ELECTORAL REFORMS AND PDP’s ROTATIONAL PRESIDENCY
There is no doubt surrounding the fact that democracy is the best form of government ever known to man. Even so, many democratic societies and its citizens still suffer gross underdevelopment and abject poverty owing to poor political leadership culture. This sad reality has elicited a whole lot of debate among political scientists, journalists, opinion leaders, and commentators on contemporary issues. The consensus opinion is that the masses have been robbed of their powers by the political class. It has become clear that political power no longer belongs to the people- electorates like it is supposed to be. As a result of this, the loyalty of political leaders is mostly directed at electoral umpires, god fathers, and kingmakers. It is for this simple reason that public office holders can afford to ignore the concerns of the electorates and loot the treasury.
In an effort to return power to the people, the late President Musa Yar’Adua stunned the world when he admitted openly that the election that brought him to power was faulty. He thereafter called for understanding and promised to carry out a holistic electoral reform exercise. Unfortunately, many Nigerians have failed to appreciate the true meaning of electoral reform and have therefore restricted it to mean the recommendations of Justice Mohammed Uwais-led Electoral Reform Committee.
For the avoidance of doubt, let it be noted that the main aim of reforming the nation’s electoral system would be defeated if it is not done holistically. We cannot talk of electoral reforms when there is no internal democracy within the political parties. We cannot talk of electoral reforms when some key players in the nation’s electoral body- INEC are card-carrying members of political parties. In the same vein, Nigerians cannot talk of electoral reforms when political parties are allowed to practice undemocratic traditions such as rotational presidency.
One of the major aims of reforming the electoral system is to promote quality political leadership in the country. For this very important reason, whatever action or practice that would not support this objective should be jettisoned. Rotational presidency is one of them. Apart from promoting tribalism, the culture of seclusion is undemocratic. It creates bitterness among party members and also reduces the chances of sourcing for the best hands.
My opinion is not based on the fact that I and President Goodluck Jonathan come from the same state. After all, he has not said he is going to contest the presidency in 2011. Nevertheless, there would be nothing wrong if majority of members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) wants him to contest. This is the beauty of democracy. Power belongs to the people- not a party’s National Working Committee or Board of Trustee. This is the time when Nigerians should come together and work towards making every vote count and not wasting valuable time on issues that will divide the nation along tribal lines.
Perhaps, it would be necessary to highlight the reason behind the culture of rotational presidency. It is to a very large extent erroneously believed that one has to share the same tribal lineage with the president in order to secure a key appointment or win a big contract. This anomaly is hugely responsible for why tribal lineage is regarded far above every other factor in Nigerian politics. Frankly, tribal-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.
Just like I have submitted in previous write-ups, one of Nigeria’s greatest problems is tribalism. It is owing to the deep rooted nature of tribalism in the polity that successive administrations have not been able to effectively fight corruption in the country. There is an unwritten law in Nigeria that forbids citizens from exposing or prosecuting fellow tribesmen for corrupt practices. That is the reason why public servants that earns less than N12m annually will build mansions, acquire fleet of exotic cars, and own investments worth over N200m within four years without being asked to show proof of sources of funds.
Furthermore, tribalism promotes national poverty. It makes citizens to become lazy. In a tribal-infected polity, even people that sow nothing can reap bountifully simply because their tribesperson is in power. This is clearly against natural principle. The more we promote tribal agenda above democratic prescriptions, the closer we get to the source of our disintegration.
I do not know their individual names but most of the people championing calls for electoral reforms are carrying nametags that bear “Hypocrite.” That is exactly what those of them that support the culture of rotational presidency are. The reason for the reform must not be bleached to serve tribal agendas. And for those that are threatening the corporate destiny of Nigeria following speculations that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan may run for the presidency come 2011; I wish them well. They should not play God. Nigerian masses are hungry for good political leadership. Let the people be allowed to decide whom they want. It can be Jonathan or any other person. Let us stop playing God and concentrate on how to make our votes count.
Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rule of law. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
AMNESTY IS NOT A MAGIC WAND
Nigerians should not shy away from saying the truth simply because our leaders hate hearing what is true. Only recently, the Senate President, David Mark revealed how much the ruling class abhor truth when he invested his integrity to argue that the international community should allow the nation’s leaders to do to the Nigerian masses whatever that pleases them. Mark’s unintentional confession is the truth about how much hatred Nigerian leaders have for the masses.
