APC's Litmus Tests - Appreciation

[Salihu Lukman]

APC’s Litmus Tests - Appreciation

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

I hereby sincerely express appreciation and gratitude to God Almighty and our APC leaders for the successful Public Presentation of APC Litmus Tests: Nigerian Democracy and Politics of Change. In particular, I want to restate that the objective of the book is to contribute perspectives to APC leaders and members on challenges facing the party, government and the nation. As much as possible, effort is made to objectively analyse challenges and recommend responses.

 

It is gratifying to note that our leaders in APC, especially President Muhammadu Buhari have acknowledged these challenges and have been working to address them. Unlike politicians in other parties, especially the PDP who live in permanent denial of challenges faced by their parties and therefore do everything possible to reduce Nigerian democracy to electoral contest, APC leaders recognise that the foundation of every democracy is determined more by the scope of representation and responsiveness of political parties. Once parties are not representative and responsive to the interest of members, elected leaders on the platform of such a party cannot be representative or responsive to the interest of citizens.

 

APC leaders have been working to address these foundational issues of our democracy and APC’s Litmus Tests is a contribution to support initiatives of our leaders. All leaders and members of APC are therefore invited to engage challenges facing the party, government and the nation with every confidence and belief in the capacity of Nigerians to support every patriotic and nationalistic initiative. We much never allow the loud noise of selfish political entrepreneurs to hoodwink Nigerians into believing that our party and governments produced by our party have failed.

 

It will be a mockery of our political history to allow any narrative in the public space, which suggest that comparative to previous administrations since 1999, APC controlled administration led by President Muhammadu Buhari has failed. Like President Muhammadu Buhari himself has acknowledged, there are no doubt challenges facing the country, but no administration since 1999 has succeeded in completing projects, whether initiated by previous or current governments. Just on Thursday, June 10, 2021, President Buhari commissioned the Lagos – Ibadan railway, a project started and completed by his administration. And because leaders of PDP are shameless, they had the temerity to make a public statement calling on President Muhammadu Buhari to ‘stop taking credit for projects not initiated by him.’ May be they also want President Buhari and APC to acquire all their scandalous records, which include abandoning the construction of the PDP National Secretariat after mobilising billions on Naira.

 

PDP leaders and Nigerians should be reminded about the scandalous records of PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015. Part of it is already documented in the publication Power of Possibility & Politics of Change in Nigeria. Find attached the excerpt from that publication – Patently Political Fact, which illustrate graphically how efficient PDP was in mismanaging public resources. With such record and without any attempt to reform themselves, PDP leaders want to take advantage of the challenges facing Nigerians to win elections.

 

The challenge before all patriotic Nigerians is to ensure that Nigerian democracy is responsive to the need of citizens. This is beyond elections. This is what APC’s Litmus Tests is all about. APC’s Litmus Tests is an advocacy tool. It will be widely circulated among party leaders and members and also Nigerians interested in engaging national issues beyond the narrow prism of electoral politics. The electronic copy of APC’s Litmus Tests will be made public.

 

I am grateful to Progressive Governors for the opportunity to serve the party and our country in a very challenging environment. In particular, I am very grateful to His Excellency Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, our PGF Chairman for his leadership. I will remain indebted to all our party leaders, especially President Muhammadu Buhari and Asiwaju Bola Tinubu for creating the required environment for intellectual engagement in the APC. This hardly exist in other parties, including the PDP.

 

Our Caretaker Committee has succeeded in changing the toxic mood in the party. The Chairman, His Excellency Mai Mala Buni and all members of the Caretaker Committee should be commended for their selfless services. As we move into the final phase of reconstituting the leadership of our party, we must appeal to party leaders and members at all levels to respect and tolerate one another. The spirit of give and take must guide the process of leadership election at all levels.

 

Like the Caretaker Committee, the National Assembly led by His Excellency Ahmed Lawan and Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila has also created a new atmosphere of teamwork, both within members of the legislative arm as well as with the executive arm. Healthy inter and intra party legislative debates are now being conducted with higher degree of decorum. As APC members, we are gratified by the successes of the 9^th National Assembly.

 

May God Almighty enrich the wisdom of our leaders and guide them to produce a new leadership for the party that will be capable of meeting the expectations of party members and Nigerians.

 

This position does not represent the view of any APC Governor or the Progressive Governors Forum

 

Patently Political Facts

 

What has been the anti-corruption scorecards of successive governments since 1999? What are the achievements and challenges? What are the necessary reforms needed for an efficient, effective and result-oriented anti-corruption campaign? How is APC approaching the fight against corruption since 2015 different from how PDP has handled it between 1999 and 2015?

 

Many would argue that both PDP and APC are the same, which is not valid. Between 2006 and 2013 alone, it was reported that N1.34 trillion was stolen by about 50 people; N146.84 billion by 15 former State Governors; N654 billion by 11 people in business; N524 billion by 8 bankers; N146 billion by 12 federal and state civil servants; and N7 billion by 4 former Ministers.

 

How have the nation’s anti-corruption agencies fared with respect to high levels of theft of public resources? What could be the estimated scorecards of PDP and APC? Looking at how both parties are managing themselves and how they handle the business of government, here are some interesting findings.

 

·         First, INEC audit report for APC and PDP for the 2015 general elections reported by Premium Times of May 25, 2018, revealed that PDP spent N2.9 billion, while APC spent N4.8 billion. The APC’s audit report, filed by Mai-Alheri and Co., disclosed that the party derived its 2015 income from the sale of nomination forms which generated N329.5 million, while donations and gifts generated N275 million. The APC also spent N296.3 million on administration, N56.5 million on repairs and maintenance, N485,800 on welfare and N15.4 million on financial charges.

 

·         The audit report further noted that while the APC spent N2.9 billion on the 2015 polls, it generated only N604.5 million in the same calendar year, leaving a deficit of N2.3 billion. The APC disclosed that this was covered by its surplus from 2014 when it earned about N6.4 billion and spent only N4 billion. The report highlighted that the party’s fixed assets including office equipment were valued at N5.1 million, APC’s Data Centre equipment at N300,000, furniture and fittings at N6.8 million, motor vehicles at N20 million and library books N3.4 million, all totaling about N35.8 million.

 

·         In the case of PDP's audit report, prepared by Paul Akinade Adebimpe and Co., it showed the party's income for 2015 derived from donations and levies totaling N200 million and other expenses amounting to N599.2 million. While the PDP spent N4.8 billion on the 2015 elections, it also spent N1.7 billion on administration, N2.8 billion on its National Secretariat and N54 million on other financial expenses. Unlike the APC, the PDP had a surplus of N9.4 billion from 2014, as it spent only N3.6 billion from the N13 billion it reportedly earned.

 

·         Ahead of the 2015 elections, as a ruling party in control of the Federal Government, on Saturday, December 20, 2014, the PDP organised fundraising dinner and generated whooping N21 billion for former President Goodluck Jonathan’s 2015 re-elections campaign. Although owing to public criticisms, and of course legal implications, the PDP subsequently denied that the fundraising dinner was meant to support former President Jonathan’s re-election campaign. The N13 billion, therefore may be the net earning accrued to the PDP from the fundraising dinner.

 

Let us for the purpose of analysis assume that the reported N13 billion represents both what was redeemed from the pledged N21 billion at the December 20, 2014, PDP fundraising dinner and all other incomes received. This leads us to the second issue, which relates to the construction of a new National Secretariat for the PDP. Nigerians may again recall that on November 14, 2008, the then National Chairman of PDP, Chief Vincent Ogbulafor, organised a fundraising dinner in Abuja to raise N10 billion in the first instance, to finance the construction of a 12-storey new PDP National Secretariat, located on Muhammadu Buhari Way, Central Business District, Abuja. Quoting Premium Times, Sahara Reporters of January 22, 2017, reported that the dinner, which was chaired by Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, then Vice President, raised over N6 billion for the project.

 

Some of the donors include Mr. Femi Otedola who donated the highest amount of N1 billion and his late father, Chief Michael Otedola, who donated N25 million. Other big donors included Alh. Aliko Dangote who offered to supply cement worth N3 billion; the PDP National Working Committee, N1 billion; Mrs. Bola Shagaya, N25 million; Strabag Construction Company N100 million; Ogun State Government, N10 million; and an anonymous donor, N100 million. Late President Umaru Yar’Adua and his Vice President, Dr. Jonathan, contributed N527,205 and N454,735, representing 15 per cent of their basic salaries, respectively. Each of the party’s 28 State Governors at the time was reportedly levied N50 million by the party.

 

The contract for the PDP National Secretariat project was awarded to BNL Limited. The party paid an initial sum of N2 billion while BNL Limited was billed to complete construction of the National Secretariat project in 126 weeks. Sahara Reporters further reported in January 2017 that because of construction variations over the years, the project cost rose to N16 billion from 2008 estimated N10 billion out of which the party had paid N6 billion before work stopped.

 

In contrast to PDP, the APC has already acquired the property located at No. 40 Blantyre Street, Wuse 2, Abuja to house the APC National Secretariat. The APC first rented the property in 2013, and in 2016, the Chief Oyegun leadership of the party bought the property from the owner at the cost of N2.5 billion and agreed to make payment in instalments. So far, as at March 2019, the party has been able to pay more than N500 million with about N1.9 billion outstanding. Significantly, this has been achieved without any fundraising funfair.

 

The narrative of the PDP National Secretariat project underscores the reality of PDP’s financial recklessness in managing the affairs of the Federal Government for the 16 years it governed the country (1999 – 2015). Allegations of mismanagement and corruption were frequent and unfortunately reduced to public noise. For instance, in 2012, following the January national protest against increases in the prices of petroleum products, there were allegations of oil subsidy fraud. The House of Representatives eventually had to set up the Hon. Farouk Lawal ad-hoc Committee to investigate the actual subsidy requirements of the country.

 

At the end of the investigation, the Committee reported that “contrary to official figure of subsidy payment of N1.3 Trillion, the Accountant-General of the Federation put forward a figure of N1.6 Trillion, the CBN N1.7 Trillion, while the Committee established subsidy payment of N2.587 Trillion as at December 2011, amounting to more than 900% over the appropriated sum of N245 Billion. This figure of N2.587 Trillion is based on the CBN figure of N844.944 billion paid to NNPC, in addition to another figure of N847.942 billion reflected as withdrawals by NNPC from the excess crude naira account, as well as the sum of N894.201 billion paid as subsidy to Marketers. The figure of N847.942 billion quoted above strongly suggests that NNPC might have been withdrawing from two sources especially when double withdrawals were also reflected both in 2009 and 2010.”

 

The report of the 2012 subsidy probe threw up issues of accountability especially on the part of the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) with the strong charge that “NNPC feasted on the Federation Account to bloat the subsidy payable, some of the marketers were involved in claiming subsidy on products not supplied.” In particular, the report also indicted the Accountant-General of the Federation that served in 2009 for making payments in equal instalments of N999 million for 128 times, totaling N127.872 billion.

 

Following the release of the House of Representatives subsidy investigation report, the Chairman of the ad-hoc Committee, Hon. Farouk Lawal was reportedly enmeshed in a $3 million bribe scandal allegedly demanded from Mr. Femi Otedola, a major oil marketer.

 

There were also claims and counterclaims of missing oil revenues. In October 2013 for instance, former CBN Governor, Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi alleged that $49.8 billion from the sales of crude oil between January 2012 – July 2013 was missing from NNPC accounts. Following series of audits and reconciliation meetings involving NNPC, CBN and Ministry of Finance, the former CBN Governor reported the missing amount to be $20 billion while the former Minister of Finance, Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala reported $10.8 billion. On February 20, 2014, former President Goodluck Jonathan suspended Mallam Sanusi from office over allegations of financial misconduct. After the suspension of Mallam Sanusi, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) confirmed that about $20 billion was missing.

 

Throughout the tenure of the Jonathan administration (2010 – 2015), allegations of corruption against public officers were regular features. In 2012, there was the case of Police Pension Task Force, which was investigated by the Senate Joint Committee on Public Service and Establishment and State and Local Government Administration. Some of the revelations include withdrawal of N24 billion for payment of pension that required about N3.5 billion — the Chairman of the Pension Review Task Team, Alh. Abdulrasheed Maina, informed the Senate Committee of two accounts in Lagos where police pension funds were lodged, each amounting to N21 and N24 billion. Alh. Maina reported daily withdrawals of various sums of money from these accounts ranging from N200 to N300 million. A total sum of N273.9 billion was reported by the Senate Committee to have been looted in 6 years from the police pension fund.

 

Other cases of corruption charges against public officials under PDP (1999 – 2015) include the case of $180 million Halliburton; $1.1 billion Malabo Oil; Princess Stella Oduak N255 million Aviation Ministry bulletproof cars; N10 billion jet scam involving the Petroleum Minister, Mrs. Dizieni Alison Madueke; and House of Representatives Capital Market probe; and N360 billion service-wide scam.

 

What is the anti-corruption scorecard of the APC since it took over the Federal Government in 2015? The Acting EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, in December 2018 told journalists that N794 billion, $261 million, £1.1 million, €8.2 million, 86,500 CFA and 407 properties were recovered.  Also, Mr. Magu disclosed that EFCC had secured 703 convictions. Other similar cases include the recovery of N93,558,000, $530,087, £25,970 and €5,680 from 5 serving judges (Justices Adeniyi Ademola, Kabir Auta, Muazu Pindiga, Mohammed Tsamiya and I. A.  Umezulike) following sting operations by operatives of Department of Security Services (DSS) in October 2016.

 

There was also the case of $2.1 billion arms deal involving Col. (Rtd) Sambo Dasuki, former National Security Adviser under the Jonathan’s PDP administration. The breakdown showed that N1.5 billion was paid to Alh. Bashir Yuguda, which was reportedly disbursed in respective sums to the following PDP chieftains - N600 million to PDP 2015 election campaign Contact and Mobilization chairmen (Chief Bode George, Amb. Yerima Abdullahi, Mr. Peter Odili, Alh. Attahiru Bafarawa, Chief Jim Nwobodo and Col. (Rtd) Ahmadu Ali); N300 million to BAM properties linked to Alh. Bello Haliru, former PDP National Chairman; N200 million to Alh. Bello Sarkin Yaki, former PDP Kebbi State 2015 governorship candidate; N100 million to Alh. Mahmud Shinkafi, former PDP Zamfara State Governor; and N100 million to Dalhatu Limited linked to Alh. Attahiru Bafarawa.

 

Other disbursements were N750 million to Reliance Referral Hospital Limited for special prayers; N380 million to support re-election of PDP members of House of Representatives; N550 million to Thisday Newspaper allegedly as compensation for attacks on the newspaper’s offices in Kaduna and Abuja in 2012; N120 million to Nduka Obaigbena allegedly as compensation for copies of various newspapers seized in June 2014; N170 million for the purchase of four-bedroom duplex; N260 million paid to Chief Tony Anenih; N345 million paid to Sen. Iyorchia Ayu; and N90 million for Dasuki’s son’s house.

 

There was also the discovery of $9.7 million by the EFCC in May 2018 and £74,000 from Mr. Andrew Yakubu, former Group Managing Director of NNPC concealed in a building in Kaduna. Similarly, in April 2017, the EFCC discovered sums of $43,449,947, £27,800 and N23,218,000 in Ikoyi apartment linked to Amb. Ayodele Oke, the DG of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA). Around the same period, there was the reported N272 million “grass cutting” contract awarded by the former Secretary to the Federal Government (SGF), Engr. Babachir David Lawal to companies allegedly owned by him.

 

There was, of course, the case of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, who did not declare the $3 million lodged in five accounts that belonged to him, which led to his suspension from office and subsequent conviction on April 18, 2019 by the Code of Conduct Tribunal, stripping him of all offices he earlier occupied, forfeiture of the money in the five accounts he failed to declare and banning him from holding public office for 10 years.

 

From these accounts, what is very clear is that while under PDP’s sixteen (16) years in control of the Federal Government, the country witnessed long lists of suspected cases of corruption, endless investigations, low convictions, and hardly any recovery, in the case of four (4) years of APC, it is a different narrative. Indeed, the evidence speaks for itself as best summarised by the EFCC Chairman’s account of the recoveries so far made which comprise N871 billion, 407 mansions and 703 convictions.

 

A realistic estimation of the differences between the PDP and APC is represented by how the two parties handled the challenge of acquiring their National Secretariats. After ten years of work, the PDP abandoned the 12-storey National Secretariat project having expended over N6 billion. In contrast, within three years of existence (between 2013 and 2016) as a party, the APC was able to acquire a National Secretariat at the cost of N2.5 billion and has paid more than N500 million with about N1.9 billion outstanding.

 

A second reality is the cost of campaigns. INEC’s Audit Reports indicated that PDP had spent only N2.9 billion while APC spent N4.8 billion for the 2015 campaigns.  Just looking at the $2.1 billion (or about N756 billion) Dasuki arms deal money, which substantially was expended to fund the 2015 PDP campaigns, it is clear that the N2.9 billion was just a fraction of what was actually spent. In fact, Premium Times of May 25, 2018, reported former President Obasanjo, at a press conference on Thursday, May 10, 2018, disclosing that PDP spent almost $3bn (or more than N1 trillion) on 2015 elections.

 

Related to campaign funds, the speculated expenditures of PDP Presidential aspirants at October 6, 2018, Port Harcourt Convention would readily come to mind. According to media reports, Alh. Atiku Abubakar, one of the PDP Presidential Aspirants spent about $5,000 (or N1.8 million) on each of the over 3,000 delegates at the convention. It was also speculated that Governor Aminu Waziri Tambuwal with the support of Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike spent about $10,000 (or N3.6 million) on each delegate.

 

In the case of APC, beyond logistical costs of organising the direct primaries in the States, the Abuja National Convention of October 6, 2018, which was incurred by the party, President Buhari who emerged as the Presidential candidate of the party did not incur any personal cost. This, however, may not apply to other candidates at governorship and other lower levels. There were undoubtedly reported cases of vote buying incidences also in APC, but hardly anywhere near the scale in PDP.

 

Underpinning extravagant costs for campaign expenditures as reported in the case of PDP require that we ask some questions: are campaign donations just generous support? Alternatively, are they business investment? Looking at the reality that some of the donors to PDP projects (both Secretariat project and campaigns) also feature prominently in some of the reported corruption cases such as the subsidy fraud, for instance, it is easy to make the connection that in reality these donations are business investments to be recouped. 

 

With high incidences of corruption, it is only logical that national development will remain elusive. This explains for instance why despite higher prices of Nigerian crude in the international market between 1999 and 2014, at more than $100 per barrel, producing an average 2.1 million barrels per day, Nigerian media quoted Mr. Waziri Adio, Executive Secretary of Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (NEITI) indicating that although Nigeria earn N77.348 trillion from oil between 1999 and 2016, ‘Nigeria has one of the lowest natural resource revenue savings in the world.’

 

In contrast, since 2015, the highest price of Nigerian crude recorded was around $74. In November 2018, a report of Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) indicated that Nigeria earned N1.68 trillion from oil between 2015 and 2017.

 

The temptation to ignore some of these realities could be high especially given a politically charged atmosphere. Partly on account of such temptations, some leading PDP chieftains and their apologists have been making claims that some of the completed projects by the President Buhari administration were projects initiated by the PDP past administrations. While it may be true that some of these projects were started by PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015, the fact is, if PDP had remained in government, these projects would not have been completed. They will simply have been subjected to contract variations, that would entail the release of more money which may end up in private accounts of public officials and PDP leaders. With such scenario, it would be difficult to expect any tangible progress towards completing the projects.

 

This would have been the story of the following projects: Abuja – Kaduna; Itakpe – Ajaokuta – Warri; Lagos – Abeokuta – Ibadan; Abuja Metro rail lines; Port Harcourt and Abuja airports; 2^nd Niger bridge; Abuja – Kaduna – Kano highway; Ilorin – Jebba Road; Abuja – Keffi – Lafia – Makurdi roads; Suleija – Minna road; and so many others. This is in addition to other social investments in school feeding, N-Power, tradermoni, and several other initiatives. For the first time in the history of the country, around August 2018, power generation was reported to have reached 7,000 Mega Watts. Maximum output under the PDP was below 4,000 MW.

 

Also, unlike under the PDP administration when billions of dollars disappeared from NNPC accounts, under the President Buhari APC led government nothing of the sort has happened. In addition to FAAC allocations to States, Paris Club refunds amounting to N760.18 billion have been paid to the 36 States governments, as bail outs and fiscal support to enable the State governments pay salaries and meet their contractual obligations as at December 2018.

 

Many PDP leaders and apologists will continue to claim that the projects being commissioned by the President Buhari administration as their achievements. Arguing that these are PDP achievements would only have some comic entertainment value. Maybe Nigerians should accept that they are genuinely PDP’s achievements, in which case it would be expedient to ask PDP leaders, when will they be commissioning their new 12-storey National Secretariat? Perhaps, in order to speed up work on the 12-storey PDP National Secretariat, the PDP leaders can invite the APC leadership to take over management of the contract to help them complete it. Without any new valuation and with the same contractors, at the same cost of N10 billion, with only outstanding payment of N4 billion to the contractors, the APC leadership should be able to get the project executed given its managerial capacity to execute projects to completion.

 

It is such a patently political fact that PDP’s record in public service only disburses public resources to personal accounts of public officials and party leaders, while APC can disburse resources to contractors and ensure the completion of infrastructural projects.

 

Excepts from the book Power of Possibility & Politics of Change in Nigeria pages 125 - 132

 

 

-- 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Director General

Progressive Governors Forum

79 Nelson Mandela

Asokoro, Abuja

http://www.pgfnigeria.org

 

 

 

[Jimoh Oriyomi]

kindly address the killing of Nigerians by bandits and other criminals with the tacit support of your government 

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/CAE69E0D-0CEA-4D2F-BE35-0E9F500412DC%40gmail.com.

--

MUFUTAU OLUWASEGUN JIMOH, PhD

Department of History and International Studies, Federal University Birnin-Kebbi, Kebbi State Nigeria.
Fellow, American Council of Learned Societies/ African Humanities Program (F17)

Fellow, French Institute For Research in Africa

Tel: +2348033390977

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigeria’s Democracy and Challenges of Federalism: Neglected Task of Political Parties’ Development

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Paper Presented at International Conference on 50 Years Post Nigerian Civil War: Issues, Challenges and Prospects towards National Integration, Justice, Peace and Security organised July 5 – 7, 2021 by Centre for Health and Allied Legal and Demographical Development Research and Training, Nnamdi Azikwe University, Awka, Anambra State

 

Introduction

 

Let me thank Prof. Charles O. Esimone, FAS, FPSN, Vice Chancellor of Nnamdi Azikwe University and all management team of the university for initiating this conference, which is to review issues, challenges and prospects towards national integration, justice, peace and security, more than fifty years after the Nigerian civil war. We must commend the foresight of the leadership of the Centre for Health and Allied Legal and Demographical Development Research and Training of the University for facilitating the conference. It is quite an honour to be invited to join other eminent scholars to contribute towards generating recommendations that would assist to explore how we can strengthen peaceful co-existence in our dear country, Nigeria.

 

There cannot be a better time than now to organise this conference. This is largely because politics has taken over almost everything in Nigeria, and almost everybody is interpreting all challenges based on narrow political choices. It is quite unfortunate that with such polluted political atmosphere, our history as a nation is being impaired and, almost every day, rewritten to serve narrow political interests. Sadly, younger generation of Nigerians are being misled to believe that ethnic and religious factors are the foundational issues for guaranteeing national integration, justice and security. No doubt, ethnic and religious factors are very important and must be recognised and respected. But making them the foundational issues for guaranteeing national integration, justice and security is deceptively self-serving.

 

It was Kwameh Anthony Appiah, a British-Ghanaian philosopher, in the book, The Lies that Bind: Rethinking Identity who argued that “Philosophers contribute to public discussions of moral and political life, …, not by telling you what to think but by providing an assortment of concepts and theories you can use to decide what to think for yourself.” In our context in Nigeria, we have more than fair share of assorted concepts and theories of what we can use to decide what to think of ourselves. In most cases, all our concepts and theories are more about justifying why things are bad and why Nigeria is ‘failing’ and some have even gone a step ahead to argue that Nigeria has ‘failed’.

 

Perhaps, it is important from the start to make the point that my presentation will deviate from the doomy approach of presenting long list of sad narratives and heaping every blame on our political leaders. As much as it is important to recognise all our leadership challenges, we should do so based on the capacity to take responsibility and to bolster the confidence of Nigerians, especially our younger generation, that as a nation, we can overcome our challenges. While recognising our challenges, we should be able to acknowledge all the important little progress we have been able to make as a nation.

 

To do this, I want to focus my presentation on the theme Nigeria’s Democracy and Challenges of Federalism: Neglected Task of Political Parties’ Development. If anything, the collapse of democracy, First Republic, in 1966 was the first launchpad of the Nigerian civil war. Secondly, with the emergence of first military government under Gen. J. T. U. Aguiyi Ironsi, Nigeria’s federalism went through several years of distortions. One of such distortions was the infamous Unification Decree No. 34 of 1966, which abolished the federal system of government based on the claim of discouraging tribalism and promoting national reconstruction.

 

Almost all the military governments we had between 1966 and 1999, more than seven, undertook some reform measures that altered (distorted) the configuration of Nigeria’s federalism. Combined, these experiences contributed substantial parts of the assortment of concepts and theories of what we are using today to think of ourselves as Nigerians. Each military administration had variant of its own propositions, which in one way or the other created additional challenges to issues of national integration, justice, peace and security.

 

If the claim is that military governments over a period of more than thirty years have created conditions that distorted Nigeria’s federalism, how has democratic experience over the last years (more than twenty years) handled the task of rebuilding the nation’s federalism? To what extent is the issue of rebuilding federalism addressing the challenges of peaceful co-existence? Beyond the question of presenting candidates for elections, have Nigerian political parties prioritise the issue of rebuilding the nation’s federalism based on the cardinal principles of promoting peaceful co-existence and national integration?

 

Democracy, Political Parties and Challenges of Federalism

 

Since the overthrow of the First Republic in 1966 and the civil war that followed between 1967 and 1970, ethnic relations, especially between the so-called Hausa-Fulani Northern part of the country and Igbos in the South-East region of the country has been twitchy. This is also the case predominantly between both the Hausa-Fulanis and Igbos on the one hand and Yorubas in the South-West, as well as with the Ijaws, Ibibios, Efik, and other ethnic groups in the South-South region of the country. Tense relations between our ethnic groups is responsible for why at different times and in many instances, there are cases of ethnic and communal violence, often resulting in ethnic profiling of criminals.

  

Problems associated with ethnic profiling get compounded by over centralisation of governance especially during periods of military rule. Frustrations associated with failed political transitions of the military, both under Gen. Ibrahim Babangida and Gen. Sani Abacha between 1985 and 1998 further compounded challenges of peaceful co-existence and national integration and have remained sources of national pain. Combined, these are unfortunately major reasons for sectional agitations, which considerably constitute challenges to current federal structure as provided under the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended.

 

Although problems of political tension between ethnic groups in the country could be said to be volatile since the 1966 military intervention, reckless and brazenly repressive conducts by the past military leadership heightened ethnic tension in the country. Twice, between 1985 and 1998, the political transition programme initiated by the military was disrupted with hardly good justifiable reasons. Even when the process, in June 1993, was leading to the emergence of a President who would have successfully won votes from all sections of the country, notwithstanding the fact that both the candidate, Chief M. K. O. Abiola and his running mate, Amb. Babagana Kingibe, were both Muslims, the military leadership of Gen. Babangida went ahead to annul the election without any credible reason.

 

The annulment of June 12, 1993 election further worsened ethnic relations in the country such that although the elections produced one of best electoral results that confirms there is still a good hope for national unity and peaceful coexistence, campaigns for its actualisation sharpened divisions along ethnic lines. This was aggravated by the tight-fisted political transition of the late Gen. Sani Abacha administration between 1993 and 1998. Chief Abiola, the presumed winner of the June 12, 1993 election spent the remaining parts of his life between 1993 and July 1998 under arrest. 

 

Part of the challenge that require proper attention in the country is the need to resolve problems of mismanagement of the country’s transition from military rule to the current Fourth Republic. Without recalling all the unfortunate details of the problems created by the annulment of the June 12, 1993, it is important to recognise that more than 20 years into the current Fourth Republic, the tension created in the country are far from being resolved. Prior to 2015, the closest we came to addressing these issues, as a nation, is the appointment of the Justice Oputa Oputa Human Right Violation Investigation Commission under former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999 and the 2014 National Conference under former President Goodluck Jonathan. Of course, in 2005, there was the National Political Reform Conference under former President Obasanjo, which eventually became embroiled in the controversy around former President Obasanjo’s Third Term agenda and as a result all the recommendations were therefore never considered. 

 

Inability to address issues of ethnic tension in the country has continued to inflame all manner of political crisis. Coupled with widespread systematic weakening of governance institutions, especially on matters of guaranteeing the security of lives and property of Nigerians, issues of role of political leaders in addressing the challenge became a major political issue. The problem of insurgency in the North-East and the spate of suicide bombings by Boko Haram terrorists between 2010 and 2015 compounded the task of managing ethnic relations thereby creating serious security challenges in the country. Before 2015, the Boko Haram insurgents were controlling most parts of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe States. Weak response and excessive politicisation of our national security challenges under former President Jonathan administration, including the false accusation that opposition politicians were sponsoring Boko Haram, lower the approval rating of the Jonathan administration in the country, which significantly contributed to its defeat in 2015.

 

Part of the challenge of ensuring that Nigeria’s democracy prioritise the issue of rebuilding federalism is the narrow focus on regional representation in governments especially in terms of who emerges as president. Promoted largely by Nigerian elites who most times position themselves to emerge as the main beneficiaries of such campaign, the major focus is reduced to which region of the country produces the President. Whether such President is able to respond to challenges of the region he/she comes from is another matter entirely.

 

The narrow focus on individual candidates has so far created a situation whereby political parties are nothing more than platforms for contesting elections. Specific commitments of parties to issues of federalism are taken for granted. Consequently, the true substance or content of politicians and how they will handle the task of rebuilding Nigeria’s federalism when elected, which will determine policy choices may only be speculated based on estimation of past experiences of candidates. The truth, however, is that the dynamic of public life is completely different and no matter the level of experiences, factors that would influence decisions of political leaders when in office are far more complex than what their past suggest.

 

Part of the assumptions that democracy is founded on the logic that political parties should have manifestos, which should highlight ideological orientations and commitments of leaders and members, is just redundant in our context. Any close observer will recognise that although there is a document called party manifesto, party members, including leaders are hardly committed, in fact, many are hardly conversant with provisions of their party’s manifesto. To a large extent, this account for why initiating policies and programmes based on provisions of the manifesto is weak. How many party members, including leaders have gone through the party manifesto? How many party leaders can develop perspectives, which will highlight policy choices in lines with provisions of the party’s manifesto?

 

The consequence is that the only political contest that take place is electoral contest, which is just about personalities. To go beyond electoral contests means that debate on perspectives should highlight possible choices open to governments. To what extent are political parties able to project the demands of Nigerians especially in terms of regional representations? Beyond the personality of candidates and their ethnic or regional backgrounds, what are the other demands of Nigerians from the six regions? How can any candidate from any of the regions reconcile all these demands and make Nigeria home to all ethnic groups in the country?

 

The Issues – Campaign for Restructuring or True Federalism

 

It was Daron Acemoglu & James A. Robinson in the book Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty, that argued No two societies create the same institutions; they will have distinct customs, different systems of property rights, and different ways of dividing a killed animal or loot stolen from another group. Some will recognise the authority of elders, others will not; some will achieve some degree of political centralisation early on, but not others. Societies are constantly subject of economic and political conflicts that is resolved in different ways because of specific historical differences, the role of individuals, or just random factors.

 

This means that the demands of the different sections of Nigeria in terms of the details of what Nigeria’s federalism should be, will be different. The extent to which therefore these details are clarified by political parties based on which individual leaders of political parties commit themselves to implementing policy proposals that unite Nigerians are hardly the issue. As a result, in 1999, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) succeeded in producing former President Olusegun Obasanjo as President of the country largely in order to pacify the Yoruba’s in the South West without any expressed specific commitment to resolving any of the broader challenges of rebuilding Nigeria’s federalism. What the emergence of former President Obasanjo for instance meant to other regions – the three regions in the North, South-East and South-South was simply taken for granted.

 

Perhaps on account of the need to end military rule and return to democracy, especially given the anger against the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election, which was adjudged to have been won by Chief M. K. O. Abiola, a Yoruba from the South-West, the elite consensus in the country was to allow the South-West to produce the President. This was mainly responsible for why the two Presidential candidates that contested the 1999 election, former President Obasanjo and Chief Olu Falea, were both Yorubas from the South-West. How the emergence of former President Obasanjo was able to respond to agitations of Yorubas from the South-West is completely another matter.

 

To considerable extent, former President Obasanjo’s era could be said to be a period of lost opportunity for Nigeria in terms of taking advantage of the return to democratic rule to commence the process of rebuilding Nigeria’s federalism. Inability to use the new democratic opening to commence national negotiations to rebuild federalism reduces democracy to electoral contests. With hardly any exception, ahead of every election, almost everyone become sucked into the politics of ethnic contests. Every government initiative and almost all actions of political leaders get interpreted in ethnic terms.

 

The best description of this reality was provided by Graeme Gerrard and Benard Murphy in the book How to think Politically when they argued that “We assume that citizens should be informed. But they also need to be knowledgeable and even wise. Today we are inundated with information – but knowledge and wisdom remain as scarce as ever. Thanks to the miracle of digital technology, we are drowning in oceans of data, facts and opinions. What we need now is not more information but more insight, not more data but more perspective, not more opinions but more wisdom. After all, much of what is called information is actually misinformed, and most opinions fall short of true knowledge, let alone wisdom. Even a superficial glance at the state of contemporary politics will dispel any illusion that the explosion of information has led to wiser citizens or politicians or improved quality of public debate. If anything, misinformation is winning out over knowledge.”

 

There is no better description of our national reality defined by ethnic tension and the politics of hatred. While it is true that ethnic politics will always be part of our national life, it is important that Nigerians are able to engage beyond the simplistic issue of which ethnic group or region produces the President of Nigeria. As important as that should be, it must be supported with specific governance reform proposals aimed at facilitating regional developments. Why should any region or ethnic group produce a President and at the end of the tenure of such a President, there is nothing in terms of physical development of the region to justify that such a region has produced the President of Nigeria? For instance, what was the benefit to the South-West throughout the eight-year of former President Obasanjo? Or what was the benefit to the South-South to justify the six-year tenure of former President Goodluck Jonathan?

