Opinions

Written by Administrator

We have watched with sadness the exchange between the Plateau State Governor, Da Jonah Jang and the Nigeria Army over the most recent massacre of hundreds of innocent and defenceless people in Jos. We wonder why such exchange should be allowed to take centre stage while the grave issues remain unsolved. Nevertheless our take on the matter is as follows: It is shocking that the Nigerian Army in a shameless statement that exposed its irresponsibility, insensitivity and dereliction of duty sought to defend its failure to prevent the cold blooded massacre of hapless and helpless people of Plateau State in their sleep by accusing the Governor of naivety. By this accusation, the Army is suggesting that the massacre was officially sanctioned by it and that the Governor a senior military officer ought to have known about the plans of the Army to look the other way while citizens of the state are massacred. It should be noted that the Army in its statement did not explain why its Commanders did not respond to the distress call of the Governor, the wailings of the people and calls for help by the affected. For three hours people wailed, shouted, screamed and asked for help which the army did not provide and the curfew imposed by the Army did not allow other people to go and help!
By questioning the judgment of Governor Jang, himself a retired general of the Military, who was two times Governor of two states, and a professional trainer of the present crop of the Military hierarchy, the present Military authorities are suggesting that Nigerians should not have any iota of confidence in the military. Certainly the statement insults the sensibilities of Nigerians and speaks volumes of the military’s perception of its responsibility to the People. Is it not curious that the Army did not respond to the issues raised by the Governor instead the Army descended on the person of the Governor?
The statement undermines the authority and good standing of the Army in the perception of right thinking people. It is universally assumed that when a city or state is under curfew, particularly the type of severe curfew in Jos, it means that the lives of the people are under the care of the authorities enforcing the curfew. The Army which is in charge should therefore take full responsibility for what happened to the people of Dogon na Hauwa and show remorse or at worse maintain a dignified silence in the face of its apparent failure. But for the curfew, the people may have been able to protect themselves or get help from neighbours or at worse run away.
We all know that since the January crises, the entire security apparatus in Plateau state has been left in the hands of the Army. The Army supervises the curfew which lasts from 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM. It is therefore inconceivable that this genocide could have been committed without the consent, or at best, connivance of the Army. Furthermore, we now know, that the Governor of Plateau state, Da Jonah Jang, alerted the GOC, Major General Maina (who has been severally accused of partisanship by victims and their relations) of the impending attack yet the Army did not respond while the attack lasted. The questions to ask are how come help did not get to the people from the Army who were within earshot of the areas affected? How did the Islamic jihadists get past the Army checkpoints? Or how can the Army claim that the shrill wailings of women and children that were being butchered in their hundreds, the sky high flames of burning homes and churches as well as the booming sounds of automatic guns did not get to their ears at the wee hours of the night when even the cry of a single infant at that time could be heard from a distance? These questions the Army has not attempted to answer, rather the Army Authorities elect to dwell on trivialities and the trading of tackles with Governor Jang.
That the Nigerian Army is highly rated around the globe for excellence in International peace keeping, suggests very clearly that the inability of the army to stop the recent massacre was not in error nor an issue of its competence or lack of logistics. This incident adds credence to the suspicion in several quarters that the Army facilitated this massacre to spark up nationwide chaos that will create the grounds for a military takeover of Government and to further some ethnic and religious agenda.
While it is not our place to ask for the removal of the failed GOC, perhaps it is correct to invite the Army to borrow a leaf from the Police who responded swiftly to the complaints of the Muslim community in Plateau State in the wake of the January crisis by swiftly removing the CP. If the Army Authorities do not have the liver to do so, it should at least advice this failed General to shut up and stop embarrassing the Army with his childish text message explanations

Statement signed on behlaf the MIDDLE BELT DIALOGUE by

Hon Biturs Kaze

Hon Mark Jacob

Rima Shawulu Kwewum

Conrad Wegba

Write comment (0 Comments)

We need a revolution

Opinions

Written by Comrade Abiodun Aremu

I should correct a major error being made when a discourse of this nature comes up, when people say, “We have done enough talks and what is required is action”. The fact is that we have done much of wrong talks to wrong audiences, and very little of the real talk to a misunderstood audience. Fela Anikulapo is one Nigerian and African patriot that had done much of the real talk to a misunderstood audience. Check it out in “Army Arrangement”, “Sorrow, Tears and Blood”, “Authority Stealing”, “International Thief Thief”, “Suffering and Smiling”, etc. Without the real talk to the real actors, there can never be the real action.

Having read the brilliant expositions of Professor Adele Jinadu’s First Unrevised Draft given to me last night as one of the Discussants, I cannot attempt writing another paper; but as a revolutionary involved in daily political struggle, I will try to point out some practical lessons, which the lecture has brought to the fore.