There is actually no reason why with four refineries, the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil should rely on the importation of petrol, diesel, and kerosene for domestic consumption. It is an abomination that Nigeria is still grappling with the problem of regular power supply despite the abundance of natural gas and availability of associated technologies to stabilise the power sector.
A drive along the nation’s highways tells a pathetic story of failed leadership. Corruption has almost become a celebrated national tradition. Unemployment has reached the sky. Crime has become part of the Nigerian culture. The take home pay of the average Nigerian civil servant can hardly support a family of three- man, wife, and a child for just a week. The educational sector is in chaos. Certificates obtained from Nigerian universities are regarded as junk outside the shores of the country. The situation is worse with our primary and post primary schools that are mostly closed due to industrial actions buy teachers demanding for improved condition of service. Nigerians desirous of giving their children sound education are therefore compelled to look the way of neighbouring West African countries. Quality health care services are beyond the reach of average Nigerians. Despite all of these, we continue to pride ourselves as the Giant of Africa. We should bury our heads in shame. Don’t we know the abilities of true Giants?
To a very large extent, the Senate President thought Nigerian leaders can continue to fool the masses. It was for this simple reason he insinuated that Nigerians should be allowed to tackle their problems when the United State’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton told our leaders the home truth at a Town Hall meeting in Abuja. David Mark and PDP’s shallow reaction to America’s verdict on Nigerian leaders pointed clearly to a government that does not believe in accountability and the rule of law. A government can only be said to be accountable when it is able to provide answers to the needs of the masses. Accountability in governance does not merely mean providing details of revenue and expenditure.
Rule of law is to governance what food is to human beings. It therefore sounds funny when one hear government officials attempt to score cheap political gains for doing what is normal. It is like a father going to the market square to boast that he has provided breakfast for his children. There is no way an oil producing country that cannot provide basic social amenities such as electricity, portable water, health care services, jobs, good roads, affordable housing, petrol, kerosene, and diesel could be judged to uphold the principle of rule of law. This is because; security, law, and order are the fundamental laws of state. They form the foundation for peace. There cannot be peace in the midst of poverty and crime, which is mostly caused by the inability of government to provide the basic necessities of life for the citizenry.
As against David Mark’s argument, the issues of failed leadership in Nigeria cannot be left for Nigerians alone. The world is a global village. The problems of failed leadership in Nigeria will impact negatively on the international community. Hillary Clinton was only being proactive. Our leaders should rather be glad that Clinton has helped to illuminate the very dark paths of political leadership. Those that have taken the wrong path should retrace their steps quickly because the masses are hungry and angry.
The argument by David Mark that the United States should leave Nigeria for Nigerians is very unfortunate. It is fair enough that natives of Nigeria’s oil bearing communities are not toeing his line of argument by insisting that the rest of the country should not interfere in the affairs of the Niger Delta region. In that case, the Niger Delta people would have demanded for 100% derivation principle. But in relying on precedent, the Niger Delta people have merely demanded that Nigeria returns to the 1960 era when derivation was 50%. Instead of the federal government coming out to explain why it has refused to honour precedent, it has gone ahead to force the NDDC and Niger Delta Ministry on the people of the region. I believe strongly that David Mark’s angry reaction to Hillary Clinton’s criticisms of failed leadership in Nigerian would make many persons to drop the negative tag they had earlier on hanged on the necks of Niger Delta militants. This is because; it has become very clear that Niger Deltan militants love Nigeria far more than most of our leaders do.
I have always maintained that the offer of amnesty is fair in spirit but arrogant in nature. That is one reason why most militants have shunned the arms collection centres to negotiate their own choice of location of disarmament. By offering amnesty to the militants, President Yar’Adua has boldly accepted the fact that the Nigerian nation has been unfair to the Niger Delta people. Punishing these militants would therefore amount to double punishment. I salute the courage of the president as many have pressurised him to use the military to quell agitations by the Niger Delta people.
