Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is Nigeria’s ruling party. Its interest has clashed with that of corporate Nigeria. Unfortunately, the political class is carrying on as if Nigeria is a lawless country. It is a massive shame that a constitutional democracy can allow the interest of one political party to distort its constitution.
Up till now, the issue of rotational presidency is foreign to Nigerian constitution. That is to say; the constitution has not prescribed that the nation’s presidency rotates between the north and southern tribal divide. Contemplating it is therefore not just an insult on the constitution, but an indictment on those championing it.
By allowing the issue of rotational presidency remain in the public domain implies that Nigeria’s constitution is not supreme. This is dangerous and capable of collapsing the pillars that hold up Nigeria as a country. Political parties should not be allowed to hide under the banner of freedom to undermine the sanctity of rule, law, and order.
The constitution of all political parties must be legislated to conform to the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria. If not so, one or more political parties would wake up one morning and fix that only homosexuals are qualified to aspire to be president. Another party may just decide that only ex-convicts are qualified to be president. It is also possible that some parties would suggest that only bachelors are eligible to contest the presidency. To avoid all of these, let all political parties work within the framework of the constitution.
In another breadth, it is even possible that the clamour for rotational presidency is a ploy to kill and bury the PDP. If not so, I do not see any reason why democrats would choose to dance naked on the head of democracy. The leadership of PDP should come out and declare its stand on zoning so that Nigerians can know the political path to follow.
There is no doubt about the fact that PDP will die the moment zoning is adopted. Nigerians are tired of poor political leadership. It is necessary to note here that we cannot talk of political reforms when internal democracy is foreign to political parties in Nigeria. As the ruling party, PDP must show good example by shunning all undemocratic and unconstitutional practices. This is the only way Nigeria can achieve political growth, which would in turn stimulate socio-economic rejuvenation.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Mourhinho Culture and FIFA Have Destroyed Nigerian Football
There is no gainsaying that Nigerian football has climbed down to its lowest depth in recent times despite a steady increase in financial investments. Apart from a complete absence of developmental programmes by the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), the issue of corruption has almost become an acceptable norm in football administration in Nigeria. Unfortunately, not much have been done to check graft in the system owing to the blind and illogical support FIFA gives to national associations. Any member of the board of NFF that speaks out against corruption is either suspended or sidelined by the leadership of the Glass House. To make matters worse, a few corrupt officials in the NFF and NSC openly accuse government of “interference” and go ahead to use FIFA to threaten a ban each time issues pertaining to graft are raised. Enough is enough. Is it not with government money that Nigerian football is run? Why should government not be seen as an active stakeholder in Nigerian football? If the NFF does not want stakeholders to ask questions bothering on their finances, it must do well to source for funds from organisations that do not know their rights or appreciate the culture of transparency, accountability, and due process.
As a Nigerian, I had wished and hoped that Nigeria reached an appreciable level at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. This could not however be because football is a practical thing that needs a whole lot of planning and systematic implementations of associated actions and programmes.
I have said it over and again that the future of Nigerian football should not be built on foreign based players. We would therefore need to improve our local league and also invest in developmental programmes. No doubt, government cannot shoulder this responsibility alone. The organised private sector must be encouraged by way of incentives to partner with government in upgrading facilities and increase monetised benefits of professional players in the local league. With this, the mad rush to Europe will reduce and enable the coaches to effectively monitor and build our national teams around home based players.
Nigerians should ignore the charge of "inexperience" that is always hanged on the neck of home based players. While it is true that experience is vital in football, it is also true that this is the excuse lazy coaches have often times used to cover up their lapses. Knowing fully well that they have nothing to offer, such coaches would always want to ride on the backs of talented players to win laurels. This is what I refer to as the "Mourhinho culture." With the "Mourhinho culture", a coach does not need to develop talents. He only needs to poach. Unfortunately for Nigeria, there are no enough quality players to poach from both the foreign and local leagues. This is the reason why we have not been able to fair well at the world stage despite the fact some our nationals play first team football in major clubs across Europe.
It is very absurd that Nigeria rely on foreign based players for even cadet competitions. This should not have been the case if the quality of our local league is high. Perhaps I should mention here that most foreign based players are framed to value their respective clubs more than country. This could best explain the lack of commitment shown by most players in our national teams.
Another area of serious concern is the quality and integrity of our local coaches. This has most times led to the selection of low quality players. Apart from upgrading their knowledge on latest coaching methods, our local coaches must move away from sentiments while selecting players for the national teams. Chances to play in the national team should be open.
As a Nigerian, I had wished and hoped that Nigeria reached an appreciable level at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. This could not however be because football is a practical thing that needs a whole lot of planning and systematic implementations of associated actions and programmes.
I have said it over and again that the future of Nigerian football should not be built on foreign based players. We would therefore need to improve our local league and also invest in developmental programmes. No doubt, government cannot shoulder this responsibility alone. The organised private sector must be encouraged by way of incentives to partner with government in upgrading facilities and increase monetised benefits of professional players in the local league. With this, the mad rush to Europe will reduce and enable the coaches to effectively monitor and build our national teams around home based players.
Nigerians should ignore the charge of "inexperience" that is always hanged on the neck of home based players. While it is true that experience is vital in football, it is also true that this is the excuse lazy coaches have often times used to cover up their lapses. Knowing fully well that they have nothing to offer, such coaches would always want to ride on the backs of talented players to win laurels. This is what I refer to as the "Mourhinho culture." With the "Mourhinho culture", a coach does not need to develop talents. He only needs to poach. Unfortunately for Nigeria, there are no enough quality players to poach from both the foreign and local leagues. This is the reason why we have not been able to fair well at the world stage despite the fact some our nationals play first team football in major clubs across Europe.
It is very absurd that Nigeria rely on foreign based players for even cadet competitions. This should not have been the case if the quality of our local league is high. Perhaps I should mention here that most foreign based players are framed to value their respective clubs more than country. This could best explain the lack of commitment shown by most players in our national teams.