The lecture draws inspiration from the moral environment on which core democratic values are anchored; but it must be emphasized that the moral environment is a creation of the socio-economic foundation. Marxist-Leninist political economy and further works by Che Guevara in Socialism and Man, and Economic Thoughts have established the primacy of the economy as the base on which the moral force rests in transforming the society. Thus, my intervention is from the point of view of economic relations, the real foundation upon which the legal and moral superstructures of the society are founded.

While I agree with the analysis of Professor Jinadu on the prevalence in the Nigeria polity, my point of departure is that the real question is: Who control the economy and for whom? Answering this question is critical to understanding our topic of discourse and the struggle for resource control and resource distribution.

1.    First, is to say that Democracy in Nigeria should be discussed in the context of production or economic relations for the following reasons:

1.1 The various attempts to build democracy in Nigeria since the self-rule regional governments of the 1950s through the 60s to the 1979 – 83 civilian regime, and the IBB-Abacha-Abdulsalam military’s ‘demonstration of craziness’ arrangements of 1989 – 93, 1995 – 98, and 1998 to date; is anchored on capitalism (i.e. capitalist socio-economic relations). Hence, the democracy being built on such economic foundation will:

·         Logically erode the social charter in the 1999 Constitution that states as part of its economic goals that “wealth shall not be concentrated in few hands at the expense of the majority”.

·         Definitely undermine the ‘rule of law” once the policy is to further primitive accumulation and deny the working people access to equitable shares of the commonwealth.

·         Promote illusions and deceptive ephemeral alliances of the oppressed and the oppressors such as the June 12 struggle, electoral/constitutional reforms network, make-Jonathan-acting president comedy, etc.

·         Produce a smart Soludo who needed to bury his head in the PDP as one of the new generation rulers in the making in order to protect his loots from the CBN. El-Rufai and Ribadu are being haunted now by the EFCC on their loots because they have temporarily chosen to rebel against the cycle of thieves that produced them.

·         Celebrate a Maryam Babangida et all as a heroine on the despicable ground that she brought glamour to the office of the first lady, whereas her so-called ‘Better Life for Rural Women’ was another platform to SAP the majority Nigerians, loot and misappropriate our collective wealth between 1985 and 93.

1.2 Nigeria still operates as a new-colony of Britain and America and therefore produce generations of lean-on-me and Uncle Tom rulers that must swallow any political and economic formula dictated by Britain and America.

·         Flowing from this, Nigeria rulers have perfected the “do or die” strategy of imperialism, which started in 1961 with the assassination of Patrice Lumumba and other African patriots whose models of leadership would have paved way for democratic transformation of the African political space. In its own style, the Nigerian ruling cabal, particularly since 2000 focused on assassination of perceived political enemies, with Dipo Dina being the latest victim. As at August 2006, the UAD listed 44 such cases of unresolved politically motivated murders.

Nigeria democratic quest is not even yet at the level of the 18th Century Europe’s franchise or universal adult suffrage. Neither is it at the level of the models of Ghana, South Africa, etc., we are quick at making examples of what go around us without understanding the concrete historical and socio-economic realities shaping such. The so-called capitalist models of democracies that we labour to ‘borrow’ or ‘copy’ from in Europe and America were nurtured by class struggles which resulted in one form of bourgeois revolution or the other, and some social welfare concessions, which the people desperately struggle to either sustain or advance. The examples were:
·         British revolution of 1642 – 1649

·         American War of Independence – 1775 – 1783, Civil war (1861 – 65)

·         French revolution of 1789 – 1893, Civil war and Paris Commune

·         Haiti (1st Black revolution) 1789 – 1804,

·         Peasants war in Germany, and

·         Revolutions across Europe from the 1830s to the Paris Commune of 1871

Ethnic divisiveness is a major limitation to building democracy in Nigeria. Only the Socialist revolution has provided answer to this question with the Constitution of the USSR having a Secession Clause, which allowed the independent republics to secede without a fight.
Interestingly my intervention is concluded on an event that was concluded on the eve of this lecture, the recognition of Jonathan as the acting president. Let me share with you what I wrote 3 days ago: “we have been so much used to deceits, hypocrisy and falsehoods that once there is a moment of truth, we all tremble. This explains why a very minor constitutional issue of the absence of Yardy (who is incapacitated and faced with imminent death) has now become the only issue being discussed, which if we had a National Assembly that is serious and not consumed by how to loot their shares of the commonwealth, would have been resolved. Let’s change the discourse. Is it the absence of Yardy that say some states should not pay the TSS owed primary and secondary school teachers or that agreements reached with ASUU should not be honoured? What of the demand by Labour for a new national minimum wage or the electoral reform bills before the National Assembly? Yet despite that Yardy is sick, states and local governments receive their monthly allocations, and the looting spree continued, while the majority Nigerians continue in deprivation…”
Democracy will not emerge in Nigeria from the standpoint of the regulated and paid protests/meetings that put people on the streets on the terms of the oppressors. If we want democracy, we have to go back to memory lane to take a cue from the real democratic struggles we waged in recent past – Education is a Right and not a privilege & Academic Freedom (1978, 84, 86, 89 - 93), National Minimum Living Wage (1981), Nigeria not for Sale (1980s), Anti-SAP (1986-9), July 5 – 7, 1993 Mass Protests, Anti-Deregulation & Privatisation Strikes/Protests, Struggle for System Change (1999 to date), etc.