Like I have suggested in other forums; in finding solutions to the problems of militancy in the Niger Delta region, the federal government has put the cart before the horse. The genuine demands of the Niger Delta people have not been addressed. Right now, the success of the amnesty deal is being threatened by cases of doubt and suspicion. The offer of amnesty would have come after addressing the issues of fiscal federalism and injustice in the sharing of revenue from crude oil and natural gas. The Niger Delta people are well aware that when the nation’s super tribes were producing the natural resources that sustained the country’s economy, derivation was 50%. The question therefore on the lips of every Niger Deltan is: Why is it 13% now that the advantage has gone the way of minority tribes in the Niger Delta region?
For the oil based Nigerian economy to grow, there is an urgent need for peace in the Niger Delta. It is however unfortunate that both the federal and Niger Delta State governments are seeing the disarmament by militants as the foundation for peace and development of the region. If the truth must be said; then I would warn that Nigerians would be disappointed in the very near future if we see amnesty as a magic wand and ignore the fundamental issues that gave birth to agitation in the Niger Delta region. Justice and fair play in the sharing of revenue from oil and gas are the foundations on which amnesty should stand on. On the other hand; the federal government should make efforts to convince the Niger Delta people why it has refused to honour the 50% derivation precedent. Perhaps, the federal government has finally accepted the suggestion by Hon. Bala Ibn Na’Allah to end militancy by wiping out the entire Niger Delta region.
In blaming Niger Delta youths for their choice of militancy in seeking justice in the sharing of revenue from oil and gas, the presidency should accept the fact that government has made the culture of non-violent protest unattractive to Nigerians. The Advanced Learners’ Dictionary defines violence as, “an angry way of speaking or reacting.” Niger Delta youths had noticed that it has mostly been through industrial actions (an angry way of reacting) that NUPENG, ASUU, NMA, RATTAWU, PHCN, Police, and the Army have succeeded in forcing government to live to its obligation. That is to say, the Nigerian federal government has murdered her capacity to do any good thing voluntarily. Therefore, Niger Delta youths saw militancy (also an angry way of reacting) as the nearest thing to industrial action in their quest to right the grave injustice in the sharing of revenue from crude oil and gas.
While I do not want to contest the suggestion by many that President Yar’Adua holds the key to solving the Niger Delta question, I want to equally advice that he should not make the mistake of seeing the amnesty deal as a magic wand. The cart should be quickly retuned to the back of the horse so that the Niger Delta question can be solved once and for all.
There is actually no reason why with four refineries, the world’s sixth largest producer of crude oil should rely on the importation of petrol, diesel, and kerosene for domestic consumption. It is an abomination that Nigeria is still grappling with the problem of regular power supply despite the abundance of natural gas and availability of associated technologies to stabilise the power sector.
A drive along the nation’s highways tells a pathetic story of failed leadership. Corruption has almost become a celebrated national tradition. Unemployment has reached the sky. Crime has become part of the Nigerian culture. The take home pay of the average Nigerian civil servant can hardly support a family of three- man, wife, and a child for just a week. The educational sector is in chaos. Certificates obtained from Nigerian universities are regarded as junk outside the shores of the country. The situation is worse with our primary and post primary schools that are mostly closed due to industrial actions buy teachers demanding for improved condition of service. Nigerians desirous of giving their children sound education are therefore compelled to look the way of neighbouring West African countries. Quality health care services are beyond the reach of average Nigerians. Despite all of these, we continue to pride ourselves as the Giant of Africa. We should bury our heads in shame. Don’t we know the abilities of true Giants?
To a very large extent, the Senate President thought Nigerian leaders can continue to fool the masses. It was for this simple reason he insinuated that Nigerians should be allowed to tackle their problems when the United State’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton told our leaders the home truth at a Town Hall meeting in Abuja. David Mark and PDP’s shallow reaction to America’s verdict on Nigerian leaders pointed clearly to a government that does not believe in accountability and the rule of law. A government can only be said to be accountable when it is able to provide answers to the needs of the masses. Accountability in governance does not merely mean providing details of revenue and expenditure.
Rule of law is to governance what food is to human beings. It therefore sounds funny when one hear government officials attempt to score cheap political gains for doing what is normal. It is like a father going to the market square to boast that he has provided breakfast for his children. There is no way an oil producing country that cannot provide basic social amenities such as electricity, portable water, health care services, jobs, good roads, affordable housing, petrol, kerosene, and diesel could be judged to uphold the principle of rule of law. This is because; security, law, and order are the fundamental laws of state. They form the foundation for peace. There cannot be peace in the midst of poverty and crime, which is mostly caused by the inability of government to provide the basic necessities of life for the citizenry.