Another area of serious concern is the quality and integrity of our local coaches. This has most times led to the selection of low quality players. Apart from upgrading their knowledge on latest coaching methods, our local coaches must move away from sentiments while selecting players for the national teams. Chances to play in the national team should be open.
Political Leadership and the Nigerian Masses
There is no gainsaying that the leadership institution in Nigeria has over the decades been bastardised to the extent that citizens have stopped nurturing the patience to appreciate even the genuine efforts of our leaders. As a result of this, all the actions of our political leaders- no matter how genuine or sincere they may be are hurriedly dismissed as callous, deceptive, or fraudulent.
Quite frankly, it is usually difficult to find sufficient good reasons to blame Nigerians for not trusting their political leaders. From whatever angle one wants to look at it, there are mountains of evidence to show that nation’s past military and political leaders did not do enough to win the confidence of the masses and the international community. This should however be a major challenge to President Goodluck Jonathan, as he attempts to lay a solid foundation for Nigeria’s economic and socio-political development.
One very rare quality of a good leader is the humility to not just listen, but also accede to popular wish. Remarkably, it takes only a sincere and humble leader to do so. Only recently, President Goodluck Jonathan responded to public opinion and withdrew the names of two nominees: Major General Abdullahi Mamman (rtd) and Ambassador Mohammed Anka to the board of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Rather than seeing and counting this as a plus for the president, a section of the media painted Dr. Jonathan as one that has been “forced to bow to public pressure.” But for the kind of person he is- not given to pride, President Goodluck Jonathan could for the sake of pride or ego decide to stick to his guns in subsequent cases. To a very large extent, it is the society that unconsciously makes dictators out of democrats.
A marked difference between Dr. Goodluck Jonathan and many of his contemporaries is that he is hardly moved to flaunt his inner strength even when compelled by natural or human-induced circumstances. That is one strong reason why some persons have rushed to dismiss him as a weakling. Funny enough, these were the same people that complained against Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s iron-hand and one-man-army style of leadership. We should realise that the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria has prescribed equal amount of power for every sitting president. How raw, one uses political power clearly differentiates between democrats and mere politicians.
There is another significant lesson to learn from the events that led to the nomination and withdrawal of Mamman and Anka. In every healthy government- especially the presidential democracy; the president is not expected to make him or her self an island. Political leadership is usually a collective effort where the level of success is mostly dependent on the quality of team work. It was perhaps in this direction that both Mamman and Anka were identified and subsequently nominated by President Goodluck Jonathan. The consequent withdrawal of their nomination could as well cause the president not to have confidence in the opinions of his aides and personal staff in future. There is iron-cast evidence that one or more persons in the line of duty failed to carry out proper checks on the nominees. There were begging evidences against the nominees which the president could not have ignored. Similar developments have in the past turned listening presidents into a one-man-team. The late President Yar’Adua is a ready example. Most of his personal staff, aides, and confidants abused their privileged positions so much so that the president decided to do everything important thing by himself. This was the reason for his administration’s slow-motion. This is a huge challenge to all those directly and indirectly associated with political office holders. They must endeavour to always put the interests of the wider society ahead of parochial concerns. This will not only stimulate rapid socio-economic growth; but also help to deepen the roots of democracy and good governance. President Goodluck Jonathan has vital lessons to learn from the above narrative. It is not enough to seek the good of Nigeria. Nothing should make him undermine the old fashioned Nigerian factor. Vigilance is the word. All corrupt, unproductive, snail, and speed-breaker officials in his administration must be identified, removed, and prosecuted if the need arises.
While I agree with the argument that six months is enough to point to the direction of hope, I do not think Nigeria is healthy enough to recover in the next one year if the level of decay is anything to go by. But for the fear of being labelled an apologist, I would have mentioned right from the beginning that Nigerians should be patient with President Jonathan. These are the reasons: Nigeria’s major problem is poor leadership culture. With good leaders in power, every other thing will fall in line. The issue of poverty, corruption, moral bankruptcy, and the shameful collapse of public infrastructure will become a thing of the past if credible persons are in positions of authority. No amount of resources invested in critical sectors of the nation’s economy now will work magic because too many bad people are still in power. It is therefore wise that President Jonathan has chosen to first invest massively in the nation’s electoral system, which will in turn help flush out unpatriotic, corrupt, and inexperienced persons in government. This approach could be related to laying a very solid foundation on which the Nigeria of our collective dream would be built. This is not tangible and can hardly be counted as an achievement. Sound electoral system is the most important gift any president can give to Nigeria.
Nevertheless, the president must put in extra efforts to address the critical issues that affect the lives of every Nigerian. These include electricity, federal roads health care system, and the educational sector. More than that, the war against corruption must be fought with more vigour and dedication. Without all of these, every section of the country will join the Niger Delta militants and the traditional institution in Edo state to resort to self help. No doubt, self help is the product of discontentment. It is also a known fact that discontentment can lead to anarchy. As the 2011 election draws closer, those that benefit from crisis are warming up for opportunities to strike gold. The federal government must be wary and deny them of any such benefits.
It would also be necessary to note here that ethnicity is the major reason behind the culture of rotational presidency. It is to a very large extent erroneously believed that one has to share the same ethnic lineage with the president in order to secure a key appointment or win a big contract. This is responsible for why ethnicity is regarded far above every other factor in Nigerian politics. Frankly, ethnic-based politics can only be rife in a country where the government pay mere lip service to the culture of transparency, accountability, justice, and fair play.
Quite frankly, it is usually difficult to find sufficient good reasons to blame Nigerians for not trusting their political leaders. From whatever angle one wants to look at it, there are mountains of evidence to show that nation’s past military and political leaders did not do enough to win the confidence of the masses and the international community. This should however be a major challenge to President Goodluck Jonathan, as he attempts to lay a solid foundation for Nigeria’s economic and socio-political development.
One very rare quality of a good leader is the humility to not just listen, but also accede to popular wish. Remarkably, it takes only a sincere and humble leader to do so. Only recently, President Goodluck Jonathan responded to public opinion and withdrew the names of two nominees: Major General Abdullahi Mamman (rtd) and Ambassador Mohammed Anka to the board of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Rather than seeing and counting this as a plus for the president, a section of the media painted Dr. Jonathan as one that has been “forced to bow to public pressure.” But for the kind of person he is- not given to pride, President Goodluck Jonathan could for the sake of pride or ego decide to stick to his guns in subsequent cases. To a very large extent, it is the society that unconsciously makes dictators out of democrats.