 

Given our political history and all the accumulated grievances of sections of the country, controlling and managing ethnic tension is a determining electoral factor, which should be taken seriously by all political leaders irrespective of ethnic background. On the other hand, no matter how well a leader performs, once such a leader failed to meet the expectations of sections of the country on account of poor management of ethnic relations, the leader may only be remembered based on all the unpopular choices he or she made while in power. For instance, President Obasanjo is only remembered today for the Third Term agenda he attempted to impose on the nation. Former President Jonathan is mostly associated with problems of insecurity. In the particular case of former President Jonathan, not even the case of convening the 2014 National Conference and his magnanimous decision to concede defeat in the 2015 election even before INEC declared the results surpass the poor management of security as the defining credentials of his leadership in the rating of many Nigerians.

 

Ethnic Tension and Challenges of National Unity

 

If the eight-year tenure of former President Obasanjo and by extension the sixteen-year tenure of PDP is regarded as period of lost opportunity, to what extent is the current era of President Buhari and APC setting the right agenda to rebuild Nigeria’s federalism? To what extent, for instance, are President Buhari’s initiatives a reflection of the commitment of the APC and its leadership? Perhaps, being a party envisioned to be social democratic with the principles of promoting all-inclusive government for the development of policies and programmes that would improve the lives of Nigerian citizens, regardless of ethnicity and religious orientation, it could be argued that APC and its leadership are as committed as President Buhari to these issues. But it is one thing to make such a claim and entirely another thing to justify it with reference to actions and pronouncements of APC leaders.

 

As things are today, President Muhammadu Buhari had done what no leader has ever done in the political history of this country in terms of attempt to respond to issues of ethnic tension because of past injustice under military rule. This is to the effect that on June 6, 2018, he acknowledged that annulment of June 12, 1993 election was an act of injustice and proceeded to declare June 12 as Nigeria’s Democracy Day. Since 1999, only South-West governments controlled by the defunct Alliance for Democracy (AD) and later ACN, observed June 12 as Democracy Day. The Federal Government and all other state governments outside the South-West only recognise May 29 as the Democracy Day. Although being a Hausa-Fulani, which is the ethnic group accused of perpetrating the June 12 injustice, President Muhammadu Buhari took the bold decision of declaring June 12 as Nigeria’s Democracy Day. In addition, he conferred the highest national honour Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR), on late Chief MKO Abiola, the standard bearer of the June 12, 1993 elections posthumously as well as also publicly apologising to the family of late Chief Abiola. 

 

In taking these bold steps, President Buhari was unambiguously clear that the objective was to correct the injustice of the past. This was contained in his speech while presenting members of Chief Abiola’s family with the award of posthumous national honour when he stressed, “We cannot rewind the past, but we can at least assuage our feelings, recognise that a wrong has been committed and resolve to stand firm now and ease the future for the sanctity of free elections. Nigerians will no longer tolerate such perversion of justice. This retrospective and posthumous recognition is only a symbolic token of redress and recompense for the grievous injury done to the peace and unity of our country.”

 

Alh. Babagana Kingibe, the running mate to Chief Abiola and another veteran of the struggle for the actualisation of the result of June 12, 1993 elections in the country, late Chief Gani Fawehinmi were conferred the national honour of Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON). These are important milestones, which the government and our leaders would have consolidated by activating the processes of considering other governance initiatives to manage problems of volatile ethnic politics. 

 

In addition to issues of injustice arising from June 12, 1993 annulment, subsisting challenges of the civil war of 1967 – 1970 in relation to political participation especially in terms of leadership of Nigeria are still there. Issues of leadership contest will continue to be a permanent factor, not just for people of the South-East but for all sections of Nigeria. How political parties and leaders are able to develop framework for political negotiations is a major challenge. The question is, would political negotiations for leadership integrate issues of regional development based on which all political leaders are able expeditiously implement? The extent to which people are able to own development initiatives and correspondingly therefore justify political choices are very critical. Politics will be meaningless if political choices are not correlated with issues of development.

 

Addressing issues of representation in government and challenges bordering on political participation are functions of negotiations and ability to produce compromises that will further expand the scope of participation of Nigerians from the South-East in Nigerian politics. This is also largely a question of the ability of leaders from the South-East to win the trust and confidence of political leaders from other parts of the country.

 

The excellent reality is that the people of the South-East are very much ahead of politics. Both in business and other private endevours, they are about the only ethnic group that have successful been able to explore and harness their vast resourceful potentials in every part of the country. The entrepreneurial capacity of the Igbos is very well located in the remotest part of Nigeria across every section. To some extent, political negotiations in Nigeria is below the standard of the desire of the average citizen from South-East. When for instance leadership negotiation is reduced to emergence of individuals as President from specific regions without recognising the progress made by citizens from that region to integrate themselves in every part of the country shortchanges Nigerians and therefore present a false narrative. Most importantly, political elites need to be more representative beyond personal ambitions for leadership.

 

All the clamour for representation should be grounded around the unique capacity of Nigerians to excel and make every part of Nigeria their home. When elites reduce issues of rebuilding Nigeria’s federalism based on opportunistic clamour of emergence of Nigerian President from a section or simplistic access to public appointments, they downgrade the resourcefulness of citizens. The rising wave of divisive, secessionist and separatist agitations that promote ethnic and regional identities is also completely at variance with the desires and capacity of citizens from the region where such campaign originate to explore and harness Nigeria’s vast potentials. Nigerian politics and political negotiations should be about supporting citizens to excel irrespective of whoever is the President of Nigeria.

 

Partly because political negotiations in Nigeria is not about supporting citizens to explore and harness Nigeria’s vast potentials, we are today confronted with a reality whereby even when government is able to initiate and implement policies that support citizens to explore and harness Nigeria’s vast potentials, so long as it does not serve the narrow interests of political elites, it is dismissed and rubbished. This is sadly the case in many respects confronting us as a nation today. As a result, we are witnessing the resurgence of desperate youth groups promoting ethnic and regional secessionist campaigns in the country from the South-East and South-West, all because political elites are mismanaging processes of political negotiations in the country based on narrow personal ambitions.

 

The challenge, therefore, is for political parties and leaders to rise above personal ambitions for leadership and make issues of national unity a priority for political negotiations. While recognising that as a nation, Nigeria has so many challenges, the resolution of the challenges rest with the development of our democracy and with it, the ascendency of structured processes of consultations, negotiations and agreements facilitate by our political parties. Inability to prioritise issues of national unity based on selfish personal ambitions of political elites have made politicians to in many respects accommodate, tolerate and impliedly accept secessionist agitations in Nigeria today. In the same vein, Nigerian political parties hardly regard the issue of negotiating national unity and peaceful co-existence of all the different components of the Nigerian federation an important political issue. This negligence has resulted in the resurgence of separatist agitations in the country.

 

For instance, since 2016, the separatist group of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) under the leadership of Nnamdi Kanu have been campaigning for the creation of Biafra. The South Eastern part of the country became the centre of activities for the group. There is hardly any counter political mobilsation by any political groups from the South-East. Similarly, there were instances of youth groups from Northern Nigeria issuing threats to Igbo citizens in Northern Nigeria to leave the North, allegedly in response to IPOB campaigns. Although many leaders and groups from these regions intervened to ensure that the situation didn’t degenerate into violent conflict, there was hardly any conscious effort to mobilise citizens against activities of these groups.

 

Unfortunately, however, political tension associated with ethnoreligious activities of groups such as IPOB and so-called coalition of Northern groups still continue to dominates the polity. In recent times, secessionist campaigns led by Sunday Igboho to mobilise for so-called Odudua Nation in the South-West have started. Noting that the IPOB campaign for a ‘Biafra Nation’ in the South-East is already launching attacks on government structures, especially police stations, thereby killing police personnel and other innocent citizens, it is worrisome that secessionist campaigns by self-acclaimed regional leaders is weakly being responded to by regional political leaders.

 

Resurgence of ethnic and regional secessionist campaigns by extremist groups are being made against the background of rising insecurity in the country. No doubt issues of insecurity are challenges which Nigerian politics and leaders must address. To what extent, are political elites united in addressing challenges of insecurity will be a critical determining factor for success. Sadly, rather than political elites uniting to address challenges of insecurity, personal ambitions for leadership are being used to further escalate the situation. Most of our political elites are positioning themselves to take advantage of rising wave of insecurity as negotiation factors for next leadership of Nigeria.

 

There is the need to appeal to political leaders in Nigeria that at the core of the forces tearing the fabrics of national unity and coherence is a contestation of nationhood, the true meaning of citizenship for many Nigerians and the perception that Nigeria’s federal system has not been fundamentally reformed to assure the constituent parts of the country of inclusiveness. These are genuine cumulative grievances from Nigeria’s colonial and post-colonial history of bad governance and manipulation of differences. These are political problems that need to be confronted with a demonstration of political will at the highest level and across the spectrum of the political leadership.

 

Despite the deep-seated challenges of the economy and insecurity, which the APC government inherited, democracy offers an opportunity for addressing all the nation’s numerous challenges including regional inequality and the distortions in Nigeria’s federal system. Without any doubt, the challenges of insecurity in the country are manifesting in new desperate forms beyond problems of kidnappings and Boko Haram, which the APC inherited in 2015 when it assumed power. Unfortunately, instead of political leaders seeking to address these issues using dialogue, negotiations and the progressive reform of the 1999 constitution, reckless and ill-motivated ethnic and regional political organisations and their self-appointed spokespersons kept issuing inflammatory and intemperate statements and counter-statements.

 

Most Nigerians observed the ethno-regional activities of these groups with consternation and grief, the reckless and bellicose utterances of groups, organisations and individuals fanning the ember of ethnic and regional hate and openly seeking the dismemberment of Nigeria. It is even more regrettable that these groups have been issuing provocative statements on behalf of sections of the country. It is, however, important to appreciate that the proliferation of these youth groups, is in the first place, a reflection of the failure of development, and specifically a failure to create a future for the youth population who now devote their energy to unproductive ventures including serving as cannon fodders for divisive politics and the violence associated with it.

 

While the unity of Nigeria should be a priority, it must be underlined by the commitment of political parties in power and their elected representatives at all levels. Political parties and elected representatives must effectively govern and deliver services and promote social justice; formulate policies that take account of Nigeria’s ethnic and cultural diversities; and promote the security and welfare of citizens across the country irrespective of the ethnicity and religion of individuals and groups.

 

Myth of a “Geographical Expression”

 

Nigerian politicians and elites who are determined to work against Nigeria’s unity and corporate existence often misrepresent the observation once made in 1947 by the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo to the effect that Nigeria was a “mere geographical expression”. The essence of this remark, which was apt at the time, was that only by addressing the reality of our differences would Nigeria make progress. 

 

Nigeria of today is not a mere geographical expression. The consequence of our liberal Constitution, which have encouraged Nigerians to live in every part of the country to pursue legitimate activities regardless of ethnicity and place of origin is that diverse and multi-cultural communities exist in every part of the country. The free movement of people across the length and breadth of Nigeria, which started even before British colonialism, has resulted in trans-regional ethnic and religious ties and truly diverse communities in all parts of Nigeria. Many Nigerians have their lifetime investments in regions and states other than the ones they call their own in the Nigerian parlance. The reality today is that these cross-cutting ties have created bonds across ethnic, religious and regional divides around livelihood issues which are more enduring than primordial identities of religion and “tribe”.

 

There are many successful nations today in terms of having a common purpose and strong national bond that have been created out of multiple ethnic and religious identities. Visionary and purposeful leadership has created such nations, leveraging on strong national institutions, good governance, equity and justice, which enable each group to fulfill its aspirations. After all, a nation is an imagined community of people who share a common aspiration, which is realisable through the principles of justice and the rule of law as enunciated in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The idea of Nigeria being a mere geographical expression is, therefore, a misnormer in the light of the present realities.

 

APC and the Campaign for True Federalism

 

Perhaps unlike the case of lost opportunity under the sixteen-year tenure of PDP in terms initiatives to rebuild Nigeria’s federalism, the Chief John Odigie-Oyegun led APC National Working Committee, in July 2017 set up the APC Committee on True Federalism with Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, Governor of Kaduna State and Sen. Olubunmi Adetunmbi, as Chairman and Secretary respectively. The Committee initially had a limited membership of ten (10) but was later expanded to twenty-seven (27), covering all sections of the country, all interest groups and given more time to consult more extensively across the country. Its terms of reference include making recommendations to advance the unity, national integration and collective well-being of the country. 

 

In discharging its mandate, the Committee identified thirteen (13) issues based on the review of reports of National Conferences, including the 2005 National Political Reform Conference and the 2014 National Conference. The 13 issues identified are - Creation of States, Merger of States, Derivation Principle, Devolution of Powers, Federating Units, Fiscal Federalism & Revenue Allocation, Form of Government, Independent Candidacy, Land Tenure System, Local Government Autonomy, Power Sharing & Rotation, Resource Control and Type of Legislature.

 

Having outlined these issues, the Committee invited memoranda from Nigerians and held public hearings in all the six geopolitical zones of the country. The committee broadened its considerations of issues to be recommended to advance the unity, national integration and collective well-being of Nigeria beyond the limited interest of members of the APC. It took memoranda and submissions of Nigerians who are not APC members. Besides, it organised dedicated public hearings for women, youth, civil society and physically challenged groups, which held between September 18 and October 9, 2017. And based on all the submissions from the public hearings, the Committee made the following recommendations:

 

1. Creation of state – creation of state is not expedient given the bureaucracy and attendant cost but recommended the need to attend to the isolated case of South East zone where there is the demand to balance states to be equal to other zones.

 

2. Merger of states – recommended constitutional provision for legal and administrative frameworks for states that may consider merger provided it does not threaten the authority or existence of the federation.

 

3. Derivation principle – recommended amendment to section 162 (2) of the constitution to allow for upward review of the current derivation formula and its adoption in respect of solid minerals and hydro power.

 

4. Fiscal federalism and revenue allocation – recommended amendment of Allocation of revenue Act 2002 to ensure upward review of current revenue sharing formula to states.

 

5. Devolution of powers – recommended the transfer of some items on the exclusive legislative lists to concurrent and residual, which include foods, drugs, poison, narcotics and psychotropic substances, fingerprints and identification of criminal records, registration of business names, labour, mines and minerals including oil field, oil mining, geological surveys and natural gas, police, prisons, public holidays, railways and stamp duties be transferred to concurrent list.

 

6. Federating units – recommended retention of current political arrangements with states as federating units. In order to continue to manage constant agitation to make geo-political zones federating units, recommended that group of states can cooperate on regional basis in line with section 5 (3) of the constitution.

 

7. Form of government – recommended continuation of the presidential system but concerns about corruption and high cost of governance should be addressed with all seriousness.

 

8. Independent candidates – recommended that anybody who wishes to contest as independent candidate can do so provided that such a person shall not be a registered member of a political party at least six (6) months before the date set for the elections, his/her nominators must not be members of registered political party, he/she pays a deposit to INEC in the same range as the non-refundable deposit fee payable to candidates sponsored by political parties to their parties, which should be determined by Act of the National Assembly and the candidate must meet other qualification requirements provided by the constitution.

 

9. Land tenure system – recommended that the land use act be retained in the constitution in the greater interest of national security and the protection of Nigeria’s arable land from international land grabbers.

 

10. Local government autonomy – recommended that LGA should be removed from the constitution and states be allowed to develop local administrative system that is relevant and peculiar to respective states.

 

11. Power sharing and rotation – recommended that the complexity of power sharing and rotation be managed at party level rather than in the constitution.

 

12. Resource control – recommended amendment of Petroleum Act, LFN 2004, Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007, Land Use Act, 1978 and Petroleum Profit Tax Act, 2007 so that states can exercise control over natural resources within their respective territories and pay taxes or royalties therefrom to federal government.

 

13. Type of legislature – recommended retention of current system but with downward review of running cost.

 

14. Other issues

 

Beyond the 13 issues, the Committee made additional recommendations on 11 issues, which are considered necessary to strengthen Nigeria’s democracy and make it functionally appealing to wider sections of Nigerians. These 11 additional recommendations, all came from the submissions received from Nigerians from all the public hearings across the six geo-political zones. The 11 additional recommendations are:

 

A.    Demand for affirmation of vulnerable groups – recommended that vulnerable groups (women, youths and physically challenged persons be given adequate attention in terms of appointment in government jobs and political positions, including creating dedicated advisory role at all levels.

 

B.    Citizenship – recommended a comprehensive review of all constitutional provisions on indigeneship and residency status to eliminate all the pervading primordial sentiments on citizenship and indegineship so that ethnic affiliation begin to give way to birth and residency.

 

C.   Ministerial appointment – recommended amendment to section 147 (3) of the constitution to remove requirement on the President to appoint Ministers from every state who must be indigene of the states.

 

D.   State constitution – recommended that state constitution is not a priority.

 

E.    Role of traditional rulers – recommended that each state explore ways of incorporating traditional institutions into their governance models based on which respective House of Assembly enact appropriate laws.

 

F.     Community participation – support all efforts to promote increased community participation in governance within the framework of two-tier federation.

 

G.   Minimum wage legislation – recommended that each state should be free to decide its remuneration based on its resources and productivity

 

H.   Elections – recommended that every tier of government should have autonomy in conducting its own elections

 

I.      Governance – recommended review of scope of immunity granted to Governors and Deputy Governors

 

J.      Judiciary – recommended the creation of State Judicial Council to exercise the function of National Judicial Council in relation to state courts.

 

K.    State alignment and boundary adjustment – recommended that section 8 (2) and (4) of the constitution be amended in order to subject any request for boundary adjustment to a referendum as the case with creation of states and local governments under section 8 (1) and (3) of the constitution.

 

The full report of the Committee was submitted to the APC National Working Committee on January 25, 2018 organised in four volumes are:

 

·         Volume 1: Main Report. - http://pgfnigeria.org/2018/01/29/volume-1-report-of-the-apc-committee-on-true-federalism/

 

·         Volume 2: Legislative, Executive and Other Action Plans - http://pgfnigeria.org/2018/01/29/volume-2-report-of-the-apc-committee-on-true-federalism-action-plan/

 

·         Volume 3: Project Communications Report & Online Survey - http://pgfnigeria.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Volume-3-Project-Communication-and-Online-Survey.pdf

 

·         Volume 4: Summary of Memoranda and Analysis of Data - http://pgfnigeria.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Appendix.pdf

 

Volume 2 contained proposed legislative bills for either constitutional or amendments of all the relevant laws based on the recommendations contained in the report of the APC Committee on True Federalism. 

 

Negotiating True Federalism and Political Parties

 

The report of the APC True Federalism Committee represents a radical departure by a political party in Nigeria in responding to political challenges facing the country. It was the first time since Nigeria’s independence that a political party would undertake such an elaborate exercise and come up with a report that could have appropriately aggregated all the contentious demands and interests of all sections of the country. Besides, the decision of the Committee to invite memorandum and organise public hearings in all the geopolitical zones of the country was also the first time a political party would undertake such an extensive participatory exercise. Perhaps for being able to correctly aggregate all the contentious demands from all parts of the country, even Governors of PDP such as former Governor Seriake Dickson of Bayelsa State publicly commended the report.

 

The Report of the Committee is now in the custody of the National Assembly Constitution amendment committee led by the Deputy Senate President, Sen. Ovie Omo-Agege. Like many nations, Nigeria is a nation built on multiple and diverse identities that requires purposeful and visionary leadership. Nigeria can fulfil its manifest destiny as Africa’s regional power with leadership that is a rallying point for good governance, justice, equity and the rule of law. It is doubtful that Igbo, Yoruba, Hausa, Tiv or any individual ethnic group can attend greatness and satisfactorily fulfil the aspirations of its members. Democratic governance offers Nigeria the rare opportunity to reconfigure the Nigerian federation to become a genuinely federal democracy that meets the aspirations of the citizens in which fiscal and political autonomy at sub-national level co-exists without tension with a stable national government capable of being a mirror for its constituent elements. However, this is only possible if the Nigerian nation is strengthened based on strategic reform of the federal structures such that issues of development and access to opportunities by all citizens irrespective of identities are guaranteed.

 

Although APC was able to debate, negotiate and agree on some baseline proposals as responses to Nigeria’s numerous national challenges during the merger negotiation and during the 2015 and 2019 campaigns, the same could not be said about other parties including the PDP. The other issue is also that even within APC, leaders may not be uniformly committed to implementation of these baseline proposals as agreed by the party including recommendations of the APC Committee on True Federalism. How parties can develop frameworks that compel all leaders especially elected representative to implement agreements is the challenge.

 

The reality is that while as a nation, we have made progress especially with respect to managing elections, the challenge of political party development and how they are able to serve as vehicles for interest negotiations in the country is taken for granted if not neglected. The only interest that dominates our parties is personal ambitions of individuals and how ethnic factors are used to negotiate those interests. Unless a new framework is instituted, which strengthened commitment of political parties and leaders to facilitate interest negotiations in the country and when there are agreements, elected leaders are compelled to implement, narrow issues of leadership selection based on ethnic or religious identities will continue to be exploited by political elites in the country. Even where political parties and leaders are able to initiate policy measure that proportionately responded to citizens demands from all parts of the country, issues of subjective interpretation of priorities of parties and political leaders would be used to undermine the democratic credentials of political parties and leaders.

 

For instance, when the issue of representation in leadership become the main problem of democracy and reduced to ethnic, religious, or other demographic factors, negotiation may only lead to some wild goose chase of endless political problems, which mutates and resurfaces in bigger or worst forms. This is largely because ethnic, religious and all the other democratic factors do not represent any conscious choice made by any candidate for any leadership position and therefore wouldn’t highlight the possible choices of such a political leader. We can as individuals be associated with any of these groups (ethnic, religious or demographic), mobilise and make demands. However, it is important to recognise that compromises based on simplistic representation in leadership on account of ethnic, religious or demographic factors alone will hardly resolve most of Nigeria’s developmental challenges.

 

Problems associated with negotiating only issues of representation in leadership has trapped the Nigeria’s democracy and for over 20 years now, Nigerians have limited political contests to only electoral contests. Whether political leaders are taking any initiative to facilitate interest negotiations based on development priorities is at best assumed. Even when they initiate interest negotiations, so long as such negotiation does not rhyme with the popular narrative of promoting dominant narrow interests, which seeks to produce some expected compromises, unwillingness and disdain sets in and sadly any potential political negotiation risked being blocked.

 

There is no dispute that Nigeria is an emerging democracy. As an emerging democracy, policy initiatives of political leaders should be the driving factors for political negotiation, not just electoral contest. Political development initiatives without corresponding negotiation or engagement involving political leaders and citizens, create problems of ownership. The painful aspect of this is that even when political leaders come up with excellent responses to problems faced by citizens, factors of alienation on account of lack of negotiation can make citizens to oppose such initiatives by political leaders.

 

This is perhaps the case why notwithstanding all the landmark development initiatives of the current APC administration under President Buhari, such as the National Social Investment Programme and the ambitious infrastructural development in every part of the country, the political narrative promoted by opposition parties, especially PDP is that APC and President Buhari have failed. What are the alternatives being offered by the PDP and all those opposed to APC especially in terms managing ethnic tension and promoting national unity and peaceful co-existence can only be assumed. There is nothing either with reference party manifesto or campaign documents that highlight the visions of political parties opposed to the APC.

 

Unfair Politics of Ethnicity

 

Thus, beyond propaganda, how true is it that APC and President Buhari are sectional as is being claimed by opposition PDP and their supporters? Is there any justification to such a claim with reference to the policies being implemented, whether with reference to location of projects or the expected beneficiaries? The best way to check this is to review the policies being implemented by APC controlled Federal Government led by President Buhari.

 

·        For instance, Social Investment Programmes are being implemented in every state of the country without any exception. As part of that all the five States of the South-East produced 68,000 N-Power beneficiaries and 85,000 similar beneficiaries for the six States of the South-South. In all five States of the South East, the APC-led Federal Government is funding school feeding programme, while three States of the South-South are benefiting. In addition, in the case of the South-East, pensions have been paid to Retired War-Affected (Ex-Biafran) Police. In 2017, the Buhari Administration paid 500 million Naira to clear pensions arrears that had not been paid since their presidential pardon in 2000.

 

·        Formal flag-off of the N-Power Build Programme, the Buhari Administration’s Vocational Training and Apprenticeship programme, took place in Enugu State, on the premises of Anambra Motor Manufacturing Company Limited (ANAMMCO Limited), on Friday May 18, 2018. It is also to the credit of President Buhari led APC government that N700 billion for Road Refunds to states was made to all state governments irrespective of which geo-political region they come from. Rivers State government which is a PDP state got over N70 billion. 362.5 billion Naira raised in Sovereign Sukuk Bonds so far, shared EQUALLY across the 6 geopolitical zones. Similarly, there was the case of Paris Club Refunds to all the 36 state governments. Estimated $5 billion was paid by the Federal Government without any state being discriminated.

 

·        There is the case of International Airport Upgrades, which the President Buhari administration included Enugu Airport in the list of International Airports receiving federal attention: Brand new runway was delivered to the airport in 2020; work is ongoing on new International Terminal Building. The new Port Harcourt International Airport Terminal has been completed and commissioned in 2018. New International Airport Terminals have also been completed and commissioned in Abuja, while those in Lagos and Kano are being completed. In addition, brand new Runways have been constructed in Abuja and Enugu, in 2017 and 2020 respectively.

 

·        The Presidential Infrastructure Development Fund (PIDF) that has 3 projects so far, one in the South-West, one in the North, one in the South-East - the 200 billion Naira Second Niger Bridge, which is projected for 2022 completion. The second Niger Bridge, originally conceived decades ago, is now more than 50 percent completed, and scheduled for commissioning in 2022, as is the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, which has defied every administration since 1999. Other landmark projects being completed include the Bodo-Bonny Road in Rivers State, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Expressway, Loko-Oweto Bridge connecting Benue and Nasarawa States across the River Benue, Port Harcourt-Enugu Expressway, East-West Road (across Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa-Ibom and Cross River States), the new Ikom Bridge in Cross River, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Keffi-Akwanga-Lafia-Makurdi Road, and many more.

 

·        Take the ground-breaking project for reconstruction of Port Harcourt – Maiduguri Rail Line, linking the South-East States to a Sea Port, and to Northern Nigeria. Similarly, there is the Lagos – Kano rail line. A section of it, 156km Lagos – Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail, the first double-track Standard Gauge Rail project in West Africa (and the first Standard Gauge Rail project in Nigeria to be started and completed by the same administration). Financing of the Ibadan – Kano part of the project has already commenced. The Lagos – Ibadan Rail Line was commissioned nine months after the 327km Itakpe – Warri Standard Gauge Rail, was commissioned 33 years after construction began. The 168km Abuja – Kaduna Rail project, and the 42.5km Abuja Light Rail project, both inherited from previous administrations, were completed in 2016 and 2018 respectively. A brand new Deep Sea Port is being constructed, in Lagos, the first new Deep Sea Port in the country in more than four decades; while ground-breaking for a second private-sector-funded Deep Sea Port (in Bonny) took place in March 2021.

 

·        There is also the flagship agriculture initiative, the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI) of the Buhari Administration. The PFI was launched in December 2016 as a government-to-government partnership between the Governments of Nigeria and Morocco. Since inception it has produced and delivered to the Nigerian market, over 30 million 50kg bags equivalent of fertilizer, at reduced prices; and resulted in the revival or construction of no fewer than 40 moribund fertilizer blending plants across the country. That Nigeria today has 44 functioning blending plants, with more on the way, is solely due to the success of the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI). The following are some of the specific achievements of the PFI:

 

o   In 2017, the multinational group Olam invested $150 million in an integrated animal feed mill, poultry breeding farms and hatchery in Kaduna State, as well as an integrated poultry and fish feed mill in Kwara State.

 

o   In Anambra State, the Coscharis Group began the cultivation of rice in 2016, on a 2,500 hectare farm, and soon after expanded into Milling, with the commissioning of a 40,000 MT modular Rice Mill in 2019,

 

o   In Niger State, the BUA Group is currently completing a $300million Integrated Facility comprising a Sugar Mill, Ethanol Plant, Sugar Refinery and Power Plant, and a 20,000-Hectare Farm.

 

o   In Kebbi State, GB Foods has invested 20 billion Naira in a Tomato Processing Factory supplied by what is said to be the single largest tomato farm in the country. Future phases of the investment will make it the largest processing facility for fresh tomatoes in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

o   The same GB Foods in July 2020 opened its N5.5 billion Mayonnaise production facility in Ogun State, which will be supplied with input from the company’s new farms in Kebbi State.

 

o   In Lagos, Ariel Foods FZE has recently constructed and completed the biggest Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTF) production facility in Africa.

 

o   In Nasarawa State, the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) has recently completed work on the first phase of a multi-million-dollar animal feed processing facility and a backward-integrated 3000-hectare Maize and Soyabeans Farm, in a co-investment partnership with a South African Investment Group.

 

o   In 2021, the Dangote Group commissioned its $2 billion Fertilizer Plant, with an annual capacity of 3 million Metric Tonnes, the largest fertilizer plant in West Africa. In June 2021, the plant began delivering an average of 120 trucks of Urea per week to the Nigerian market, and is also set to target the export market across West Africa and beyond.

 

o   State Governments are also actively keying into the President’s Agriculture vision. In 2018, Cross River commissioned a  3 billion Naira Hybrid Rice Seedlings Factory, to supply rice seedlings to farmers and governments across the country.

 

o   Lagos State is completing the 32 Metric Tonne per hour Imota Rice Mill, which, when functional, will be one of the largest rice processing facilities in sub-Saharan Africa. The Imota Rice Mill will produce 2.4 million bags of 50kg per annum, and create an estimated 250,000 direct and indirect jobs, and will plug Lagos State firmly into the national rice value chain.

 

o   Ekiti State is reviving its Ikun Dairy Farm, in a successful partnership with Promasidor, with a production target of 10,000 Liters of milk daily.

 

o   In Ondo State, the 9 billion Naira Sunshine Chocolate Factory - a Public Private Partnership involving the State Government - was completed and commissioned in 2020, to take advantage of the State’s leading position in the cultivation of cocoa.

 

·        There is also the Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP), which is being implemented by the Central Bank of Nigeria, launched by President Buhari on November 17, 2015, in Kebbi State. Since then, it has provided more than 300 billion Naira to more than 3.1 million smallholder farmers of 21 different commodities (including Rice, Wheat, Maize, Cotton, Cassava, Poultry, Soy Beans, Groundnut, Fish), across all the 36 states of Nigeria, successfully cultivating over 3.8 million hectares of farmland, and helping agriculture enjoy the enviable feat of being the only sector of the Nigerian economy that has consistently posted positive growth rates since 2015.

 

·        There is also the Energizing Education Programme (taking clean and reliable energy to Federal Universities across the country): One of the first EEP projects to be completed and launched was the 2.8MW Solar Power Plant at Alex Ekwueme Federal University, Ndufu-Alike Ikwo, Ebonyi State. Similar to the EEP is the Energizing Economies Initiative: (taking clean and reliable energy to economic clusters i.e. markets, shopping complexes etc, across the country). One of the first to be completed and launched was the first phase of the Ariaria Market (Aba) IPP, supplying electricity to 4,000 shops in the Market. 

 

·        Another initiative of the President Buhari APC led Federal Government is NSIA Healthcare Investments under which Brand new $5.5m Medical Diagnostics Center has been completed in Umuahia and operational. The other NSIA Healthcare investments are in Lagos and Kano. There is the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative and Ebonyi State was among the first set of State Governments to sign up, which resulted in the revitalisation of a moribund Fertilizer Blending Plant in Abakaliki, which now supplies NPK Fertilizer to farmers in the State and beyond. It was also to the credit of the administration that in 2018 Zik Mausoleum in Awka, Anambra State was completed and commissioned, 22 years after construction started. 

 

There are many more other initiatives of the APC led Federal Government of President Muhammadu Buhari spread across all sections of the country. Compared to all other administrations, especially PDP led Federal Government between 1999 and today, a fair assessment will indicate the reality that President Buhari has achieved much more within six years covering all the six geo-political zones of the country. President Buhari led APC Federal Government has done more for the South-West and South-East in six years than all the PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015 combined. Largely because politics is reduced to electoral contests of personalities, dishonest campaigns led by PDP have dominated public conversations in the country.

 

Challenges of Insecurity – The Big Elephant in the Room

 

Recognising that issues of insecurity inherited by the APC led government of President Buhari remained a major challenge, this not a matter that should be politicised. Some PDP leaders and their supporters have accused APC of using insecurity to defeat PDP. This is false. The reality was that PDP under former President Jonathan argued that Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East was sponsored by opposition to PDP. And when the Chibok abduction of more than 200 schoolgirls happened in 2014, the position of former President Jonathan led Federal Government was that it was a setup. For quite some time, former President Jonathan administration did not mobilise any response to the Chibok abduction.

 

There was also the challenge of corruption, which embroiled the management of huge amount of money (billions) meant for the procurement of arms to fight the Boko Haram insurgents. Till today those issues are being investigated. Former National Security Adviser under the former President Jonathan, Col. (Rtd) Sambo Dasuki, former PDP National Publicity Secretary, Mr. Olisa Metu and many PDP leaders are facing trial.

 

The point is, up to May 2015 when APC government was inaugurated, PDP led Federal Government was in denial of especially the problem of Boko Haram insurgency. This is not the case with APC under President Buhari. No doubt, insecurity has assumed new forms, activities of bandits, resulting in kidnappings and abductions of innocent Nigerians, including school children. Related to this is the recurrence of ethnic conflicts because of criminal activities of some Fulani herdsmen. Issues of open grazing and the need to regulate the movement of Fulani herdsmen have generated so much controversies in the country.

 

Beyond politics however, it must be recognised that problems of insecurity are issues, which require that Nigerians, especially our leaders should unite. A situation where political leaders use the problem of insecurity to promote divisive campaigns in the country, is most unfortunate. It was the American political scientist, John Mearsheimer, in the book, The Great Delusion – Liberal Dreams and International Realities, who draw attention to how our capability for critical thinking and reasoning as humans distinguishes us with all other creatures and makes it possible to dominate our planet earth. It is also the same capacity for critical thinking and reasoning that enables us to create body of ideas ‘about how the world works. Yet there are significant limits on our ability to reason, which have important consequences for social and political life. One such limitation, our inability to agree about what constitutes the good life, sometimes leads individually as well as social groups to hate and try to hurt others, which in turn causes the others to worry about their survival.’

 

As Nigerians, the problem of hate is making us lose our humanity so much that notion of survival both for individuals and groups is more about our ability to defend and rationalise our inclinations even when lives of other citizens are in danger. Our instinct to rationalise unacceptable realities has worsened and is certainly extinguishing our humanity to the extent that there is hardly any difference between leaders and followers as well as educated and illiterate citizens. If anything, our education is making most of us to become leading campaigners and promoters of our disagreements and why we should hate each other on accounts of our ethnic and religious differences. But as Mearsheimer asked, ‘First, are our preferences rational, and do those goals promote our survival or make some other kind of sense? Second, are we acting strategically to achieve our goal?

