owes explanations and apologies to the people of Ihiala LGA for bringing Ihiala to the mud for mere political conspiracy. One therefore wonders how the umpire could conduct a general election across the country at the same time.

    Indeed, INEC’s failure to conduct an election at Ihiala LGA on the original date is suspicious, and clearly appears to be a deliberate act to maneuver the outcome of the poll in favour of a paymaster and politician. By this plot, INEC has compromised in the Anambra election and must be made to explain their actions and identify fellow conspirators. The failure to assign electoral officials and materials to the areas is an indictment to the umpire that it is not neutral and competent but vulnerable to playing scripts of some corrupt politicians. No one needs to be told that many Anambra people that possibly returned from place of residence outside the state to exercise their franchise may no longer be available for the rescheduled poll. Thus, INEC scores a mere pass mark in Anambra governorship poll.

    Instructively, an election can only be rescheduled with a credible reason, and not rescheduling part of a poll that was meant to take place concurrently to a later date using the Commission’s veto power without any just cause after announcing results. Thus, the umpire must ensure that the choice of the Anambra people is in no way thwarted or maneuvered by any means to avoid heightening the tension already ravaging the state over perceived intimidations from the center.

     

    Umegboro, a public affairs analyst sent this piece from Ihiala in Anambra State.

  • Democracy and the Tyranny of Judges – Chidi Amuta

    Chidi Amuta

    Those paid to protect the guardrails of democracy hardly look in the direction of the courts for enemies. Nor do most people suspect that judges could become facilitators of authoritarianism and subtle promoters of anarchy. As custodians of the rule of law, judges and the courts over which they preside are the insurance for democracy’s ultimate good. The entire edifice of democracy thrives because the judicial system is expected to act in a manner that reassures ordinary men and women that the excesses of politicians will not be allowed to endanger law and order or the presumed equality of men. That at least is the standard expectation and the reassuring assumption.

    Curiously, however, in Nigeria’s fledgling democracy, the judiciary has lately been operating more like an unregistered political party, one that towers above all the other parties. It not only wields the decisive gavel in political cases but has been known to hand down judgments that subvert the popular will expressed through the voting process. Thus, in its serial nefarious interventions in political matters, the Nigerian judiciary has emerged as an interested political force and a major disrupter of the democratic process. Some judges hardly disguise their partisanship just as they are ready to hawk pre-packed judgments to the highest bidder. To that extent, part of the trouble with Nigerian democracy is the tyranny of judges in their conversion of the law into a merchandise of political confusion often in pursuit of their personal or group self aggrandizement.

    An offshoot of the troublesome role of judges in fueling political confusion is a certain lingering concern with rampant corruption among some judges. At the onset of Mr. Buhari’s second term in office, he sought to confront corruption among judges frontally. Security and anti-graft agency operatives staged a series of programmed raids on judges’ homes and offices. The findings unsettled a public long inured to tales and instances of epic public sector looting. Some judges bedrooms were literal bank vaults with troves of cash in various currencies. Some judges’ bank accounts would make low level Forbes billionaires green with envy. Some of them had real estate inventories that read like telephone books and in no way related to their legitimate earnings. A few were prosecuted, hardly found guilty and hardly any was convicted. By a curious irony, the bulk of illegal funds found with the ugly judges were traceable to proceeds of corrupt payments by the very same politicians that were hounding the judges. The chase ran cold and was discontinued. Some of those sent to search judges homes allegedly ended up sharing or re-looting the judges loots. End of chapter!

    Now to the current anxiety. In quick response to an embarrassing recent epidemic of conflicting injunctions and ex parte orders on political cases, the Chief Justice of the federation, Mr. Tanko Muhammed, last week summoned the Chief Judges of six state High Courts over a recent wave of conflicting and embarrassing court orders on political matters. The state Appeal Court chief judges summoned to the CJN’s admonition meeting include those of Rivers, Imo, Cross River, Anambra, Kebbi and Jigawa states.

    A similar summons has gone out from the National Judicial Council (NJC) to the same set of state High Court judges to explain their roe in the indiscriminate granting of conflicting ex parte injunctions from courts of concurrent jurisdiction even from states far away from the actual theatres of political trouble. The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) whose members feed the courts with these spurious requests for ex parte motions has itself weighed in on the same side as the CJN and the NJC by condemning the rampant practice and inherent abuse of judicial powers. What has spurred this outpouring of outrage and condemnations is the embarassment which the judiciary has become to itself and the threat it now constitutes to the nation’s democracy in general. In the immediate instances at issue, two critical aspects of democracy are under direct threat.