A marked difference between Dr. Goodluck Jonathan and many of his contemporaries is that he is hardly moved to flaunt his inner strength even when compelled by natural or human-induced circumstances. That is one strong reason why some persons have rushed to dismiss him as a weakling. Funny enough, these were the same people that complained against Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s iron-hand and one-man-army style of leadership. We should realise that the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria has prescribed equal amount of power for every sitting president. How raw, one uses political power clearly differentiates between democrats and mere politicians.
There is another significant lesson to learn from the events that led to the nomination and withdrawal of Mamman and Anka. In every healthy government- especially the presidential democracy; the president is not expected to make him or her self an island. Political leadership is usually a collective effort where the level of success is mostly dependent on the quality of team work. It was perhaps in this direction that both Mamman and Anka were identified and subsequently nominated by President Goodluck Jonathan. The consequent withdrawal of their nomination could as well cause the president not to have confidence in the opinions of his aides and personal staff in future. There is iron-cast evidence that one or more persons in the line of duty failed to carry out proper checks on the nominees. There were begging evidences against the nominees which the president could not have ignored. Similar developments have in the past turned listening presidents into a one-man-team. The late President Yar’Adua is a ready example. Most of his personal staff, aides, and confidants abused their privileged positions so much so that the president decided to do everything important thing by himself. This was the reason for his administration’s slow-motion. This is a huge challenge to all those directly and indirectly associated with political office holders. They must endeavour to always put the interests of the wider society ahead of parochial concerns. This will not only stimulate rapid socio-economic growth; but also help to deepen the roots of democracy and good governance. President Goodluck Jonathan has vital lessons to learn from the above narrative. It is not enough to seek the good of Nigeria. Nothing should make him undermine the old fashioned Nigerian factor. Vigilance is the word. All corrupt, unproductive, snail, and speed-breaker officials in his administration must be identified, removed, and prosecuted if the need arises.
While I agree with the argument that six months is enough to point to the direction of hope, I do not think Nigeria is healthy enough to recover in the next one year if the level of decay is anything to go by. But for the fear of being labelled an apologist, I would have mentioned right from the beginning that Nigerians should be patient with President Jonathan. These are the reasons: Nigeria’s major problem is poor leadership culture. With good leaders in power, every other thing will fall in line. The issue of poverty, corruption, moral bankruptcy, and the shameful collapse of public infrastructure will become a thing of the past if credible persons are in positions of authority. No amount of resources invested in critical sectors of the nation’s economy now will work magic because too many bad people are still in power. It is therefore wise that President Jonathan has chosen to first invest massively in the nation’s electoral system, which will in turn help flush out unpatriotic, corrupt, and inexperienced persons in government. This approach could be related to laying a very solid foundation on which the Nigeria of our collective dream would be built. This is not tangible and can hardly be counted as an achievement. Sound electoral system is the most important gift any president can give to Nigeria.
Nevertheless, the president must put in extra efforts to address the critical issues that affect the lives of every Nigerian. These include electricity, federal roads health care system, and the educational sector. More than that, the war against corruption must be fought with more vigour and dedication. Without all of these, every section of the country will join the Niger Delta militants and the traditional institution in Edo state to resort to self help. No doubt, self help is the product of discontentment. It is also a known fact that discontentment can lead to anarchy. As the 2011 election draws closer, those that benefit from crisis are warming up for opportunities to strike gold. The federal government must be wary and deny them of any such benefits.
It would also be necessary to note here that ethnicity is the major reason behind the culture of rotational presidency. It is to a very large extent erroneously believed that one has to share the same ethnic lineage with the president in order to secure a key appointment or win a big contract. This is responsible for why ethnicity is regarded far above every other factor in Nigerian politics. Frankly, ethnic-based politics can only be rife in a country where the government pay mere lip service to the culture of transparency, accountability, justice, and fair play.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
A Look at Nigeria's democracy
Like many other Nigerians, I have followed with fervour the colourful debate that trailed the official presentation of the report of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Panel, set up by the late President Musa Yar’Adua to proffer solutions to the nation’s defective electoral system. This was in fulfilment of a promise he made following his public admission that the election which brought him to power was faulty. The high point of the report was the recommendation that the president be stripped of the singular privilege of appointing the chairman of the Independent national Electoral Commission (INEC). From whatever angle one wants to look at it, the recommendations of the panel was a clear-cut statement that Nigerians were truly hungering for a sound political leadership culture. For a period spanning close to the middle mark of a century, the Nigerian nation has harvested the consequences of poor leadership culture.
It is so sad that Nigeria’s barn has been stalked full with shameful tales of corruption, unemployment, poverty, high crime rate, energy crisis, bad roads, and absolute collapse of the educational and health sectors. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, Nigeria relies on the importation of petroleum products to service local demands. This has forced government to spend billions of petro-Dollars to subsidise imported fuel. Rather than finding ways to make the nation’s four refineries and petro-chemical plant operate at optimum capacity so as to stop the importation of petroleum products, the leadership of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF), and Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) have in the last two years embarked on a campaign to stampede government into withdrawing fuel subsidy. This minority colony of upper class citizens did that with the knowledge that they can afford to buy petrol even at N500 per litre. Blinded by the privileges they enjoy, they refused to take into cognisance the nation’s poor socio-economical framework that is glaringly too weak to withstand the instruments of international forces, which is built around the US Dollar.
Apart from the open fact that Nigerian workers are not paid the Dollar equivalent of what their contemporaries earn in Europe and the United States, ¾ of the nation’s workforce cannot rely on their salaries for feeding, rent, transport, health, and educational needs of their families. This is one primary root cause of poverty and corruption in the country. In the absence of a sound socio-economic framework, people are forced to look for alternative means to take care of the basic needs of their families. Painfully, corruption is always the available option! Surely, the CBN, FMF, and NGF have put the cart before the horse. President Goodluck Jonathan should as a matter of national importance ignore the elitist drumming and concentrate on strengthening the nation’s socio-economic framework before withdrawing fuel subsidy.