 

Do we even have any goal and if we do, what is our goal? Is it possible in any way that our goal includes promoting crimes or rationalising misconducts of Nigerians on account of ethnicity? It is very worrisome that as supporters of ethnic agitations, in one way or the other, political campaigns in the country is promoting ethnic and religious hatreds. Consequently, we are unable to see anything good associated with our so-called competing ethnic and religious groups. Everything is about casting aspersion on religious and ethnic groups outside the ones we belong. We profile each other in ways that suggest there is scarcely anything good about citizens belonging to other religious and ethnic groups. Everything that anyone coming from other ethnic and religious groups other than the ones we belong pronounces or articulates must be interpreted to confirm our beliefs in how bad other ethnic and religious groups are.

 

The reality is that none of Nigeria’s security challenges is new. Many would ask, if they are not new, why is the President Buhari led APC government unable to resolve the nation’s security challenges? The good thing is that unlike the former PDP led Federal Government, APC led Federal Government is not denying that the country is faced with security challenges. As a result, there are initiatives being implemented to respond to the challenges. These include Equipping the Security Agencies and Building Morale, under which hundreds of new platforms are being acquired for the Army, Air Force and Navy. The Nigeria Air Force has received 23 new aircraft since 2015, with at least a dozen more being expected, and the Navy has most recently acquired its first new Landing Ship Tank (LST) since 1979.

 

The administration is promoting Community-led Solutions to Insecurity, New Security Infrastructure and Operations across Land and Maritime Environments, under which the Integrated National Security and Waterways Protection Infrastructure project was flagged-off and in the last five years, a number of technology solutions are being deployed and implemented to support the Police, Immigration and other security agencies.

 

The APC led administration is also addressing the underlying drivers of insecurity (poverty and youth unemployment), which include the new plan to lifted 10.5 million Nigerians out of poverty. The Federal Government has recently approved a National Poverty Reduction with Growth Strategy Plan, to consolidate on the successes so far, and to achieve the President’s vision of lifting a 100 million Nigerians out of poverty within a decade. 

 

Certainly, all these measures can be strengthened, and the government can do more especially in relation to getting our security agencies to be accountable. Irrespective of ethnicity or religion, every Nigerian is at risk. The hard truth is that the nation’s security challenge requires thorough introspection by not just our security agencies but also imposition of severe sanction against security personnel, traditional and community leaders where kidnappings, banditry and all the crimes consuming the lives of innocent Nigerians are taking place. Most of the crimes being committed across the country are products of collaborations by some security personnel, traditional and community leaders.

 

Every police, security personnel, traditional and community leader, located within areas where activities of bandits such as kidnappings and abductions are taking place should be arrested and tried. Similarly, everywhere such incidences take place, police, security, traditional and community leaders should be the first line suspect. They should be made to prove their innocence by producing the culprits, failing which, they should be convicted. Depending on the extent of the problem, there is no reason why corporal punishment covering life and death sentences should not be given.

 

Everything considered, it will appear that number of police personnel in Nigeria may not necessarily be the problem, although many security experts believe strongly that it is indeed an issue. Issues of capacity with reference to equipment, training, intelligence gathering, moral, etc. are also strong factors, which need to be immediately addressed. Outside the police, other arms of the security agencies are faced with similar challenges.

 

The current security structure in the country needs to radically be reformed. Issues of amending the laws to enable state governments to establish state police

are clearly unavoidable. However, there are conditions that must be considered before any decision to establish state police can serve as a good response to Nigeria’s security challenges. This include the requirement that processes of regulating the operations of the state police should be centralised as part of the functions of the Federal Police. Under that, for instance, issues of recruitment, qualification, background checks for those to be recruited, enforcement of disciplinary requirement, arms procurement and training for weapon handling, etc. should be handled at Federal level so that there are uniform standards across the country. It should be like the case of universities with National University Commission (NUC) serving as the regulatory body enforcing standards across all Nigerian universities.

 

Outside regulations, there are issues of funding. Most time, Nigerians make proposals in terms of how government should address challenges with the assumption that funding is given, which means that government can always mobilise the resources. This is mostly exaggerated. To address Nigerian security challenges, especially if the establishment of state police is to be considered, there must be a new funding arrangement, which should insulate the operations of Nigeria Police including the new state police to be established from all the uncertainties surrounding public financial management.

 

Conclusion – Developing Political Parties

All things considered; Nigerian politics must be developed such that political parties prioritise interest negotiations beyond the narrow electoral contest focusing on regional and ethnic representations. Specific regional demands for developments should be integral parts of any demand for regional or ethnic representation in the leadership of the country. Clear policy choices reflected in commitments of political parties based on provisions in their manifestos should be the driving factors of leadership negotiations. Opposition to leadership should not be about promoting ethnic and religious hatred in the country. Once politics is oriented around promotion of ethnic and religious hatred, it will undermine capacity of leaders to mobilise Nigerians. It will also weaken the capacity of citizens to engage leaders and influence policy decisions. Consequently, this will undermine democratic development of Nigeria.

 

It is necessary that Nigerians recognise that political parties should be the most important democratic bodies to facilitate the process of negotiations in terms of how Nigerian federalism should be reformed. All political parties should be able to have clear positions in terms of how they intend to reform Nigerian federalism. Specific details of negotiable items should be outlined, and frameworks should be developed within political parties to ensure that elected representatives are committed to implement positions adopted by political parties. Eventually, Nigerian democracy should graduate from situation whereby electoral contests is all about personality contests, to the level that policy choices are integral parts of electoral contest.

 

If the narrative is that APC has failed, what is the alternative being offered by the opposition, including PDP? As part of the introspection required to strengthen the capacity of our party, our leaders and governments, we need to engage the debate based on assessment of what we must do to rebuild the confidence of Nigerians and regained their trust. In doing that, we need to restrategise and more effectively present the objective scorecards of governments at all levels since 2015 in ways that can truly demonstrate to Nigerians what has been achieved, and why in spite of what has been achieved we are having the challenges facing us as a nation. Nigerians need to rise above cheap campaigns of ethnic politics, which is now being used to promote hatred in the country. Anybody playing up the politics of ethnic hatred is big risk to even his/her ethnic group and is only opportunistically doing so in order to access leadership positions.

 

The debate continues, Nigerian democracy shall overcome its challenges such that Nigerian political parties can develop to facilitate interest negotiations effectively and efficiently as a major attribute of politics. Ultimately, Nigerians will be able to respect our differences and be able to access and harness the vast resource potentials of Nigeria at any point, anytime, anywhere and by everyone!

 

Thank you!

 

 

[Toyin Falola]

Great One:

I always enjoy reading your essays and responses. One point of disagreement, if you allow me sir. Is it the PDP that is promoting the narrative on the failure of the Buhari administration? My evidence suggests that this is actually the street-side narrative.

TF

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536CD747FC7FE6DCFB72F17AE1A9%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Moh. Lukman]

That is also there sir. Part of what responsible for that is combination of opposition (PDP) propaganda and very weak engagement by government. I have in so many occasion make reference to that. Because there is weak engagement ownership of what government is doing is almost zero. With such reality, combined with all the challenges it is very easy to dismiss all the achievements of government.

As things are, we have as a nation set ourselves for endless vicious cycle of frustration. Unless we focus on building our political parties and based on strengthen citizen engagement by government, Nigerian democracy will continue to have problem of ownership of whatever is the achievement of goverment.

SMLukman

Sent from my iPhone

On 7 Jul 2021, at 13:16, Toyin Falola <toyin...@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/SN7PR06MB7247A248589C361EB0713D59F81A9%40SN7PR06MB7247.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Moses Ebe Ochonu]

Oga Falola,

Please don't expend your valuable brain wattage on Salihu and his tendentiously partisan propaganda. The body he directs should be renamed Retrogressive Governors Forum. Six years into this calamity of a regime, they're still blaming PDP for their failures.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/SN7PR06MB7247A248589C361EB0713D59F81A9%40SN7PR06MB7247.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Salihu Moh. Lukman]

Moses, you free to make your choice and I respect that even when you don’t respect my position. It is just unfortunate that we reduce scholarship to throwing mud at each other. Wish you all the best pls

SMLukman

Sent from my iPhone

On 7 Jul 2021, at 16:31, Moses Ebe Ochonu <meoc...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/CAAHJfPpT7W%2Bk0-LVnqnrLoJJ5OxNr%3DxYUV03gzazPy%3D1GueooQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Moses Ochonu]

Salihu,

No mud throwing here bro. Just stating the obvious fact that your party, APC, has outdone the PDP many folds  in all aspects of governing badness—corruption, incompetence, and the mismanagement of Nigeria’s economy and its diversity. What’s more, your APC president presides over the worst crisis of insecurity since the civil war because he chose the path of parochial divisiveness over pan-Nigerian statesmanship. As a diabolical bonus, he has inflicted an almost insurmountable division on the country by blatantly pursuing an Arewa-ization and Fulanization agenda that embarrasses even fellow Fulani and Northerners. 

And yet here you are blaming the comatose PDP, a party that for all practical purposes is dead, for your president’s self-advertising string of failures and disasters  instead of taking responsibility as a party for deepening our fissures, borrowing our future away, expanding poverty and unemployment, spreading hunger and terrorism, creating violent monsters and martyrdom from peaceful, legitimate agitations, and casting a huge pall of doubt on the country’s survival.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 7, 2021, at 10:48 AM, Salihu Moh. Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com> wrote:

Moses, you free to make your choice and I respect that even when you don’t respect my position. It is just unfortunate that we reduce scholarship to throwing mud at each other. Wish you all the best pls

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/803ED2C1-0F34-4A93-B042-D4B14925326A%40gmail.com.

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigerian Politics and Question of National Unity

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

President Muhammadu Buhari, on Wednesday, July 14, 2021, while receiving the report of the National Security Summit of May 26, 2021, organised by the House of Representatives, remarked that ‘we are a lucky country and should congratulate ourselves, despite challenges that could have torn us apart.’ More than any time, since the end of the Nigerian civil war in 1970, the survival of the country as a united nation is being threatened. Although, at all times, there were issues that reminded us of our divisive backgrounds, often manifesting in terms of political demands by sections of the country, this is the first time Nigeria is experiencing secessionist agitations from two groups from two sections of the country – Nnamdi Kanu’s group in the South-East and Sunday Igboho’s in the South-West. These are agitations, which have assumed the forms of civil disobedience and in the case of Nnamdi Kanu’s group in South-East, it has graduated to rebellion against the Nigerian state, resulting in attacks on police stations, kidnappings and killings of security personnel and other functionaries of government as well as destructions of government structures.

 

With the Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, which has dragged for over ten years now and the unfortunate loss of thousands of lives, destructions of both public and private properties, the recent secessionist agitations of Nnamdi Kano and Sunday Igboho require effective and efficient responses to maintain Nigeria as a united country. Noting also the rising incidences of banditry in the North-West and North-Central, producing more cases of kidnappings and abductions of law-abiding citizens, including schoolchildren, challenges of national survival is basically about strengthening the capacity of Nigerian security agencies to prevent and arrest criminal activities of rebellious groups in all parts of the country. In the midst of all these is the task of preventing or managing conflicts arising from activities of herdsmen, which is engendering all manner of clashes between Fulani herdsmen and other citizens, especially farmers, across all parts of Nigeria. Criminal activities associated with herdsmen have increased incidences of banditry, kidnappings and abductions of citizens.

 

Although challenges of insecurity in the North-West and North-Central have not taken the form of organised civil disobedience or insurgency against the Nigerian state, it has certainly reached the level of war against innocent citizens. Remarkably, the South-South region of the country, which used to have higher incidences of kidnappings and attacks on oil installations, at least up to around 2007, is now, relative to the other regions, with the least of incidences of disruptive activities. Whether low incidences of disruptive activities mean it is the safest section of the country, is entirely a different matter. Somehow, the Niger Delta Avengers, who were responsible for attacks on oil installations across the South-South region in the past, are now threatening to resume their old disruptive activities against the Nigerian state, according to them to protest government’s neglect of the region.

 

All these contribute significantly to the tense inter-ethnic relations between and within all the six geo-political regions of Nigeria, thereby responsible for rising cases of ethnic and communal conflicts and violence. Issues of equity, justice and fairness, both with respect to distribution of resources and representation in government are the main political demands requiring responses to meet the expectations of Nigerians from all the six geo-political regions. Cries of marginalisation and neglect with contestable justifications are very loud across all parts of the country. It is simply either demand for restructuring/true federalism or power shift/rotation of Presidency between the Northern and Southern parts Nigeria.

 

These demands mean different things to the different regions. Consequently, perceptions of contemporary challenges of Nigeria are different across all the six geo-political regions and from the different ethnic groups. Therefore, expectations are also different even when the demands are made in the same vocabulary. To a large extent, the distinctive attributes of the different geo-political regions that constitute Nigeria and the ethnic groups from the respective regions is responsible for why the same demand is interpreted differently. The overarching challenge basically is how, as a democratic nation, political structures can facilitate the process of consensus building and agreement among the constituent parts of the country – the six geo-political regions and all the different ethnic groups.

 

The extent to which therefore the details of the demands from the six geo-political regions are clarified by political leaders based on which they are able to commit themselves to agreements that translate to initiatives that unite citizens is the critical challenge of Nigeria’s contemporary political development. How are political leaders handling this critical challenge? Are there initiatives being taken to facilitate consensus building and agreements by political leaders from the six geo-political regions of the country? To what extent are processes of consensus building being driven by lawful institutions in the country? How representative are the different sections of the country’s political leadership in the processes of consensus building? To what extent are political leaders committed to agreements reached?

 

No doubt, there are efforts by successive political leaders, especially since the end the civil war to facilitate institutionalised processes of consensus building in the country. Whether those processes have produced agreements among the constituents’ parts of the country is also a challenge. However, the fact that national unity remained under threat, even on a bigger scale, is indicative of either the absence of agreement or lack of commitments by political leaders to implement agreements. Part of the growing challenge is that commitment of political leaders from all parts of the country to facilitate processes of consensus building is more and more diminishing. How can we, as a nation, push our political leaders to be more dedicated to facilitating processes of consensus building and at the same time become more committed to implementing agreements therefrom?

 

Difficulties in developing or strengthening initiatives to facilitate national unity in the country has engendered situations whereby all sections of the country are contemptuous of one another. High contempt for one another has also created unhealthy dynamic such that when initiatives for national unity are introduced, they become additional incentives for sharper divisions in the country. Rather than political leaders from the respective regions engaging initiatives to facilitate consensus building in the country, the initiatives escalate the problems of national unity. Every initiative then widens the problem of national unity. It is more of a vicious circle of endless agitations to resolve problems of maginalisation, injustice, unfairness and so on and so forth. Almost every Nigerian and every section of the country is complaining of almost the same problem.

 

Endless vicious circle of agitations to resolve problems of marginalisation, injustice and unfairness has created atmosphere of deep-seated frustrations by most Nigerians from all sections. It is also responsible for the anger against political leaders and political establishments. Consequently, public commentaries are antagonistic against elected leaders and the ruling party – President Muhammadu Buhari and the All Progressives Congress (APC). Arguably, the belief is that President Buhari and the APC are the problem. Anybody who is associated with them is condemned and projected to be part of the problem. In the same way, every analysis of challenges facing the country, which attempt to highlight any progress being made on account of initiatives by the APC administration led by President Buhari is dismissed and condemned. Some critiques have argued that the APC and President Buhari also used the same approach to defeat the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and former President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015, which is debatable.

 

It is important that the point is stressed that politics is about choices and every citizen should have the inalienable right to make his/her political decisions. Part of what civilisation require is to respect the choices made by every Nigerian even if we disagree. Inability to respect one another and the choices we all make only stabilise the nation in this season of ethnic contempt, tension and endless conflicts. In all the public outcry against the APC and President Buhari, for instance, even when opposition make valid recommendations to resolve the challenges of national unity, they are not presented with the aim of winning the minds of elected leaders, and to that extent therefore get them to consider adopting and implementing the recommendations. In the same way, when elected representatives initiate actions to resolve challenges facing the country, there is hardly efforts to win the support of citizens.

 

This reality has stagnated Nigerian politics such that almost everything is about election and everyday become election day. All discussions of resolving Nigeria’s challenges then become about voting out the President and his party right from the day he is inaugurated. Unless and until, Nigerian politics is developed in such a way that elections go beyond who emerges as a leader, which happens only every four years, to the point when it is expanded to include engagements between leaders and citizens to contract support for initiatives being taken or to be taken in order to address challenges, national unity may continue to elude us as a nation and problems of avoidable conflicts leading to loss of lives and property will continue to confront the country.

 

Issues of equitable representation in the country’s leadership by the six geo-political regions and their constituent ethnic groups will remain permanent political demand. Regions may continue to produce Nigeria’s leaders with hardly any justification in terms of governments being able to respond to specific challenges facing the particular regions where leaders emerge. For instance, what was the benefit to the South-West throughout the eight-year tenure of former President Obasanjo? Or what was the benefit to the South-South to justify the six-year tenure of former President Goodluck Jonathan?

 

While it is true that ethnic politics based on regional contests for the leadership of Nigeria will continue, Nigerians should elevate politics to the level of active engagements to influence choices leaders make, on the one hand, and contract support of citizens for initiatives being taken by leaders, on the other. As important as the question of ensuring that there is equitable opportunity by all the six geo-political regions in terms of who emerges as Nigeria’s leader, specific governance reform agreement to be implement in all the six geo-political regions are required. Why should any region or ethnic group produce a President and at the end of the tenure of such a President, there is nothing in terms of physical development of the region to justify that such a region has produced the President of Nigeria? In the same way, why should the other five regions of the country support the emergence of a President from any one region without agreement that translate to regional developments, covering all the six geo-political zones?

 

As a nation, both citizens and political leaders need to come to terms with the reality that we all need each other to be able to build a nation that guarantee good livelihood for citizens from all sections of the country. Nigeria can fulfil its destiny as Africa and world power with leadership that is a rallying point for good governance based on fair representation, justice and equity. It is debatable if any of the constituent parts and the respective ethnic groups – Igbos, Yorubas, Hausa-Fulanis, Tivs, Efik, Igbibios, Urogbos, or any other individual ethnic group can attend greatness and satisfactorily fulfil the aspirations of its members. Democratic governance offers Nigeria the rare opportunity to reorient the politics of the country to develop the framework for continuous engagements, negotiations and agreements. For this to happen, Nigerian politics must produce political leaders who are able to embrace all parts of the country as their constituency and engage political leaders from the regions based on capacity to support them to provide new leadership to their people that is able to win support for political agreements, which may not be simply about cheap access to elective and appointive positions by the regions.

 

With such political leadership, the blind and dumb perception, which prevent people on both sides of the ethnic divide from recognising the real challenge of national unity can be purged from Nigerian politics. What is the real challenge of national unity? The real challenge would appear to be largely driven by what the political economists, David P. Levine, in the book, Politics Without Reason: The Perfect World and the Liberal Ideal, described as desire that leads to destruction. According to him, it means ‘the construction of desire as a force that demands exclusive possession. This exclusivity suggests a connection to two emotions: greed and envy. Desire is greedy in the sense that it is to have and hold all that is of value: the true or worthy self of which, in the end, there can be only one. It involves envy because this desire to have the one true self must exclude others who in failing to gain honour experience envy in its place. The problem is that desire is inextricably bound up with greed and envy so that the pursuit of desire’s object must bring with it conflict and destruction.

 

This is one of the best explanations of the challenge of national unity facing Nigeria. Every region wants to have exclusive possession of whatever is of value in Nigeria. Inextricably, it produces greed and envy. Political leaders from all sections want to ‘exclusively possess Nigeria’ – the assets and the power to control the territorial boundary to the exclusion of other parts. Regions that are not in control or being controlled become resentful. Today’s conflictual and destructive reality of what we have as Nigeria is a direct consequence of the inability of the nation’s political leadership from all the regions to commit themselves to processes of consensus building so that greed and envy arising from desire by all the regions’ political leaders for exclusive possession can be stopped or at least reduced to the barest minimum.

 

Sadly, almost all Nigerians are now active participants in all the conflict and destructions that is consuming the country produced by the raging desire for exclusive possession of everything of value. Political leaders and ordinary citizens of all the regions are hardly interested in initiatives that can facilitate consensus building, which is required to end current conflicts and destructions as well as prevent future occurrences. All the demands coming from all the regions of the country are more about increased possession, if not exclusive possession. Choices in terms of equitable and fair access to Nigeria’s resources, is at best a derived demand. Tragically, everybody, not just partisan politicians, engages this issue very defensively, mainly to protect current hold and win more possession. Private business people, professionals, academics, diaspora citizens, traditional, religious, community leaders, women, youth, civil society, labour activists are all active campaigners to protect current hold and win more possession for our respective geo-political regions.

 

Campaign for equity, justice and fairness, which should be about finding the right balance for the country become limited to self-protective scheming, often directed to defend the repressive framework, which undermined capacity of political institutions to serve as vehicles for consensus building in the country. Part of the problem, which is resulting in further compounding the challenge of national unity is that Nigerian politics has succeeded in transforming almost every political leader into a regional leader. Instead of nationalist leaders who prioritise initiatives that can unite Nigerians, many political leaders are simply regional leaders who only engages politics with the objective of ensuring that they protect what they imagined their respective regions control, and where possible seek to increase the scope of resources being controlled.

 

When the campaign is about restructuring or true federalism, it is hardly about raising the productive capacities of citizens or governments at all levels across all sections of the country. It is also hardly about expanding the scope of productive activities so that more processing capacity can be developed resulting in industrial growth of all parts the country. When the campaign is about power shift or rotation of presidency between the Northern and Southern parts of the country, it may not necessarily include specific initiatives to resolve regional challenges, which could then facilitate resolution of critical problems faced by citizens in those regions where the President come from such as insurgency, banditry, kidnappings, abductions, etc.

 

Now that 2023 politics is heating up, what is it that can be done specifically to ensure that Nigerian politics begin to focus on mobilising political leaders and establishments to facilitate national unity? First things first; Political leaders from all the six geo-political regions must recognise that they can’t have everything. Therefore, the notion of exclusive possession of everything of value in Nigeria is impossible. Ab initio, political leaders and citizens must recognise that something just has to give for regions to maximise what they can have. The spirit of sacrifice by all will be required in order to guarantee any prospect for regional development under a united Nigeria. It however needs to be stressed that any choice made by political leaders, should not be expected to be perfect or unassailable. If choices made by leaders are to achieve the desired objectives of meeting the expectations of Nigerians, they must be engaged by both citizens and leaders must also recognise that they need to engage citizens to be able to win their support.

 

How Nigerian political parties are able to transform themselves into active platforms for political negotiations to strengthen the unity of Nigeria is the major problem confronting the politics of the country now. The more this task is reduced to expression of regional agitations for demands for restructuring/true federalism or power shift/rotation of presidency between the Northern and Southern parts of the country without addressing the substantive issue of negotiating the details of what all these should mean for all the six geo-political regions, the more national unity will continue to evade our politics. In fact, the more our respective regions will continue to be shortchanged by self-appointed leaders who are least qualified in every respect to speak on behalf of our regions. Otherwise, how could someone like Nnamdi Kanu emerge as the representative of Igbo people from the South-East. These are people who in every field of life have produced very well accomplished, knowledgeable, inspiring and charismatic leaders such as the great Zik of Africa, Dim Chukwuemeka Ojukwu, Alex Ekwueme, Chinua Achebe and in contemporary times Dr. Ogbonnaya Onu, Ken Nnamani, Enyinnaya Abaribe, the two Innocent Chukwumas – the industrialist and the late human rights activist, Allen Onyema, Ngozie Okonjo Eweala, Olisa Agbakoba, Chima Ubani, Emma Ezeazu, etc.

 

Similarly, how can a lackluster looking character like Sunday Igboho be the spokesperson of the knowledgeable Yoruba people of the South-West, the home of the great Awolowo, Chief M. K. O. Abiola, Chief Bola Ige, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Chief Alao Aka-Boshorun, Prof. Wole Soyinka, the noble Ransome-Kuti family, Chief Bisi Akande, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and many leaders of human rights and pro-democracy struggles who have given all their lives to the struggle for Nigeria’s development as a united nation such as Mrs. Ayo Ogbe, Mr. Femi Falana, Bamidele Aturu, etc. The same is also the case for all the other regions. Take the case of Boko Haram in the North-East and compare the quality of political leaders the region has provided the nation. It is quite pathetic that a rag tag leader like Shekau could emerge to hold the region captive with a richly endowed and some of the best leaders the country and the world can celebrate.

 

Inability of Nigerian politics to facilitate political negotiations and consensus building is responsible for the current difficulties facing all the geo-political zones of the country. The big question is whether the contest for leadership of the country in 2023 will prioritise processes of national consensus building through negotiations and agreement. Will political leaders from all the six geo-political regions commit themselves to implementing agreements that can strengthen the bonds of unity among citizens from the six geo-political regions? What could be the details of such agreements? And to what extent could the agreements meet the expectations of citizens from all the six geo-political regions? Beyond which region produces the successor to President Buhari, what will be the commitment of the post-2023 Nigerian President to specific agenda of regional developments of both the region he/she come from and the other five regions?

 

Invariably, how will our political parties respond to the challenge of mainstreaming initiatives to facilitate consensus building activities, involving negotiations and agreements to produce the right balance for equitable, just and fair access to Nigeria’s resources by all sections of the country and all citizens. Will parties and their leaders take steps to produce leaders from the regions who can facilitate the unity of the country? Or will parties continue to prioritise issues of regional/ethnic politics at the expense of national unity? At the same time, will parties be able to ensure that once there are agreements on issues that have implications for national unity, leaders are committed to their implementation unassailably? Is there even any prospect that the question of national unity will be a major political agenda of any of our parties?

 

All these would require specific agenda setting initiatives within our respective parties. It is never given. Party leaders and members must work hard to initiate actions within parties. For those of us in APC, the process of re-organisation going on in the party present an advantage. For instance, it should be possible to commence a campaign to review provisions of the APC manifesto to strengthen political initiatives for national unity. Part of the projection should be to get the next National Convention of the party adopt a new manifesto, which would highlight major commitments of the party for national unity to be use during the 2023 campaigns. Integral to the campaign for national unity is the issue of how the party intend to handle negotiation for the emergence of the standard bearer for 2023 elections. In many respects, these are issues that should be handled internally within the structures of the party with all the confidence that principles of justice, equity and fairness can be achieved.

 

Perhaps, it is important to remind our leaders about the point made by the American Political Scientist, John J. Measheimer, in the book, The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities, to the effect that ‘Politics is essentially about who gets to write the rules that govern the group’. According to him, the responsibility of who writes the rule ‘matters greatly because the members of any society are certain to have some conflicting interests, as they will never completely agree about first principles. Given that basic fact of life, whichever faction writes and interprets the rules can do so in ways that serve its interests rather than its rivals’, or reflect its vision of society rather than its rivals’. Of course, power matters greatly in determining which faction wins this competition. The more resources an individual or faction possesses, the more likely it is to control the governing institutions. In short, in a world where reason takes you only so far, the balance of power usually decides who gets to write and enforce the rules.’

 

This means that the campaign for power shift, which is about writing or respecting the rules of our parties, should be handled within the structures of the APC. There will always be conflicting interests in terms of who determine how agreements are reached internally within parties. The reality of our contemporary development as a nation in this Fourth Republic, since 1999, is that during the sixteen years of PDP tenure, processes of respecting political agreements within the PDP have been mismanaged and undermined. With the emergence of our party, APC, in 2013, our leaders were able to skillfully handle negotiations for leadership based on strategic consideration of winning the votes of Nigerians. APC leaders must return to that 2013 mode and handle leadership negotiations for 2023 very carefully and skillfully. APC should continue to work towards setting the right standards for Nigerian politics, which should prioritise national unity!

[tunde jaiyeoba]

Dr Salihu, well-balanced views but why is the so-called consensus and balancing of ethnic politics not taking us on the path of development? If Obasanjo has ruled without any real benefits to the South West, Goodluck Jonathan has ruled without any gains for the South-South and Buhari is now ruling without any peace and development to Northern Nigeria, what is the solution? Are you saying people were wrong to have voted them in if they were indeed voted in? Is that not a pointer to the fact that the kind of democracy we are practising is not leading us in the path of development? What exactly is the problem especially since every tenure has led to some ethnic agitation or the other? If the calibre of people leading the agitations in the South West, South East and North East are not up to the class of the elites (political or otherwise) from these regions, is it not a pointer that the ordinary people have lost confidence in the so-called elites?

I am just thinking aloud, really my mind is agitated because we cannot do things in exactly the same ways and expect different answers. I think Nigeria and Nigerians deserve better considering the resources at our disposal especially if we think about what each region was in the 1950s and the 1960s. How can we be where we are considering the achievements of this past era?? Why are we never interested in discussing the real issues but mask them in ethnic and religious politics especially towards the election year???

I am still thinking aloud........

Babatunde JAIYEOBA

Prof. E. Babatunde JAIYEOBA PhD

Head, Department of Architecture

Faculty of Environmental Design and Management

Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

ebj...@oauife.edu.ng; tundej...@yahoo.co.uk; +234 8037880023 

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB55368DE7518CC88B74F3014DAE109%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/248624485.193190.1626559563451%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Salihu Lukman]

Labour Issues and Need for Reorientation in Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On August 2, 2021, the National Association of Resident Doctors (NARD) began indefinite nationwide strike over demands for improved conditions, payment of salaries ranging between two to nineteen months by some state governments, failure to domesticate Medical Residency Training (MRT) Act 2017 in states, among others. Less than four months back, between April 1 and 10, 2021, the Resident Doctors were on strike over the same issues and the strike was called off following a memorandum of understanding signed by the Federal Government and the leadership of the NARD led by Dr. Uyilawa Okhuaihesuyi.

 

Resident Doctors are supposedly doctors in training, if you like interns, who provide direct care to patients covering diagnosis, management and treatment. They work in intensive care units, emergency departments, operating rooms and general patient wards supervised by senior residents and specialists. There are estimated 16,800 resident doctors in Nigeria, which represent about 40% of the total (42,000) registered doctors in the country. Without any doubt, they are a very critical pillar of healthcare delivery services in hospitals whose absence always result in shutting down hospitals across the country.

 

The frequent strikes by Resident Doctors and health workers generally are unfortunate and avoidable and always lead to preventable deaths of patients in the country. Given the cost to human life from strikes by health workers, it is quite alarming that strikes actions in a sector as important as health would be taking place at all. This is a sector that by every standard should be classified as essential, based on which there should be special legal restrictions regarding labour actions such as strikes. Healthcare, utility services such as electricity and water supply, law enforcement, firefighting and food services are all categorised both by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and United Nations (UN) as essential services.

 

Being categorised as essential services does not prevent workers in the sector from being organised under a trade union. The existence of a union should be mainly for the purpose of collective bargaining to improve the working conditions of workers and negotiate higher wages. In addition, the existence of trade unions in these sectors would also ensure that collective bargaining promote the growth and competitiveness in the sector, so that they can expand employment opportunities, productivity and wages.

 

Part of the questions that cannot be ignored, will be the issue of both the legal and institutional frameworks for collective bargaining in Nigeria. Is it a case of gaps in Nigeria’s labour laws such that operations of essential service sectors could be reduced to normal operations associated with other lesser sectors whose activities doesn’t pose any direct threat to human life? Or is it a case that there is the necessary legal framework but weak institutional capacity for both enforcement of the laws and regulations of the conducts of both employers and employees in sectors classified as essential services?

 

One of the things that must be acknowledged is that Nigeria has all the needed laws and perhaps the most progressive labour laws in the world. These are provided under the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended, Trade Union Act, Labour (Employment) Act, Factory Act, Workmen’s Compensation Act, Trade Disputes (Essential Services) Act, etc. Procedural rules and regulations governing workplaces, including negotiations between employers and employees are provided. Specifically, ILO Convention 98, which guarantees the right to organise and bargain collectively is ratified under the Trade Unions Act. Provisions of the Act, Cap 437 Section 24:l, guarantees unconditional recognition of trade unions by employers. One of the things that can be deduced is that practice of collective bargaining between workers’ and employers’ organisations is not restricted to unions registered under the law, which is why professional organisation such as NARD could negotiate and enter into agreements that are binding on work organisations where their members are employed.

 

A major challenge of Nigeria’s labour relations may have to do with issues of over centralisation and institutional capacity to manage, regulate and facilitate negotiations and agreements. The issue of over centralisation will continue to create challenges largely because the negotiation between workers’ and employers’ organisations are no longer informed by empirical reality of resources available. There is a mindset in the country that government has all the resources required to implement agreements. Most Nigerians, including leaders of workers’ organisations and their members believe that the problem is that the resources are being diverted by political leaders. The consequence is that almost all collective bargaining negotiation end up as power contest between workers’ and employers’ organisation.

 

Because of being power contests, conditions of indeterminateness as propounded by the late English Economist, W. H. Hutt in the book The Theory of Collective Bargaining, is created. According to him, conditions of indeterminateness make “sharing of gross returns of industry between capital and labour … in perpetual flux and never have time to settle into a state of stable equilibrium. … to a very considerable extent … determined by circumstances which may fairly be called fortuitous, and may be greatly influenced by a bargain between the employer and the employed. Consequently, almost every negotiation and agreement produce new sets of disagreements and disputes between workers and their organisations. This is largely where Nigeria found itself.

 

Although under the law, provision of dispute settlement is required to go through processes of mediation, conciliation and compulsory adjudication through the Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP) and National Industrial Court (NIC), the reality is the almost complete absence of any mechanism to negotiate resolution or at the least implement agreement. Over the years however, conciliation and mediation, as functions of labour administration, have greatly declined due to lethargic factors largely because of indecisiveness of Ministry of Labour. For instance, the processes for access to both the IAP and NIC, being the two legal bodies with the primary responsibility of dispute settlement that are legally binding are mainly through the Minister of Labour. It is curious to ask, out of all the plethora of industrial disputes leading to strikes, how many have been filed before the IAP and NIC to pre-empt strikes?

 

In addition, given that awards by both IAP and NIC are not made directly to the parties but through the Minister, who has the right to refer the parties back to both the IAP and NIC, how many judgements have been obtained and to what extend has the Minister or his representatives taken actions to refer parties back to IAP and NIC to enforce existing judgements and therefore avoid strikes? Without going into all the legal technicalities, which are the vocation of lawyers, in several cases the Ministry of Labour is laid back and hardly intervene to prevent strikes from taking place through brokering negotiations between workers’ and employers’ organisation until strike commences.