As against David Mark’s argument, the issues of failed leadership in Nigeria cannot be left for Nigerians alone. The world is a global village. The problems of failed leadership in Nigeria will impact negatively on the international community. Hillary Clinton was only being proactive. Our leaders should rather be glad that Clinton has helped to illuminate the very dark paths of political leadership. Those that have taken the wrong path should retrace their steps quickly because the masses are hungry and angry.
The argument by David Mark that the United States should leave Nigeria for Nigerians is very unfortunate. It is fair enough that natives of Nigeria’s oil bearing communities are not toeing his line of argument by insisting that the rest of the country should not interfere in the affairs of the Niger Delta region. In that case, the Niger Delta people would have demanded for 100% derivation principle. But in relying on precedent, the Niger Delta people have merely demanded that Nigeria returns to the 1960 era when derivation was 50%. Instead of the federal government coming out to explain why it has refused to honour precedent, it has gone ahead to force the NDDC and Niger Delta Ministry on the people of the region. I believe strongly that David Mark’s angry reaction to Hillary Clinton’s criticisms of failed leadership in Nigerian would make many persons to drop the negative tag they had earlier on hanged on the necks of Niger Delta militants. This is because; it has become very clear that Niger Deltan militants love Nigeria far more than most of our leaders do.
I have always maintained that the offer of amnesty is fair in spirit but arrogant in nature. That is one reason why most militants have shunned the arms collection centres to negotiate their own choice of location of disarmament. By offering amnesty to the militants, President Yar’Adua has boldly accepted the fact that the Nigerian nation has been unfair to the Niger Delta people. Punishing these militants would therefore amount to double punishment. I salute the courage of the president as many have pressurised him to use the military to quell agitations by the Niger Delta people.
Like I have suggested in other forums; in finding solutions to the problems of militancy in the Niger Delta region, the federal government has put the cart before the horse. The genuine demands of the Niger Delta people have not been addressed. Right now, the success of the amnesty deal is being threatened by cases of doubt and suspicion. The offer of amnesty would have come after addressing the issues of fiscal federalism and injustice in the sharing of revenue from crude oil and natural gas. The Niger Delta people are well aware that when the nation’s super tribes were producing the natural resources that sustained the country’s economy, derivation was 50%. The question therefore on the lips of every Niger Deltan is: Why is it 13% now that the advantage has gone the way of minority tribes in the Niger Delta region?
For the oil based Nigerian economy to grow, there is an urgent need for peace in the Niger Delta. It is however unfortunate that both the federal and Niger Delta State governments are seeing the disarmament by militants as the foundation for peace and development of the region. If the truth must be said; then I would warn that Nigerians would be disappointed in the very near future if we see amnesty as a magic wand and ignore the fundamental issues that gave birth to agitation in the Niger Delta region. Justice and fair play in the sharing of revenue from oil and gas are the foundations on which amnesty should stand on. On the other hand; the federal government should make efforts to convince the Niger Delta people why it has refused to honour the 50% derivation precedent. Perhaps, the federal government has finally accepted the suggestion by Hon. Bala Ibn Na’Allah to end militancy by wiping out the entire Niger Delta region.
In blaming Niger Delta youths for their choice of militancy in seeking justice in the sharing of revenue from oil and gas, the presidency should accept the fact that government has made the culture of non-violent protest unattractive to Nigerians. The Advanced Learners’ Dictionary defines violence as, “an angry way of speaking or reacting.” Niger Delta youths had noticed that it has mostly been through industrial actions (an angry way of reacting) that NUPENG, ASUU, NMA, RATTAWU, PHCN, Police, and the Army have succeeded in forcing government to live to its obligation. That is to say, the Nigerian federal government has murdered her capacity to do any good thing voluntarily. Therefore, Niger Delta youths saw militancy (also an angry way of reacting) as the nearest thing to industrial action in their quest to right the grave injustice in the sharing of revenue from crude oil and gas.
While I do not want to contest the suggestion by many that President Yar’Adua holds the key to solving the Niger Delta question, I want to equally advice that he should not make the mistake of seeing the amnesty deal as a magic wand. The cart should be quickly retuned to the back of the horse so that the Niger Delta question can be solved once and for all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