There is no doubt that with the removal of fuel subsidy, government would save so much money, which can be invested in other critical sectors of the economy. Despite this fact, most developed countries still subsidise critical sectors of their national economy. For instance, agricultural subsidies alone accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of the EU. This has not only helped the agro-allied sector to grow; it has equally guaranteed food security in the EU. The message here is that, subsidy is not as bad as is being painted. It is just that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and team of presidential economic advisers have run dry of ideas. The fuel subsidy mantra is just but a shortcut to the nation’s economic growth. Relying on shortcuts to stabilise an economy most times end up throwing up associated negative challenges especially when the top-bottom approach is applied to critical issues involving fiscal planning. Calls for the removal of fuel subsidy are primarily aimed at covering their failure and also mislead the president into believing that they are doing a good job. Rather than rely on the immediate gains from subsidy removal, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers should task government on the diversification of the economy through the opening up of the non-oil sector. Through this way, the already battered Nigerian masses would not be forced to carry the burden of a few corrupt government officials and inefficient team of economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators.
There are abundant potentials in the agro-allied sector alone. In case Aganga, Sanusi, and Babalola need help, I would offer it free of charge for the sake of our dear nation. Government can raise huge sums of money by rejigging the nation’s anti- corruption protocols. Corruption is costing Nigeria more money than fuel subsidy. They should also encourage government to embark on a thorough review of all contracts and audit the activities of the NNPC. It is very clear that most contracts have been inflated to lubricate the wheels of corruption.
There is no gainsaying that a society can only enjoy the luxury of sound political leadership when the leaders are accountable to the people. For now, the electorates have been robbed of their ballot. It accounts for why political power is still in the hands of the president, governors, and council chairmen. By all measures, it is only through a credible electoral culture that political power can be returned to the electorates. This will help to compel public office holders to deepen the foundations of democracy by rendering purposeful and transparent political leadership.
More than that, let us consider the important fact that blames for all the flawed elections in Nigeria are usually heaped on the head of the chairman of the nation’s electoral body. It was in recognition of this very significant factor that respected opinion leaders, the media, opposition parties, cultural organisation, religious and civil society groups held strongly to the recommendation that the exclusive right to appoint the chairman of INEC be transferred from the president to the National Judicial Council (NJC). The major aim of this recommendation was to build a thick and high wall between the president and the chief electoral umpire. My take on this has been that, even if the NJC is empowered to nominate three persons from which the president was to pick one; the possibility of the president romancing the nation’s chief electoral umpire cannot be ruled out. I had therefore banked on the idea of appointing a tested and strong-willed person to the office of chairman of INEC. I am aware of the question on the lips of several stakeholders: Will a sitting president, desirous of contesting election be kind enough to appoint a strong-willed person to umpire his political battle? For obvious reasons, civil society and opposition parties would not afford to trust a sitting president with such sacred privilege.
Surprisingly however, a wide range of negative voices voluntarily drowned themselves in a pool of harmony immediately after President Goodluck Jonathan nominated the vice chancellor of Bayero University, Kano; Professor Attahiru Jega as chairman of INEC. Many, who had become freelance ambassadors of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Panel, started praising the courage and sincerity of President Jonathan in nominating a tested no-nonsense academician as the nation’s chief electoral umpire. It was a demonstration that the personality of those to be entrusted with the sacred responsibility of conducting elections remains very critical and even more important than who does the appointment. The few that have expressed regret over the president’s nomination of Professor Jega did so for one underlying reason: There is a strong and genuine fear that just like other fire-spitting crusaders did in the past, Professor Jega too could be flogged into line. This is quite true! However, one yawning question that comes to mind at this point is: What is it that corrupts the spirit of hitherto honest electoral umpires in the past? In my own opinion, lack of integrity and faulty electoral system are the two main cause of electoral fraud in Nigeria. It would take a faulty electoral system and a dishonest president to rig an election. That is to say, the quality of every election is the true reflection of the integrity of the president. That is the reason why the ongoing amendments of the nation’s electoral laws are gladdening. Not minding who appointed him; Professor Jega is a man with the courage to say “No” should the president attempt to muscle him.
For good reasons, I find it difficult to accept the charge that a president, desirous of contest an election cannot be honest with appointing credible electoral umpires. President Goodluck Jonathan has in the last three years demonstrated huge amount of honesty, humility, and dedication to make Nigerians take him by his words concerning credible elections in 2011. There have been several instances where presidents who appointed electoral officers still lost at the polls. This is one important reason for reforming the electoral system. It should also not be taken that the opposition must have to win an election in order to confirm the credibility of the polls.
For now, two fundamental facts have emerged: First among them is that majority of Nigerians have deep confidence in the person of Professor Attahiru Jega. Secondly, by nominating Professor Jega, President Goodluck Jonathan has practically demonstrated that he is serious about the conduct of free and fair elections in 2011. This is true to the extent that the nominee has all the credentials needed for midwifing credible elections in the country. Professor Jega is known to be fearless, intelligent, resolute, and not a pauper. But above all, Jega is not given to materialism. These are some of the factors that would have swallowed him up either by the ruling party or opposition. Many even believe that the opposition does not rig election.
Furthermore, the decision of the Senate to invite members of the general public to make contributions concerning all those nominated to the board of INEC is a good test for the sincerity of President Goodluck Jonathan, who has for the umpteenth time, promised free and fair elections come 2011. Also worthy of note is the fact that the nomination of Professor Jega as INEC chairman is a positive social development. It is surely a practical confirmation that the nation’s reward culture is shifting to the right. For a very long time now, Nigeria has been turned into a country where honest and hardworking people are derided and abandoned to rot away. Nigerians would definitely be encouraged to live clean lives if honesty, integrity, and hardwork are rewarded. This is a very huge challenge to government, religious bodies, socio-cultural organisations, and civil society.