    First is the integrity of political parties in terms of their internal leadership selection and replacement procedures. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has recently been wracked by a slew of crises bordering on whether their embattled national chairman, Mr. Uche Secondus, should remain in office after his legitimacy was been challenged by aggrieved members and factions within the party. In reference to one of these suits, a Port Harcourt high court ruling suspended the party chairman, Mr. Uche Secondus, from office. He was in the process of obeying the ruling with the ascendancy of two rival acting chairmen when another high court ruling quickly reinstated him. He hurried to the party secretariat to re-assume his contested position only to be informed that another state high court had just voided his position once again.

    As matters now stand, no one is sure of who is in charge of the day to day running of the party as Mr. Secondus clings on to office in defiance of confusing court rders. The intervention of the party’s Board of Trustees and various elders conclaves to fix a date for the party’s convention is not likely to resolve the crisis with so many cases still in courts.

    The ruling APC is itself not immune from instability resulting from conflicting legal interpretations of its present state of interim leadership. Soon after the Supreme Court ruling on the election petition of the former Deputy Governor of Ondo state challenging the victory of Governor Akeredolu, key legal voices in the APC hierarchy quickly used the ruling as a basis to challenge the legality of retaining the Governor Buni led caretaker committee of the party. The sum of the argument was that if the former Deputy governor had joined Mr. Buni in his suit, there probably would have been a different and more favorable outcome. In this opinion, Mr. Buni’s leadership is in violation of the constitution of the party as he is a substantive governor and cannot also be a substantive party chairman. There are any number of court cases instituted to challenge the incumbency of the caretaker on the basis of this contention. Only the anticipated party convention before the end of the year is retraining some of the potential judicial combatants. There again, the stability of a political party is subject to the whims and vagaries of conflicting judicial interpretations and outcomes.

    In this process, the very survival and integrity of the major political parties is being subjected to a ridiculous judicial ping pong by lawyers and judges with doubtful motivations. Ordinarily, political parties are the building blocks and lifeblood of a democracy. They produce successive political leadership of the nation through their internal leadership selection processes. They determine the direction of public policy through their ideological underpinnings and the programmes they canvass in their manifestoes. The direction of a nation and the well being of its citizens is a direct reflection of the state of the parties that comprise its political ecosystem and also emplace the governments in power.

    Of course the legitimacy of party leaderships and the processes that produce them is subject to occasional legality stress tests based on contests based on the party constitution and of course the general relevant laws of the land. The role of the judiciary in preserving the integrity and coherence of political parties is inherent in its overall responsibility to guarantee and protect the rule of law in a democracy. When judicial rascality encourages perennial crises in political parties, the very survival of the nation as a democracy is under threat. Judges that tacitly encourage dissidence and confusion in the leadership of political parties are undermining the foundation of democracy.

    A different threat to democracy is active in Anambra state. In the countdown to the November governorship elections in the state, there has been an avalanche of court actions and conflicting rulings on who should fly the flag of the various parties especially the ruling All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). The unstated assumption is of course that any candidate supported by the incumbent governor, Mr. Willie Obianor, of APGA would almost certainly move into the Governor’s Lodge in Awka. That assumption has fed serial controversies as to who is the legitimate candidate of the party for the November election. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has had the unenviable task of constantly changing the approved candidate of the party for the November polls in obedience to constantly changing and conflicting court orders emanating from courts of concurrent jurisdiction in far flung states. As matters stand now, no one knows exactly who will be on INEC’s final ballot for APGA in the November Anambra governorship election.

    Here again, a purely intra party political process, namely the selection of a party candidate for an electoral contest has become the football field of political entrepreneurs and judicial scavengers. In the process, the consciousness of the electorate is being shredded and tormented. The people of Anambra state are being deprived of the certainty to freely debate and openly campaign to choose the candidate the candidates of their choice for governor. In this unfortunate drama, the Nigerian judiciary is again leading the charge.

    Ordinarily, the special position of the courts and judges especially in political matters confers on them a great deal of power. The indiscriminate conflicting judgments and injunctions are therefore nothing short of impunity and abuse of power. And in a democracy, nothing is more lethal than wanton abuse of power. It injects elements of authoritarianism into a democratic milieu and soon enough converts the rule of the majority into the dominance of those rich and powerful enough to thwart the popular will by bribing judgments and purchasing court injunctions and judgments.