 

Two of the most recently celebrated strike actions in the country may have been averted had the Ministry of Labour enforced provisions of the relevant laws in the country to compel resumption of negotiations between unions and employers, including government in the country. The first celebrated case was the ‘five-day warning strike’ by Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) against Kaduna State Government of May 16, 2021, over allegations of wrongful dismissals of employees of the state government. The second is the current indefinite strike by the NARD. In both the two cases, there is hardly any reported meeting between the Ministry of Labour and parties to the disputes before the expiration of the ultimatum given by representatives of workers – NLC and NARD. In the case of the ‘five-day warning strike’ by NLC against Kaduna State Government, the intervention by Ministry of Labour came only after the strike commences and a meeting eventually held in Abuja on Wednesday, May 18 when the strike was already three days old. Good enough, following the intervention by the Ministry of Labour, the strike was suspended on Thursday, May 19, 2021, by which time so much damage had already been caused, including disruption of essential services by health, electricity, water services workers in the state.

 

It is possible that the Ministry has had some consultations and initiated processes of dispute settlement that are not reported. Be that as it may, to the extent that they were unable to pre-empt the strikes, they were ineffective. Being ineffective also made it possible for leaders of unions and workers to organisation to concentrate more in terms of power struggles between them and government than engage in collective bargaining negotiations. As a result, disputes between states governments and their workers are made disputes involving federal government and citizens, which also cover employees in private sector. In the case of NLC versus Kaduna State Government, although the strike was scheduled to commence on May 16, electricity workers who are not employed by the state government commenced the strike action on May 15 ahead of even the aggrieved employees of the state government. Aviation workers who are also not part of the state government employees and therefore not having any legitimate grievances against the state government, stopped all flights into Kaduna on May 16.

 

Similarly, in the case of the current indefinite strike by NARD, the dispute is largely with state governments and specifically, Abia, Imo, Ondo and Ekiti States have been identified as the states with poor conditions. States that are yet to domesticate the MRT Act 2017 are also known. Of course, there are also issues between members of NARD employed in Federal Governments. But those issues could hardly justify why the NARD should lump every all states and federal establishments in a single basket of dispute. Part of what is clearly a major crisis is the fact that although in most cases, disputes between workers and employers are limited mainly to some few state governments, somehow, in complete violation of legal provisions or industrial relations practices and conventions, wildcat national strikes beyond the organisations affected are declared. Even when strikes produce human casualties, including deaths, both leaders of unions and employers, including governments behave as if it is normal. It is difficult to avoid the question, why should demands for job protection, better conditions of service and higher remuneration become more important than human life in Nigeria?

 

Above all, the Code of Medical Ethics in Nigeria provided by the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria, under Part B (Professional Conduct) defined professional negligence to include ‘Failure to attend promptly to a patient requiring urgent attention when the practitioner was in a position to do so.’ How can this important ethical requirement be reconciled with the whimsical disposition of Resident Doctors in Nigeria to go on strike, including what is clearly a solidarity strike? It is very easy to put all the blame on government and political leaders in the country. There is every reason to recognise the challenge that always come with the reality of governments operating both as a sovereign authority as well as employer of labour. Being sovereign authority, makes it easy to associate governments with repressive practices, which in the context of management of labour relations result in violations or refusals to implement agreements.

 

The reality is that, increasingly, recognising that government and political leaders in Nigeria would have taken wrong steps that breached conditions of employment, does that then become the licence to sacrifice the lives of innocent Nigerians by withdrawing services in Nigerian hospitals? No doubt, Medical Doctors, and health workers generally, require special attention. It is very demeaning that the required special attention is being reduced to languages of industrial relations bordering on cheap demands for so-called improved working conditions and higher wages. That Resident Doctors and health workers in Nigeria are being discussed in very elementary vocabulary reflects the endemic empirical and conceptual crisis the country is facing. As a nation, we must elevate the status of Resident Doctors and health workers in the country. This goes beyond the realm of any institutional arrangement for the practice of collective bargaining. It is more about political decisions based on which special status and privileges are provided for special category of workers.

 

It is in fact, the privilege of enjoying those special status that justify placing the sector as an essential service sector. No doubt, provisions of the Trade Dispute (Essential Services) Act would make some of those provisions, which may need periodic review. It is scandalous that the agitation by the leaders of NARD is not about qualitatively reviewing those conditions that goes beyond cheap Naira and Kobo negotiations. Eventually, no doubt, everything comes down to Naira and Kobo. But there are provisions with very high monetary value, which may not cost a dime to government. For instance, assuming that being a Resident Doctor or a health worker in a state government establishment qualifies one to be on priority list for land allocation for the purpose of building personal accommodation. Also, assuming state governments can facilitate financing arrangement with banks to NARD and other organisations of health workers for their members with valid Certificate of Occupancy to build personal accommodations. There are so many non-monetary incentives, which have very high monetary value to the beneficiaries that can be arranged.

 

Sadly, both governments and leaders of workers organisations in these essential service sectors are locked in the limited negotiations of monetary awards, which at best whittled down the profile of a very special category of an important sector such as health, which is required to provide uninterrupted services dearly needed by all citizens for our survival and wellbeing. To be endowed by God Almighty with the intelligence to become a medical doctor or health worker must not be devalued in anyway. Not devaluing these category of personnel means there are superior demands being negotiated, which may mean zero costs to employers but higher value to workers beyond wages and current conditions of services. This is what should be on the table for negotiation, which an agreement should make it easy for all state governments to implement, based on which every worker in the health sector is proud to provide uninterrupted services, no matter what.

 

The challenge before the nation is not about lamentation. It is more about creatively finding solutions. It is worrisome, that Nigerians could easily justify why strike actions are taking place in essential service sectors such as health. There is the need to appeal to all Nigerians, not just political leaders, we need to all take steps to stop the current madness in the country whereby we can resort to actions that consume human lives. If the argument is that we have problems created by our political leaders, we should ask the question, is our actions solving the problem or creating new ones? In most cases, it is more likely that we adopt actions which basically transform us into the status of our political leaders as excellently argued by the Brazilian educator, Paulo Freire in the classic book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, when he argued that “The oppressed, instead of striving for liberation, tend themselves to become oppressors. Liberation is thus a childbirth, and a painful one. The oppressed want at any cost to resemble the oppressor.”

 

When one listen to arguments canvassed by leaders of workers’ organisation in Nigeria, including NLC and NARD, all that one hears is the display of raw power with hardly any empirical or conceptual evidence highlighting a vision of how the problems we face as a nation can be solved. Rather than providing a roadmap of how problems can be solved, ego and loud voices of people who can best qualify for some physical contests with supposed opponnents have become the main attributes. Any opinion to the contrary is condemned and dismissed. This is the new face of leaders’ workers organisations in Nigeria. Street protests and strikes ahead of any negotiations are now very common. There is the need to reorient the practice of labour relations in Nigeria. A situation whereby because citizens are angry with government and political leaders, essential services are withdrawn, and lives of citizens cheaply sacrificed must stop.

 

It is quite frustrating, when political appointees, such as Ministers of Labour and Health are unable to proactively pre-empt strikes of health workers in the country. As loyal members of APC, being the governing party, we must appeal to our Ministers of Labour and Health to wake up to their responsibility and end this political embarrassment coming with huge cost to lives to citizens. Ministers of Labour, Health and all stakeholders must as a matter of urgency lock themselves in the most qualitative form of negotiations with all workers in the health sector to restore some minimum standards in the sector. This is not simply about negotiating terms and conditions of services of health workers in the country. It more about creatively ensuring that these are sectors that are essential services sectors with commensurate benefits that is beyond monetary provisions.

 

Similarly, Nigerians must appeal to the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria to take all the necessary measures to restore ethical conducts of all its registered members. A situation where conducts of medical practitioners, being also members of trade unions, conflict with the Code of Ethics they subscribed to must be resolved in favour of protecting the lives of Nigerians. Under no circumstance should a registered medical doctor who is a member of the Medical and Dental Council conduct himself or herself in manners that neglect the primary responsibility of attending to sick persons in Nigerian hospitals.

 

In the end, priority attention must be given to the issue of redefining Nigerian federalism to ensure that labour issues, including negotiations for wages and terms of conditions of services and resolving all challenges that come with it are moved to the concurrent list of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended. A situation whereby terms agreed with Federal Government are used for state government employees will always create problems of implementation. State governments need to be more creative to introduce new incentives, which are not monetary but perhaps having higher monetary values than what obtains in federal establishments. There is a wide scope for initiatives beyond the question of monetary value of employment.

[Toyin Falola]

Dear Sir:

This is a patriotic essay, well meaning, good intention. May we all live a healthy life. May bad health not be our misfortune.

Sir, if the President of a country has stayed out of his country for over 200 days since his coming to office, have you and I not lost our moral voice to ask the Resident Doctors to be patriotic? Patriotism is two sided, like the relationship between the head of a fish and its tail, both of which cannot survive the middle.

I am always conflicted about these things. If I don’t honor my children when they are under my care, will they honor me at old age?

TF

 

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>

Date: Saturday, August 7, 2021 at 11:54 AM
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536E37A067DA30ED3431A5BAEF49%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Modification of Falola's Response to Even More Accurately Reflect Reality-

When the President of a country stays out of the country seeking medical care for himself, and for more than 200 days in that pursuit, what moral voice does that leave the nation in relation to doctors striking for better working conditions?

The fish is rotten from the head to the tail but some are insisting that cleaning the skin on the surface will remove the rot.

Thanks

Toyin

On Sat, Aug 7, 2021, 18:43 Toyin Falola <toyin...@austin.utexas.edu> wrote:

Dear Sir:

This is a patriotic essay, well meaning, good intention. May we all live a healthy life. May bad health not be our misfortune.

Sir, if the President of a country has stayed out of his country for over 200 days since his coming to office, have you and I not lost our moral voice to ask the Resident Doctors to be patriotic? Patriotism is two sided, like the relationship between the head of a fish and its tail, both of which cannot survive the middle.

I am always conflicted about-face these things. If I don’t honor my children when they are under my care, will they honor me at old age?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/SN7PR06MB72470D0B1D03F12E0A6178BBF8F49%40SN7PR06MB7247.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Salihu Lukman]

Civil Society and Nigeria’s Democratic Development

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

David G. Green, the head of Civitas – The Institute for the Study of Civil Society, British Think Tank in the book, Reinventing Civil Society: The Rediscovery of Welfare Without Politics, made the point that ‘histories of welfare provision tend to equate the improvement of welfare services with the growth of government involvement. Over the years the welfare state filled the gaps supposedly left by the market. More careful examination of the evidence, however, shows that the reality was very different. People in need because of their inability to earn enough to support themselves, whether temporarily or permanently, were supported in a rich variety of ways. Family and neighbours played their part but because their help was informal and undocumented historians have tended to underestimate it. Charity was also important and it is often supposed that organised welfare before the welfare state was left to charities, but by far the most important organised method by which people met the needs of their fellows was mutual aid.’

 

What this mean is that levels of welfare of citizens is a product of combined initiatives of both government and non-governmental actors. In other words, people take care of one another voluntarily and reciprocally (mutual aid), which provide welfare support and improve general wellbeing of citizens. While it is easy to estimate governmental initiatives, services of non-governmental actors are most times undervalued, especially in less developed economies. These non-governmental actors are mainly referred to as civil society covering voluntary associations such as human right, faith-based, media, community-based, labour, professional bodies, women, youths, persons with disability and other forms of non-governmental associations. Considered as the “third sector” of society different from government and business, providing voluntary services, it is referred to as civil society. Its legitimacy is largely derived based on the knowledge, experience and expertise they mobilise, which implies that they have requisite skills to undertake initiatives in their chosen fields. This also suggest that they have the capacity to mobilise the needed resources, both financial, material and human for the execution of activities.

 

For African societies however, civil society organising is a very recent development largely because mutual aid was commonly abundant given the communal nature of our societies. Without necessarily going into sociological analysis, it is important to highlight that welfare provision in Africa is innately part of the orientation of our societies. But as African societies grew into modern nation states, the communal orientation of African societies started disappearing. Capacities of families, neighbours and old traditional institutions to participate in mutual aid activities lessen. With the growing supremacy of the role of governments and other modern institutions, new modern structures of voluntary initiatives emerged, which equates to what is regarded as civil society.

 

Part of the regulatory requirement is tht these new modern structures are expected to ensure that service delivery to citizens through voluntary work conform to minimum standards and comply with provisions of the law. Over the years, the debate has always been about whether regulatory requirements are going to be used by governments to trample on the rights of citizens to freely associate. It is crucial, however, to recognise that part of the context of the debate borders on the question of accountability in terms of the broader responsibility for these organisations to be answerable to citizens or groups that they serve.

 

In terms of therefore, the emergence of new modern structures of voluntary initiatives, a major characteristic is that although civil society organisations are expected to be mass (membership) based, increasingly, they have become small bureaucracies with hardly any requirement for recruitment of members. Depending on levels of compliance with legal provisions, being small bureaucracies, makes accountability largely notional. Considerably, this also weakens relationship with the people they seek to serve, which raises concern about impact of activities on the welfare of citizens. There are, of course, cases where activities of civil society are designed purely based on the availability of funding, often from foreign donors. Naturally, requirements to access donor funding, imposes its own accountability requirements. Consequently, while relationship between these organisations and people they seek to serve may be weak, relationship with donors tend to be strong.

 

With the expectation of being knowledgeable, civil society should also have clear vision of what is required to facilitate national development. Since democracy is the most important enabler of national development, combined with the expectation that civil society organisations, themselves anticipated to be membership organisations and therefore democratic, ideally, they should serve as models of representation, hence important promoters of democratic development. Their strength or otherwise is a critical determinant of how they can contribute to democratic development. This is partly because these are organisations that should have capacity for policy engagements through advocacy to influence governments’ choices as part of the broader strategy to improve the welfare of citizens.

 

Part of the reality in Nigeria is that weak institutional capacity of both government and the emerging structures of civil society have considerably made policy engagements very minimal. In so many ways, poor progress in managing relations between government and civil society in Nigeria has also produced a new reality whereby Nigerian civil society groups are increasingly being replaced by international non-governmental organisations. Unlike in the past where these international non-governmental organisations provide financial support to Nigerian organisations to implement activities, these international non-governmental organisations now setup structures in Nigeria, hire Nigerians, including leaders of civil society to run these offices and implement projects.

 

Largely oriented based on conditions determined by regulatory requirements of the countries where they originate, these international non-governmental organisations have become dominant players in the work of Nigerian civil society organisations. Although, the National Planning Commission (NPC) is statutorily required to serve as the regulatory agency for these international non-governmental organisations, in many respects, issues of institutional capacity of the NPC continue to undermine effectiveness of these organisations especially in terms of ensuring that high impact on the welfare needs of Nigerians is achieved.

 

Weak institutional capacity in terms of enforcing both organisational and activity standards also significantly contribute to changing the orientation of civil society in Nigeria. Part of the factors that have contributed to weakening institutional capacity of both regulatory structures of government as well as engagement between Nigerian government and civil society include experiences under repressive military regimes, which created compelling conditions for the focus on human rights and prodemocracy campaigns, especially following the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election by the military government of former President Ibrahim Babangida. Most of the national civil society groups that led the campaigns for human rights and prodemocracy in the country, which helped to usher in the current Fourth Republic, although began as membership organisations, eventually became bureaucracies oriented around projects.

 

Sources of funding for the work of these organisations were largely from foreign donors. Local funding is hardly available. This made civil society organisations to be project oriented, governed by a board whose membership are small. Accountability gradually become limited to the boards and funding sources. Minimum engagement with government, which is needed to protect civil society organisation from government control makes demand by civil society for initiatives to negotiate any stronger relationship with Nigerian government very unattractive. This also legitimise the belief that any consideration of financial support from Nigerian government to civil society as very detrimental.

 

This is the negative orientation, which has continued to block debates in the country about considerations for improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society. Sadly, this negative orientation has pushed leaders of civil society in Nigeria to develop a mindset, which encourages them to positively relate with foreign organisations that are directly linked to governments in their countries but despise considering developing positive or structured relationship with Nigerian government. It is basically a belief that accept relationship with foreign governments as good but relationship with Nigerian government is bad.

 

Interestingly, however, individual leaders of civil society could have positive relations with functionaries of Nigerian government. If it is okay for individual leaders of civil society to have positive relations with functionaries of Nigerian government, why should civil society continue to resist negotiating improved relations with Nigerian government? If Nigerian civil society can accept funding from foreign governments, why should it be difficult for them to take steps to negotiate structured local funding, which may include contributions from Nigerian government?

 

The problem of poor relations between Nigerian government and civil society has produced combination of poor funding and very weak organisations of civil society in the country. In terms of poor funding, although, there are possibilities, which can include access to portions of corporate social responsibility funds provided by big corporations in the country, these are funds that are only made available to some few organisations that may have even been formed with the active support of government, whose mission may be anything but altruistic. Therefore, capacity or competence of the organisations that access some of the available local funding to deliver services may be questionable. Substantially, access to corporate social responsibility funds, could provide opportunity to create legitimate sources of financial support for the work of Nigerian civil society. At the moment, because access to these funds is based on discretionary decisions of the management of the organisations making the grant, misuse and mismanagement both by the provider and the recipient become the dominant feature.

 

With all our realities in Nigeria, the consequence is that there are no guaranteed local funding sources available to support the work of civil society organisations. Sadly, there is no campaign in the country to create domestic funding sources for the work of civil society. Somehow, the background of repressive military rule, which made campaigns for human rights and democracy to become the primary focus of the work of civil society, the negative mindset that translate to opposition to Nigerian government is deep-rooted among civil society leaders. Civil society leaders believe that opposition to government is a requirement for their work. On the other hand, government functionaries have contempt for civil society and their leaders.

 

It was, George Soros, in his book, The Age of Fallibility: Consequences of the War on Terror, who made the point that ‘Fallibility has a negative sound. Indeed, every advance we make in better understanding the relationship between thinking and reality has a negative connotation because it involves a retreat from perfection. But this negative interpretation is itself a manifestation of our fallibility. Recognising our fallibility has a positive aspect that ought to outweigh the loss of an illusory perfection. What is imperfect can be improved, and the improvement can manifest itself not only in our thinking but also in reality. If perfect understanding is beyond our reach, the room for improvement is infinite.’

 

It is true that relationship with government, especially when it come with access to funding has some risks. Part of the risk includes the loss of moral authority, which can make civil society vulnerable and susceptible to being controlled by government and political leaders. A major problem is when being independent from government is applied in a way that blocked relationship with Nigerian government but encourages relationship with foreign governments, which may have similar, or even worse risks that could be interpreted to project Nigerian civil society and their leaders as unpatriotic. Why should relationship with Nigerian government be considered bad, but relationship with foreign governments good? Most activists in civil society pretentiously overlooked this issue largely because good relationship with foreign governments enable them to access grants from organisations such as the UK Department for International Development (DFID), United States Agency for International Development (USAID), European Union (EU), etc. These are basically funding directly provided by governments of UK, US and countries under the European Union.

 

Why should Nigerian civil society resent financial support from Nigerian government but accept from UK, US and EU governments? Isn’t it possible to negotiate conditions that makes funding from Nigerian government acceptable? Part of the disadvantage of refusal to consider negotiating stronger relationship between Nigerian civil society organisations and Nigerian government is that work of these organisations are dictated by priorities set by foreign donor organisations. Whether funded activities of Nigerian civil society organisations accommodate the priority needs of Nigerians is entirely a different matter. The fact is, having stronger relationship with Nigerian government could require periodic agenda setting negotiations to determine both priority areas of work for Nigerian civil society as well as the volume of funding to be mobilised. Negotiating these issues may considerably contribute to influencing government’s policy choices. In addition to policy choices, stronger engagement between Nigerian government and civil society could also impact positively on the operational conduct of government, which may make government more disposed to engagement with Nigerians.

 

The reality is that inability to consider negotiating relationship between Nigerian civil society and Nigerian government is the manifestation of our fallibility. To begin to positively shift to ‘outweigh the loss of an illusory perfection’, will be to debate these issues. Negative mindset of completely projecting resentment to relating with Nigerian government condemn the country to below standards frameworks, with no hope of any improvement in site. The consequence is that although, there are some civil society organisations in the country that can access relatively large grants from foreign donors, the outlook of these organisations in terms of both organisational behaviour and service delivery to citizens are hardly any different from all the negative attributes associated with Nigerian government. There is the need to push Nigerian civil society organisations to change the orientation of operating with a mindset of being in opposition to Nigerian government. Initiating negotiation to develop a functional relationship with Nigerian government so that the imperfect framework, which undermine capacity to mobilise local resources can be improved.

 

Imagine a situation, whereby a national framework is instituted, which for instance make it possible for the pooling of a ratio of corporate social responsibility funds in the country to support the work of Nigerian civil society organisation. Such a framework should necessarily have both management framework and defined criteria for access. Also, think of the possibility that the management framework would have representative structures and some levels of democratic control, which could strengthen ownership by civil society. Development of a framework that can guarantee the independence of Nigerian civil society from interference by government while at the same time mobilising local funding is possible. Such funding could be further supported by government through appropriate annual provisions based on existing budgetary processes, which could be negotiated by the management framework.

 

A wide scope of possibility exists to negotiate improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society. The question is whether, as a nation, we want to open the debate beyond the narrow mindset that project Nigerian government as a bad partner to civil society, but foreign governments good partners. If democracy is about engagement, negotiation and agreement, why is it not important to consider expanding the scope of Nigerian democracy to prioritise negotiating better and stronger relationship between Nigerian government and civil society?

 

It was Civitas’ David Green, in the book We’re (Nearly) All Victims Now! How Political Correctness is Undermining our Liberal Culture, who made the point that ‘Victimhood as a political status is best understood as the outcome of a political strategy by some groups aimed at gaining preferential treatment. In free societies groups often organise to gain advantages for themselves, but the increase in the number and power of groups seeking politically‐mandated victimhood raises some deeper questions… Group victimhood is not compatible with our heritage of liberal democracy in three particular ways: it is inconsistent with the moral equality that underpins liberalism; it weakens our democratic culture; and it undermines legal equality.’

 

In many respects, the thesis of victimhood as a political strategy to attract patronage or preferential access to support by foreigners who have basically nothing to lose if Nigeria is bad is the dominant orientation of civil society in Nigeria. It could be debated if without the risk of losing anything, foreign support can come with any superior commitment to Nigeria’s democratic development. A rational assessment will suggest that commitment of foreign organisations and governments would need to be balanced with corresponding support to push Nigerian government to strengthen engagement with civil society.

 

To be fair to most of the foreign organisations and governments providing support to Nigerian civil society groups, there is evidence of support to government as well. Whether the support is balanced such that it is facilitating improved relationships between Nigerian government and civil society is completely a different matter. May be, as part of the strategic goal of pushing most of these foreign organisations and governments to support Nigerian civil society to overcome current victimhood mindset, an appeal needs to be made to these foreign organisations and governments to also ensure that support to both Nigerian government and civil society include initiatives to negotiate improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society.

 

Collaboration between government and civil society, if structured and organised and the independence of civil society groups are guaranteed, could facilitate strengthened engagement between Nigerian government and citizens and will be an important requirement for the development of Nigerian democracy. How can political initiatives to negotiate improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society organisation be introduced? As a party founded on the vision of change, there is no reason why APC should not prioritise development of initiatives towards improved relations with Nigerian civil society. Developing improved relations with Nigerian civil society should be part of the strategic goal of developing Nigeria’s democracy and ensuring that Nigerian politics is being refined and new democratic frontiers, which should promote engagement between Nigerian government and citizens are created. Inability to refine Nigerian politics and create new democratic frontiers would continue to legitimise the mindset of opposition to Nigerian government by civil society.

 

Political leaders in the country should be encouraged to develop a more positive disposition towards civil society in the country. To achieve that, the National Orientation Agency (NOA) should be able to provide leadership in initiating and implementing activities to facilitate negotiations for improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society. Part of the objective should also be to enhance processes of political leadership recruitment in the country, which are hardly planned and largely impulsive. This can be achieved if political political parties in Nigeria broaden membership mobilisation to include engagement with Nigerian civil society as a strategy for leadership recruitment?

 

Improved relationship between Nigerian government and civil society groups can be designed to reorient civil society to return to being membership based with high measure of democratic control by the members. Being democratically controlled by members should mean that activities of Nigerian civil society organisations accommodate the priority needs of Nigerians. This should translate to high impact on levels of welfare of citizens from activities of Nigerian civil society. Capacity for policy engagement will be high.

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigerian Politics and Fallacy of PDP – APC Semblance

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Partisan Problem of One-Dimensional Politics

 

In his recent book, Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics and the Fight for Better Future, the American economists, Paul Krugman drew attention to what he refers to as ‘one-dimensional politics’, which is about opinions and not facts. According to him, ‘everything is political. In many cases, accepting what the evidence says about …question will be seen as a partisan act.’ Although the United States was the focus of Krugman’s analysis, one-dimensional politics such that accepting evidence become partisan, goes beyond the US. At least, it is also the reality in Nigeria, largely because opinions dominate almost all political conversations in the country. For instance, there is the widespread belief that the two leading parties in the country – Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and All Progressives Congress (APC) – are the same. Some analysts have gone further to argue that both parties have failed Nigerians.

 

Prof. Attahiru Jega, former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), in a BBC Hausa Service interview on August 2, 2021, reechoed this position with the submission that ‘the two big parties had failed to engender good governance and development in the country.’ Consequently, he called on Nigerians not to ‘give their trust to the parties again.’ Coming from Prof. Jega, the claim that both the PDP and APC are the same and had failed Nigerians should not be taken lightly. Prof. Jega wasn’t just the former Chairman of INEC. He is a respected political scientist internationally. He is both a theoretician and practitioner whose commitment to Nigeria’s development cannot be faulted. He grew through the ranks of radical activism to become the leader, both intellectually and in the practical field of politics and was able to inspire and influence the emergence of generation of both activists and leaders in the country. As Chairman of INEC, it cannot be disputed that he successfully led the reform of electoral management in the country.

 

As should be expected, both the PDP and APC dismissed Prof. Jega’s submissions that the two parties had failed Nigerians. Speaking through Mr. Kola Ologbondiyan and Sen. John Akpanudoedehe, respectively PDP National Publicity Secretary and APC Secretary of Caretaker/Extraordinary National Convention Planning Committee, they both argued that Prof. Jega was wrong to conclude that the two parties had failed Nigerians. PDP went further to accuse Prof. Jega of being ignorant of the ‘significant milestones’ it recorded during its reign and contended that ‘it is indeed unfortunate that … a professor of Political Science could portray an ignorance of the manifest contrasts between the robust fortunes of our nation under the PDP and the wasteland she has become under the APC.’

 

Somehow, both responses from the two officials of the PDP and APC failed to disproof Prof. Jega’s declaration that PDP and APC have failed Nigerians. A clear demonstration of the problem of one-dimensional politics, which is just about opinion and even when there is evidence to prove otherwise, individual opinion of leaders, which was what the responses of both Mr. Ologbondiyan and Sen. Akpanudoedehe represents, will instead be the reference. The responses from Mr. Ologbondiyan and Sen. Akpanudoedehe, if allowed to stand can only strengthen the argument that both PDP and APC are the same, which is not correct. The question of whether PDP and APC are the same and have all failed Nigerians should therefore be proven beyond the opinion of anybody, including the responses of Mr. Ologbondiyan and Sen. Akpanudoedehe. Irrespective of whether it is PDP, APC or any other party for that matter, performances of parties when elected to manage governments must go beyond opinions.

 

Perhaps, it needs to be acknowledged that given the disposition of politicians to switch between parties, especially from PDP to APC and vice versa, is often cited as justification of semblance. In addition, there is also the question of ideology, which many have argued is absent in Nigerian politics and is another evidence of why the two parties are the same. While it is important to acknowledge the validity of these criticism, it doesn’t however confirm that both the two parties are the same and as Prof. Jega alleged have failed Nigerians. Noting that Prof. Jega granted the BBC interview as a member of the People Redemption Party (PRP), it is important that he is assisted to go beyond the seductive appeal of one-dimensional politics by checking what the evidence are with respect to the credentials of both the APC and PDP as ruling parties.

 

Recognising also that one-dimensional politics, in the context of Nigeria, encourage politicians to resent criticisms, which is why Prof. Jega can be accused of being ignorant of ‘significant milestones’, politicians, especially from leading political parties need to also be made to appreciate that their opinion does not prove any achievement or disprove failure. To dismiss people criticising both the PDP and APC highlight the problem of intolerance, which Nigerian democracy must overcome. Intolerance creates a big gap between politics and knowledge. The consequence is that many politicians will continue to develop inferiority complex, based on which they use very uncouth language in responding to criticisms. It will either be a case of ‘ignorance’ as Mr. Ologbondiyan and Sen. Akpanudoedehe, will argue, ‘nauseating, malicious and nonsensical’ as Dr. Chris Ngige will refer to criticism of his management of industrial relations in the country or Comrade Adams Oshiomhole’s reference to people critical of his leadership approaches as ‘cowards and pigs’. Once the attitude of politicians is to resent criticism, loyal party members will be intimidated and forced to submission. Nigerian politics must be reoriented such that leaders are able to respect criticism.

 

PDP and APC have failed Nigerians: Scholar Jega Vs Politician Jega

 

First thing first, is it true that both PDP and APC ‘had failed to engender good governance and development in the country’ as argued by Prof. Jega? What exactly are the evidence that made Prof. Jega to arrive at such a conclusion? So far, from the BBC interview, Prof. Jega did not present any specific validation of his conclusion. Both listening and reading the script of the interview, one is tempted to conclude that Prof. Jega spoke more as a politician in that interview than the thorough scholar he is. Being a PRP member, it was more about justifying his choice of PRP as opposed to any of the so-called big parties. In many respects, it wasn’t necessary at all. He doesn’t need to justify his political choice with reference to other parties. Doing so, cheaply bring him down to the basement of one-dimensional politics, which he is way above. As a result, at least from the BBC interview, he didn’t make any attempt to present how his party, PRP, will be different.

 

A person of the stature of Prof. Jega is entitled to his own political choice without having to justify it with reference to what is in existence. Projecting his choice confidently without having to situate it in relation to existing parties will determine substantially the value he is bring into Nigerian partisan politics. No doubt, his potentials are very high, which is why every serious-minded Nigerian should continue to advocate that people like Prof. Jega should join partisan politics. Being the successful scholar he is, in fact an authority in the field of political science in every respect, evidence-based politics should be the reference point of his political conclusions. He should be able to engage politics based on facts and not just opinion. Once he deviates from that and orient his politics based on opinions, it will be difficult, if not impossible for him to be different from the mainstream Nigerian politicians. This will simply mean that partisan politics will erode his moral authority and devalue his personality.

 

The second concern borders on how the two senior officials of the two parties – PDP and APC – contemptuously dismissed Prof. Jega’s statement. The PDP went further to question the credential of Prof. Jega as a professor of political science. This highlights one of the dangers of the Nigerian brand of one-dimensional politics. What qualifies any politician to question the academic qualification of anybody? Anybody going into politics, should be ready to be bullied by politicians who are experts in all the conventional strategies, both fair and unfair. It is debatable, if politics has entry requirement, Mr. Ologbondiyan can qualify to be anywhere near Prof. Jega. Once the disposition of politicians is to disrespect people like Prof. Jega, it will be almost impossible to expect anything more than what the PDP has achieved in Nigerian politics, which is more about opinion rather than evidence.

 

The truth is that one-dimensional politics in Nigeria, create a situation whereby no matter one’s level of education or exposure, the person must contend with the strong opinions of politicians. Going contrary to those opinions will be resisted. In the process, crude methods will be applied to rubbish the person. Recall how sadly under the immediate past leadership of the APC, a particular person was disqualified from emerging as a candidate of the party for election based on false allegation that his academic qualification was forged. Even when the Registrar of the institution made public statement confirming that the person graduated from that institution, the APC leadership went ahead to disqualify the person.

 

With one-dimensional politics, everything is reduced to opinion. With Prof. Jega now becoming a partisan politician, will he play politics based on evidence or it will just be about his opinion? Will he fail to apply all his knowledge and experience, which is his life achievement and use it to contribute towards building Nigerian political parties to practice evidence-based politics? Or will he join the conventional one-dimension politics, which is just about opinions? One will be tempted to imagine that even the choice of PRP suggest that Prof. Jega want to practice evidence-based politics largely perhaps because he is looking for a free space where internal dynamics doesn’t have the strong opinion that will be hard to break. In many respects, the choice of political party based on the strategy of avoiding strong opinions is simply a quick fix, which may not translate to any qualitative shift. That is why Prof. Jega’s BBC interview makes him vulnerable to being downgraded to the basement of one-dimensional politics.

 

This being the case, Prof. Jega, the politician risked being different from Prof. Jega the scholar. If Nigerian partisan politics is to benefit at all from Prof. Jega’s wealth of knowledge and experience, Prof. Jega the politician should be the same person as Prof. Jega the thorough scholar, theoretician, and practitioner of evidence-based politics. Being a member of PRP, his contribution towards the development of the PRP, should be evidence-based so that he is able to apply his knowledge and experience in politics. Otherwise, his ability to contribute to making PRP competitive in the politics of Nigeria is not blocked because however he approaches it, he will have to still contend with all the strong opinions that dominate Nigerian politics when seeking to mobilise support for his party, as was the case with the BBC interview.

 

PDP’s Significant Milestone – A Confirmation of Failure

 

If evidence-based politics is the reference, the recognition that no party is perfect is important. To that extend, it should be also recognised that both PDP and APC have challenges. Part of the challenge is that leaders and members of political parties should constantly be working to build capacity and correct inadequacies. The degree to which leaders of political parties ignore problems or deny that those challenges exist, the weaker they will be in managing public trust. Once the disposition of leaders is to deny existence of challenges, one-dimensional politics oriented based on opinions, which may not be the true reflections of reality, will be the attraction. Therefore, when PDP’s Mr. Ologbondiyan referred to ‘significant milestones’ recorded during the sixteen years tenure of the PDP, it is more about his opinion, which for opportunistic reasons of gaining electoral advantage could be acceptable to other PDP leaders and members.

 

The evidence so far from PDP’s record of sixteen years in government is largely about litany of corruption and how problems of insecurity become widespread in the country. With respect to the problem of corruption, series of reports of investigation are there, which is not about anybody’s opinion. For instance, recall the House of Representatives investigation on petroleum subsidy in 2012. Under the Chairmanship of Hon. Faruk Lawan, the Committee reported that “contrary to official figure of subsidy payment of N1.3 Trillion, the Accountant-General of the Federation put forward a figure of N1.6 Trillion, the CBN N1.7 Trillion, while the Committee established subsidy payment of N2.587 Trillion as at December 2011, amounting to more than 900% over the appropriated sum of N245 Billion. This figure of N2.587 Trillion is based on the CBN figure of N844.944 billion paid to NNPC, in addition to another figure of N847.942 billion reflected as withdrawals by NNPC from the excess crude naira account, as well as the sum of N894.201 billion paid as subsidy to Marketers. The figure of N847.942 billion quoted above strongly suggests that NNPC might have been withdrawing from two sources especially when double withdrawals were also reflected both in 2009 and 2010.” The report also indicted the Accountant-General of the Federation because of payments in 2009, in equal instalments of N999 million for 128 times, totaling N127.872 billion.