I would however like to warn that the appointment of credible personalities into the board of INEC would not automatically translate into having credible elections. All stakeholders in the Nigerian project must have to join hands and support INEC in order for it to be able to conduct free and fair elections. It is only through credible elections that unpatriotic, dubious, and criminal elements can be kept out of government. Political parties too must have to shun all forms of “do-or-die” politics. Security and law enforcement agencies in the country would need to carry out their duties without fear and favour. Furthermore, as the final hope of the oppressed and cheated during elections, the judiciary must sacrifice everything to dispense justice fairly. There is no doubt that with an impeccable judiciary, money-bags and unrepentant apostles of “do-or-die” politics that are able to dribble past Professor Jega and his team would be quickly tracked down by the long arms of the law.
Let us not quickly forget the fact that some stakeholders were not too eager about making the NJC to nominate the chairman of INEC owing to their perception of the judiciary. They do not see the judiciary as deserving such task going by the number of controversial judgements coming out of the courts. Corruption is known to be Nigeria’s greatest albatross. Many see the judiciary as a major hindrance to fighting the menace of graft in the country. They therefore fear that adding another big feather to its wings may endanger the nation’s democracy. What is critical to Nigeria now is the reformation of the electoral system so as to promote greater transparency during polls. Transparent electoral culture will surely narrow opportunities for rigging of elections. A neutral judiciary will be in a better position to handle election complaints. Whether contemplated or not, people will cry fowl when a judiciary that nominated the chairman of INEC sits on matters calling to question the integrity and activities of the electoral body. Let the judiciary stay detached as prescribed in the doctrine of separation of powers and perform its traditional duties of interpreting the law.
It is so sad that Nigeria’s barn has been stalked full with shameful tales of corruption, unemployment, poverty, high crime rate, energy crisis, bad roads, and absolute collapse of the educational and health sectors. As the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil, Nigeria relies on the importation of petroleum products to service local demands. This has forced government to spend billions of petro-Dollars to subsidise imported fuel. Rather than finding ways to make the nation’s four refineries and petro-chemical plant operate at optimum capacity so as to stop the importation of petroleum products, the leadership of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF), and Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) have in the last two years embarked on a campaign to stampede government into withdrawing fuel subsidy. This minority colony of upper class citizens did that with the knowledge that they can afford to buy petrol even at N500 per litre. Blinded by the privileges they enjoy, they refused to take into cognisance the nation’s poor socio-economical framework that is glaringly too weak to withstand the instruments of international forces, which is built around the US Dollar.
Apart from the open fact that Nigerian workers are not paid the Dollar equivalent of what their contemporaries earn in Europe and the United States, ¾ of the nation’s workforce cannot rely on their salaries for feeding, rent, transport, health, and educational needs of their families. This is one primary root cause of poverty and corruption in the country. In the absence of a sound socio-economic framework, people are forced to look for alternative means to take care of the basic needs of their families. Painfully, corruption is always the available option! Surely, the CBN, FMF, and NGF have put the cart before the horse. President Goodluck Jonathan should as a matter of national importance ignore the elitist drumming and concentrate on strengthening the nation’s socio-economic framework before withdrawing fuel subsidy.
There is no doubt that with the removal of fuel subsidy, government would save so much money, which can be invested in other critical sectors of the economy. Despite this fact, most developed countries still subsidise critical sectors of their national economy. For instance, agricultural subsidies alone accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of the EU. This has not only helped the agro-allied sector to grow; it has equally guaranteed food security in the EU. The message here is that, subsidy is not as bad as is being painted. It is just that the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and team of presidential economic advisers have run dry of ideas. The fuel subsidy mantra is just but a shortcut to the nation’s economic growth. Relying on shortcuts to stabilise an economy most times end up throwing up associated negative challenges especially when the top-bottom approach is applied to critical issues involving fiscal planning. Calls for the removal of fuel subsidy are primarily aimed at covering their failure and also mislead the president into believing that they are doing a good job. Rather than rely on the immediate gains from subsidy removal, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers should task government on the diversification of the economy through the opening up of the non-oil sector. Through this way, the already battered Nigerian masses would not be forced to carry the burden of a few corrupt government officials and inefficient team of economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators.
There are abundant potentials in the agro-allied sector alone. In case Aganga, Sanusi, and Babalola need help, I would offer it free of charge for the sake of our dear nation. Government can raise huge sums of money by rejigging the nation’s anti- corruption protocols. Corruption is costing Nigeria more money than fuel subsidy. They should also encourage government to embark on a thorough review of all contracts and audit the activities of the NNPC. It is very clear that most contracts have been inflated to lubricate the wheels of corruption.
There is no gainsaying that a society can only enjoy the luxury of sound political leadership when the leaders are accountable to the people. For now, the electorates have been robbed of their ballot. It accounts for why political power is still in the hands of the president, governors, and council chairmen. By all measures, it is only through a credible electoral culture that political power can be returned to the electorates. This will help to compel public office holders to deepen the foundations of democracy by rendering purposeful and transparent political leadership.
More than that, let us consider the important fact that blames for all the flawed elections in Nigeria are usually heaped on the head of the chairman of the nation’s electoral body. It was in recognition of this very significant factor that respected opinion leaders, the media, opposition parties, cultural organisation, religious and civil society groups held strongly to the recommendation that the exclusive right to appoint the chairman of INEC be transferred from the president to the National Judicial Council (NJC). The major aim of this recommendation was to build a thick and high wall between the president and the chief electoral umpire. My take on this has been that, even if the NJC is empowered to nominate three persons from which the president was to pick one; the possibility of the president romancing the nation’s chief electoral umpire cannot be ruled out. I had therefore banked on the idea of appointing a tested and strong-willed person to the office of chairman of INEC. I am aware of the question on the lips of several stakeholders: Will a sitting president, desirous of contesting election be kind enough to appoint a strong-willed person to umpire his political battle? For obvious reasons, civil society and opposition parties would not afford to trust a sitting president with such sacred privilege.