If there is any reason to save Nigeria, it is to organize and mobilize Nigerians to wage a revolution to rid the polity of the IBB, OBJ, Yar’Adua and Badluck Jonathan, Dangote and Otedola and others who serve as fronts for looting the resources of the nation.

Interventions by Comrade Abiodun Aremu (Joint-Secretary of Labour and Civil Society Coalition (LASCO) and immediate past Convener of United Action for Democracy (UAD) at the 4th Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti Memorial Lecture, held in Lagos, February 10, 2010

Write comment (0 Comments)

If Nigeria Fails?

Opinions

Written by Princeton Lyman: Former U.S. ambassador to South Africa and Nigeria

Thank you very much Prof. Keller and thanks to the organizers of this conference. It is such a privilege to be here in a conference in honor of Prof. Achebe, an inspiration and teacher to all of us.

I have a long connection to Nigeria . Not only was I Ambassador there, I have travelled to and from Nigeria for a number of years and have a deep and abiding vital emotional attachment to the Nigerian people, their magnificence, their courage, artistic brilliance, their irony, sense of humor in the face of challenges etc.

And I hope that we keep that in mind when I say some things that I think are counter to what we normally say about Nigeria . And I say that with all due respect to Eric Silla* who is doing a magnificent work at State Department and to our good friend from the legislature, because I have a feeling that we both Nigerians and Americans may be doing Nigeria and Nigerians no favor by stressing Nigeria's strategic importance.

I know all the arguments: it is a major oil producer, it is the most populous country in Africa, it has made major contributions to Africa in peacekeeping, and of course negatively if Nigeria were to fall apart the ripple effects would be tremendous, etc.. But I wonder if all this emphasis on Nigeria 's importance creates a tendency of inflate Nigeria 's opinion of its own invulnerability.

Among much of the elite today, I have the feeling that there is a belief that Nigeria is too big to fail, too important to be ignored, and that Nigerians can go on ignoring some of the most fundamental challenges they have many of which we have talked about: disgraceful lack of infrastructure, the growing problems of unemployment, the failure to deal with the underlying problems in the Niger-Delta, the failure to consolidate democracy and somehow feel will remain important to everybody because of all those reasons that are strategically important. And I am not sure that that is helpful.

Let me sort of deconstruct those elements of Nigeria’s importance, and ask whether they are as relevant as they have been.

We often hear that one in five Africans is a Nigerian. What does it mean? Do we ever say one in five Asians is a Chinese? Chinese power comes not just for the fact that it has a lot of people but it has harnessed the entrepreneurial talent and economic capacity and all the other talents of China to make her a major economic force and political force.

What does it mean that one in five Africans is Nigeria? It does not mean anything to a Namibian or a South African. It is a kind of conceit. What makes it important is what is happening to the people of Nigerian. Are their talents being tapped? Are they becoming an economic force? Is all that potential being used?

And the answer is "Not really."

And oil, yes, Nigeria is a major oil producer, but Brazil is now launching a 10-year program that is going to make it one of the major oil producers in the world. And every other country in Africa is now beginning to produce oil.

And Angola is rivaling Nigeria in oil production, and the United States has just discovered a huge gas reserve which is going to replace some of our dependence on imported energy.

So if you look ahead ten years, is Nigeria really going to be that relevant as a major oil producer, or just another of another of the many oil producers while the world moves on to alternative sources of energy and other sources of supply.

And what about its influence, its contributions to the continent? As our representative from the parliament talked about, there is a great history of those contributions. But that is history.

Is Nigeria really playing a major role today in the crisis in Niger on its border, or in Guinea , or in Darfur, or after many many promises making any contributions to Somalia ? The answer is no, Nigeria is today NOT making a major impact, on its region, or on the African Union or on the big problems of Africa that it was making before.

What about its economic influence?