    The current atmosphere of rampant judicial rascality is not novel in the short history of our young democracy. It all comes down to power politics and, many believe, the money that fuels it. In this clime, very few things survive a handshake let alone an embrace with politics and politicians. Nigerian politics taints and toxifies nearly all that it comes into contact with.

    Rewind to Imo State in 2020. The 2019 governorship election overwhelmingly returned Mr. Emeka Ihedioha as the winner of the election. He was duly sworn in and began in ernest to showcase exemplary people oriented leadership in the state. Meanwhile, a series of election petition processes were ongoing at the Election Tribunal, Court of Appeal and even the Supreme Court. Mr. Ihedioha seemed to have his mandate all secure and confidently assured.

    The election petition case escalated to the Supreme Court which on 15th January, 2020 surprisingly altered the state’s political landscape. A controversial Supreme Court verdict sacked the short- lived administration of Mr. Emeka Ihedioha of the PDP and installed Mr. Hope Uzodinma of the APC as governor of the state. In the Imo case, the Supreme Court judges literally trespassed into realms constitutionally reserved for INEC by veering into the zone of vote tallying. To be fair, nothing stops a court from using mathematical data as an evidential basis of a judgment.

    First, the Court took over INEC’s role as ultimate vote tallying agency. Not only that, the Court revalidated votes that had been nullified as defective by INEC without caring to ascertain how many of these controversial votes there were. Worse still, the court relied on the evidence of a controversial witness- just one police officer- to arrive at its verdict. In an apparent haste to hand Mr. Hope Uzodinma the keys to the Owerri Governor’s mansion and toss Mr. Ihedioha into the job market, the Supreme Court retrieved and tallied the INEC discredited votes and arrived at a ruling that produced a voter turnout far in excess of the total number of registered and accredited voters in the affected polling stations.

    Even in an age where every cheap smart phone is a calculator, the apex court lost sight of this mathematical incongruity, electoral curiosity and political minefield. The Supreme Court simply leap frogged Mr. Uzodinma from a fourth position in the original score ranking to number one and governor in an instant. In an apparent haste to hand Mr. Hope Uzodinma the keys to the Owerri Governor’s mansion, the Court retrieved and tallied the INEC discredited votes and arrived at a ruling that produced a voter turnout far in excess of the total number of registered and accredited voters in the affected polling stations.
    In the process, the Court opened itself to charges of vicarious ballot inflation amounting to election rigging. These are felonies that Nigerian politicians are repeatedly charged with but hardly get convicted for. In the aftermath of this ruling on the Imo governorship elections, therefore, it became hard for the public to choose between the Supreme Court and crass partisan politicians.

    The growing tradition of Judicial recklessness is not exactly the fault of the judiciary. Its origins and driving force are essentially political and societal. We have bred a political class that has a fundamentally transactional attitude to power. Nigerian politicians treat and approach political contests as the equivalent of warfare in which they have to conquer their opponents through the deployment of everything at their disposal. Cash and violence are the principal weapons of choice. Politicians have been known to bribe INEC election officials to twist the ballot, the police to barricade their opponents and even the military to terrorize their rivals. Even when they lose the very elections, politicians have been known to bribe or blackmail judges to overturn legitimate electoral outcomes. Through the overwhelming influence of politicians on the judiciary, our democracy has been so disfigured that we now rely on the verdict of a handful judges to validate or vitiate the verdict of millions of voters.

    The unsavory conclusion is that the Nigerian judiciary has in recent times constantly mired itself in odious political mud. In the process, it has descended from the pinnacle of learned discourse to the rough and tumble of street corner banter and gutter sniping. Hardly anyone out there takes our courts, judges and judgments seriously anymore. Among common folk these days, the reputation of our judges and the courts over which they preside is repeatedly thrashed and lampooned by fish mongers, two penny whores, casual artisans and assorted palm wine bar patrons alike. Struggling free from this reputational mess will be hard and prolonged, if ever.

    The supremacy of the rule of law only finds meaning in a democracy because there is a standard expectation that the instruments of law will exemplify order.
    Something goes awfully wrong when the law itself violates the codes of orderly conduct and becomes a source of anarchic behavior. That is exactly where we stand now. The countdown to the fraught 2023 electoral season is a bad time for our judges to exhibit their trademark rascality and crass mercantilism. These judicial bad manners are endangering our democratic prospects and laying the red carpet for authoritarianism and anarchy. It is a playground for unscrupulous politicians. And we are all at risk.