Surprisingly however, a wide range of negative voices voluntarily drowned themselves in a pool of harmony immediately after President Goodluck Jonathan nominated the vice chancellor of Bayero University, Kano; Professor Attahiru Jega as chairman of INEC. Many, who had become freelance ambassadors of the Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reforms Panel, started praising the courage and sincerity of President Jonathan in nominating a tested no-nonsense academician as the nation’s chief electoral umpire. It was a demonstration that the personality of those to be entrusted with the sacred responsibility of conducting elections remains very critical and even more important than who does the appointment. The few that have expressed regret over the president’s nomination of Professor Jega did so for one underlying reason: There is a strong and genuine fear that just like other fire-spitting crusaders did in the past, Professor Jega too could be flogged into line. This is quite true! However, one yawning question that comes to mind at this point is: What is it that corrupts the spirit of hitherto honest electoral umpires in the past? In my own opinion, lack of integrity and faulty electoral system are the two main cause of electoral fraud in Nigeria. It would take a faulty electoral system and a dishonest president to rig an election. That is to say, the quality of every election is the true reflection of the integrity of the president. That is the reason why the ongoing amendments of the nation’s electoral laws are gladdening. Not minding who appointed him; Professor Jega is a man with the courage to say “No” should the president attempt to muscle him.
For good reasons, I find it difficult to accept the charge that a president, desirous of contest an election cannot be honest with appointing credible electoral umpires. President Goodluck Jonathan has in the last three years demonstrated huge amount of honesty, humility, and dedication to make Nigerians take him by his words concerning credible elections in 2011. There have been several instances where presidents who appointed electoral officers still lost at the polls. This is one important reason for reforming the electoral system. It should also not be taken that the opposition must have to win an election in order to confirm the credibility of the polls.
For now, two fundamental facts have emerged: First among them is that majority of Nigerians have deep confidence in the person of Professor Attahiru Jega. Secondly, by nominating Professor Jega, President Goodluck Jonathan has practically demonstrated that he is serious about the conduct of free and fair elections in 2011. This is true to the extent that the nominee has all the credentials needed for midwifing credible elections in the country. Professor Jega is known to be fearless, intelligent, resolute, and not a pauper. But above all, Jega is not given to materialism. These are some of the factors that would have swallowed him up either by the ruling party or opposition. Many even believe that the opposition does not rig election.
Furthermore, the decision of the Senate to invite members of the general public to make contributions concerning all those nominated to the board of INEC is a good test for the sincerity of President Goodluck Jonathan, who has for the umpteenth time, promised free and fair elections come 2011. Also worthy of note is the fact that the nomination of Professor Jega as INEC chairman is a positive social development. It is surely a practical confirmation that the nation’s reward culture is shifting to the right. For a very long time now, Nigeria has been turned into a country where honest and hardworking people are derided and abandoned to rot away. Nigerians would definitely be encouraged to live clean lives if honesty, integrity, and hardwork are rewarded. This is a very huge challenge to government, religious bodies, socio-cultural organisations, and civil society.
I would however like to warn that the appointment of credible personalities into the board of INEC would not automatically translate into having credible elections. All stakeholders in the Nigerian project must have to join hands and support INEC in order for it to be able to conduct free and fair elections. It is only through credible elections that unpatriotic, dubious, and criminal elements can be kept out of government. Political parties too must have to shun all forms of “do-or-die” politics. Security and law enforcement agencies in the country would need to carry out their duties without fear and favour. Furthermore, as the final hope of the oppressed and cheated during elections, the judiciary must sacrifice everything to dispense justice fairly. There is no doubt that with an impeccable judiciary, money-bags and unrepentant apostles of “do-or-die” politics that are able to dribble past Professor Jega and his team would be quickly tracked down by the long arms of the law.
Let us not quickly forget the fact that some stakeholders were not too eager about making the NJC to nominate the chairman of INEC owing to their perception of the judiciary. They do not see the judiciary as deserving such task going by the number of controversial judgements coming out of the courts. Corruption is known to be Nigeria’s greatest albatross. Many see the judiciary as a major hindrance to fighting the menace of graft in the country. They therefore fear that adding another big feather to its wings may endanger the nation’s democracy. What is critical to Nigeria now is the reformation of the electoral system so as to promote greater transparency during polls. Transparent electoral culture will surely narrow opportunities for rigging of elections. A neutral judiciary will be in a better position to handle election complaints. Whether contemplated or not, people will cry fowl when a judiciary that nominated the chairman of INEC sits on matters calling to question the integrity and activities of the electoral body. Let the judiciary stay detached as prescribed in the doctrine of separation of powers and perform its traditional duties of interpreting the law.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
THE TRUTH ABOUT FUEL SUBSIDY IN NIGERIA
THE TRUTH ABOUT FUEL SUBSIDY IN NIGERIA
I have in the past, and will continue to disagree with the minority elitist clan of bureaucrats calling for the removal of fuel subsidy. I do this just for one simple reason: Nigeria’s present socio-economic framework is too weak to carry the additional burden that will arise owing to any further hike in the pump price of petroleum products. The removal of fuel subsidy will for sure leave millions of hapless Nigerians at the mercy of international market forces. This is not only dangerous, but undemocratic.
Let it be understood that subsidy is an indirect way of putting money in the pockets of citizens. It should therefore not be seen as waste of money as the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF) would want us to believe. Furthermore, the removal of fuel subsidy is just one among the several means through which government conserve funds. Despite this fact, most developed countries still subsidise critical sectors of their national economy. For instance, agricultural subsidies alone accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of EU. This has not only helped the agro-allied sector to grow; it has equally promoted food security in the EU. The message here is that, subsidy is not as bad as is being painted.
Like in every other country on the face of the earth, activities in the petroleum sector are strongly tied to international market forces. Apart from the fact that Nigeria does not have influence over the pricing of crude oil in the international market, our local currency is too weak against the US Dollar. Those campaigning for the removal of fuel subsidy must also take into account the fact that Nigerian workers are not paid the Dollar equivalent of what their contemporaries earn in developed countries. This fact alone should rubbish the bases for anyone to assume that the income of the average Nigerian workers can withstand the effects of removal of fuel subsidy. The very wide disparity in the wages of Nigerian workers and their contemporaries in developed countries where fuel subsidy was removed should act as bumps along the economic road Sanusi Lamido and Olusegun Aganga are driving. President Goodluck Jonathan is also reminded that there are inherent dangers associated with leaving the fate of the down trodden masses at the mercy of international market forces, which Nigeria does not have any influence over. This is the major reason why fuel is still being subsidised all over the world.