Well, as we have talked about earlier, there is a de-industrialization going on in Nigeria a lack of infrastructure, a lack of power means that with imported goods under globalization, Nigerian factories are closing, more and more people are becoming unemployed and Nigeria is becoming a kind of society that imports and exports and lives off the oil, which does not make it a significant economic entity. Now, of course, on the negative side, the collapse of Nigeria would be enormous, but is that a point to make Nigeria strategically important?

Years ago, I worked for an Assistant Secretary of State who had the longest tenure in that job in the 1980s and I remember in one meeting a minister from a country not very friendly to the United States came in and was berating the Assistant Secretary on all the evils of the United States and all its dire plots and in things in Africa and was going on and on and finally the Assistant Secretary cut him off and said: "You know, the biggest danger for your relationship with the United States is not our opposition but that we will find you irrelevant."

The point is that Nigeria can become much less relevant to the United States. We have already seen evidence of it. When President Obama went to Ghana and not to Nigeria, he was sending a message, that Ghana symbolized more of the significant trends, issues and importance that one wants to put on Africa than Nigeria.

And when I was asked by journalists why President Obama did not go to Nigeria, I said "what would he gain from going? Would Nigeria be a good model for democracy, would it be a model for good governance, would he obtain new commitments on Darfur or Somalia or strengthen the African Union or in Niger or elsewhere?" No he would not, so he did not go.

And when Secretary Clinton did go, indeed but she also went to Angola and who would have thought years ago that Angola would be the most stable country in the Gulf of Guinea and establish a bi-national commission in Angola.

So the handwriting may already be on the wall, and that is a sad commentary. Because what it means is that Nigeria’s most important strategic importance in the end could be that it has failed.

And that is a sad sad conclusion. It does not have to happen, but I think that we ought to stop talking about what a great country it is, and how terribly important it is to us and talk about what it would take for Nigeria to be that important and great. And that takes an enormous amount of commitment. And you don't need saints, you don't need leaders like Nelson Mandela in every state, because you are not going to get them.

I served in South Korea in the middle of the 1960s and it was time when South Korea was poor and considered hopeless, but it was becoming to turn around, later to become to every person's amazement then the eleventh largest economy in the world. And I remember the economist in my mission saying, you know it did not bother him that the leading elites in the government of South Korea were taking 15 - 20 percent off the top of every project, as long as every project was a good one, and that was the difference. The leadership at the time was determined to solve the fundamental economic issues of South Korea economy and turn its economy around.

It has not happened in Nigeria today. You don't need saints. It needs leaders who say "You know we could be becoming irrelevant, and we got to do something about it."
Thank you.
Princeton N. Lyman, Adjunct Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies, Council on Foreign Relations, Former U.S. ambassador to South Africa and Nigeria, made these remarks at the Achebe Foundation Colloquium on Nigerian Election at Providence, Rhode Island, USA, on December 11, 2009.

Write comment (0 Comments)