 

Also recall the claims and counterclaims of missing oil revenues in October 2013 when Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, as CBN Governor alleged that $49.8 billion from the sales of crude oil between January 2012 – July 2013 was missing from NNPC accounts. Following series of audits and reconciliation meetings involving NNPC, CBN and Ministry of Finance, the former CBN Governor reported the missing amount to be $20 billion while the former Minister of Finance, Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala reported $10.8 billion. On February 20, 2014, former President Goodluck Jonathan suspended Mallam Sanusi from office over allegations of financial misconduct. After the suspension of Mallam Sanusi as CBN Governor, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) confirmed that about $20 billion was missing.

 

In 2012, there was the case of Police Pension Task Force, which was investigated by the Senate Joint Committee on Public Service and Establishment and State and Local Government Administration. Some of the revelations include withdrawal of N24 billion for payment of pension that required about N3.5 billion — the Chairman of the Pension Review Task Team, Alh. Abdulrasheed Maina, informed the Senate Committee of two accounts in Lagos where police pension funds were lodged, each amounting to N21 and N24 billion. Alh. Maina reported daily withdrawals of various sums of money from these accounts ranging from N200 to N300 million. A total sum of N273.9 billion was reported by the Senate Committee to have been looted in 6 years from the police pension fund.

 

Other corruption cases under PDP (1999 – 2015) include the case of $180 million Halliburton; $1.1 billion Malabo Oil; Princess Stella Oduak N255 million Aviation Ministry bulletproof cars; N10 billion jet scam involving the Petroleum Minister (2011 – 2015), Mrs. Dizieni Alison Madueke; and House of Representatives Capital Market probe; and N360 billion service-wide scam. There was also the case of $2.1 billion arms deal involving Col. (Rtd) Sambo Dasuki, former National Security Adviser under the Jonathan’s PDP administration. The breakdown showed that N1.5 billion was paid to Alh. Bashir Yuguda, which was reportedly disbursed in respective sums to the following PDP chieftains - N600 million to PDP 2015 election campaign Contact and Mobilization chairmen (Chief Bode George, Amb. Yerima Abdullahi, Mr. Peter Odili, Alh. Attahiru Bafarawa, Chief Jim Nwobodo and Col. (Rtd) Ahmadu Ali); N300 million to BAM properties linked to Alh. Bello Haliru, former PDP National Chairman; N200 million to Alh. Bello Sarkin Yaki, former PDP Kebbi State 2015 governorship candidate; N100 million to Alh. Mahmud Shinkafi, former PDP Zamfara State Governor; and N100 million to Dalhatu Limited linked to Alh. Attahiru Bafarawa.

 

Other disbursements from the $2.1 billion arms deal were N750 million to Reliance Referral Hospital Limited for special prayers; N380 million to support re-election of PDP members of House of Representatives; N550 million to Thisday Newspaper allegedly as compensation for attacks on the newspaper’s offices in Kaduna and Abuja in 2012; N120 million to Nduka Obaigbena allegedly as compensation for copies of various newspapers seized in June 2014; N170 million for the purchase of four-bedroom duplex; N260 million paid to Chief Tony Anenih; N345 million paid to Sen. Iyorchia Ayu; and N90 million for Dasuki’s son’s house.

 

Even in terms of the internal administration of PDP, corruption was an identifiable legacy. The proof is the construction of the PDP National Secretariat for which on November 14, 2008, the then National Chairman of PDP, Chief Vincent Ogbulafor, organised a fundraising dinner in Abuja to raise N10 billion to finance the construction of a 12-storey new PDP National Secretariat, located on Muhammadu Buhari Way, Central Business District, Abuja. Quoting Premium Times, Sahara Reporters of January 22, 2017, reported that the dinner, which was chaired by Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, then Vice President, raised over N6 billion for the project.

 

Some of the donors include Mr. Femi Otedola who donated the highest amount of N1 billion and his late father, Chief Michael Otedola, who donated N25 million. Other big donors included Alh. Aliko Dangote who offered to supply cement worth N3 billion; the PDP National Working Committee, N1 billion; Mrs. Bola Shagaya, N25 million; Strabag Construction Company N100 million; Ogun State Government, N10 million; and an anonymous donor, N100 million. Late President Umaru Yar’Adua and his Vice President, Dr. Jonathan, contributed N527,205 and N454,735, representing 15 per cent of their basic salaries, respectively. Each of the party’s 28 State Governors at the time was reportedly levied N50 million by the party.

 

The contract for the PDP National Secretariat project was awarded to BNL Limited. The party paid an initial sum of N2 billion while BNL Limited was billed to complete construction of the National Secretariat project in 126 weeks. Sahara Reporters further reported in January 2017 that because of construction variations over the years, the project cost rose to N16 billion from the 2008 estimated N10 billion out of which the party had paid N6 billion before work stopped. At it is, the project has been abandoned.

 

Another major legacy of the PDP’s sixteen years tenure was the problem of insecurity, especially Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East. Of course, there were problems of vandalisation of oil installations and kidnapping in the South-South and parts of South-East, cases of cattle rustling in North-West and North-Central. While it needs to be acknowledged that in the cases of vandalisation of oil installations and kidnapping by Niger-Delta militants in South-South were brought under control, the case of Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East was politicised by the PDP under former President Jonathan, which accounted for the failure of the PDP administration to mobilise effective response. When for instance, the abduction of more than 200 Chibok schoolgirls happened in 2014, the position of former President Jonathan led PDP Federal Government was that it was a setup. For quite some time, former President Jonathan administration did not mobilise any response to the Chibok abduction. Up to May 2015 when APC government was inaugurated, PDP led Federal Government failed to mobilise strong military response to the problem of Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East.

 

Apart from all these records of corruption and insecurity, what were the other legacies of the PDP after sixteen years in government at Federal level? May be Mr. Ologbondiyan and other PDP leaders can provide the evidence of ‘significant milestones’, which may be different from the depressing records of corruption and insecurity. Or put differently, the evidence will confirm ‘manifest contrasts … robust fortunes of our nation under the PDP.’ PDP’s Mr. Ologbondiyan will have to go beyond claims and specifically tell Nigerians what exactly were the ‘significant milestones’ recorded by the PDP during its sixteen years reign in power between 1999 and 2015.  

 

APC’s Contrasting Scorecard

 

While awaiting Mr. Ologbondiyan and PDP leaders’ account of ‘significant milestones’, as well as Prof. Jega’s evidence that both PDP and APC have failed Nigerians, as members of APC, we should be able to engage the debate by providing supporting evidence highlighting the contrasting scorecards of APC government in the last six years. In doing so, it will be necessary to acknowledge challenges. Unlike PDP leaders, APC leaders are not in denial of the existence of challenges. Despite the challenges, however, APC Federal Government under the leadership of President Muhammadu Buhari is making efforts to move the country forward. To confirm that, unlike the PDP, APC led government is not a failure, three important achievements, in the areas of social investment, infrastructure and agriculture will be emphasised. Assessment of challenges of insecurity and how APC is handling it different will be also presented as part of the supporting evidence of APC’s contrasting scorecard.

 

Social Investment Programme: Since emerging as the governing party in 2015, APC Federal Government has been implementing National Social Investment Programme (NSIP), which is far more than what any government in the past has done. Now elevated to a ministerial status, which is the initiative of President Buhari, it is founded on four pillars of N-Power, Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT), Home Grown School Feeding and Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP). With the goal of lifting 100 million Nigerians out of poverty, millions of poor Nigerians are benefiting from these initiatives. For instance, GEEP has disbursed N36.9 billion in interest-free loans of between N50,000 to N350,000 to more than 2.3 million Nigerians. Under the Home-Grown School Feeding Programme, 9.9 million primary 1 – 3 pupils in 54,952 public primary schools in 35 states have benefited. Additional 107,000 cooks have been engaged. In the case of Conditional Cash Transfer more than 3 million poor and vulnerable households have been registered on the National Social Register, out of which more than one million families are currently being paid N5,000 monthly.

 

Infrastructure: When President Muhammadu Buhari administration assumed office in 2015, the total budget for Federal Roads by the outgoing PDP government of former President Goodluck Jonathan was 18 billion Naira, which is only about 25% of the Lagos State roads budget for that year. The persistent skeletal funding translated to abandoned or slow-moving road projects across the country. APC administration’s first priorities were to increase the amount of funding available for road projects, while also ensuring the resumption of work on abandoned projects. In 2016, the roads budget went up to 260 billion Naira, for which about 200 billion Naira was released.

 

Significantly, more resources were devoted to construction of road and transport infrastructure than any other administration since 1999, and the results are roads, bridges, highways, rail lines and stations, and air and seaport upgrades. Work has since resumed on several stalled, abandoned or solution-defying road projects that were inherited, like the Loko-Oweto Bridge, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, Sagamu-Benin Expressway, the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway, Onitsha-Enugu Expressway, Kano-Maiduguri Expressway, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Obajana-Kabba Road, Ilorin-Jebba Road, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Road, and several others are in progress, with some already close to completion.

 

A brand new bridge in Ikom, Cross River State, has just been completed, to replace a dilapidated steel truss bridge originally built five decades ago, as was a new border bridge linking Nigeria and Cameroon, in the spirit of regional integration. Construction work on the Second Niger Bridge, a contract awarded multiple times between 2002 and 2015, but constantly stalled for lack of funding, finally kicked off in 2018, with guaranteed funding, for the first time in the history of the project. In 2017, construction finally commenced on the Bodo-Bonny Bridges and Road (linking Bonny Island to the Rivers Mainland), a project first mooted decades ago, and awarded a number of times without success, prior to the Buhari APC led Administration. Currently, according to the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, there are around 900 active road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country, out of a total of 35,000km of Federal roads in existence.

 

Agriculture: Some of the specific initiatives of the APC led government of President Buhari in the agricultural sector include National Food Security Council (NFSC), Agriculture for Food and Jobs Plan (AFJP), National Livestock Transformation Plan, The Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP), The Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI), and Creation of an Enabling Environment. Specifically, the ABP for instance, implemented by the Central Bank of Nigeria, since 2015, provided more than 300 billion Naira to more than 3.1 million smallholder farmers of 21 different commodities (including Rice, Wheat, Maize, Cotton, Cassava, Poultry, Soy Beans, Groundnut, Fish), across Nigeria, successfully cultivating over 3.8 million hectares of farmland.

 

The PFI has produced and delivered to the Nigerian market, over 30 million 50kg bags equivalent of fertilizer, at reduced prices; and resulted in the revival or construction of no fewer than 40 moribund fertilizer blending plants across the country. That Nigeria today has 44 functioning blending plants, with more on the way, is solely due to the success of the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI). The plants include the following:

 

·         In 2017, the multinational group Olam invested $150 million in an integrated animal feed mill, poultry breeding farms and hatchery in Kaduna State, as well as an integrated poultry and fish feed mill in Kwara State.

 

·         In Anambra State, the Coscharis Group began the cultivation of rice in 2016, on a 2,500 hectare farm, and soon after expanded into Milling, with the commissioning of a 40,000 MT modular Rice Mill in 2019,

 

·         In Niger State, the BUA Group is currently completing a $300million Integrated Facility comprising a Sugar Mill, Ethanol Plant, Sugar Refinery and Power Plant, and a 20,000-Hectare Farm.

 

·         In Kebbi State, GB Foods has invested 20 billion Naira in a Tomato Processing Factory supplied by what is said to be the single largest tomato farm in the country. Future phases of the investment will make it the largest processing facility for fresh tomatoes in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

·         The same GB Foods in July 2020 opened its N5.5 billion Mayonnaise production facility in Ogun State, which will be supplied with input from the company’s new farms in Kebbi State.

 

·         In Lagos, Ariel Foods FZE has recently constructed and completed the biggest Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTF) production facility in Africa.

 

·         In Nasarawa State, the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) has recently completed work on the first phase of a multi-million-dollar animal feed processing facility and a backward-integrated 3000-hectare Maize and Soyabeans Farm, in a co-investment partnership with a South African Investment Group.

 

·         In 2021, the Dangote Group commissioned its $2 billion Fertilizer Plant, with an annual capacity of 3 million Metric Tonnes, the largest fertilizer plant in West Africa. In June 2021, the plant began delivering an average of 120 trucks of Urea per week to the Nigerian market, and is also set to target the export market across West Africa and beyond.

 

·         State Governments are also actively keying into the President’s Agriculture vision. In 2018, Cross River commissioned a  3 billion Naira Hybrid Rice Seedlings Factory, to supply rice seedlings to farmers and governments across the country.

 

·         Lagos State is completing the 32 Metric Tonne per hour Imota Rice Mill, which, when functional, will be one of the largest rice processing facilities in sub-Saharan Africa. The Imota Rice Mill will produce 2.4 million bags of 50kg per annum, and create an estimated 250,000 direct and indirect jobs, and will plug Lagos State firmly into the national rice value chain.

 

·         Ekiti State is reviving its Ikun Dairy Farm, in a successful partnership with Promasidor, with a production target of 10,000 Liters of milk daily.

 

·         In Ondo State, the 9 billion Naira Sunshine Chocolate Factory - a Public Private Partnership involving the State Government - was completed and commissioned in 2020, to take advantage of the State’s leading position in the cultivation of cocoa.

 

Apart from these three sectors, there are other initiatives in other sectors. The achievements cited in these three sectors is just to substantiate the point that based on records of performance in government, APC can’t be in the same category with PDP. Anybody arguing that these achievements represent failure will need to substantiate it with convincing evidence of how their impact on the lives Nigerians translate to negative outcomes.

 

Beyond Politics

 

The need to be honest, whether as politicians or intellectuals is a minimum requirement that should confer legitimacy to conclusions being presented to Nigerians. If APC led Federal Government has initiated the kind of ambitious National Social Investment Programme in the country, which no other government in the past has undertaken, including PDP governments, isn’t that a confirmation of the difference between PDP and APC? If APC led Federal Government has successfully revived Nigerian Railways, actively implementing around 900 road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country, out of a total of 35,000km of Federal roads in existence, how many kilometers of road contracts were constructed, reconstructed or rehabilitated throughout PDP’s sixteen years rule?

 

What was the specific agricultural initiatives of all the PDP led Federal Governments between 1999 and 2015? In the context of these three achievements, and in other areas, the APC led Federal Government was able to succeed where other administrations, including the PDP have failed. Take the case of the 327km Itakpe-Warri Standard Gauge Rail, completed by the President Buhari led APC administration 33 years after construction began. There was the evidential case of the second Niger Bridge, originally conceived decades ago, which is now more than 50 percent completed, and scheduled for commissioning in 2022. There was the case of the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, which has defied every PDP administration since 1999.

 

There is the case of the new Petroleum Industry Act assented to by President Buhari on Monday, August 16, 2021, which is going to restructure the operations and management of the Nigerian oil and gas industry. The initiative to put in place a new legal framework for the oil and gas sector started under the PDP government of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, more than two decades ago. It was shrouded in endless national debates and stalemate but was eventually passed by the two Chambers of the National Assembly under APC leadership with a six-month transition for the emergence of new institutional framework for the operations of oil and gas industry in the country.

 

If with all these, it means that PDP and APC are the same and have all failed, then failure must be defined in a way that invalidates APC’s achievements since taking over the reigns of Federal Government in 2015. However, recognising that the issues of insecurity inherited by the APC led government of President Buhari remained a major national challenge, it is important that assessment of performance of APC government is not reduced to opinions of individual politicians. The reality is that both President Buhari and all APC leaders acknowledged the enormity of the challenges of insecurity in the country, which is why Maj. Gen. (Rtd) Babagana Monguno, National Security Adviser was reported after the meeting of National Security Council of August 19, 2021, to have declared that President Buhari ‘would not leave office a failure.’ This is in recognition of the fact notwithstanding all the achievements of the APC administration, once the problem of insecurity persists, it means the government has failed.

 

Noting also that APC administration is taking steps to equip the security agencies and build morale, promote community-led solutions, develop new security infrastructure and operations across land and maritime environments, and address the underlying drivers of insecurity (poverty and youth unemployment), encouraging reports are emerging from the various theatres of operation. Although serious challenges still exist, and there is still a long way to go in restoring a robust sense of security in the country, it is also very important to continually acknowledge the victories and successes being recorded by the military and law enforcement agencies, in the various theatres of operation across the country.

 

For instance, the tide has turned against Boko Haram and ISWAP in the North-East and is turning against the bandits and criminals in the North-West. In the South East, relative calm has returned, and efforts are ongoing to fully neutralise the militant networks that have been troubling the region. In the Coastal Areas, the full rollout of the Deep Blue and Falcon Eye surveillance and security projects is certain to deal a strong blow on the activities of pirates and militants in the weeks and months ahead.

 

Certainly, all these measures can be strengthened, and the government can do more especially in relation to getting our security agencies to be more accountable. Everything considered, the current security structure in the country needs to be radically reformed. Issues of amending the laws to enable state governments establish state police

are clearly unavoidable. However, there are conditions that must be met before any decision to establish state police can serve as a good response to Nigeria’s security challenges. This include the requirement that processes of regulating the operations of the state police should be centralised as part of the functions of the Federal Police. Under that, for instance, issues of recruitment, qualification, background checks for those to be recruited, enforcement of disciplinary requirement, arms procurement and training for weapon handling, etc. should be handled at Federal level so that there are uniform standards across the country. It should be like the case of universities with National University Commission (NUC) serving as the regulatory body enforcing standards across all Nigerian universities.

 

Outside regulations, there are issues of funding. Most time, Nigerians make proposals in terms of how government should address challenges with the assumption that funding is given, which means that government can always mobilise the resources. This is mostly exaggerated. To address Nigerian security challenges, especially if the establishment of state police is to be considered, there must be a new funding arrangement, which should insulate the operations of Nigeria Police including the new state police to be established from all the uncertainties surrounding public financial management.

 

Conclusion – Facts Should Define the Boundaries of Politics

If the narrative is that PDP and APC have failed, what is the evidence based on the performances of both the PDP during its sixteen years tenure between 1999 and 2015, on the one hand, and that of the APC since 2015, on the other? If the disposition of politicians is one-dimensional politics, which is limited to opinions, why should scholars endorse opinions without evaluating them based on what the facts are? Could it be that the field of politics is truly different from the intellectual environment? May be that is so. However, it will be important to recognise that ability of individuals to contribute to changing Nigerian politics will depend a lot on the extent to which facts are recognised and respected. Whether political conclusions are oriented based on unsubstantiated opinions or facts, depend a lot on the degree to which evidence rather than opinion is the reference. Once conclusions are about opinions, propensity to ignore facts and become intolerant will be high.

 

The contours of the difference between the PDP and APC should be defined by the records of their experiences managing governments. The commitment to move Nigerian politics forward should be constructed based honest recognition of the realities, which the facts of performances of political parties when entrusted to manage governments represents.

[OLAYINKA AGBETUYI]

I support Prof Jega's position intoto.  Why should Salihu Lukman not do the same?

We quibble when we exonerate APC's  failures, while the APC waxes eloquent when they catalogue PDP failures that brought them to power.  It is now 6 years in an 8 year double term.

OAA

Let those who believe in majority rule ensure its practice at the centre come 2023

Sent from my Galaxy

-------- Original message --------

From: Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>

Date: 22/08/2021 19:37 (GMT+00:00)

To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com

Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Nigerian Politics and Fallacy of PDP -APC Semblance

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (smlu...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Nigerian Politics and Fallacy of PDP – APC Semblance

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Partisan Problem of One-Dimensional Politics

Certainly, all these measures can be strengthened, and the government can do more especially in relation to getting our security agencies to be more accountable. Everything considered, the current security structure in the country needs to be radically reformed. Issues of amending the laws to enable state governments establish state police

are clearly unavoidable. However, there are conditions that must be met before any decision to establish state police can serve as a good response to Nigeria’s security challenges. This include the requirement that processes of regulating the operations of the state police should be centralised as part of the functions of the Federal Police. Under that, for instance, issues of recruitment, qualification, background checks for those to be recruited, enforcement of disciplinary requirement, arms procurement and training for weapon handling, etc. should be handled at Federal level so that there are uniform standards across the country. It should be like the case of universities with National University Commission (NUC) serving as the regulatory body enforcing standards across all Nigerian universities.

 

Outside regulations, there are issues of funding. Most time, Nigerians make proposals in terms of how government should address challenges with the assumption that funding is given, which means that government can always mobilise the resources. This is mostly exaggerated. To address Nigerian security challenges, especially if the establishment of state police is to be considered, there must be a new funding arrangement, which should insulate the operations of Nigeria Police including the new state police to be established from all the uncertainties surrounding public financial management.

 

Conclusion – Facts Should Define the Boundaries of Politics

If the narrative is that PDP and APC have failed, what is the evidence based on the performances of both the PDP during its sixteen years tenure between 1999 and 2015, on the one hand, and that of the APC since 2015, on the other? If the disposition of politicians is one-dimensional politics, which is limited to opinions, why should scholars endorse opinions without evaluating them based on what the facts are? Could it be that the field of politics is truly different from the intellectual environment? May be that is so. However, it will be important to recognise that ability of individuals to contribute to changing Nigerian politics will depend a lot on the extent to which facts are recognised and respected. Whether political conclusions are oriented based on unsubstantiated opinions or facts, depend a lot on the degree to which evidence rather than opinion is the reference. Once conclusions are about opinions, propensity to ignore facts and become intolerant will be high.

 

The contours of the difference between the PDP and APC should be defined by the records of their experiences managing governments. The commitment to move Nigerian politics forward should be constructed based honest recognition of the realities, which the facts of performances of political parties when entrusted to manage governments represents.

 

This position does not represent the view of any APC Governor or the Progressive Governors Forum

 

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536AEB49E0586FE35CC2576AEC39%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[tunde jaiyeoba]

Dear Dr Salihu,

You asked " First thing first, is it true that both PDP and APC ‘had failed to engender good governance and development in the country’ as argued by Prof. Jega? What exactly are the evidence that made Prof. Jega to arrive at such a conclusion?"

The evidence is obvious. The membership of APC and PDP is fluid and unrecognisable. Subject to study, at least 50 per cent of the present crop of politicians have been members of both parties at one time or the other including their 'base' parties SDP and NRC and the Bola Ige described '....leprous fingers of the same hand'. How can one claim that one has outperformed the other?

Above all, globally with the human and natural resources in Nigeria and considering the countries we were at the same level since the second republic, leaders of both parties should be ashamed. The perception of Nigeria and Nigerians around the World is a testament to how woefully the Nigerian leadership class has performed. Professor Jega is right but I think the structure of Nigeria has really aided and abetted this woeful performance. APC or PDP, we have had the same names and are still having the same personalities!!!

Babatunde JAIYEOBA

Prof. E. Babatunde JAIYEOBA PhD

Head, Department of Architecture

Faculty of Environmental Design and Management

Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

ebj...@oauife.edu.ng; tundej...@yahoo.co.uk; +234 8037880023

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/DB6PR04MB2982C223665BB21917CE151FA6C39%40DB6PR04MB2982.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com.

[Salihu Lukman]

Narrow Politics and Questions of Democratic Development

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

The American journalist and historian, Anne Applebaum, in the book, Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism, stressed that ‘The jangling, dissonant sound of modern politics; the anger on cable television and the evening news; the fast pace of social media; the headlines that clash with one another when we scroll through them; the dullness, by contrast, of the bureaucracy and the courts; all of this has unnerved that part of the population that prefers unity and homogeneity. Democracy itself has always been loud and raucous, but when its rules are followed, it eventually creates consensus. The modern debate does not. Instead, it inspires in some people the desire to forcibly silence the rest.’

 

There is no better description of contemporary Nigerian political reality. The avalanche of objectionable news with commentaries that basically conclude everything is bad in the country, is the order of the day. Any attempt to argue to the contrary is condemned and rejected. Both social and conventional media – electronic, print, local, national, and international news about Nigeria are dominated by horrible newsflashes of activities of insurgents, bandits, ethnic and religious mercenaries in the country. It is either report of kidnap, abduction, and killing of innocent Nigerians, or some depressing reports of attacks on security agencies and institutions by bandits and insurgents, or damaging commentaries of so-called failure of political leaders, parties and governments, especially, President Muhammadu Buhari and the governing All Progressives Congress (APC), or court judgements that further exposes the challenges facing Nigerian democracy, or some angry public statements by groups, so-called analysts, experts and political leaders against political establishments in the country, and so on and so forth.

 

The list is almost endless. For instance, in August 2021, reported incidences of killings in Plateau State, bandit attacks of Nigeria Defence Academy (NDA), continued activities of bandits in Zamfara, Katsina, Kaduna and Niger States, Boko Haram – ISWAP clashes and many other criminal activities across the country have dominated national discourses. No doubt these are challenges, which require decisive responses from government. The occurrence and recurrence of these incidences, resulting in loss of lives and property are frightening, which has generated all manner headlines. Politics, which is supposed to provide options to citizens in terms of how to tackle these challenges, unfortunately, there is hardly any options, especially in terms of opposition to APC and its government.

 

Instead, some unsubstantiated and meaningless allegations dominate political debates in the country, without any specific proposal on how to resolve our national challenges. May be anger has taken the best out of people opposed to the APC and its government to the extent that presentations are reduced to amplifying challenges to demonstrate failure of APC and President Buhari. Wild goose campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ as Governor Samuel Ortom of Benue would insist or allegations that government, including the presidency are the sponsors of Boko Haram and bandits as Commodore (Rtd) Kunle Olawunmi would want Nigerians to believe are part of major highlight of the campaign by political opposition in the country.

 

Sensationally, both Governor Ortom and Commodore Olawunmi argued that they have evidence to prove their allegations. Coincidentally, not too long, sometime in September 2020, Dr. Obadiah Mailafia, former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria similarly alleged that a serving Northern Governor is the sponsor of Boko Haram. Although while making the allegations, he also claimed to have proof, after interrogation by the security, Dr. Mailafia was reported to backtracked, saying that he ‘did not really mean to say that the government was part and parcel of the killings.’ Since Commodore Olawumni has already began meeting with the security, hopefully the details of his evidence will come out. On the part of Governor Ortom, he claimed that he has forwarded his evidence to President Buhari and security agencies in the country. But since he feels so strong as to go public with his allegation without waiting for both President Buhari and security agencies to handle the matter, he can as well make the evidence public since he has lost confidence on established processes of managing matters of national security.

 

Part of the challenge with Nigerian politics is that accountability is almost zero. People could say whatever they want and get away with it. This has entrenched the phenomena whereby the main strategy of so-called opposition to APC is to ‘forcibly silence’ everyone into believing that President Buhari and APC governments have failed. Even leaders such as Governor Ortom whose constitutional powers to mobilise responses towards resolving challenges, no matter how small, as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution as amended, has become a leading campaigner against what he considers ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda. As far as Governor Ortom is concerned anybody arguing differently must be a supporter of ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda in the country, which according to him is the continuation of the early 19^th Century Fulani Jihad of Usman Danfodio.

 

It was the American linguist and philosopher, Noam Chomsky, in his recent book, The Precipice who lamented about how ‘the “political landscape” is indeed ominous. While today’s political and social circumstances are much less dire, still they do call to mind Antonio Gramsci’s warning …about the severe crisis …which “consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born [and] in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.”’ When a retired public servant of the status of Dr. Mailafia and a retired military officer, Commodore Olawunmi can go on air on national television to allege that people in government, including a serving Governor are the sponsors insurgency and banditry in the country and the issues are reduced to media debates, it highlights how low we have descended as a nation. Such weighty allegations should be matters of judicial investigation and once proved, all identified culprits should face the full wrath of the law.

 

It is more worrisome when a serving Governor could attempt to substantiate allegations of complicity against political leaders, especially President Buhari with argument about ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda in the country. What does ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ of Nigeria mean? Although it is possible to convert people from other religions to Islam, could anyone who is not a Fulani be conscripted to become Fulani? Maybe it means that every Nigerian will be forced to have a Fulani tribal mark. What will be such a mark? In addition, Fulfude may become the lingua franca of Nigeria.

 

With respect to so-called ‘islamisation’, is it possible to force everybody in Nigeria to convert to islam? Maybe ‘islamisation’ means that shari’a law will be imposed on the country. Will that be possible. Often those who campaign based on narrow agenda have short memory. As recent as 2000, when Zamfara State under Ahmed Sani Yerima, made a questionable political declaration adopting shari’a law, thereby triggering a campaign in many parts of the North to make similar declaration for shari’a law. How many states in the North succeeded in making such a shari’a declaration? In Kaduna State, it was resisted, which led to a big crisis that consume many lives. If it wasn’t successful in Kaduna, how can it succeed in Nigeria? Even as tales by moonlight, how conceivable could Governor Ortom’s alleged ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda be?

 

If a primary school pupil talks like the way all the diehard opposition campaigners in the country campaigning against so-called ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda, one can excuse it because at that level of innocence, everything could appear possible. But for a public servant as highly placed as that of a Governor, retire public servant, retire security personnel, etc. it portends a big danger, which if overlooked can produce a cult mentality in the country with all the ethnic and religious hatred associated with it. Being Governor, retired public servants, retired military personnel, with all the knowledge and experiences they have but decided to adopt the imaginary notion that a country as diverse as Nigeria can be taken over by any ethnic or religious group, is the highest manifestation of morbid symptom of attempt to block any possibility that a new society can be born out of the dying culture of corruption, greed and lawlessness, which was the hallmark of PDP’s sixteen year tenure.

 

The debate about whether PDP and APC are the same and why some mischievously argue that they have both failed was substantially treated in the presentation Nigerian Politics and Fallacy of PDP – APC Semblance. Those who wish to block initiatives to produce a new Nigeria can continue to dismiss the rebuilding work of APC government under President Buhari. However, to accuse APC and President Buhari of promoting ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ will be taking politics beneath the realm of logical reasoning. Ideally, knowledgeable and experienced people, especially public servants should not suffer from any problem that can exhibit ‘morbid symptoms.’ But, sadly, as a nation, we are having knowledgeable and experienced people with manifestations of ‘morbid symptoms.’

 

The fact that a serving Governor is one of those exhibiting manifestations of ‘morbid symptoms’ calls for urgent review of leadership recruitment processes in the country. This should not be a partisan matter. All the parties in the country should take this very seriously. As part of that reality, the case of wild goose allegations of ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda, should be a challenge, which the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) should take over and make it an important priority. There is no reason why for instance Governor Ortom should not disclose the full details of the APC and President Buhari’s ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda. The proof should be a major campaign advantage for the PDP. Inability of the PDP to take over the campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ may simply confirm the lack of evidence. To achieve that makes it obligatory for the PDP to call Governor Ortom to order by demanding for all the proof at his disposal. The consequences of allowing Governor Ortom to continue with a so-called campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ without proof will confirm that the campaign is nothing but to promote ethnic and religious hatred in the country, which is dangerous.

 

Already, it is arguably very clear that Governor Ortom’s passion for the so-called campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ is not about developing the country or even Bunue State. Without going into the politics of Benue State, which the citizens of that state are very competent to handle, Governor Ortom’s campaign mode is based on ultra-right-wing politics, which is neo-fascist and neo-Nazist. Being neo-fascist, in our context, the politics is anchored on ethnic supremacy, which is the source of Governor Ortom’s so-called campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda. As far as Governor Ortom is concerned, fulanis are the source of all his problems, by extension, the problem of Benue State and that of Nigeria as a whole. The bigger danger is that having identified the so-called problem, he is beginning to develop an ideology of hatred around it, which sadly is winning all manner of converts.

 

The only reason why such a campaign is attractive today is because President Buhari who is a Fulani man is in power. If President Buhari, a Fulani man and a Muslim being in power confirms the existence of ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation, does that suggest that when his tenure ends in May 2023, less than two years away, he will succeed in imposing another Fulani, Muslim to take over from him? Could it be part of President Buhari’s strategy to impose a Fulani Muslim, that many PDP leaders are already campaigning that a PDP Presidential candidate for 2023 should come from the North? We can choose to dismiss or take for granted all the warning signs about the appearance of ultra-right-wing leadership in the country. Once the issue of leadership recruitment in the country maintained a blind eye to this reality, the potential of producing people with such ideological mindset in leadership position of Governors or even President is high. If United State could produce a Donald Trump as President, activities of people like Governor Ortom, Dr. Mailafia and Commodore Olawunmi will prepare the stage for ultra-right-wing elements to assume leadership positions in the country.

 

Again, if today, ultra-right wingers can conveniently moblise hatred against Fulani Muslims, it will just be a matter of time before they shift focus to other groups. Any group that can potentially block or weaken its power base, it will mobilise hatred against such a group. Given Nigerian reality, depending on who will be the major contenders in both PDP and APC, campaign against so-called ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ will mutate against both Yorubas, Igbos, Ijaws, Ishekiris, etc. Based on short-term calculations, it may choose to contract fluid partnership with the aim of blocking emerging candidates even within PDP. Therefore, as we move closer to 2023, the pangs of ethnic and religious hatred will have its strong manifestation inside PDP. Once the PDP is not able to moderate campaign of ethnic and religious hatred of so-called ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’, it will be weak in controlling how it manifest itself internally in PDP.

 

There is therefore the urgent need for political parties in Nigeria to take steps to discourage ethnic and religious campaign of hatred. The hard truth is that to be able to discourage ethnic and religious campaign of hatred in the country would require that parties put in place internal code of conducts – byelaws, beyond what is provided in their constitution. Parties, as they are today, are weak in regulating the conducts of political leaders and elected representatives. If Nigerian democracy is to develop and become the facilitator for national unity and political development in the country, regulating the conduct of political leaders and elected representatives cannot be left to chance. In the circumstance, as things are today, so-called campaign against ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ is more a danger to PDP than it is to APC.

 

In fact, it more a danger to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Sen. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Governor Aminu Waziri Tambuwal, former Governor Sule Lamido, etc. than it is a danger to President Muhammadu Buhari or any potential APC Presidential candidate from the North. It is also potentially a danger against the emergence of any possible Presidential candidate in PDP from the South-West, South-East or South-South than it is to Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Vice President Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, Governor Kayode Fayemi, former Governor Ibikunle Amosun of APC from the South-West; or former Governor Rotimi Amaechi and Comrade Adams Oshiomhole from the South-South; or former Governor Rochas Okorocha and any other contender from the South-East.

 

Narrow politics can misrepresent ultra-right-wing politics based on partisan coloration. The biggest danger of ultra-right-wing politics is more manifest in the host party. PDP leaders would need to understudy what became of the US Republican Party after President Donald Trump to appreciate the dangers of so-called ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ campaign of promoting ethnic and religious hatred to PDP’s electoral fortune. Already, PDP is faced with enough challenges. It must not allow the seed of right-wing politics to grow within its leadership. Once that happens, its capacity to put up any strong electoral contest in the country will be eroded.