The Economist reports that over half of the world’s population enjoy fuel subsidies. However, the level of subsidy varies from country to country. For instance, the official pump price of a litre of petrol in Nigeria is N65- about US45₵. However, petrol marketers sell a litre of petrol for as much N100 in the riverine areas of the Niger Delta region due to the dearth of major marketers. Venezuela is reputed to be the nation with the cheapest fuel. There, a litre of petrol goes for just 4₵. It is 79₵ in China, 15₵ in Saudi Arabia, 30₵ in Kuwait, 29₵ in Egypt, 16₵ in Libya, 24₵ in Qatar, and 13₵ in Iran. Compare this to the $2.77 in Britain, $2.62 in Germany, $2.69 in France, and $1.15 in the United States. The percentage of subsidy is mostly influenced by government’s evaluation of the country’s socio-economic framework.
While it is true that the subsidisation of petroleum products is costing the country huge sums of money annually, it must also be noted that democracy has a distinct fundamental character- good governance. Under normal circumstances, this character is not supposed to be killed on the alter of narrow and shallow economic theories, strongly influenced by lack of practical ideas by fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers.
In every democratic society, leadership is mostly about offering selfless service. On the other hand, politics is a democratic exercise aimed at securing the mandate of the electorates in order to offer quality leadership for the good of man and society. There is no doubt that sound political leadership is the hallmark of every healthy constitutional democracy. Fortunately, Nigeria is gradually adjusting to the culture of good governance. Eleven years of uninterrupted democratic governance is indeed a huge achievement. The important need to sustain this political culture cannot be overemphasised.
It is sad to note that for more than one year now, there has been an orchestrated pressure on the federal government to withdraw fuel subsidy. This pressure has been mostly from the leadership of the FMF, CBN, and membership of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum. It is necessary to note that by virtue of their remuneration and accompanying entitlements, this category of government officials can afford to buy petrol even at N500 per litre. They are definitely not representing the interest of the over 60m unemployed Nigerians. Even among the employed citizens, how many can rely on their salaries for feeding, transportation, rent, medical, and academic needs of their families?
In calling for the removal of fuel subsidy, the two ministers in the federal Ministry of Finance, Governor of the CBN, and membership of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum failed to look at the nation’s socio-economic framework critically. Quite frankly, an average Nigerian family (father, mother, and three children) would need about N5,000 daily in order to escape poverty and withstand the negative effects of increase in prices of petroleum products. Of this amount, feeding alone will gulp N3,000: N200 x 3 meals x 5 persons. Transport will take another N1,000: N200 x 5 persons. Another N1,000 would equally be needed to cover rent, medical, academic, and miscellaneous expenses. Unfortunately, a large chunk of the nation’s workforce is earning in a whole month, what they would need for just a day. It is in this very sad situation that highly informed persons in government are calling for the removal of fuel subsidy, which will no doubt drive up the price of transportation, rent, essential commodities, and services.
I am of the opinion that the inability of fiscal policy formulators and the several teams of economic advisers to find appropriate solutions to the nation’s poor socio-economic infrastructure are forcing them to look for shortcuts. The removal of fuel subsidy is by all indications a dangerous short cut to our economic recovery. Rather than rely on the immediate gains from subsidy removal, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers should encourage government to diverse the economy by opening up the non-oil sector. Through this way, the already battered Nigerian masses would not be forced to carry the burden of a few corrupt officials and inefficient team of economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators. There are abundant potentials in the agro-allied sector alone. In case Aganga, Sanusi, and Babalola need help, I would offer it free of charge for the sake of our dear nation. Government can raise huge sums by rejigging the nation’s anti- corruption protocols. Corruption is costing Nigeria more money than fuel subsidy. They should also advise government to embark on a thorough review of all contracts and audit the activities of the NNPC. It is very clear that most contracts have been inflated to oil the wheels of corruption. The fact that the activities of the NNPC have been shrouded in secrecy for decades is an indication that Nigeria was being milked dry by a few dishonest people in the system.
Worse still, it is a huge shame that government officials have had to resort to blackmail and propaganda in order to stampede government into withdrawing fuel subsidy. From a safe distance, the anti-subsidy apostles appear as though they love Nigeria so much. Far from it! They are only trying to cover up their abysmal lack of credible ideas. Why must anyone deceive the Nigerian public just to score a point?
Only recently, the Executive Secretary of PPPRA, Mr. Abiodun Ibikunle told the world that the 2009 payments for fuel subsidy was N450b and not N1trillion as alleged by the CBN Governor, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi. This is ridiculous and calls for an immediate investigation. It could be that some persons are short-changing the country. Ordinarily, the operation of Petroleum Support Fund (PSF) is so detailed that corruption cannot find root except more than three key players are involved. The agencies involved in the activities of the PSF are Nigeria Customs Services, Nigeria Port Authority, Department of Petroleum Resources, Federal Ministry of Finance, Office of the Accountant General, marketers, security bodies, external auditors, and inspection agents.
I have in the past, and will continue to disagree with the minority elitist clan of bureaucrats calling for the removal of fuel subsidy. I do this just for one simple reason: Nigeria’s present socio-economic framework is too weak to carry the additional burden that will arise owing to any further hike in the pump price of petroleum products. The removal of fuel subsidy will for sure leave millions of hapless Nigerians at the mercy of international market forces. This is not only dangerous, but undemocratic.
Let it be understood that subsidy is an indirect way of putting money in the pockets of citizens. It should therefore not be seen as waste of money as the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF) would want us to believe. Furthermore, the removal of fuel subsidy is just one among the several means through which government conserve funds. Despite this fact, most developed countries still subsidise critical sectors of their national economy. For instance, agricultural subsidies alone accounts for more than 40% of the total budget of EU. This has not only helped the agro-allied sector to grow; it has equally promoted food security in the EU. The message here is that, subsidy is not as bad as is being painted.