SOUTHERN KADUNA IS BEING MARGINALISED--MARK JACOB

Opinions
Written by Administrator
Mr. Mark Jacob was a one time National Legal Adviser of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) before he was appointed Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in Kaduna state during the administration of former governor Ahmed Mohammed Makarfi. In this interview with correspondent RANA BAYOK in Kaduna , Mark accused the administration of Governor Mohammed Namadi Sambo of unequal distribution of resources in the state, alleging that the Southern part of Kaduna state was being marginalized. Excerpts. *Few months into the next election year, the electoral reform which the president promised is yet to be carried out. Do you think that we are going to have these reforms before the next election?* I quite believe that the electoral system requires some inputs. I also believe that the president meant well when he said that electoral reform will be one of his cardinal objectives and I hold it strongly that this is possible before 2011. We can have a new electoral law before the next election. As long as people are serious and dedicated to their duty, the process of law making can take a very short time. There are areas that do not require constitutional amendment, while there are areas that require constitutional amendment. The most cumbersome aspect of this is actually knowing what Nigerians expect and having in detail what the electoral reform will look like. So, I think that the president has scored a pass mark in setting up that committee headed by the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Lawal Uwais to look at the details, collate all the information and make it into one report. It reduces the scope of work and I sure that the content of that report can easily be compressed into what will make for a good electoral law for the country especially those areas that does not require constitutional amendment. *INEC Chairman recently raised an alarm that the 2011 elections are threatened by the lack of an enabling law. What do you think about that?* I don’t really understand what he meant by that. *That the law that will guide the election ought to have been ready by now.* If you want an election to be truly transparent, the issues that should be considered are not complicated. First, make sure that there a voter’s register that is authentic, make sure that people’s votes count, make sure that the man who is going to declare the result declare exactly what has been cast by the electorate. All these don’t require any long term planning. Agreed that the logistics need to be put in place. But it is not really about law making or about the existence of detailed laws; but the will and desire by the operators of the system to make it work. I believe that in Nigeria , we have a collection of people who are interested in genuine and fair election and we can do this thing once we decide that we are going to do it. The law as it can be amended to make for those things that are fundamental. Make sure that we have a credible voter’s register and that when you go to Ward A, you don’t find the register of ward B. These are issues that can be corrected without necessarily looking for a new law. The existing law as it is makes provision for such things to be taken care of. I believe that once there is a will, Nigerians will make things work and I believe that we can make it work. 2011 is around the corner and there is trouble here and there among members of the PDP in various states. If things continue like this, do you really think that the party has any chance in the next elections. A: Let me say clearly that we are used to crisis and that politics without these kinds of crises is not sweet. But how you manage crises is what matters. Any state that does not manage its crisis properly will suffer for it. One reason why I say so is because Nigerians are becoming more enlightened by the day and becoming more interested in their rights and not just the privileges. We no longer have the situation where you can compel people to vote for you whether they like it or not or you can vote for them by proxy. There are people in Nigeria today who will insist that their votes must count. I want to think that the number is growing by the day by virtue of political education and the growth in the system which I think is coming as a result of the sustenance of democratic structures. We need to sustain democracy so that with time, something will continue to happen. I believe that with time, these things will be shifted and will get to the real sense of democracy. The system will be cleaned up and we will get to the true sense of democracy that we are aiming at. But I say very strongly that we have been inundated with crisis here and there within the PDP. It is not new. It is either somebody wants to become chairman or secretary; somebody wants to contest election or wants to bring down someone and take the position. These things are normal, but like I said, it is how you manage these crises that matters. Kano state for instance has been unable to recover from the crisis encountered after 1999 and that former stronghold of the PDP was suddenly taken over by the ANPP without any struggle. It all bore down to how the operators of the system at any micro manage any matter. *You are saying that if the party failed to manage these crises before 2011, it might lose the elections?* That is the natural consequence. You go to Anambra; it is the same situation, go to Imo, the same. I was at the party executive at the national level and I know that the PDP lost some of these elections not because the party was not on ground or not popular; but largely because the operators of the system did not manage the crisis of who should be the candidate and who should not be. It is the same situation we are now having in Anambra again. Those who have bought and returned the form in Anambra as at yesterday (Tuesday, September 15, 2009) are 35 for one governorship seat for one party. So, you can see that the failure to manage such things gives birth to this plurality of candidates. I know that one of the things we encountered even when the PDP challenged the elections in Anambra was that there were people who were challenging the nomination of the PDP candidate. That was after the elections. The operators of the system need to manage the system towards peace and amicable resolution of the crisis. Crisis is natural occurrence in any human endevour, particularly in politics where the interest are largely personal and people are just interested in occupying offices. You are bound to have crisis, but how you manage them; whether you are matured in the handling, whether you are dispassionate, lay down your personal interest and allow the larger interest of the community to over ride yours matters a lot. Aside the crisis in the PDP, the Nigerian nation is at a standstill at the moment, nothing is moving. Don’t you think this is an indication that the PDP is losing grip and that this might work against them in 2011? I don’t absolutely believe that nothing is working. There