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigerian Democracy and Challenges of Nation Building

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

In the book, King of the Mountain: The Nature of Political Leadership, the Psychiatrist, Arnold M. Ludwig, observed that ‘One problem in judging the political genius of rulers is knowing what they should get credit for. The situation for rulers is a lot different than for other kinds of professionals. With creative artists, scientists, military commanders, athletes, or surgeons, you have no trouble telling who should get credit for what. Creative artists paint, sculpt, build, and compose works under their own signature. Scientists conduct experiments and publish their results. Athletes compete against others in contests. Military commanders win or lose wars. And surgeons operate on patients and take responsibility for their lives. In contrast, political rulers often rely on expert advisors to help them formulate foreign, domestic, and economic policies. They also may delegate responsibility to their cabinet members, diplomats, and staff to implement these policies or even to start programs of their own. Also, unlike other professionals, they may be credited with the long-term effects of initiatives launched by their predecessors and be blamed for events beyond their control.’

 

In the Nigerian context, like every other country, the politics of judging leaders is very attractive. Everybody, perhaps except the leader, is expert and know much better. Depending on disposition and affiliation, leaders are either condemned or celebrated. There is no middle ground. Once leaders are condemned, there is hardly anything good that can be associated with that leader. On the other hand, if the leader is celebrated, every decision and action is right and supported. This is a very elusive reality, which require caution. No leader can be a complete write-off or perfect. The inability to recognise the reality that no leader is a complete write-off or perfect further thickens the wall that separate citizens and governments. If democracy is to produce governments, which affirms the power of the people, the gap between leaders and citizens should be very small, in fact, ideally, it shouldn’t exist.

 

That is theory. Without any attempt to review theories of democracy, debate about performance of leaders are necessary realities, which needs to be engaged especially if the objective is to influence decisions made by leaders. Often, the issue of influencing the decisions of leaders is lost because the act of passing judgement on leaders is dominated by election mindset that narrow interest to whether leaders should remain in office or not. It is hardly about influencing decisions made by leaders. An important pillar of democracy is rule of law based on which tenure of leaders are clearly provided in the constitution of every democratic nation. But such provisions in the constitution will not resolve the challenge of ensuring that leaders meet the expectations of citizens, however defined. Ability of leaders to meet citizens’ expectation is an important requirement for nationhood.

 

Successful nations should have common purpose and strong national bond especially when created out of multiple ethnic and religious identities. Visionary and purposeful leadership are expected to facilitate the emergence of nations, leveraging on strong national institutions, good governance, equity and justice, which enable each group to fulfill its aspirations. After all, a nation is an imagined community of people who share a common aspiration, which is realisable through the principles of justice and the rule of law as enunciated in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

 

The major problem leadership in Nigeria, at all levels, borders on skewed inclination to question of nation building. How can we manage our diversity and build confidence of citizens across every part of the country to have a sense of national belonging? Admittedly, this is one area, which all leaders in the country seems to have common approach largely because all leaders approach the matter very defensively. Everybody cries of marginalisation, unfairness and injustice, but only in relation to group interests, predominantly ethnic. Hardly, one finds any leader who is raising issues of marginalisation, unfairness and injustice not based on protecting the interests of groups they belong. Consequently, every problem of the country become interpreted based on such narrow group interests.

 

If the Nigerian nation is to be developed, there must be leaders who are broadminded enough to campaign for justice, equity and fairness beyond narrow group interests. Therefore, a major challenge of nation building in Nigeria revolves around how to produce truly national leaders. Is Nigerian democracy oriented to produce national leaders? It was the British Actress, Barbara Kellerman, in the book, Bad Leadership: What It Is, How It Happen, Why It Matters, who made the point that ‘political theorists have been more interested in the question of how to control proclivities of bad leaders than in the question of how to promote the virtues of good ones. Influenced by religious tradition that focused on good and evil, and often personally scarred by war and disorder, the best political thinkers have had rather a jaundiced view of human nature.’

 

Most debates or proposals about what to do to build the Nigerian nation is about what to do to control (proclivity) of leaders and hardly about promoting what they should do (good virtues). From all the public debates in Nigeria, leaders are already condemned, which weakened capacity of citizens to influence decisions they take. The conclusion therefore is that leaders are already bad. This is the reality. A nation cannot be built with negative attitude. Sadly, the preponderance of negative attitude further polarised the country. Even when problems of insecurity in the country reached the frightening reality whereby every part of the country is threatened, with grave danger to lives and property, public debate is reduced to passing negative judgements about actions or inactions of political leaders especially President Muhammadu Buhari and governing All Progressives Congress (APC), both real and imagined.

 

No doubt, both President Buhari and APC must be held accountable. But when issues of accountability are reduced to interpreting challenges to mean evidence of failure, it can only re-enforce the conclusion that leaders are bad, which may make it attractive for the campaign to remove leaders out of office. Most times, the debate about changing leaders is influenced largely by the frustration of getting leaders to meet expectations of citizens, often imaginatively constructed with hardly much clarity. So long as the determining factor in judging leaders is driven by the frustration that leaders are not meeting citizens’ expectations, prejudiced conclusions against leaders will be the case. What is it that need to be done to ensure that leaders meet citizens’ expectations?

 

The gap between the theory and practice of democracy will always be determined by the extent to which democratic leaders meet the expectations of citizens. Part of the indicators of weak citizens capacity to influence decisions of leaders should include the issue of whether the debate about failure of leaders is oriented to produce options in terms of policy choices. Once debates about failure of leaders are not substantively about policy choices, it highlights manifest weaknesses of democracy. The fact that Nigerian democracy is not able to overcome the manifest weaknesses of inability to debate policy choices, is responsible for why, for instance, candidates for elections at all levels continue to campaign for the offices they contested even after results are declared, and notwithstanding that they may have lost the election. Immediately results are declared, electoral contest moved to courts and the media. Victorious candidates and their parties and INEC, at best become respondents. And defeated candidates and their parties become the appellants. In the circumstance, the judiciary is then made to pass judgements almost coloured in partisan robes.

 

As things are, Nigerian democracy is imperiled to the extent that even the routine issue of day-to-day management of political parties in Nigeria has moved to the courts. Conflicting court orders are flying all over the place given by court judges. This has made the INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, while addressing the third quarterly meeting with political parties, on Monday, September 6, 2021, to exclaimed that the situation of conflicting court orders ‘is compounded by cases on the leadership of political parties, thereby making the exercise of our (INEC) regulatory responsibilities difficult. It appears that in a number of electoral cases in Nigeria today, the settled law is now unsettled and the time-honoured principles of ‘Stare decisis’ does not seem to matter any longer.’ In other words, what Prof. Yakubu was drawing attention to is the apparent looming danger of judicial anarchy in the country with respect to management of political cases.

 

This is not a matter that should be taken lightly. The positive development is that the leadership of the judiciary in the country are already alert to this danger given that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad has given queries to many of the judges in the country involved in giving these conflicting orders. However, beyond these conflicting orders, the need to sanitise Nigerian judiciary should be broadened to cover issues of ensuring that judges with underlying political interests don’t preside over political cases in which their interest’s conflict with their judicial responsibility. Once judges with underlying political interests are allowed to preside over cases in which their interests is already in disagreement with their judicial responsibility, their decisions can be predictable. Just review must of Supreme Court Judgements on electoral matters since 2019, for instance, including minority judgements. There are judges whose political leanings can be confirmed by merely looking at the judgements. The need to insulate Nigerian judiciary from unethical influences of partisan commitment of individual judges is an important requirement for both the development of democracy and nation building.

 

The challenge of nation building in Nigeria must be broadened beyond just the simplistic approach of merely passing negative judgements on political leaders in the country. It is important that citizens recognise the need to prioritise initiatives to influence the decisions of leaders at all levels. For instance, regarding the challenge of insecurity, what actions do Nigerians want the APC led government of President Muhammadu Buhari to do? Is the security challenge facing the country persisting because the government is failing to initiate the required actions? The encouraging thing about both President Buhari and APC leaders is that they are not in denial about the security challenge facing the country. This wasn’t the case under PDP especially when the problem of Boko Haram came up around 2010.

 

It is public knowledge that former President Goodluck Jonathan and many PDP leaders, at the time, alleged that Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East was sponsored by opposition politicians. Recall that when the Chibok abduction of more than 200 schoolgirls happened in 2014, the position of former President Jonathan led Federal Government was that it was a setup, based on which PDP led Federal Government refused to mobilise the needed security responses for the rescue of the abducted Chibok schoolgirls. Also recall some of the recent wild goose allegations made by Commodore (Rtd) Kunle Olawunmi and Dr. Obadiah Mailafia to the effect that some people in government, including a Northern Governor are the sponsors of Boko Haram and banditry. These were the dominant narratives officially adopted by the PDP led Federal Government of former President Jonathan.

 

With all the lamentation about alleged inability of the APC led government of President Buhari to mobilise response to end the security challenge in the country, around the second week of August 2021, the narrative is beginning to change. In line with the instructions of President Buhari, the security agencies are speaking the language best understood by the bandits and insurgents. All arms of the security agencies are fully mobilised and are working in a coordinated way to crush the bandits in Zamfara, Katsina and Kaduna forests. Interestingly however, there are Nigerian leaders who have dismissed the military campaign going on to crush the bandits. So-called media commentators, religious and other leaders have discredited decisions of government to shut down communication services, markets, etc. in the states where the military operations are taking place. A religious leader has already proclaimed that the military operations against the bandits will fail.

 

What a jaundiced view. May be Nigeria should return to the era when hundreds of millions meant for arms procurement to fight insurgency, banditry and other criminality will be diverted and given to religious leaders for prayers. Instead of mobilising security agencies to fight the criminals, resources being deployed to fight insecurity in the country should be given to religious leaders to pray for the bandits to come back to their senses. This is perhaps what Sheikh Ahmad Gumi is preaching when he insists that government should grant amnesty to bandits in the North just the way the administration of late President Umaru Yar’Adua handled Niger Delta militants. Anybody who argue this way is already part of Nigeria’s national security problem. Nigerians need to rise to the challenge of regulating the conduct of so-called leaders, including religious clerics. Being jaundiced makes most of these leaders to be antagonistic to initiatives towards nation building.

 

Beyond religious clerics, there are other category of leaders in the country with similarly jaundiced views. Individuals, who in their own rights count as elders and have paid their dues to this country have become very vocal almost virtually against every decision and action of government. Ideally, elders should speak with strong moral voice based on capacity to say more than the ordinary on account of their lived experiences. But when elders speak with the same voice as that of politicians, it weakens their authority and diminish their influence in society. If the weakness of politicians is that they are unable to project a national identity, how different could elders whose mission only seek to entrench divisive politics in the country? The hallmark of being elders should be to bring something completely different from what the political class are offering. In which case, instead of claiming to be speaking as elders, so-called elders who promote Nigeria’s fractured reality should just honestly disclose all their political objectives.

 

However one looks at it, there is no way a nation can be built with leaders and elders whose views are antithetical to national development. Nigerians cannot be facing the challenge of insecurity and some leaders are working to undermine the efforts of government to crush the criminal elements responsible for all the pains citizens are going through, including loss of lives of citizens. Anytime leaders dismiss actions of government against bandits and insurgents, they embolden these criminals to continue with their nefarious activities. Yes, Nigerians may be angry with government and our political leaders. On no account should anyone take advantage of the anger of Nigerians to furtively support criminal activities. There must be some defined boundaries to these debates, if at all the Nigerian nation is to have a common purpose and a strong national bond.

 

The good thing is that there are some inspiring exceptions that gives hope that notwithstanding all our challenges, there is a good prospect for a Nigerian nation. One of such exception was demonstrated by Mr. Allen Onyema, the CEO of Air Peace, who on Monday, September 6, 2021 addressed Super Eagles player onboard Air Peace to Cape Verde for their World Cup Qualifying match. Mr. Onyema told the players that ‘you are not just going to play a football match, you’re going to carry on your young shoulders the aspiration and the hope of a nation almost in distress.’ He appealed to them to do everything they can to win the match for the country. He pledged an award of N20 million once they win the match. Mr. Onyema’s inspiring words of encouragement to those young Nigerian players, among many other positive factors, must have contributed to the 2-1 victory of the Super Eagles against Cape Verde on Tuesday, September 7, 2021.

 

It is quite therapeutic hearing those words from Mr. Onyema. We need more leaders in this country like Mr. Onyema. In particular, we need more leaders like Mr. Onyema in politics. If Nigerian democracy is to develop the capacity to drive processes of nation building, our political parties must develop capacity to recruit leaders like Mr. Onyema. There are many leaders in Nigeria in the mold of Mr. Onyema from every part of the country. The big barrier against recruiting them into politics is that debates about expanding membership of political parties is limited to protecting the personal ambitions of political leaders. Largely because political debate is almost all about ambitions of political leaders, nationalists of the mode of Mr. Onyema may just be limited to being financiers and sponsors of candidates for elections, and in return get rewarded with contracts, etc.

 

It was the US Republican Party member and former Congressman, Edward Royce, in the book, Classical Social Theory and Modern Society, while recalling Emile Durkheim’s teachings of political sociology, who argued that ‘One reason democracy is the dominant political system in the modern world, …is that it fulfills a pressing societal need. Under the governance of pre-modern regimes, society’s affairs are carried out according to habit, tradition, and “blind routine.” But given the complexity of the modern world and the everpresent necessity to introduce changes and enact reforms, society can no longer function effectively without the heightened capacity for reflection, deliberation, and innovation that democratic government makes possible. In the simpler period of the past, “things go on happening in the same way.” But survival in the modern era depends on the state being able to make constant adjustments, respond thoughtfully to the flux of circumstances, and plan for the future with intelligence and foresight. Democracy is the government of choice in the modern world, … because of its superior capability as society’s brain.’

 

Our politics in Nigeria starts and end with who will be the candidate for election. More clearly stated is which part of the country will the candidate come from? Promoted largely by Nigerian elites who most times position themselves to emerge as the main beneficiaries of such campaign, the major focus is reduced to which region of the country produces the President. Whether such President can respond to challenges of the region he/she comes from is another matter entirely. Champions of group interests then suggest that such candidates can ‘fulfill’ our pressing needs. Questions of justice, fairness and equity are confined to rationalising group interest even when for instance upholding the group interest means higher levels of injustice against other groups (blind routine). Nigerian democracy needs to evolve new political negotiating frameworks to guarantee that electoral contests facilitate constant adjustments to respond to the state of instability Nigeria finds itself.

 

While it is true that ethnic politics will always be part of our national life, it is important that Nigerians are able to engage these issues based on the recognition for a superior commitment to building the Nigerian nation. The underlying issue is to ensure that beyond condemning or celebrating leaders, Nigerians should come up with specific governance and political reform proposals aimed at facilitating regional developments as part of leadership negotiations. A situation whereby regions or ethnic groups produce Presidents and at the end of their tenure nothing in terms of physical development of the region to justify the emergence of President of Nigeria from such region is simply unacceptable. For instance, what was the benefit to the South-West throughout the eight-year of former President Obasanjo? Or what was the benefit to the South-South to justify the six-year tenure of former President Goodluck Jonathan?

 

May be the current anger against President Buhari is because development initiatives of APC government is skewed in favour of the North. If that is the case, then most of the 900 active road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country most have favoured the North. Specifically, Loko-Oweto Bridge, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, Sagamu-Benin Expressway, the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway, Onitsha-Enugu Expressway, Kano-Maiduguri Expressway, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Obajana-Kabba Road, Ilorin-Jebba Road, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Road, Bodo-Bonny Road in Rivers State, Keffi-Akwanga-Lafia-Makurdi Road, and several others should evidentially confirmed preference for the North.

 

Additional confirmation should include the 156km Lagos-Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail, the first double-track Standard Gauge Rail project in West Africa (and the first Standard Gauge Rail project in Nigeria to be started and completed by the same administration). Also recall that the 327km Itakpe-Warri Standard Gauge Rail was completed by the Buhari administration 33 years after construction began. The 168km Abuja-Kaduna Rail project, and the 42.5km Abuja Light Rail project, both inherited from previous administrations, were completed in 2016 and 2018 respectively. The second Niger Bridge, originally conceived decades ago, is now more than 50 percent completed, and scheduled for commissioning in 2022.

 

The narrow focus on individual candidates and where they come from has so far created a situation whereby political parties are nothing more than platforms for contesting elections. Specific commitments of parties to issues of nation building are taken for granted. Consequently, the true substance or content of politicians and how they will handle the task of building Nigerian nation when elected, which will determine policy choices may only be speculated based on estimation of past experiences of candidates. The truth, however, is that the dynamic of public life is completely different and no matter the level of experiences, factors that would influence decisions of political leaders when in office are far more complex than what their past suggest.

 

Part of the assumptions that democracy is founded on the logic that political parties should have manifestos, which should highlight ideological orientations and commitments of leaders and members, is just redundant in our context. Any close observer will recognise that although there is a document called party manifesto, party members, including leaders are hardly committed, in fact, many are hardly conversant with provisions of their party’s manifesto. To a large extent, this account for why initiating policies and programmes based on provisions of the party’s manifesto is weak. How many party members, including leaders have gone through the party manifesto? How many party leaders can develop perspectives, which will highlight policy choices in lines with provisions of the party’s manifesto?

 

The consequence is that the only political contest that take place is personality contest. To go beyond personality contests means that debate on perspectives should highlight possible choices open to governments. To what extent are political parties able to project the demands of Nigerians especially in terms of regional representations? Beyond the personality of candidates and their ethnic or regional backgrounds, what are the other demands of Nigerians from the other six regions? How can any candidate from any of the regions reconcile all these demands and make Nigeria home to all ethnic groups in the country?

 

If Nigeria is to emerge as a nation with common purpose and strong national bond, Nigerian politics must be developed such that political parties prioritise interest negotiations beyond the narrow electoral contest focusing on regional and ethnic representations. Specific regional demands for developments should be integral parts of any demand for regional or ethnic representation in the leadership of the country. Clear policy choices reflected in commitments of political parties based on provisions in their manifestos should be the driving factors for leadership negotiations. Opposition to leadership should not be simply about opposing ethnic and religious identity. Once politics is oriented around ethnic and religious identity, it will undermine capacity of leaders to mobilise Nigerians to have common purpose and strong national bond.

 

It is necessary Nigerians recognise that political parties are the most important democratic bodies to facilitate processes of nation building. All political parties should be able to have clear positions in terms of how they intend to mobilse Nigerians to have common purpose and strong national bond. Specific details of how that can guarantee justice, equity and fairness should be clarified beyond the personalities of prospective political leaders. Frameworks should be developed within political parties to ensure that elected representatives are committed to implement positions adopted by political parties. Eventually, Nigerian democracy should graduate from situation whereby electoral contests is all about personalities, to the level that policy choices are integral parts of electoral contest.

 

Accordingly, if the narrative is that APC has failed, what is the alternative being offered by the opposition, including PDP? As part of the introspection required to strengthen the capacity of our parties, our leaders, and governments, we need to engage the debate based on assessment of what we must do to rebuild the confidence of Nigerians and regained their trust. In doing that, we need to restrategise and more effectively present the objective scorecards of governments at all levels since 2015 in ways that can truly demonstrate to Nigerians what has been achieved, and why despite what has been achieved we are having the challenges facing us as a nation. Nigerians need to rise above cheap campaigns of ethnic politics, which is now being used to promote hatred in the country.

 

Any leader or elder – politician, religious, traditional, irrespective of gender, age, and social class, who is promoting politics of ethnicity or campaigning against initiatives of government to fight criminality, especially in cases where activities of criminals are destroying lives and properties of innocent citizens, such a leader or elder is also a security risk. As part of Nigeria’s common purpose, strong national bond to eliminate criminal activities of bandits and insurgents is irreducible minimum. The act of judging leaders, however well intentioned, must not serve as a cover to protect criminality. On the other hand, leaders who inspire national hope should be celebrated in the country and political parties must take steps to recruit those leaders into politics. The only guarantee that Nigerian democracy can facilitate nation building is when political leaders are able to graduate from being champions of small group interests to being torchbearers of our common purpose and strong national bond.

 

Similarly, our common purpose as a nation must enthrone high ethical conducts, especially in our judicial institutions. The integrity of judges must be revered such that Nigerian justice system is insulated from partisan meddling, which then undermine fairness in granting orders by Nigerian courts with respect to political cases. Once Nigerian judiciary is compromised, rule of law will be undermined, which can only further widen the gap between political leaders and government, on the one hand, and citizens, on the other. If political leaders and governments are disconnected from citizens, potentials for common purpose and strong national bond will be weak.

[Salihu Lukman]

Retrogressive Politics of Value Added Tax in Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

The controversy around whether Value Added Tax (VAT) should be centrally collected by the federal government or decentralised so that state governments are the ones to collect, beyond anything, is a test about the type of democracy Nigerians want. Is it going to prioritise the development of the nation’s productive capacity? Or will it simply be about consuming the resources that are currently available? Once the priority is about consuming currently available resources, commitment of political leaders to mobilise investment to develop the nation’s productive sectors will be weak. This is not to dismiss issues of access to existing resources by those who produce them. However, access may not necessarily translate into commitment to utilise the resources in ways that strengthened commitment of political leaders to invest in the development of Nigeria’s productive sector. The important challenge therefore is to ensure that access to resources also come with increased commitment by political leaders towards developing Nigeria’s productive sector.

 

With this background, it is important that Nigerians are also reminded that since 1999, public debate about increased access to resources by state governments, otherwise known as resource control, was limited to revenue from petroleum. Largely, promoted by the oil producing states, mainly the South-South geopolitical zone of the country, the debate was about allowing those states to control all the revenue from oil and perhaps pay a percentage as royalty to federal government. The royalty will be expected to support both the federal government and other non-oil producing states in the country. In all the debates around resource control, tax revenue was never recognised as a significant factor worthy of consideration. Partly, on account of both combination of weak institutional capacity and corruption in the public sector, the belief was that the most important source of government revenue for Nigeria is petroleum.

 

That Nigerians are debating whether it is states or federal government that should collect VAT signify some progress, which has to do with the fact that there is an increase in what is being generated from VAT. For instance, in 2015, the total amount collected was N759.43 billion. Between 2016 to 2020, there was consistently increase in the amount collected respectively to N777.51 billion, N972.35 billion, N1.11 trillion, N1.17 trillion and N1.531 trillion. Everything considered, under the APC led federal government of President Muhammadu Buhari, VAT collection increased from N759.43 billion in 2015 to N1.531 trillion in 2020, an increase of more than hundred percent.

 

Nigerians can conveniently dismiss the role of APC led federal government in making it possible for the remarkable improvement in VAT collection in the country such that today, it has become an attractive variable in the struggle for resource control by state governments. The reality however is that credit must go to the APC led federal government of President Buhari. Whether it would have been possible if PDP is still in control of the federal government can only be wishful thoughts. If that were to be the case, why wasn’t it the case at any point between 1999 and 2015? No matter what anyone want to say, the reality is that the significant increase in VAT in the country between 2015 and 2020 confirmed improved efficiency and reduced corruption in the process of collection and management of Nigeria’s public finances.

 

Interestingly, in terms of the politics of the debate, improved efficiency and management of Nigeria’s public finances are not the focus of the debate. In some ways, even those who are supposed to recognise this fact and promote the achievements of the APC and its federal government, instead have become so defensive, may be because the public noise in the country is all about demonstrating how the APC led federal government of President Buhari is the driver of inequality, injustice and unfair practices against state governments. Sponsored by Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers States, the argument is that monies belonging to state governments are collected by the federal government and shared to states. According to Governor Wike, State money is taken by ‘Abuja people’, based on which he expressed ‘surprise at the level of injustice in the country’, arguing that ‘Rivers State generated about N15 billion as VAT in June 2021 but received only N4.7 billion, Lagos State generated over N46 billion as VAT in June, but got just over N9 billion, whereas Kano State generated N2.8 billion and also got N2.8 billion as allocation.’

 

Governor Wike can audaciously and shamelessly talk about VAT today because, its value has significantly increased which made it attractive for a rich state like Rivers to be interested in controlling it. If Governor Wike has any morality, he should look back and acknowledge how small Rivers must have received as its VAT share before 2015. Being a leading member of PDP, what was responsible for the low VAT records in the country between 1999 and 2015? And since, according to him and almost every leader of PDP, Nigerians are looking up to the PDP to rescue the nation from ‘bad governance’ in the hands of APC, does PDP’s brand of good governance come with low capacity to manage the nation’s public finances?

 

As members of APC, it is important that Governor Wike is reminded that the current increased record of VAT collection in the country is made possible only because the PDP is no longer in power. If PDP were to be in power the fact of inefficiency and corruption in the process of collection and management of VAT would have continued and the amount collected would have remained relatively low. It is not by accident that VAT collection in the country significantly increased under APC led federal government. This is because one of the specific commitment of APC since 2015 as outlined in the section of the party’s manifesto Funding a New Nigeria was that ‘APC government will set about the urgent task of getting Nigeria’s public finances in order, by tackling the massive waste, duplication and corruption in the system, diversifying the economy and expanding our tax base to increase non-oil revenues, and reprioritising public spending away from bureaucracy towards investment in infrastructure and improved frontline services.’

 

Both in terms of ‘getting Nigeria’s public finances in order’ and ‘investment in infrastructure’, APC led Federal Government is implementing provisions of the APC manifesto to the letter. Nigerian’s especially PDP leaders can conveniently dismiss all the work being done to develop Nigeria’s dilapidated and abandoned infrastructure, but the question of ‘expanding our tax base to increase non-oil revenue’ cannot be disputed. One strong evidence of that is the debate about states collecting VAT. It is very easy to play very cheap politics with these issues, partially because also, as a party, APC is not taking ownership of its achievements. Instead, its achievements are now being interpreted to justify some rebellious politics against the APC led federal government.

 

Somehow, the VAT debate in Nigeria reminisce the warning by Amartya Sen in the book, The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity, when he cautioned that ‘One of the penalties of the increased focus on religious and communal identities, which has recently gone hand in hand with the deliberate fostering of sectarian politics …, is a weakening of the pursuit of egalitarian commitments, which requires a more integrated focus on the interests and freedoms of deprived groups taken together (related to economic, social and gender-based stratifications). While political organisations that unite all the lower castes can – and often do – help the underdogs in general, that end is not served by the divisive politics of rivalry between different lower-caste groups …, or by religious sectarianism …. The newly erected communal boundary lines are not only divisive in themselves, they also add to the social and political difficulties in removing the old barriers of hardened inequality.”

 

So far, the VAT debate is more about perceived injustice on account of Nigeria’s divisive politics of ethnicity. Substantive issues of desirability or otherwise of VAT, including all the administrative challenges bordering on implications of methods of collection and why it is a crucially determining factor for any democracy is ignored. Part of the challenge of debating policy issues in Nigeria is that public noise, largely influenced by subjective anger of citizens become the guiding consideration. The subjective anger of citizens is mainly about the blind politics of dismissing whatever is associated with Federal Government as biasedly in favour of a section of the country, however it is defined. With or without justification, many Nigerians who dominate the media space accuse the Federal Government of injustice. In several respects, ethnicised campaigns is further entrenching divisive politics, thereby increasing social and political inequality. As things are, Nigerian politics is blind to ‘egalitarian commitments’ of promoting national integration.

 

With respect to the specific issue of VAT, if the federal government can record increase of more than hundred percent between 2015 and 2020, is the current figure representative of the total expected collection from VAT? Simple reading of all the federal government revenue projections as contained in every year’s budget estimate will indicate a wide gap in expectation. Although there is remarkable increase in collection, it should be recognised that a lot more can be done to generate more revenue from VAT. Can transferring collection to state governments achieve that? May be and maybe not. But beyond the question of what is collected and what states get, what is even the economic implications VAT?

 

Generally, debate around tax is about how governments can use it to influence economic development. As fiscal policy tool, it is basically about controlling amount of money individuals should have for consumption. Will government tax policy seek to support low-income groups, i.e., ensure that the higher income groups pay more tax? Or will government tax policy disfavour the lower income group. The first test of whether any government can make any claim to being progressive will be reflected in the orientation of its tax policy. A progressive government will generally be associated with progressive tax policy, which means it will seek to tax the rich more. A conservative government will tax the rich less. Beyond who is taxed more, taxing the poor less is proven economically to be a strong incentive to increase demands for goods and services. If government want to ensure increased production of goods and services in the country, increasing the amount of money available to low-income groups is an attraction. Therefore, in addition to progressive tax policy being in favour of low-income group, given that low-income group are in the majority, any government that want to be popular with citizens would lean towards progressive tax policy. 

 

Given that VAT is basically a sales tax, which is regressive because both the rich and the poor pay the same rates, and to that extent therefore makes it disadvantageous in terms of using it as a fiscal policy instrument to stimulate demand, ideally the politics of debating it should distinguish conservative and progressive politicians. Somehow, the public noise in Nigeria has pulled our dear Lagos State government into teaming up with Rivers in the legal battle to ensure that states win the right of collecting VAT and not federal government. Something must have just gone wrong for Lagos State to disregard its longstanding historical commitment to progressive governance and embrace what in the long run will be a disadvantage to majority of Lagosians.

 

Mr. Simon Kolawole, publisher of the Cable online newspaper has excellently demonstrated why in the long run VAT collection by states governments may be disadvantageous to both Rivers and Lagos States. According to Mr. Kolawole, in ‘2020, Nigeria earned N1.531tr from VAT. While local VAT was N763bn, foreign VAT — collected by FG — was N768bn. Therefore, rather than take just 15% (N230bn) from the N1.531trn, FG may now pocket the entire N768bn from foreign VAT since it does not go into federation account and may not be subject to the regular sharing formula. That would deprive the states, Rivers and Lagos inclusive, of about half of the total VAT revenue. This is HUGE. The FCT may also win as it generated N202bn in VAT last year but got only N34.6bn as its share.’

 

The desire to access more resource is perhaps the main driving factor in the battle to get state governments to collect VAT in the country. Wouldn’t it be possible to work with federal government and manage all the challenges, including ensuring that businesses are not necessarily encumbered by having to deal with multiple points of collection? There is no need to go into the details about how decentralised collection can impact on prices of products and services. Also, no need to go into the potential conflicts that would emerge between branch offices of companies and state governments in the country. All these are issues that would be instigated because VAT collected at the point of sales by a branch of company is expected to be remitted to the host state government where the head office is located. If state governments want to control what is generated in their states therefore, the administrative framework of how it is remitted to government and which government will be a major issue.

 

Nigerian democracy and politics must functionally rise above sentiment. Instead of debating how to consume the little resources so far available, Nigerian political leaders should be debating how to increase available resources. Even within the limit of the debate about increased available resources, the question of what governments need to do, policy measures required, including issues of tax, its administration and orientation in terms of whether it should favour the low or high-income groups should not be issues that would be blindly considered. In the same way Rivers and Lagos imagined that they would have more revenue if they were allowed to collect VAT and therefore control everything, they collected without sharing with the federal government and other states, states like Osun, Ekiti, Bayelsa, Ebonyi, Abia, would lose. On the other hand, Oyo, Ogun, Kano, Kaduna and Enugu, may be the surprise actual gainers.

 

Overall, APC leaders, must take advantage of the current VAT debate to take ownership of its achievements, which the fact of improved VAT collections in the country represent. In doing, APC leaders must go beyond the narrow debate about access to what is currently available. If at all APC leaders and members are to make any claim to progressive political credentials, generating large scale financial resources at both federal and state levels, which should be deployed to expand the productive base of the nation’s economy, should be the aspiration. There is no reason why any state in the country, including Zamfara, Yobe, Osun, Ekiti, Abia, Ebonye, should not aspire to generate at least N10 – 15 billion monthly as Internally Generated Revenue. To be caught in the backward debate about whether they should have the little they currently receive from the federation account is retrogressive. As a nation, our politics and democracy must be refocused towards nurturing the productive potentials of every state.

 

Commitment to develop capacity to mobilise large scale financial resources to develop productive potentials of all Nigerian states should be the minimum requirement for all APC leaders. Already, since the time of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, as Governor of Lagos State between 1999 and 2007, Lagos State has emerged to be the leader in mobilising large scale financial resources in the country, which is why it is the only state with about one trillion Naira annual budget. Justifiably, Lagos was able to undertake large scale public investment commensurate with its resource base. It’s not by accident therefore, it is the leader in the country with a model transport infrastructure. If the Lagos vision is limited to sharing available resources, it wouldn’t have been the leader it is.

 

The VAT debate in the country also poses a significant challenge to political parties in terms of developing capacity to coordinate policy debate within the structures of parties as well as ensuring that policies of governments produced by the party reflects any emerging consensus. Somehow, the current VAT debate in the country is completely removed from the structures of the main political parties – PDP and APC. If the debate is to take place within the structures of PDP, for instance, even the sectarian outburst of Governor Wike will be moderated. On the other hand, if the debate is to take place in any of the organs of APC, the question of the role of APC federal government in achieving improved collections will be well emphasised. In addition, the potential to mobilise more revenue from VAT and the expected role of state governments cannot be avoided.

 

The need to develop Nigerian democracy so that political parties in the country can initiate pro-people and pro-poor public policies, and not cheap sentiments that can be disadvantageous to citizens, especially the poor, is an urgent imperative. Important as the debate around increased access to resources by state governments, so long as political leaders are not commitment to initiatives that can develop the productive capacity of the country, amount of revenue generated will remain low. The other issue is that all APC leaders must be appealed to jealously guard the achievements of APC and all its governments. Why should APC leaders allow a situation whereby any PDP leader, including Governor Wike, can make claims of any injustice on a matter that demonstrated in practical terms the failure of PDP? If VAT is important source of revenue for government, why did PDP failed to record any significant collection throughout their sixteen years as a ruling party?

 

Every opportunity to remind Nigerians about the failure of PDP should be amplified. Similarly, all evidence of success of APC and its governments should be affirmed. APC leaders must take ownership of all the achievements of APC governments at all levels. On no account should APC leaders allow opportunistic rebellious politics of PDP and its leaders to distract them from the task of providing the needed progressive leadership to develop the nation’s productive potentials. As a nation, the question of fighting poverty and reduced inequality both among citizens and across all the 36 states of the country should be the egalitarian commitment of all progressive political leaders in the country. If Nigerians are to be united, it must be based on equitable productive resource endowment across every part of the country!