Like in every other country on the face of the earth, activities in the petroleum sector are strongly tied to international market forces. Apart from the fact that Nigeria does not have influence over the pricing of crude oil in the international market, our local currency is too weak against the US Dollar. Those campaigning for the removal of fuel subsidy must also take into account the fact that Nigerian workers are not paid the Dollar equivalent of what their contemporaries earn in developed countries. This fact alone should rubbish the bases for anyone to assume that the income of the average Nigerian workers can withstand the effects of removal of fuel subsidy. The very wide disparity in the wages of Nigerian workers and their contemporaries in developed countries where fuel subsidy was removed should act as bumps along the economic road Sanusi Lamido and Olusegun Aganga are driving. President Goodluck Jonathan is also reminded that there are inherent dangers associated with leaving the fate of the down trodden masses at the mercy of international market forces, which Nigeria does not have any influence over. This is the major reason why fuel is still being subsidised all over the world.
The Economist reports that over half of the world’s population enjoy fuel subsidies. However, the level of subsidy varies from country to country. For instance, the official pump price of a litre of petrol in Nigeria is N65- about US45₵. However, petrol marketers sell a litre of petrol for as much N100 in the riverine areas of the Niger Delta region due to the dearth of major marketers. Venezuela is reputed to be the nation with the cheapest fuel. There, a litre of petrol goes for just 4₵. It is 79₵ in China, 15₵ in Saudi Arabia, 30₵ in Kuwait, 29₵ in Egypt, 16₵ in Libya, 24₵ in Qatar, and 13₵ in Iran. Compare this to the $2.77 in Britain, $2.62 in Germany, $2.69 in France, and $1.15 in the United States. The percentage of subsidy is mostly influenced by government’s evaluation of the country’s socio-economic framework.
While it is true that the subsidisation of petroleum products is costing the country huge sums of money annually, it must also be noted that democracy has a distinct fundamental character- good governance. Under normal circumstances, this character is not supposed to be killed on the alter of narrow and shallow economic theories, strongly influenced by lack of practical ideas by fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers.
In every democratic society, leadership is mostly about offering selfless service. On the other hand, politics is a democratic exercise aimed at securing the mandate of the electorates in order to offer quality leadership for the good of man and society. There is no doubt that sound political leadership is the hallmark of every healthy constitutional democracy. Fortunately, Nigeria is gradually adjusting to the culture of good governance. Eleven years of uninterrupted democratic governance is indeed a huge achievement. The important need to sustain this political culture cannot be overemphasised.
It is sad to note that for more than one year now, there has been an orchestrated pressure on the federal government to withdraw fuel subsidy. This pressure has been mostly from the leadership of the FMF, CBN, and membership of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum. It is necessary to note that by virtue of their remuneration and accompanying entitlements, this category of government officials can afford to buy petrol even at N500 per litre. They are definitely not representing the interest of the over 60m unemployed Nigerians. Even among the employed citizens, how many can rely on their salaries for feeding, transportation, rent, medical, and academic needs of their families?
In calling for the removal of fuel subsidy, the two ministers in the federal Ministry of Finance, Governor of the CBN, and membership of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum failed to look at the nation’s socio-economic framework critically. Quite frankly, an average Nigerian family (father, mother, and three children) would need about N5,000 daily in order to escape poverty and withstand the negative effects of increase in prices of petroleum products. Of this amount, feeding alone will gulp N3,000: N200 x 3 meals x 5 persons. Transport will take another N1,000: N200 x 5 persons. Another N1,000 would equally be needed to cover rent, medical, academic, and miscellaneous expenses. Unfortunately, a large chunk of the nation’s workforce is earning in a whole month, what they would need for just a day. It is in this very sad situation that highly informed persons in government are calling for the removal of fuel subsidy, which will no doubt drive up the price of transportation, rent, essential commodities, and services.
I am of the opinion that the inability of fiscal policy formulators and the several teams of economic advisers to find appropriate solutions to the nation’s poor socio-economic infrastructure are forcing them to look for shortcuts. The removal of fuel subsidy is by all indications a dangerous short cut to our economic recovery. Rather than rely on the immediate gains from subsidy removal, the nation’s fiscal policy formulators and economic advisers should encourage government to diverse the economy by opening up the non-oil sector. Through this way, the already battered Nigerian masses would not be forced to carry the burden of a few corrupt officials and inefficient team of economic advisers and fiscal policy formulators. There are abundant potentials in the agro-allied sector alone. In case Aganga, Sanusi, and Babalola need help, I would offer it free of charge for the sake of our dear nation. Government can raise huge sums by rejigging the nation’s anti- corruption protocols. Corruption is costing Nigeria more money than fuel subsidy. They should also advise government to embark on a thorough review of all contracts and audit the activities of the NNPC. It is very clear that most contracts have been inflated to oil the wheels of corruption. The fact that the activities of the NNPC have been shrouded in secrecy for decades is an indication that Nigeria was being milked dry by a few dishonest people in the system.
Worse still, it is a huge shame that government officials have had to resort to blackmail and propaganda in order to stampede government into withdrawing fuel subsidy. From a safe distance, the anti-subsidy apostles appear as though they love Nigeria so much. Far from it! They are only trying to cover up their abysmal lack of credible ideas. Why must anyone deceive the Nigerian public just to score a point?
Only recently, the Executive Secretary of PPPRA, Mr. Abiodun Ibikunle told the world that the 2009 payments for fuel subsidy was N450b and not N1trillion as alleged by the CBN Governor, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi. This is ridiculous and calls for an immediate investigation. It could be that some persons are short-changing the country. Ordinarily, the operation of Petroleum Support Fund (PSF) is so detailed that corruption cannot find root except more than three key players are involved. The agencies involved in the activities of the PSF are Nigeria Customs Services, Nigeria Port Authority, Department of Petroleum Resources, Federal Ministry of Finance, Office of the Accountant General, marketers, security bodies, external auditors, and inspection agents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