are a few things that are working, but we must admit that there are apparent failures here and there. But again, when you talk of 2011, who else will take it from the PDP. Who is the opposition when everybody is decamping to the PDP? Even those who are not in PDP in their states are doing the same thing that the PDP states are doing? There is nothing unique; there is nothing you can point at like what you have during the Shagari era when you could say this is a PRP era pursuing this agenda. You go to Edo , with due respect to the Comrade Governor, the reports coming in are not in any way different from any other PDP state. You go to Borno where you have ANPP, I am not sure that you will have any remarkable difference from what you have in any other state. So, who is going to take over from the PDP in 2011? They do not exist. The opposition has shown that they have virtually surrendered and most of them have closed their offices. In APGA, the crisis going on right now between the two factional leaders with everybody announcing them as national chairman with only one governor, what will happen if they have up to five governors? So, these are the issues that must be tackled by Nigerians holistically. Truly, there is no viable opposition that can give the PDP any serious fight at least by 2011. *We are aware of the infighting within the PDP in Kaduna state and you are talking about the problem at the national level. Are you saying that by 2011, the PDP can still win the elections?* At the national level, people are decamping from other parties to the PDP; it is not as if we even have any serious or vibrant opposition. Whatever crisis we have as a party is internal. I have refused to just keep quiet and say this is a family affair and when things are wrong, we just keep quiet and sweep them under the carpet in the name of espirit de corp. We need to checkmate ourselves. Otherwise, this solid foundation we seem to be boasting about can be swept away. It is not possible that you have a party and install a government and the government does not perform and you expect that without any difficulty, you will still win. The natural consequences of failure are that if the people are responsible and are interested in protecting their votes, they will not support any government that fails or they will not vote him back to office. The court of the common man is his vote where he dispenses justice himself by saying I gave you a mandate and you have not performed and so, I am withdrawing the mandate. That is the right of the common man. We are saying that as a party, we have internal problems and we are not happy that we have such internal problems because they are not necessary and are not supposed to be there. The issues under discussion are issues that ought not to even arise because everybody involved in politics should know those elementary issues and address them. *What really are those things you believe are working and those things that are not working in the Nigerian system?* I wouldn’t want to be a spokesman for the government today because generally, you need to agree with me that a few things are working. Let me take you to how Nigeria has been run in the past where accountability has never been an issue. I can say today with joy in my heart that this government and the one before it put in place structures that call the high and mighty to account for service, to account for the resources of the state, resources of the people handed over to them in good faith. People are being held accountable and you agree with me that this has not been part of Nigeria for a long time. That we have it today is a plus. People you can describe in the past as untouchable are today touchable and are now answerable to some structures that have been put in place by this government. There is also the area of communication. Today, we can communicate and a sometimes ago, that was not possible. Nigeria today has one of the fastest growing telecom markets. Whether we are positively managing it or not is another issue. These are issues that are very germane tom the survival of the society. Electricity and electoral reforms are certainly bad. We have not scored high marks there. But I want to believe that there are many things that are working beside the ones that I have mentioned. People see your recent remarks in the media as an extension of the seeming political feud between former governor Ahmed Mohammed Makarfi and Governor Namadi Sambo. As a close associate of the former governor, we want to know from you whether there is any problem between them. I will say very clearly that I was not aware of the feud until I read the statements of Umar Gana, Husseini Jallo and the PDP chairman in the state in the media. Until then, I was not aware that there was a feud between the two. It was Umar Gana who was not part of the machineries that brought the present governor into office because he was not part of the campaign at all. He came back after the elections and he is now speaking for this government that he was not part of. He has repeatedly said that between Namadi Sambo and Makarfi, it is a fight to finish and that they will never settle. I read it with fear because I didn’t know when they started fighting. Then the PDP state chairman also made a statement that Makarfi has been causing trouble in the state and that they are going to deal with him and that he should come out and face them in the 2011 election so that they can stripe him naked and show the world that he is actually powerless and nothing in the state. I read that one also with very serious caution. Husseini Jallo was the one who said the most unprintable things which I don’t want to repeat. He went as far as saying that they will deal with Makarfi. It is from these snippets of Journalistic work that some of us got to know that there is something in between. I spoke about equitable sharing of state resources and state power and for God sake, I don’t need any Makarfi to educate me on that or instigate me to say that. I am a player of this game and I know that the reward of politics is not in heaven, but here. When you sow in politics, you reap it here. If you don’t reap it here, you have lost. I followed the present governor round the state and he said in my local government that any area or section of the state that gives him the lion share of votes will get the lion share of appointments and projects. He used the commercial language like your vote is like your shares in this company. When the dividends will come, it will go to those who put in more shares. If you go to the ministry of water resources for example, one project alone in Zaria is costing N15 billion and when you go my own side of the state, the entire boreholes, both ongoing and completed in the area is not up to N1 billion. So, why should anybody feel that he is being fair to me? When election come, he will not go there, I will be the one to go and the people will confront me. These are the issues and Makarfi does not need to tell me to raise my voice on this. He does not even know what it is because he does not live there and has