[Salihu Lukman]

APC’s High-Profile Membership Recruitment and Issues for 2023

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode’s Red-Carpet Reception

 

Late on Thursday, September 16, 2021, reports emerged that Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode had joined the All Progressives Congress (APC) and he was received by President Muhammadu Buhari at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, in the company of His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni, Chairman of the APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee and the Governor of Zamfara State, His Excellency, Bello Matawalle. With the emergence of the report, public attention in the country has been dominated by negative commentaries, mostly from APC members, about why Mr. Fani-Kayode should have been accorded such a high-profile reception. One of the first people to express disappointment was Sen. Babafemi Ojudu, Special Adviser to President on Political Matters, who lamented that the reception given to Mr. Fani-Kayode makes the day ‘the saddest day of his political career.’ Mr. Joe Igbokwe, Special Adviser to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu on Drainage and Water Resources and former APC Chairman of Lagos State cried that ‘Fani-Kayode is coming to destroy APC’ and expressed ‘sadness that he (Fani-Kayode) who was not coming to add value to the party was given a red-carpet treatment while his (Igbokwe’s) efforts go unappreciated.’

 

The issue of Mr. Fani-Kayode joining the APC, first emerged on Monday, February 8, 2021, when his pictures together with HE Mai Mala Buni, Chairman of the APC Caretaker Committee and Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State appeared in many social media platforms. Many believed that the emergence of the pictures signaled that negotiation is going on, if not concluded, to bring Mr. Fani-Kayode into the APC. This made many party members to protest that leaders of the party are about to admit Mr. Fani-Kayode into the APC. Partly, on account of the protest, Mr. Fani-Kayode himself denied that he is joining the APC and boasted that he will never do so. The protest against Mr. Fani-Kayode joining the APC has to do with his venomous nature. He abuses, insults, and disparages everybody, almost indiscriminately. As a result, his capacity to build and sustain relationships is short, not just politically, but it also the case almost in every aspect of his life.

 

Almost every member of APC is angry that our leaders have brought someone like Mr. Fani-Kayode into our party. This is made worse by the red-carpet reception given to him, which he doesn’t deserve. But since it has happened, there is no need to cry over spilled milk. What is very clear is that our leaders, especially President Buhari have forgiven Mr. Fani-Kayode and embrace him as one of us. As members of APC, our anger with Mr. Fani-Kayode is that he has abused both the APC, President Buhari and virtually every leader of the party. For instance, he claimed that the ‘emergence of Buhari in 2015 annihilated Nigeria and plunged her into darkness, death and destruction. He came to steal, kill and destroy and for the last disastrous 5 years that is all he has done.’ More than this, he has said unprintable things against the APC and all its leaders.

 

At this point therefore, if with all these, our leaders can accept Mr. Fani-Kayode into the party, APC members should not be more Catholic than the Pope. Why should APC members be sad that our leaders are magnanimous? Perhaps, because of the red-carpet reception, which many committed APC members cannot even dream of, it should be legitimate to feel unappreciated like Mr. Igbokwe had cried out. But as APC members, especially those that have been in the party since its formation in 2013 and have endured all the challenges of being loyal members, we must always be reminded that our commitment is to contribute in whatever way and manner possible to change Nigeria for the better. If therefore, someone like Mr. Fani-Kayode, who is considered unreliable and therefore not qualified to be a member, would seek for forgiveness from our leaders, based on which they extended their arms to him, members of the APC should also show understanding.

 

No doubt, since 2015, there are many opportunistic political leaders in the country who joined our party, got all the welcome reception, like the one given to Mr. Fani-Kayode, but end up betraying and in some instances outrightly undermining our party and our leaders. Understandably therefore, part of the frustration of many APC members is that most times, it could be predicted that our leaders are wrongly investing trust and confidence on wrong people. Contrastingly, those who are consistent and loyal to our party and our leaders hardly gained the deserving respect they should have. This may not necessarily be intended but it is there. Be that as it may, members need to move forward with every confidence and commitment to engage our leaders. If we are to succeed in changing Nigeria, both APC leaders and members must commit themselves to developing strong and functional relationship. Ability to develop strong and functional relationship between APC leaders and members is the foundational requirement for APC leaders to be able to develop strong and functional relationship with Nigerians. This will require that APC members are able to respectfully tell leaders the truth.

 

Functional relationship with Nigerians is always very crucial for winning elections. Since our leaders have developed the needed large heart to forgive Mr. Fani-Kayode, as loyal party members, we should be able to take advantage of their large hearts and make some demands, which, if met, can make our party better and more attractive to credible Nigerians beyond Mr. Fani-Kayode. The proviso however is that even if our leaders ignore our demands, as loyal and committed party members, we should take a rain cheque and continue to respect decisions of party leaders and make every sacrifice for our democracy and our dear country. One day, our leaders will have no option but to concede to members’ demands. Who knows, some of the members making demands may even become leaders tomorrow. In which case, what will be their excuse not to respond to those demands, which they themselves made on leaders.

 

To that extent therefore party members should respect the decision of our leaders to admit Mr. Fani-Kayode and welcome him with a red-carpet reception. On no account, should we be distracted. If Mr. Fani-Kayode need red-carpet reception to be a member of APC, millions of party member have demonstrated that they need any form of recognition to work for Nigeria. Being very consistent and stable members of the APC, we should also recognise that the party is partly what it is today on account of our little contributions over the years. At the same time, all our leaders, without any exception, are also where they are today partly because of our small support, loyalty and committed to execute task given to us. Having recognised all these, although we would have loved a situation whereby our leaders carry party members along in every decision they take, the difference between many party members who today feel unrecognised and people like Mr. Fani-Kayode is that even when not carried alone, they will respect decisions of party leaders and execute tasks that can make both the party and leaders succeed.

 

Specifically with respect to accepting Mr. Fani-Kayode as a member of APC, therefore, party members expect that our leaders accepted him to join the APC so that he can be supported to reform himself. That being the case, party members should hope that our leaders, including President Buhari, also accepted to forgive Mr. Fani-Kayode because he has undertaken to commit himself to the process of getting reformed. With all the reservations party members may have about the commitment of Mr. Fani-Kayode to reform himself, we should trust our leaders and through them, also trust that Mr. Fani-Kayode will truly want to reform himself. His (Mr. Fani-Kayode’s) statement to the effect that ‘let’s focus on unity, peace and togetherness’ is an encouraging testament. For Mr. Fani-Kayode to talk of the unity of Nigeria at this time, shortly after he supported and promoted secessionist campaigns of Nnamdi Kanu and Sunday Igboho is a remarkable departure. However, recognising such a departure shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that we should blindly trust Mr. Fani-Kayode.

 

What is required in the circumstance is that our leaders must test the commitment of Mr. Fani-Kayode to reform himself. The first test is that Mr. Fani-Kayode should be reminded that politics is local. Coming from Osun State, his commitment to reform himself should start with getting him to integrate himself with APC leaders back in Osun State. At this early stage of his membership of APC, beyond the photo show with our dear President Buhari and the Chairman of the APC Caretaker Committee, Mr. Fani-Kayode should have a photo gallery with images of him uniting with Chief Bisi Akande, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, Governor Gboyega Oyetola and other party leaders in his home state, Osun. In fact, part of this test would have been met had Governor Oyetola and Ogbeni Aregbesola, at the minimum, been part of the welcome reception at the Presidential Villa on Thursday, September 16. Had that happened, the raging controversy following the admission of Mr. Fani-Kayode into the party would have been minimised.

 

The photo gallery should also cover images with leaders from the South-West. Mr. Fani-Kayode should take every step to reciprocate the gesture of our leaders by demonstrating that he is ready to reform himself. Some of the controversy he has already created makes it doubtful whether he want to reform himself at all. For instance, when he claimed that he facilitated the defection of some Governors that joined the APC from PDP, suggests that he is still his old venomous self. Only people with very small minds could make such statement and only gullible people can believe them. The claim that three additional Governors – Bauchi, Oyo and Enugu – are on their way to join the APC, also falls in the same category of small mind talking to gullible people. If Mr. Fani-Kayode truly want the party to succeed in recruiting anybody, including Governors, he should quietly support the leadership. We have a very competent leadership that can handle that responsibility, which is why his admission into the party succeeded in the first place.

 

Accountability and High-Profile Membership Recruitment

 

A major challenge of high-profile political party membership recruitment, like that of Mr. Fani-Kayode, is the issue of getting those recruited to be accountable. How can the party ensure that newly recruited high-profile members moderate themselves such that it is the party that control them and not the other way round? While it is easy to control people that are already constraint by legal provisions on account of statutory responsibilities such as Governors and legislators, individuals like Mr. Fani-Kayode, who are only responsible to themselves, would be difficult to manage. It is therefore important that APC members prepare to engage Mr. Fani-Kayode to ensure that he is accountable to our leaders, our party organs and by extension, Nigerians. A reformed Mr. Fani-Kayode should be an accountable personality, both to the party and to Nigerians. On no account should Mr. Fani-Kayode ever imagine that he has come to APC to conduct himself uncontrollably. He must be accountable to our leadership and all our party structures. He must respect himself and abide by the provisions of the party constitution and its manifesto. To support him, copies of the APC constitution and manifesto must be made available to him immediately.

 

There are also issues related to getting him to work with other party members especially in relation to addressing national challenges. The problem of managing Nigeria’s diversity, for instance, require respect and tolerance. That he (Mr. Fani-Kayode) has joined APC and has made statements to the effect that he is committed to a united Nigeria must be demonstrated based on respect for all Nigerians irrespective of differences. A major test will be the extent to which Mr. Fani-Kayode is able to demonstrate tolerance and respect for opinions of leaders and members of the party. This doesn’t mean he shouldn’t disagree. But he must express his disagreement with utmost respect. On no account must he promote divisive campaigns, in whatever forms or manner. Doing so will suggest that he is still the old venomous Mr. Fani-Kayode. Once that become the case, party members must be ready to engage him including campaigns to discipline him as provided in the constitution of the APC. Therefore, his membership of the party must take root in his Ward in Osun State, and he must subordinate himself to his Ward leadership.

 

The Case of Former President Jonathan Goodluck

 

Part of the reason why high-profile membership recruitments by political parties in Nigeria attract a lot of debate, attention, and controversy, is that it hardly come without any ambition to contest election by those joining the party. Although in the case of Mr. Fani-Kayode, no one can associate it with the ambition to contest election, which is why many questioned his electoral value, with 2023 elections less than two years away, and with the APC leadership efficiently succeeding to win so many high-profile leaders joining the party, there has been lots of speculation in terms of what all the high-profile membership recruitment into APC represent. Partly because President Buhari will be completing his 2^nd term and therefore ineligible to contest, the question of who will emerge as the Presidential candidate of the APC for 2023 is quite open.

 

Two of the Governors that recently joined the APC from the PDP are speculated to have done so because of ambition for 2023. And since the 2019 Bayelsa State Governorship election, when APC leaders met former President Goodluck Jonathan to lobby support for APC candidate, Mr. David Lyon, there have speculations that he (former President Jonathan) will also be joining the APC. Some have even alleged that as part of the negotiation, former President Jonathan has already been offered the APC Presidential ticket for 2023. Amid the controversy around Mr. Fani-Kayode, the Secretary of the APC Caretaker Committee, Sen. Akpan Udoedehe, is reported to have confirmed that anyone who join the party will be free to contest. However, it is important that the issue of high-profile membership recruitment by APC are clarified beyond the narrow expectations of electoral contest. Why should the objective of recruiting high-profile members be reduced to the issue of contesting election? Assuming someone like former President Jonathan agree to join the APC and he fail to emerge as the President Candidate of the party for 2023 election, what will happen to him?

 

As Nigerians, we must begin to take steps to protect our leaders. As APC members, we have campaigned against former President Jonathan in 2015. As President, former President Jonathan made every effort to block the emergence of APC in 2013. But those should not be the reference point. The reference point should be the historic decision of former President Jonathan to concede defeat in 2015 even before the final votes were counted. With that, former President Jonathan ranked himself as one of those who fought and defended Nigeria’s democracy. On no account therefore, any political party should be allowed to push former President Jonathan to diminish his stature, either as an aspirant or a candidate for any office. Doing so will mean that we want him to gamble away all his legendary achievements.

 

It is sad enough that PDP leaders, being who they are, don’t recognise and respect former President Jonathan’s deservedly political stature. No doubt, every speculation about the possibility of former President Jonathan joining the APC has to do with the reality of being unappreciated by PDP leadership. Negotiating to bring him into APC should not be based on aspiring for any office. It must be recognised that former President Jonathan, and indeed every former President, is beyond holding any office in the land. Bringing former Presidents to that level will amount to diminishing their political stature. Already, President Buhari is doing excellently well by delegating some high-profile diplomatic responsibilities to former President Jonathan. One of the failures of PDP is the inability to create responsibilities that can match the statures of former Presidents. Inability to create responsibilities for former Presidents is perhaps what accounts for the overbearing restlessness of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

 

With President Buhari scheduled to end his tenure in 2023, less than two years away, negotiation to recruit former President Jonathan into APC must be used to settle the question of the roles of former Presidents within the APC. APC must not allow the situation to emerge whereby party leaders and members only respect elected and appointed functionaries. Part of the lessons from the challenges created under the last National Working Committee led by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole had to do with the absence of Board of Trustees. Is it possible therefore to organise the APC Board of Trustees’ and get former Presidents to provide the needed moral leadership that can serve as a check to both party leaders and elected functionaries of the party?

 

The question of providing needed moral leadership to check party leadership and elected functionaries can be debated. But its desirability can hardly be contested. Part of the need for checks also has to do with the issue of implementing campaign promises and provisions of party manifesto. Having former Presidents discharging persuasive moral responsibilities as leaders of Board of Trustees would strengthen the capacity of party leaders and members to influence decisions of elected functionaries. Just emerging two former serving Presidents of the standings of President Buhari and former President Jonathan working in harmony towards a common political goal. It will take a rascally elected functionary at whatever level to ignore their recommendations. On the other hand, the big risk is when they are unable to work in harmony. That will tear the party apart and may potentially destroy the party. There is the need therefore to broaden consultations and agree on everything required to ensure that the framework of operations of the APC Board of Trustees guarantees that former serving Presidents can work in harmony.

 

Transforming Partisan Politics Beyond Electoral Contests

 

Negotiating to recruit high-profile members must go beyond the narrow speculation for electoral contest. Getting high-profile party members to be accountable to structures of the party should be developed beyond lip service. Weak accountability is responsibility for why some elected leaders become overbearing and refuse to respect decisions of the party. At the same time, weak accountability is also responsible for why leaders of the party, for instance the National Working Committee fails to convene meetings of organs of the party. Beyond failure to convene meetings, relationship between the party and elected representatives, both executive and legislative arms at all levels is similarly weak. Capacity to direct or influence decisions of elected and appointed functionaries of governments produced by the party is just notional. There is the need to take every step necessary to strengthen the relationship between the party structures and elected and appointed functionaries in both the executive and legislative arms at all levels.

 

The other important issue is managing internal negotiations to agree on substantive details that can guide the process of decisions of what the party needs to do to win elections in 2023. A major issue in this respect is the question of what will guide the emergence of APC Presidential Candidate for 2023 elections. As party members, we must appeal to our leaders to quietly negotiate this sensitive matter within the structures of APC. It is worrisome when some of leaders of our party partner with some PDP leaders to start public advocacy for power shift. Once APC leaders form partnership with PDP leaders to force a decision on a matter that a competent organ of the party is expected to decide, will suggest loss of confidence. Besides, what will be the morality of partnership with leaders of PDP who are decidedly in opposition against our party?

 

Negotiating a number of these issues will require tolerance and strong commitment by our leaders. It must be acknowledged that it is not going to be an easy negotiation. Part of the challenge also is the distraction from all the pressure from Nigerians. Leaders must be leaders by being able to withstand all the public pressure. Of course, most of the public pressure is also emanating out of some of our contemporary challenges as a nation. This include problems of insecurity on account of banditry and insurgency, which sadly is further widening all the fault lines of the country. Therefore, in addition to the question of who the Presidential Candidate of APC will be and from which part of the country he/she will come from, specific issues that can unite Nigerians must be identified by our leaders and make them issues for the 2023 campaigns.

 

APC leaders have demonstrated that nothing is impossible in Nigeria politics. With commitment and skilful negotiations, every desirable proposal can be achieved. That was the motivation for the successful merger of 2013. It was the driving factor for the successful defeat of PDP in 2015. It was similarly the reason why APC is coming out of a major leadership crisis successfully as a united party. APC leaders need to remain confident, committed and go into negotiation on all the issues around 2023. The same attitude that guided all the success of the party since 2013 can guide our party to victory in 2023!

[Toyin Falola]

My Most Honoured Salihu:

Is there enough money to go around? The theory in wars and the booties that come with them is that the lesser the men, the greater the glory, the bigger the fame. And the greater the glory and fame, the greater the spoils. If more had joined in the conquest of greater Mexico which is now part of Texas where I live, how would they have managed naming the great cities named after generals like Austin and Houston?

 

TF

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536132E0DA1F7EB16C052FFAEDE9%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigeria’s Debt and Struggle for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

In a letter to Nigerian Senate, read to the plenary session of Tuesday, September 14, 2021, President Muhammadu Buhari requested approval for external borrowing plan to finance deficit in 2021 Federal Government budget ‘through sovereign loans from the World Bank, French Development Agency, EXIM Bank and IFAD in the total sum of $4,054,476,863 and €710 million and grant components of $125 million.’ Since the request of President Buhari for the new loans, there have been so much debate about the rising debt profile of Nigeria based on the fear that it is not sustainable. Mainly informed by moral consideration of accumulating debts, which will be inherited by future generation of Nigerians, there have been media debates almost suggesting that APC government of President Buhari is impulsively taking foreign loans. Are loans taken by the APC led government of President Buhari unsustainable? Relative to other PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015, to what extent can it be argued that the current APC led government of President Buhari is reckless in its decisions to obtain more loans?

 

During the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s (1999 – 2007), external debt was reduced to $2.11 billion at the end of 2007. However, the domestic component increased from N798 billion to N2.17 trillion within the same period. According to the Debt Management Office (DMO), the breakdown of Nigeria’s debt stock shows that $20.5 billion (about 73%) was owed to Paris Club. By 2004, the external debt stock had risen to $35.94 billion. The negotiation eventually paid off in 2005 when Paris Club granted relief of $18 billion. By the end of 2006, the Obasanjo administration had cleared off the Paris Club’s debt. However, the country still owed $2.11 billion external debt and domestic debt was or N2.17 trillion.

 

Under late President Umaru Musa Yar’adua (2007 – 2011), Nigeria’s external debt increased from $2.11 billion to $3.5 billion and domestic debt rose to N5.62 trillion. Similarly, between 2010 – 2015, during the tenure of former President Goodluck Jonathan, Nigeria’s foreign debt rose to $7.3 billion and domestic debt was N7.9 trillion. By June 2021, under President Buhari’s administration, Nigeria’s external debt has risen to $28.57 billion and domestic debt was N16.02 trillion. This means that both with respect to external and domestic debt, under President Buhari, Nigeria borrowed more. Although it is legitimate to worry about Nigeria’s rising external debt portfolio, it may be helpful to go beyond the moral debate of implications to future generations. Arguments about non sustainability based on morality will not highlight many of the core economic realities influencing government’s decision to borrow.

 

Debate about debt sustainability is estimated with reference to debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratio. GDP being the monetary value of goods and services produced in the country within a given year. It was the American political economists at Duke University, North Carolina, Richard Salsman, in the book The Political Economy of Public Debt – Three Centuries of Theory and Evidence, who drew attention to the fact that assessment of public debt of nations ‘differ in taxable capacities, …, the willingness of their citizens actually to pay taxes (by choosing to work, or spend, more or less), and rate of compliance. Suppose a nation called “Reckless” has a public leverage (public debt/GDP) of 100 that’s twice that of another (at 50 percent) named “Prudence.” Which nation’s debt is less sustainable? Suppose each year Reckless routinely extracts half of national income in tax revenues while Prudence extracts only a tenth. The public debt of Reckless is more sustainable, all else equal, despite its higher leverage, because its debt is only twice its annual tax revenues, while the debt of Prudent is quintuple its tax revenues. Reckless doesn’t look so reckless, while Prudence is far less prudent than a surface view suggests. The public debt/GDP metric is better than none but the public debt/revenue ratio better measures fiscal sustainability.’

 

So far, the debate about Nigeria’s debt is based on the absolute value of the amount Nigeria owe. Variables of both GDP and revenue are ignored in the debate. Without any doubt, some of the concerns expressed in the debate are legitimate, especially in relation to problems of exchange rate, which has further increased Nigeria’s debt burden. But in terms of looking at other critical variables such as revenue profile and even performance of the economy, the debate is excessively politicisation. This is partly responsible for why some even suggest that compared to all previous PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015, the performance of the APC led administration of President Buhari is reckless. How correct is this assertion? In terms of both debt/GDP and debt/revenue ratios, what is the reality?

 

Computed at current basic prices, under former President Obasanjo, between 1999 and 2007, Nigeria’s GDP increased from N5,426.47 billion to N34,318.67. By 2010, under late President Yar’Adua, Nigeria’s GDP increased to N62,989.40 billion. In 2015, under former President Goodluck Jonathan, increased to N94,144.96 billion. At the end of 2020, under the current administration of President Buhari, Nigeria’s GDP has increased to N152,324.07. Just looking at both the debt profiles of respective governments since 1999 as well as GDP values, debt/GDP ratio has decreased from about 22% in 1999 to about 12% at the end of former President Jonathan’s administration. By the end of 2020, under President Buhari, debt to GDP ratio has gone up to around 21%, but still less than the 22% in 1999.

 

Low debt to GDP ratio indicates that the economy produces and sells goods sufficient to pay back the debt. Therefore, based on Nigeria’s debt to GDP figures, arguments of previous PDP administration performing better than the current Buhari administration may appear attractive. The point however should be emphasised that although some literature suggests that debt to GDP ratio of below 60% is sustainable, the issue of assessment of performance of governments revenue in relation to debt provides a better measure of sustainability. In other words, what is the size of debt in relation to revenue, which is the point made by Richard Salsman to the effect that ‘public debt/GDP metric is better than none but the public debt/revenue ratio better measures fiscal sustainability.’

 

Nigeria’s total revenue in 1999 was N949.2 billion. In 2007, under late President Yar’Adua, it rose to N5,727.5 billion, in 2010, N7,303.7 billion, and in 2015, under former President Goodluck, N6,912.5 billion and in 2020, under President Buhari, N9,303.2 billion. This means that debt to revenue ratio was respectively 3.6%, 1.3%, 1.75% and 1.75%. This means that even with the rising debt profile of the Buhari administration, the ability of Nigeria to pay back its debts is not lower than it was under former President Jonathan. Even with the worsening exchange rate reality, which on its own has further increased the Naira value of Nigeria’s debt portfolio given that under former President Jonathan, Naira was exchanging for N158 to the US Dollar. Currently, in September 2021, exchange rate is N570. Note that the computation of both debt to GDP and debt to revenue ratios is based on the current exchange rate of N570.

 

Part of what is largely responsible for the lower debt to revenue ratio is the reality that under the current administration of President Buhari, Federal Government is making good progress in diversifying revenue sources. For instance, although Oil Revenue only increased from N3,830.1 billion in 2015 to N5,536.7 billion in 2019, an increase of 45%, Non-Oil Revenue increased from N3,082.4 billion to N4,725.6 billion, an increase of 53%. For the combined sixteen years of former President Obasanjo, late President Yar’Adua and former President Goodluck, between 1999 and 2015, Oil Revenue increased from N724.4 billion to N3,830.1 billion, representing an increase of over 81%. On the other hand, Non-Oil Revenue increased from N224.8 billion in 1999 to N3,082.4 billion in 2015. Ratio of Oil Revenue to Non-Oil Revenue in 2015 was 1:1.24 in 2015. In 2019, it has decreased to 1:1.17. This implies that Non-Oil Revenue increased.

 

In terms of expenditure assessments, between 1999 and 2015, total expenditure increased from N947.7 billion to N4,988.9 billion. Recurrent expenditure in 1999 was N449.7 billion, which increased to N3,831.9 billion in 2015. Comparably, between 2015 and 2019, under President Buhari, total expenditure increased to N9,714.6 billion in 2019, from N4,988.9 billion in 2015. Recurrent expenditure increased to N6,997.2 billion in 2019, from N3,831.9 billion in 2015. On the other hand, capital expenditure between 1999 and 2015 increased to N8,18.4 billion, from N498 billion. Under President Buhari, between 2015 and 2019, capital expenditure increased to N2,289 billion. The overall implication of all these to government budget is that budget deficit between 1999 and 2015 increased to -1557.8 from -285.1. It similarly increased to -4820.6 in 2019.

 

The elementary logic is that higher budget deficits contribute to pushing governments to borrow. Applying the same logic, expectedly lower debts should encourage governments to have more favourable balanced budgets. Although following debt cancellation of more than $30 billion in 2004, under former President Obasanjo, there was reduction in budget deficit consistently, between 2003 and 2008, from -202.7, -172.6, -161.4, -100.8, -117.2 and -47.4, respectively for 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008, however, considering lower capital to recurrent expenditure ratio, it is quite debatable whether any favorable change was achieved. For instance, one of the expectations would have been that following the debt cancellation of 2004, government should have more revenue to put in its capital expenditure given that it has freed itself from issues of debt services and other associated costs. May be, the small increases in capital expenditure to N351.3 billion, N519.5 billion, N552.4 billion and N759.3 billion respectively for 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 was enough to justify the debt cancellation. Or perhaps the correspondingly similar small increases in recurrent expenditure of the Federal Government during the same period to N1,110.8 billion, N1,321.3, N1,390.2 and N1,589.3 respectively, contribute to the aggregate impact that was achieved due to debt cancellation during the tenure of former President Obasanjo.

 

May former President Obasanjo have forgotten this very legacy of being unable to prioritise capital expenditure during his tenure, especially give the successful debt cancellation, when he recently adds his voice to those who are critising the decision of President Buhari’s administration to obtain additional debt when he argued, ‘If we are borrowing for recurrent expenditure, it is the height of folly. If we are borrowing for development that can pay for itself, that is understandable. Then the payment, how long will it take to pay itself?.’ We may have to curious ask former President Obasanjo, when Nigeria cancelled its debt in 2004, what specifically was the objective? Shouldn’t it have been for development? The resources that were freed from debt services, which component of the Federal Government budget was it used for?

 

Everything considered, all the indices of Nigeria’s fiscal management between 1999 and 2020, indicates more prudence under the six years of President Buhari than during the eight years of former President Obasanjo, notwithstanding the claims of cancelling Nigerian debts. By the time the analysis is expanded to cover specific issues of projects executed, under the current administration of President Buhari, Nigerians would need help from former President Obasanjo, former President Goodluck, all PDP leaders and their supporters to highlight what specifically they were able to give Nigerians in terms of projects executed in return for their ‘prudent’ management of the national economy during their sixteen years tenure.

 

For instance, President Buhari is implementing one of the most ambitious National Social Investment Programme (NSIP) in the country since independence. Under the programme, with the goal of lifting 100 million Nigerians out of poverty, millions of poor Nigerians are benefiting from these initiatives. One of the components of the programme, Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP), N36.9 billion in interest-free loans of between N50,000 to N350,000 has been disbursed to more than 2.3 million Nigerians. Under another component of the Programme Home-Grown School Feeding Programme, 9.9 million primary 1 – 3 pupils in 54,952 public primary schools in 35 states have benefited. Additional 107,000 cooks have been engaged. In the case of Conditional Cash Transfer, the third component, more than 3 million poor and vulnerable households have been registered on the National Social Register, out of which more than one million families are currently being paid N5,000 monthly.

 

In the area of infrastructure, APC led administration of President Buhari has increased annual budgetary allocation for Federal Roads to about N260 billion as against the allocation of 18 billion Naira in 2015 under PDP administration. Significantly, more resources were devoted to construction of road and transport infrastructure than any other administration since 1999, and the results are roads, bridges, highways, rail lines and stations, and air and seaport upgrades. Work has since resumed on several stalled, abandoned or solution-defying road projects that were inherited, like the Loko-Oweto Bridge, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, Sagamu-Benin Expressway, the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway, Onitsha-Enugu Expressway, Kano-Maiduguri Expressway, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Obajana-Kabba Road, Ilorin-Jebba Road, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Road, and several others are in progress, with some already close to completion.

 

A brand-new bridge in Ikom, Cross River State, was completed, which replaced the dilapidated steel truss bridge originally built five decades ago, as was a new border bridge linking Nigeria and Cameroon, in the spirit of regional integration. Construction work on the Second Niger Bridge, a contract awarded multiple times between 2002 and 2015, under PDP administration, but constantly stalled for lack of funding, finally kicked off in 2018, with guaranteed funding, for the first time in the history of the project. In 2017, construction finally commenced on the Bodo-Bonny Bridges and Road (linking Bonny Island to the Rivers Mainland), a project first mooted decades ago, and awarded several times without success, prior to the Buhari APC led Administration. Currently, according to the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, there are around 900 active road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country, out of a total of 35,000km of Federal roads in existence.

 

In the Agricultural sector, specific initiatives of the APC led government of President Buhari include National Food Security Council (NFSC), Agriculture for Food and Jobs Plan (AFJP), National Livestock Transformation Plan, The Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP), The Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI), and Creation of an Enabling Environment. Specifically, the ABP for instance, implemented by the Central Bank of Nigeria, since 2015, provided more than 300 billion Naira to more than 3.1 million smallholder farmers of 21 different commodities (including Rice, Wheat, Maize, Cotton, Cassava, Poultry, Soybeans, Groundnut, Fish), across Nigeria, successfully cultivating over 3.8 million hectares of farmland.

 

The PFI has produced and delivered to the Nigerian market, over 30 million 50kg bags equivalent of fertilizer, at reduced prices; and resulted in the revival or construction of no fewer than 40 moribund fertilizer blending plants across the country. That Nigeria today has 44 functioning blending plants, with more on the way, is solely due to the success of the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI). The plants include the following:

 

·         In 2017, the multinational group Olam invested $150 million in an integrated animal feed mill, poultry breeding farms and hatchery in Kaduna State, as well as an integrated poultry and fish feed mill in Kwara State.

 

·         In Anambra State, the Coscharis Group began the cultivation of rice in 2016, on a 2,500 hectare farm, and soon after expanded into Milling, with the commissioning of a 40,000 MT modular Rice Mill in 2019,

 

·         In Niger State, the BUA Group is currently completing a $300million Integrated Facility comprising a Sugar Mill, Ethanol Plant, Sugar Refinery and Power Plant, and a 20,000-Hectare Farm.

 

·         In Kebbi State, GB Foods has invested 20 billion Naira in a Tomato Processing Factory supplied by what is said to be the single largest tomato farm in the country. Future phases of the investment will make it the largest processing facility for fresh tomatoes in sub-Saharan Africa.

 

·         The same GB Foods in July 2020 opened its N5.5 billion Mayonnaise production facility in Ogun State, which will be supplied with input from the company’s new farms in Kebbi State.

 

·         In Lagos, Ariel Foods FZE has recently constructed and completed the biggest Ready-To-Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTF) production facility in Africa.

 

·         In Nasarawa State, the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) has recently completed work on the first phase of a multi-million-dollar animal feed processing facility and a backward-integrated 3000-hectare Maize and Soyabeans Farm, in a co-investment partnership with a South African Investment Group.

 

·         In 2021, the Dangote Group commissioned its $2 billion Fertilizer Plant, with an annual capacity of 3 million Metric Tonnes, the largest fertilizer plant in West Africa. In June 2021, the plant began delivering an average of 120 trucks of Urea per week to the Nigerian market, and is also set to target the export market across West Africa and beyond.

 

·         State Governments are also actively keying into the President’s Agriculture vision. In 2018, Cross River commissioned a  3 billion Naira Hybrid Rice Seedlings Factory, to supply rice seedlings to farmers and governments across the country.

 

·         Lagos State is completing the 32 Metric Tonne per hour Imota Rice Mill, which, when functional, will be one of the largest rice processing facilities in sub-Saharan Africa. The Imota Rice Mill will produce 2.4 million bags of 50kg per annum, and create an estimated 250,000 direct and indirect jobs, and will plug Lagos State firmly into the national rice value chain.

 

·         Ekiti State is reviving its Ikun Dairy Farm, in a successful partnership with Promasidor, with a production target of 10,000 Liters of milk daily.

 

·         In Ondo State, the 9 billion Naira Sunshine Chocolate Factory - a Public Private Partnership involving the State Government - was completed and commissioned in 2020, to take advantage of the State’s leading position in the cultivation of cocoa.

 

Notwithstanding all these and ignoring all the years of lost opportunities under sixteen years of PDP, public debates around comparative assessments of performance of six years of APC government under President Buhari as compared to sixteen years of PDP get unfairly dominated by allegations of recklessness and incompetence. PDP may wish to go beyond the manipulative strategy to rewrite the realities of incomparable achievements of President Buhari led APC government as against all the PDP administrations between 1999 and 2015 by coming out with a clearer empirical account than can present new evidence. Otherwise, the incontrovertible evidence is that APC led government of President Buhari is in fact more prudent than all PDP governments between 1999 and 2015.

 

May be also, given the bullish disposition of Governor Nyesom Wike of River States in engaging economic policy debates in the country, it is important to stress the point that in addition to the requirement for honesty, PDP leaders should understand and appreciate that when issue of development are reduced to what the English Economist, Kate Raworth referred in the book, Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21^st-Century Economist, as the portrait of a person ‘standing alone, money in hand, calculator in hand, and ego in heart’, initiatives of governments can hardly rise above consumption, which was the case throughout the sixteen years of PDP. Because that was the case, even when former President Obasanjo negotiated debt cancellation, rather than resulting increased capital expenditure significantly, that didn’t happen.

 

Interestingly Governor Wike’s response to the decision of President Buhari’s administration to negotiate the new debt of about $4 billion was that Rivers State was discriminated against. One of the problems of bullies is the mentality of believing that they can force their way by intimidating others. Governor Wike need to accept that negotiation in a 21^st century economy doesn’t require intimidation. In addition, leaders who are committed to developing their societies would have to outgrow the doughnut mentality, which reduces every policy debate to cheap sharing of so-called resources. Afterall, in any case some of the projects being executed by the administration of President Buhari such as the Bodo-Bonny Bridges and Road (linking Bonny Island to the Rivers Mainland), was decided without any pressure. Besides, how much pressure did Governor Wike had to put on the Federal Government of President Buhari to get the refund of over N70 billion for repairs on Federal Roads?

 

One of the issues that need to also be appreciated is that to some extent, the confidence of PDP leaders tends to be high in engaging debates around the performance of the economy because of the laid-back attitude of some appointees of Federal Government who should have been very proactive in directing public debates in the country. Many PDP leaders and their supporters are emboldened by the weak responses of designated public officers in Federal Government saddled with the responsibilities of engaging Nigerians around initiatives of government. The other challenge, which is very disturbing is issues around management of Nigeria’s foreign exchange by the Central Bank. A situation whereby the US Dollar would appear to be on a roller-coaster against the Naira is simply unacceptable. Had the Naira to US Dollar exchange rate been stable in the last two years, most of the alleged debates about so-called recklessness against the government of President Buhari would have been long settled.