no family there. The common man, whether in Soba or in Zonkwa should be able to enjoy minimally. I am not saying that the project in Zaria should not be done. Infact, I am very happy that the project is being done and that the water problem in Zaria will be solved. If they are going to resolve the water crisis in Zaria , it is a good thing because we have many federal institutions in Zaria and if there is a water scheme that will take care of that problem, I will be happy. But what I am saying is that there is enough money to do that and build a similar thing in Manchok, Kafanchan or Zonkwa. I also made it clear that we have an existing water system that was built a long time ago with sponsorship from the World Bank. It flow from Manchok and serve Kaura and Zangon Kataf local government and can also serve Ja’maa local government. That thing is not being utilized till today because of lack of power to generate and pump the power. The pipes have been laid and the machines are working perfectly well. During Makarfi’s tenure, an arrangement was made for diesel to be supplied to the plant so that water can be pumped to these local government. Everything is in place there except for power supply and nobody has bothered about it. Instead of taking care of that, they are going to sink boreholes that will break down after one year and you say we should not talk. When we talk, you say we are Makarfi boys. What has Makarfi got to do with water supply to my village? Do I need to be a friend to Makarfi to know what is good for me? People should address the real issues and leave the mundane things aside and use them in the gossip corners. *Talking about equitable distribution of resources, would you say that during the Makarfi era, resources were equitably distributed compared to the present administration in Kaduna state?* If you have been in Kaduna , you will know that there was a time some people called him Joseph. They were abusing him because, for the first time, somebody was paying attention to the Southern Kaduna interest. I cannot speak for him, but when the truth comes, we speak it. I was a part of a group called Club 12 and we were good at analyzing projects when the budget of the state is announced. We look at where all these projects are going and we condemned him where necessary and gave him pass mark where necessary. Of course, it is not a 50-50 ratio; but I can say that for the first time in over 18 years, somebody bothered to open up the interior, send electricity to the interior of Southern Kaduna ; give us Chiefdoms that people have been craving for before we were born. Somebody bothered to say talk to me and I will talk to you. We were condemning Makarfi, but he never shut us up. We use to condemn even the quality of road projects in our area. When we talk today, it is not saying that Makarfi was 100 perfect or that he never faulted. He had his areas of failure and we never failed to point them out. He had his areas of passes and we gave it to him. Makarfi won our heart in many areas and we expected that this governor who was brought in singlehandedly by Makarfi will follow his footsteps and improve on those things he stated. Our side of the state is the most patient and most docile. If you give us a small chunk of these things, we will allow you to take the rest and that is what Makarfi did. He knew that we are not vicious people and not ungrateful people; that we are gentlemen and those who did not even go to school are responsible people. When you show them good spirit and a good heart and want to relate with them as human being, treat them as partners in this game and then engage them in the things you are doing. I am saying it clearly that we don’t have the same scenario today and people are not addressing the difference. That is why they run to say Makarfi boys or Namadi boys. By the way, who are the Namadi boys? Is it Senator Musa Bello? He was a governorship candidate of Action Congress and lost the primaries when Namadi was contesting the primaries in PDP. So, when did he become the champion? You became governor and threw away all the people that worked for you and take the people that have been against the PDP. Things cannot work when you are doing that. *Governor Sambo has an 11 points agenda. What are those areas that you think he has done well? Secondly, in 2011, is Southern Kaduna preparing anybody to take over from Sambo?* 11 points is too much. I wish he had only one or two which he will concentrate on. Today, you are neither here nor there. I challenged him to take up one of these agenda and tell us how far he has worked. Forget about the tantrum in the newspaper by the Commissioner for Information about keeping promises and all that. They are spending our money on propaganda. I wish some of this money being spent on keeping promises will be spent on the construction of a small dam somewhere so that the people in Ikara will get water, somebody in the interior of Abet can drink water from a pipe. We are just deceiving ourselves with 11 points agenda. I hope that at the end of the day, somebody will do an end of tenure report that will score the government on these 11 points. It should not be the governor scoring himself. Let outsiders access what is happening and report. If they find out that this man has worked, I will surrender. But I maintain that there is nothing to show from all the propaganda going on. As for whether we are grooming somebody, time will tell. For us, we live by the day because that is our up bring. We live and pray to God for today, tomorrow will serve it. But I assure you that from what is on ground today, unless it changes, there is going to be some shaking. The Attorney General and Minister of Justice and the EFCC has been engaged in a war of words of late with the minister insisting that the EFCC cleared some people which the commission said they did not clear. What is your opinion about this development? Personally, I don’t think that the Attorney General has any business addressing the press on matters like this. He is hitting up the politics unnecessarily. There is a minister of Information and the EFCC has a spokesman. Ordinarily, even in the Ministry of Justice, he is supposed to have a Press Secretary. There are things you don’t come out yourself to do for the sake of maintaining your status and really being an Attorney General. I do not see any reason why a senior member of the bar should be over stretching himself explaining something as if he was in court. It is not his business. In fact, the governors under discussion should be the ones explaining that they were cleared and not him. Is he their lawyer? It is not a very healthy development. But I do know that as the supervising minister over EFCC, he was trying to help them explain some things to the public. But if EFCC, as it has become now has come out to say we didn’t clear anybody, it becomes an embarrassment. You are the supervising minister and a parastatal under you is challenging your integrity publicly. He should leave these things to those who are trained to handle the media. ENDS Write comment (0 Comments)

THE EDUCATION SECTOR IN NIGERIA UNDER SEIGE

Opinions
Written by BY Alphonsus Eseleme
The nation’s education sector was already reeling from the effects of the ASUU strike when another front was opened by a rather peculiar interest group, not usually associated with the sector. The palaver was sparked by UBEC’s advertisement inviting pre-qualification bid from contractors for supply of school furniture, which prompted protests from Intermarkets, a company that had executed a similar contract for UBEC in 2005, demanding exclusive rights to the supply contract advertised by UBEC. From there commenced a flurry of events, including litigation and eventually, an EFCC swoop which took in some UBEC executives as well as the company boss. In the aftermath, it became public knowledge that there were some sharp practices and contraventions of due process in the award of the 2005 contract for the supply of plastic chairs and tables for some secondary schools. As the investigations progressed, a media campaign was unleashed by the peculiar interest group, with the purpose of discrediting UBEC by beclouding the main issues involved. Our concern here is not the on-going investigations and other legal processes, but the targeting of a strategic national educational institution such as UBEC and its board and management for media bashing over an issue that is not germane to its mandate. UBEC has always been in the news as a major player in the Federal Government’s strategic intervention in support of the delivery of qualitative basic education throughout the country. In recent times, the Commission has focused on monitoring and evaluation of the delivery chain through state and local government education boards and departments, and evolving effective measures to enhance prudence and quality assurance mechanisms, for the desired impact on basic education in the country. In its latest outing, a Good Performance Award initiative was revived to encourage greater performance of state governments in delivery of qualitative basic education, with commendable outcomes. Obviously, all these proactive measures are in line with the policies enunciated and enforced by the Yaradua Administration, especially the emphasis on prudent management of budgeted funds, due process and provision of qualitative education. It can therefore be clearly understood that a recourse to deliberate campaigns of calumny targeting UBEC and its executives by interests caught in the web of past discrepancies and indiscretions, is not only a ploy to becloud the reality of such misdeeds, but worse still, an unacceptable attempt to distract UBEC from its mission, even at the risk of derailing the recent initiatives that are already having the desired impact on the basic education sector that is so crucial as a foundation for higher levels of education. The orchestrated media campaigns have been targeting the professional and managerial competence of UBEC’s executives, especially its Executive Secretary, Dr Ahmed Modibbo Mohammed, whose unblemished career and enviable track record as a silent but highly committed and result-oriented professional is common knowledge in the nation’s education sector. From the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria where he began as a graduate assistant in the History Department in 1977, earning merited progression to Senior Lecturer by 1998, and occupying positions of Head of Department of History (1991-1997) as well as Dean, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (1995-1997), he had proved his mettle as a historian, academician and educationist. Dr Modibbo was a member of JAMB’s admission committee, WAEC’s Nigeria National Committee and Administrative and Finance Committee before being recognized with appointment as a member of the Education Sub-Committee, President-Elect Policy Advisory Committee in April 1999 and Ministerial Committee on Review and Drafting White Paper on Visitation Panel Reports on Federal Universities in October 1999. His appointment as Chief Executive of the National Teachers’ Institute(NTI) in 2000 turned around the fortunes of the Institute and gave it a new lease on life as the foremost distance learning teacher education institution in Nigeria, the acclaim of which is still reverberating at the NTI. His appointment as UBEC Executive Secretary was a vindication of his reputation for focus and performance, that is already manifest. However, none of this impressed the hired propagandists who are more interested in fabricating tales about “extended tenures” and maliciously redefining “seasoned educationist”, in a frantic bid to pull him down in retaliation for disrupting the peculiar business of their sponsors. Perhaps now we can understand what EFCC Chairperson Farida Waziri meant by stating recently that “when you fight corruption, corruption fights back”, because the wisdom and impact of policies and strategies implemented by UBEC under Dr Ahmed Modibbo Mohammed in furtherance of its founding objectives and need for refocusing to address observed challenges, have proved appropriate and effective and earned the endorsement of education authorities. Moreover, the media onslaught has not been able to find fault with issues pertaining to policies or implementation strategies adopted by UBEC hence the adoption of contrived criticism of qualifications and tenures. This episode shows how ruthless disgruntled vested interests can be in reacting to threats to their peculiar business interests. They have no qualms about deliberately casting aspersions on implementers of policies considered favorable to the nation’s quest for development and even disrupting the status-quo, if that will restore their business interests. This is not to say that there is no room for constructive criticism from competent quarters, as even the UBEC benefitted a lot from the contributions of various specialists and other valuable resource persons in basic education through several retreats and workshops organized precisely to augment in-house capacities and evolve innovative and effective strategies to address challenges, for the success of its policies and programmes. Critical areas like education should not be reduced to mere business opportunities to be exploited at the expense of the very policies and programmes that necessitate the involvement of purely commercial enterprises like contractors. The vision and mission of UBEC focusing on provision of qualitative basic education for the leaders of tomorrow should therefore be spared the wheeling and dealing and media propaganda that tends to distract attention from the crucial assignments outlined for implementation. National interest must not be subordinated to pecuniary peculiarities of private interests in the conduct of government affairs, especially in the education sector. ALPHONSUS ESELEME is a public affairs analyst in Onitsha Write comment (0 Comments)