 

Therefore, while appealing to the CBN to take every measure necessary urgently and expeditiously to stablise the Naira exchange rate, similar appeal must also be made to all functionaries of the Federal Government, especially in ministries of Finance and National Planning to provide all the intellectual leadership required to convert the false accusation that APC led government of Buhari is recklessly borrowing. Nigeria’s borrowing, both with reference to debt/GDP and debt/revenue ratio is still below the permissible economic threshold of below 60% and 46% respectively. If economic indices are the reference point in any comparative assessment of performance President Buhari led administration as compared to all the PDP administrations between 1999 and 2016, PDP leaders and their supporters cannot have any voice!

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Struggle for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On October 1, 2021, Nigeria’s sixty-first independence anniversary, President Muhammadu Buhari, in a national broadcast, acknowledged that, ‘the past eighteen months have been some of the most difficult periods in the history of Nigeria. Since the civil war, I doubt whether we have seen a period of more heightened challenges than what we have witnessed in this period.’ The country has been caught by secessionist agitations of Nnamdi Kanu’s group in the South-East and Sunday Igboho’s in the South-West. Specifically, agitation by Nnamdi Kanu’s group has graduated to rebellion against the Nigerian state, resulting in attacks on police stations and killings of security personnel and other functionaries of government as well as destructions of government structures. Compounded by ongoing Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, these secessionist agitations have threatened the unity of Nigeria.

 

With incidences of banditry in the North-West and North-Central producing more cases of kidnappings and abductions of citizens, including schoolchildren, capacity of Nigerian security agencies to prevent and arrest criminal activities of rebellious groups in all parts of the country are legitimate concerns of all Nigerians. There is also the challenge of preventing or managing conflicts arising from activities of herdsmen, which have provoked all manner of conflicts between Fulani herdsmen and other citizens, especially farmers, across every part of the country. Criminal activities associated with herdsmen also increased incidences of banditry, kidnappings and abductions of citizens.

 

The narrative around this, promoted by the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and their supporters, is that challenges of insecurity facing the country is a confirmation that President Buhari and APC have failed Nigerians. Citing campaign promises of APC in 2015, undertaking to end insecurity, fight corruption and build the economy, problems of insecurity in the country is being used to mobilise Nigerians against the APC and President Buhari. Part of the politics is also aimed at mobilising support for opposition politicians ahead of 2023 elections. Divisive politics of ethnicity and religion have been important elements of the campaigns.

 

Consequently, there appears to be some disconnect between politics and the need to unite Nigerians to work together to address the nation’s security challenges. Opposition politicians and their supporters are unreceptive to efforts to mobilise Nigerians to forge strong unity towards ending insecurity in the country. It is therefore a good mark of leadership, notwithstanding the desperate grandstanding politics for 2023 by PDP and its supporters for President Buhari to acknowledge that Nigeria is passing through period of momentous challenges. No doubt President Buhari is not in denial of Nigeria’s security challenges. Acknowledging the challenges is indicative of the commitment of President Buhari and by extension APC leaders to end the problem of insecurity facing the country.

 

Recalling that APC was officially registered as political party by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on July 31, 2013, with the slogan CHANGE, specifically, Section Three of the APC manifesto undertook ‘to institute radical reform of the Nigerian Government based on Good Governance precepts – transparency, accountability, fiscal responsibility, the rule of law, human rights, civil and political liberties. We must install a government whose leaders are responsive to the needs of Nigerian citizens and delivering effective and efficient services to citizens equitably in all the three branches of our governance realm – the executive, judiciary and the legislature. We cannot achieve these reforms without strengthening our public institutions and away from the “Strong Man” model, which has devastated our economy and institutions.’

 

Since 2015, under the leadership of President Buhari, APC controlled Federal Government has rolled out several initiatives to deliver on its campaign promises targeted at strengthening Nigeria’s public service institutions. Quite some significant progresses have been achieved. A major gap being exploited by the opposition against the APC and the Federal Government is that official communication both from the APC and the Federal Government are passive and reactive. Efforts to engage Nigerians to secure citizens’ ownership of policy initiatives is quite low. Consequently, political opposition in the country is succeeding to take good advantage of this reality to unfairly portray both the APC and President Buhari in bad light.

 

Partly because of the domineering influence of the negative publicity by opposition politicians against the APC, unfortunate activities of armed bandits, insurgents and criminal elements in the country are mischievously being presented as confirmation of failure of APC led Federal Government. False narrative against APC and President Buhari are being promoted, suggesting that criminal activities of bandits only started when APC took control of the Federal Government in 2015. In addition, APC is being alleged to have failed in ending Boko Haram insurgency.

 

Any objective analyst would recall that activities of Boko Haram insurgents as at 2015, apart from controlling most parts of the North-East, have spread to parts of North-West and North-Central, notably, Kano, Kaduna, FCT, Niger, Kogi and Nasarawa. In both the North-West and North-Central, problems of cattle rustling were rampant. Kidnapping was also there in many parts of the South-South and South-East. To worsen matters, there was the 2014 corruption case of $2.1 billion meant for arms procurement, which was diverted by PDP led administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan.

 

It is true that problem of cattle rustling in the North-West and North-Central has graduated to banditry and it is assuming a war situation. However, it should be also recognised that the fight against Boko Haram has made significant progress. Unlike before 2015 when most parts of the North-East was under the control of insurgents, this is no longer the case. No doubt both in the case of fighting banditry and Boko Haram, there are challenges, which the APC led government of President Buhari is responding to.

 

Any comparative assessment of APC and PDP management of Nigeria’s security challenges, which failed to recognise these realities is only being dishonest. Dishonest mindset is responsible for why all initiatives of APC Federal Government are being dismissed based on false narrative. Nigerians must pose the question, if APC and President Buhari have failed, as is being claimed, what is the political opposition specifically proposing as solutions to the problems of insecurity? Or, if as now PDP is claiming that during their sixteen-year tenure recorded significant milestones, what were the details?

 

Both the APC and the Federal Government need to evolve new strategy of problem-solving communication in the country. Part of the objective should be to facilitate partnership to communicate activities of the party, government through engagement with major national players – non-governmental actors, civil society, labour, tranditional and religious leaders, women, youths, persons with disability, etc. The goal of partnership is to generate public awareness around initiatives of governments, especially Federal Government. There should be regular consultations to engage Nigerians aimed at reviewing progress being made to address national challenges. In the context of consultative activities with major national players, initiatives to rebuild, re-orient organisations of civil society and labour movement can be developed based on a strategy to ensure that civil society and labour leaders, for instance, directly supervise and coordinate initiatives.

 

Refining the politics of these organisations to be value-driven should also be the goal. A situation where both civil society and labour activities are oriented as opposition politics founded on falsehood can only be exploitative against majority of Nigerians, including the working people. Effective engagements with citizens through their organisations and their leaders will help build trust and endear the party, which can support processes of membership recruitment for the party.

 

Part of the task of reviewing progress in addressing national challenges would also be to ensure that the current strategy of excessive politicisation of insecurity by the PDP and their supports is stopped. At the same time, appropriate steps can be taken to ensure that Nigerians appreciate all the unprecedented investments in military hardware: dozens of new aircraft, ships, battle tanks and others being procured and deployed in the fight against insecurity in the country by the APC led Federal Government. Initiatives under the new Police Act to provide Community Policing can be similarly appreciated by Nigerians, as well as establishment of the Police Trust Fund to finance training, logistics and welfare of Nigeria Police and investment in technology-aided policing of land and maritime environments.

 

Through problem-solving communication strategy, Nigerians will be able to see through all the false propaganda of the PDP and their supporters and accordingly recognise all the successes being recorded in the fight against insecurity in the country. For instance, President Buhari himself, in the October 1, 2021, national address, highlighted that ‘In the North East region alone, over eight thousand Boko Haram terrorists have surrendered.’ In addition, ‘the Nigerian Armed Forces have recruited over 17,000 personnel across all ranks.’ Similarly, as contained in the October 1, 2021 broadcast of President Buhari, approval has been given to ‘the Nigerian Police Force to recruit 10,000 police officers annually over the next six years.’

 

While it is important that Nigerians apply every necessary pressure on government and the APC to expeditiously address the problem of insecurity in the country, efforts must also be made to prevent a situation whereby desperate politicians seek to take advantage of Nigeria’s security challenges based on false propaganda. In all promises APC made in 2015, there are initiatives being implement by the Federal Government, which include developing Nigeria’s infrastructure, in Rail, Roads, Ports, Power are ongoing; achieving agricultural self-sufficiency; entrenching technology in government processes and service delivery; creating the first truly national social safety net in the history of Nigeria; among many others.

 

Part the challenge of excessive politicisation is that it also threatens internal unity of APC members and leaders. For instance, excessive politicisation in the country is influencing decision of some APC leaders to push negotiation for the emergence of the party’s Presidential Candidate for 2023 elections outside the structures of the APC. This is now threatening the unity of leaders of APC. Around the whole question of power shift, some leaders of the APC have gone outside the structures of the party to mobilise support for the party to zone its Presidential candidate for 2023 to the Southern part of the country. In a worrisome way, loose partnership is being contracted with a section of leaders from other opposition political parties, notably PDP.

 

It is important that all APC leaders are reminded that the campaign for power shift is about writing or respecting the rules of our party. This should be handled within the structures of the APC. It is belittling for APC leaders who are statutory members of all the relevant structures of the party that are competent to take final decision on the matter to go outside the structures of the party and forge partnership with PDP leaders to compel a decision, one way or the other, on the matter. It simply means loss of confidence on the structures of the party, which in this matter couldn’t have been the case. It is therefore important that a strong appeal is made to all APC leaders to develop more confidence to negotiate every matter, including the issue of power shift, within the structures of APC.

 

The current trend, which appears to create divisions among APC leaders must be halted. Question of unity among APC leaders is a fundamental precondition for being able to continue to win the support of Nigerians, which is what can guarantee any electoral victory. In fact, the confidence of PDP and their supporters is only stronger in campaigning against APC and President Buhari’s led Federal Government, using false narrative of failure, because unity among the ranks of APC leaders and member is increasingly being broken. Even the reality of reactive and passive communication of APC led government initiatives is further becoming a dominant attribute because unity among APC leaders is getting weaker.

 

All APC members must strongly appeal to all APC leaders to rebuild confidence and ensure that every issue that should be addressed within the structures of the party are treated so. Perhaps, also in relation to the question of unity of leaders within the party, all governments produced by the party should be able to strengthen internal relations. Internal consultative processes should be functionally made stronger such that disputes between governments are well managed, negotiated and any possible agreement respected. The recent partnership between Lagos and Rivers States in relation to the legal dispute on Value Added Tax against the Federal Government is to say the least very disturbing. All party members and leaders should without prejudice to the grievances of Lagos State Government appeal to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu to initiate processes of direct engagement with the Federal Government to resolve all issues.

 

It is politically scandalous for APC state to sue APC Federal Government. Everything taken together – mobilising for power shift outside APC and the legal case between Lagos State and Federal Government – require that our leaders should be open to themselves. Beyond being open, APC leaders should have both discipline and respect for each other. Unity of leaders will be meaningless, if not impossible, without discipline and respect for one another. In fact, leaders will be unable to unite party members and Nigerians if they don’t have the required discipline and respect for one another. It is not by accident that public debate in Nigeria is very offensive. Citizens treat each other with disrespect and easily abuse each other in unprintable languages. This may perhaps be the true reflection of the quality of relationship among leaders.

 

The APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee need to take up the issue of uniting all APC leaders and ensure that relevant structures of the party are being used to facilitate negotiation on all emerging issues, including the question of power shift. All leaders of the party should be reminded that the fundamental issue of changing Nigeria will remain a dream so long as leaders failed to work for the development of the structures of the party. Building a party is beyond winning election, important as it is. Building the party is specifically about ensuring that structures of the party are competent and capable of facilitating negotiations among members and leaders on every issue. Every negotiation should produce an agreement which must be respected by every leader and member.

 

At this point, it is also important to appeal to the APC Caretaker Committee to conclude the work being done to amend the constitution of the party. Strengthening processes of disciplinary hearing and enforcement of decisions should be prioritised. Capacity of the party to regulate the conduct of members and leaders should be strengthened. Being a party envisioned to bring about change, regulating the conduct of party members and leaders will be an important catalysing factor to change Nigerian politics and produce the new Nigeria of our dream. The quality of any democracy is defined by the strength of political parties. Once political parties are irrelevant to the processes of regulating conducts of leaders, leaders are not united, disciplined and respect one another, democracy will be meaningless unresponsive and nonrepresentative, and cannot meet the expectations of citizens.

 

For APC to achieve the goal of producing a new Nigeria, first thing first, it must be a party with a leadership that is united, disciplined, and respectful. The process of re-organising the structures of APC must make the party functionally active in facilitating negotiations among leaders at all levels and all agreements reached must be respected by all. It is the process of negotiation and implementing agreements reached, which should be respected by all that can produce a New Nigeria!

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Struggle for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On October 1, 2021, Nigeria’s sixty-first independence anniversary, President Muhammadu Buhari, in a national broadcast, acknowledged that, ‘the past eighteen months have been some of the most difficult periods in the history of Nigeria. Since the civil war, I doubt whether we have seen a period of more heightened challenges than what we have witnessed in this period.’ The country has been caught by secessionist agitations of Nnamdi Kanu’s group in the South-East and Sunday Igboho’s in the South-West. Specifically, agitation by Nnamdi Kanu’s group has graduated to rebellion against the Nigerian state, resulting in attacks on police stations and killings of security personnel and other functionaries of government as well as destructions of government structures. Compounded by ongoing Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, these secessionist agitations have threatened the unity of Nigeria.

This position does not represent the view of any APC Governor or the Progressive Governors Forum

 

[OLAYINKA AGBETUYI]

Salihu Lukman.

1.If it is true that the APC is engaged in constructing the first truly national safety net in Nigeria, why is it that the nation is seen as the poverty capital of the world more than three quarters of the maximum allowed rule for a government?  Where are the signs and highlights of this initiative?

2.  I was among those canvassing during the Jonathan era, that power be shifted back to the North for some time after seeming dominance, either by commission or omission, of power being held much longer in the Fourth Republic by the South. It just seemed unfair, because we previously complained when power was retained for too long in the North, through the military hijack of the polity.  If the APC wants to bury its head in the sand by a ruse of let party structures decide to retain power in the North, on the ruse that the party structure will present the best leader, why should Southern leaders not form a parallel extra-party coalition to ensure their goal of power rotation?  After all, this was what produced the Buhari presidency which you celebrate.  

Is that not the usual antic of climbing to the top and removing the ladder?  Northern power brokers are too fond of this clever by half treachery of retention of power at all costs by sundry political guiles.

There is no region that cannot produce 'the best canditate" and in fact I would suggest that you work with your party APC  to ensure that it uses its majority in the National Assembly to implement the working with the sundry stakeholders agenda to in particular build a cross-party coalition in the National Assembly to insert in the Constitution that leadership of the country, no matter what party is in power must rotate between the North and the South every 8 years ( and the candidate need not be the current Vice-President of the ruling party.)

This provision will defuse once and for all ethno- religious tensions at elections.  I would also canvass majority rule as corollary to determine candidate.  It should constitute a non- negotiable grund norm of the Nigerian Constitution, even if it means the power and remuneration of the office of the President is pruned down as the trade off. ( a very good bestseller by a president released after office will fetch several times more than the salary in an 8 year tenure.  So immediate gratification must be de- emphasised.)

OAA

Majority rule is the hallmark of modern democracies.  End the aberration of minority rule at the centre in Nigeria by constitutional change come 2023.

Sent from my Galaxy

-------- Original message --------

From: Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>

Date: 03/10/2021 02:57 (GMT+00:00)

To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com

Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - APC and the Struggle for New Nigeria

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (smlu...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

APC and Struggle for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On October 1, 2021, Nigeria’s sixty-first independence anniversary, President Muhammadu Buhari, in a national broadcast, acknowledged that, ‘the past eighteen months have been some of the most difficult periods in the history of Nigeria. Since the civil war, I doubt whether we have seen a period of more heightened challenges than what we have witnessed in this period.’ The country has been caught by secessionist agitations of Nnamdi Kanu’s group in the South-East and Sunday Igboho’s in the South-West. Specifically, agitation by Nnamdi Kanu’s group has graduated to rebellion against the Nigerian state, resulting in attacks on police stations and killings of security personnel and other functionaries of government as well as destructions of government structures. Compounded by ongoing Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, these secessionist agitations have threatened the unity of Nigeria.

This position does not represent the view of any APC Governor or the Progressive Governors Forum

 

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB553610926EC80415AA763DF9AEAD9%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Internal Democracy in Political Parties and Prospects for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On Tuesday, October 12, 2021, the Nigerian Senate passed the electoral amendment bill, which among others approved electronic transmission of election results and compel all political parties in the country to use direct method of conducting party primary for the selection of candidates for electoral contests. These are significant decisions, which could potentially enhance the credibility of Nigerian elections and expand the scope of citizens’ participation in politics. A critical success factor in terms of whether these decisions would achieve such potential outcomes has to do with capacity of both Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and political parties to develop the needed organisational capacity to administer the new legal framework provided under the amended electoral law.

 

Specifically, INEC will have the direct responsibility of transmitting all election results electronically. This would include developing all the technological infrastructure, procurement and installations of all the hardware and software as well as recruitment and training of all the personnel requirement for the electronic transmission of electoral results. No doubt, this is a groundbreaking decision given that physical process of transmitting election results from voting areas to collation centres give space for rigging. Noting that since 2011, the introduction of card reader technology for voter accreditation has significantly weaken the capacity of politicians to inflate election results, which during previous elections produced voter turnout close to hundred percent of registered voters. If the new electoral amendment is passed, it should be expected that introduction of technology to the process of transmission of electoral results would similarly weaken the capacity of politicians to interfere or manipulate the election during the process of transmission of results.

 

Prior to the October 12 decision of the Senate, there were proposals by many Senators and members of the House of Representatives that the National Communication Commission (NCC) should confirm that the national communication infrastructure can permit the electronic transmission of election results from every part of the country. Many Nigerians criticise such a proposal based on the understanding that it will erode the independence of INEC, partly because subordinating INEC to NCC, being an executive body directly under the control of the President, would imply conferring some levels of advantage for the party controlling government at federal level. The new amendment adopted on Tuesday October 12 therefore eliminated such potential advantages, which demonstrated a positive shift by the Nigerian Senate based on public criticism. This is very commendable, and it significantly indicate high measure of responsiveness by Senators of the Federal Republic. Nigerians hope that the Conference Committee involving members from the House of Representatives would eventually adopt the new amendment and President Muhammadu Buhari will eventually assent to the new bill.

 

Once that is done, the bulk of the work to operationalise the new law to effectively transmit election results from voting areas to collation centres electronically will be the responsibility of INEC. Given that INEC’s institutional capacity for deployment of technology during elections has been test successfully with the introduction of card reader since 2011 elections, Nigerians expect that deployment of technology to manage the process of collation of results through electronic transmission of election results commencing with the 2023 election would also be successful and to that extent make Nigerian electoral process more credible. And like the introduction of card reader technology drastically reduced electoral litigation due to manipulation of accreditation, litigation arising from alleged manipulation of collation process should also be reduced. With such development, the only aspect of Nigerian election that will not be technologically driven is the actual voting. This will mean that some of the challenges bordering on vote buying, which is very rampant would still be there.

 

It is therefore important to continue to engage the debate about making the Nigerian electoral process more credible based on corresponding provision of electronic voting opportunity as part of the Nigerian electoral laws. Nigerian Senators should be commended for this landmark decision of approving electronic transmission of election results to be in Nigeria’s electoral law. Investing INEC with such a responsibility independent of other agencies of government is a demonstration of high measure of responsiveness by Senators. In the same measure, Nigerians who actively engaged the debate of the amendment proposals in the National Assembly, especially leaders of civil society organisations should be equally commended. Without their engagement, the decision of the Senate of October 12 may have been different.

 

Certainly, a lot of progress has been made in the development of both Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence and electoral management. Partly, on account of this reality, there is increasing public confidence even among politicians that INEC should be given more responsibility to regulate political parties, especially with respect to internal party elections to select candidates for election. Unlike in the past, at least before 2011, when Nigerians consider INEC as the extension of the ruling party, relatively today, INEC’s independence is greater and more reflected in the results of elections. The party in power at federal level loses elections as much as the opposition, if not more. Votes now count and the margin of inaccuracy in terms of results of elections is getting smaller since the commencement of introduction of technology in Nigerian election in 2011.

 

The disconnect however is that although progress in being made to enhance the processes of election management in the country, management of political party remained very backward. The practice across all Nigerian parties is that political leaders aspiring to contest elections for political offices recruit members. The aspiring political leader influence choices of party leaders based on estimation of loyalty. The loyalists who emerge as political leaders in turn become delegates during party primary for the selection of candidates for election, who then confirmed the aspiring political leader as the party’s candidate for election.

 

Issues of membership participation and internal party democracy are compromised, professional management of political parties doesn’t exist, and disciplinary conduct of members and leaders are sacrificed. The consequence is the preponderances of unethical, and unfair practices by party leaders. Lack of professionalism and absence of viable democratic funding sources are major characteristics of Nigerian political parties. This explains why for instance external auditors’ report on the accounts of political parties by INEC raised issues bordering on absence of internal audit, accounting books not properly maintained, lack of budget and budgetary control, and poorly defined, fixed assets registers, among many others.

 

Notably, issues of membership participation especially during the process of selection of party candidates within political parties in Nigeria is a major source of national frustration, which is perhaps the rationale behind the October 12 Senate proposal to compel all parties to adopt the direct method of primary to weaken the capacity of some power blocs within parties from manipulating internal process of candidate selection. The current dominant reality of choosing candidates for elections in virtually all political parties in the country is through the indirect method of using delegates in all parties. The critical issue of citizens’ participation in politics and how it leads to the difficult task of candidates’ selection is an issue that appears to be the cause of most of the frustration of Nigerians with politics. The decision of the Senate to propose amendment to the Electoral Act to compel parties to use direct primaries to select candidates for election is informed by this reality.

 

The rationale for direct primary based on expanding the democratic space for membership participation is hardly contestable. Some of the questions requiring good responses, which further make the application of the direct mode of party primary appealing include, for instance: will increase in participation of party members lead to more citizens’ participation during general elections? Could it also bring party leaders closer to membership, or citizens closer to their elected representatives? The reality is that the space for participation of party members, or what some literature refers to as ‘logic for collective action’, which assumes that membership participation in activities of political parties is dependent on economic choices in diverse areas, including politics. This certainly would suggest that low participation means small groups of interests control the parties.

 

A strong corollary here is the issue of party funding? How are political parties being funded? Are there accountability mechanisms associated with the process of political party’s financial mobilisation? In other words, are members contributing to party’s finances? Are they aware of all the sources and size of contributions? Is the awareness of sources and size complemented by members’ consent of any expected transaction details associated with such financial contribution? The Nigerian reality bears some levels of dishonesties about issues of party funding. Party members, to say the least, are free riders. Across almost all Nigerian parties, issues of membership subscription hardly exist. Politicians aspiring to emerge as candidates for elections are the financiers of political parties, including funding electoral campaigns.

 

With that, political practice and culture in the party is about recruiting loyalists to be members. Once an aspirant has strong financial capability, he/she then controls the party. Such a person would then proceed to appoint loyalists to serve as party officials. Issues of membership and participation in political activities, including holding party positions and appointments into governments controlled by the party, are restricted to close associates and supporters, while professional management of the party and disciplinary conduct of members are conveniently ignored. The consequence is the preponderance of unethical, unfair and other substandard practices by the party officials and public officials. Party offices are reduced to territorial control with hardly any focus on the responsibilities associated with them. Cost considerations are tied to personal conveniences of politicians aspiring for elective offices and depending on which party organs are subordinated to campaign structures of contestants. As a result, lack of professionalism and absence of a viable democratic funding sources have become a major challenge for all Nigerian parties.

 

A number of these issues were highlighted in Chapter II of the publication Power of Possibility & Politics of Change in Nigeria released in 2019. Apart from APC, none of the other political parties is debating these issues. In fact, in many respects, it could be argued that part of the founding vision of APC is to change this reality. A lot of the internal contests in the party is about whether the party should abandon its founding vision and collapse into the conventional way of organising political contests in the country. In fact, the debate around direct or indirect primary has been a constant issue in APC since 2014. Part of the experience is that aspiring politicians and by extension god fathers who are aspiring to continue to impose their preferences as candidates would continue to undermine initiatives within the party to develop new organisational frameworks that can allow broader participation of members. It is another confirmation of Antonio Gramsci’s thesis about ‘the old is dying and the new cannot be born.’

 

Most of the public debates about internal democracy within Nigerian political parties hardly address the fundamental issues of membership management, party funding and administrations. So long as political parties in Nigeria are not challenged to alter the current framework, which reduced party members to free riders, with no financial responsibility, and party leaders at all levels surrogates of aspiring politicians, effectiveness of legal provisions will remain weak. With all its problems, in its short period, more than any party in the history Nigeria, at least in this Fourth Republic, APC has some empirical evidence to prove that we can have a law compelling political parties to use the direct method involving all members of the party to select candidates for elections but will not stop politicians from undermining the process. Recall that ahead of the 2019 elections, the decision in APC was that stakeholders in each state will decide on the mode of primary to select Governorship candidates.

 

In the case of Presidential primary, President Buhari opted for the direct primary. In many of the states, the votes returned for President Buhari was quite higher than the votes during the general election. For instance, Lagos State returned 1.9 million during the internal party primary but only got 580,825 votes during the general elections. In fact, the total voter turn out during the general election was just around one million. Similarly, Kano State returned 2,931,235 votes for the President during the party primary. But during the general election got only, 1,464,768. Like the case of Lagos, the total voter turnout for Kano State during the general election was less two million.

 

Without going into details, there were many instances in APC, in 2019, which recorded wide margin between results of internal party primary and the general election. Although, there could be some logical explanations accounting for most of the wide margins, but when it became uniform, almost suggesting a pattern that negates any possible correlation between alleged membership participation and voter turnout during elections, it should be a source of concern. Part of the reality in APC, which have been a source of debate especially leading to the membership registration and revalidation exercise organised by the Caretaker Extraordinary and Convention Planning Committee, led by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni was that some of the power blocs within the party preferred to maintain the old framework because it guarantees them control of structures of the party.

 

At another level, there is also the constant interest of virtually all politicians to gain advantage by way of commanding some levels of influence. Several of the complains that emerged against the membership registration and revalidation exercise carried out by the party reflect this reality. The same complaint by the same politicians resurfaces during the Ward, Local Governments and now, just concluded, State Congresses. When one review concerns raised following the Supreme Court Judgement on Ondo election, in addition to many who expressed legitimate concerns about the minority view by the panel of Supreme Court Judges who presided over the matter, almost all aggrieved persons in the party aggrieved from the membership registration and revalidation exercise attempted to use the minority decision to campaign for the removal of the Caretaker Extraordinary and Convention Planning Committee.

 

A major feature of the internal dynamics across all Nigerian political parties is that there are tense relations between members of the executive and legislative branches. Part of the factors accounting for the tense relations is that, predominantly, aspirations of members of the legislative branches to succeed governors are hardly supported by serving governors. This may be understandable when for instance a Senator or Member of the House of Representatives is plotting to block a serving governor from contesting for a second term. But it is worrisome when a clear pattern has evolved in the country across all political parties whereby it can almost be predicted that the probability will always be high that most serving governors would oppose members of the legislative branch from succeeding them.

 

Nigerians can continue to engage this debate based on the attraction to campaign against the control of party structures by serving Governors. To what extent, will any measure to free parties from the control of serving governors address the fundamental issues of membership management, party funding and administration? How can a legal provision compelling parties to use direct primary to select candidates for election address the problem of poor record of members, for instance? With poor records of members, it is almost certain that the phenomenon of internal process of candidate selection will be messier. Just imagine a situation whereby INEC is asked to introduce card readers to accredit voters without voters register.

 

At this point in the life of Nigerian democracy, there is the need to broaden the debate about membership participation to issues of relationship building among political leaders at all levels within parties. A situation whereby political leaders only develop relationship with people who only endorse their aspirations for elective offices is unhealthy. Sadly, relationships developed overtime, which endured many difficult challenging moments simply get sacrificed, often not because of opposition to political aspirations of party leaders but because disagreements have been expressed against personal positions of political leaders when the political rule as dictated by former President Olusegun Obasanjo is that there must be hundred percent loyalty. Even people who won their leadership qualification in Nigerian politics on account of being critical and providing leadership against perceived injustices became warriors and champions of politics of loyalty.

 

Unless the core issues of membership recruitment and management, party funding and administration are addressed in Nigeria, problems of internal democracy within political parties in the country will continue. Already, following the October 12 decision of the Senate, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has announced it opposition to direct primary, which means issues of membership participation in the process of candidates’ selection is not PDP’s priority. In the case of APC, since 2013 when the merger negotiation leading to the emergence of the party was concluded, the vision was that eventually the internal process for candidate selection will be through the direct primary. Unfortunately, problems of putting in place verifiable membership register has continued to undermine the capacity of the party to actualise that vision.

 

There is the need to strongly appeal to all APC leaders to return to the founding vision of the party of ensuring that every member of the party is authorised as part of the internal rule to participate in the process of candidate selection for election. To achieve that will require the existence of verifiable membership record, which should be electronically preserved. The current manual analogue record must be upgraded to digital and computerised record with very competent officials managing it. Part of the appeal to APC leaders is that the process of electing national officers present a big opportunity to ensure that competent officers to run the affairs of the party, and not surrogates, are elected. Competent officers may not be attracted when the funding reality for the party is loosely defined. Therefore, as part of the compelling initiatives to return the party to its original vision, leaders of the party should conclude on issues of membership subscription and specifically take every decision about sources of funding for the party.

 

Once party funding is defined such that minimum resources needed to run party affairs are generated, remuneration and conditions of services for party leaders at all levels should be similarly defined. Part of the recommendation should be to benchmark party condition of service with existing conditions of public service. For instance, the National Chairman of the party could have the same remuneration and condition as the Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as provided in the 1999 Constitution as amended and other relevant provisions of other statutory bodies. Similarly, Deputy National Chairmen could have the same conditions as that of the Senate President, National Secretary, same conditions as that of the Secretary to Government of the Federation, other principal officers in the National Working Committee could have same conditions as Ministers while those of them that are Deputies or Assistants could have the same conditions as Ministers of State. Directors in the party Secretariat could have the same conditions as Permanent Secretaries. This logic can also be replicated at state and local governments levels.

 

The point is that so long as management of political parties failed to address these fundamental issues of membership recruitment and management, party funding and administration, Nigerians will continue to experience all the familiar challenges weakening internal democracy within political parties. To the extent that a number of these issues are being debated in APC, which is largely responsible for why an APC dominated Senate could propose compelling parties to include direct primary as the method for candidates’ selection by all parties as part of the electoral law, there is every hope that the potential is higher to be achieved in APC. APC leaders will have to make all the needed sacrifice to allow the party to develop the corresponding new orientation, to make the party emerge as truly the party of change. The caution must however be expressed that it will almost be impossible to achieve once disposition of party leaders is limited to aspiring to emerge as candidates for elections. Desperation to emerge as candidates for elections will always pitch party leaders against each other. Party structures will only be allowed to operate based on estimation of potentials to achieve political aspirations. Internal consultations, both formal and informal will be weak. Relationship between members of the executive and legislative branches, even when belonging to the same party, will be everything but cordial. Above all the powers of party management to regulate conduct of elected officials at all levels will remain a dream.

 

As much as enabling legal framework is required to guarantee internal democracy within parties, political leaders at all levels should be ready to make the right sacrifices. Making sacrifices in politics must be seen beyond personal advantages to access elective and appointive offices. Ability to develop strong institutional capacity to command the respect and confidence of party members is an important democratic enabler for both electoral victory and security for political leaders in the long run.

[Salihu Lukman]

Internal Democracy in Political Parties and Prospects for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On Tuesday, October 12, 2021, the Nigerian Senate passed the electoral amendment bill, which among others approved electronic transmission of election results and compel all political parties in the country to use direct method of conducting party primary for the selection of candidates for electoral contests. These are significant decisions, which could potentially enhance the credibility of Nigerian elections and expand the scope of citizens’ participation in politics. A critical success factor in terms of whether these decisions would achieve such potential outcomes has to do with capacity of both Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and political parties to develop the needed organisational capacity to administer the new legal framework provided under the amended electoral law.

This position does not represent the view of any APC Governor or the Progressive Governors Forum

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigeria’s Insecurity and Communication Problems

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

On Wednesday, October 20, 2021, reports emerged in the Nigerian media, alleging that Nigerian Armed Forces are yet to fully deplore the A-29 Super Tucano fighter jets procured from the United States against bandits in the North-West because of an agreement, which require Nigeria to only use the jets on terrorists and insurgents. Interestingly, the next day, Thursday, October 21, 2021, so-called bandits planted explosives on Abuja-Kaduna rail line and attack passenger train, which led to the suspension of the Abuja-Kaduna train services for almost 48 hours. On Saturday, October 23, 2021, The Economist magazine of London published a damning report captioned ‘Insurgency, secessionism and banditry threaten Nigeria.’

 

The report by The Economist, which is basically editorial opinion is that Nigerian army is over stretched and only ‘mighty on paper’, officers stole weapons and ‘sold to insurgents’, police are understaffed, demoralised and poorly trained’, and they ‘supplement their low pay by robbing the public.’ It concluded with the recommendation that Nigeria need ‘to beef up its police’ with the call to recruit more police by pointing out that Niger State ‘has just 4,000 officers to protect 24m people.’ The population of Niger State is about 4 million. This error, however, may not invalidate the fact that Nigeria is under policed. The woolgathering disposition of The Economists might have been responsible for such avoidable error.

 

It is not only the error in presenting the population of Niger State, but the fact that the magazine lost almost every sense of objectivity in analysing challenges of insecurity facing the country. It (The Economist) reduced the so-called report to arguing that the procurement of the A-29 Super Tucano jets is wasteful spending because ‘Local cops would be better at stopping kidnappings and solving crimes than the current federal force, which is often sent charging from one trouble spot to another. Money could come from cutting wasteful spending by the armed forces on jet fighters, which are not much use for guarding schools. Britain and America, which help train Nigeria’s army, could also train detectives. Better policing could let the army withdraw from areas where it is pouring fuel on secessionist fires.’ As far as The Economists is concerned, what is required to end banditry and protect schools in the North-West is recruitment of more police and not ‘wasteful’ spending in the procurement of jets.

 

In his weekly article, titled Mighty Armies on Paper, Mallam Mahmud Jega, on Monday, October 25, 2021, reminded The Economist magazine how the ‘mighty’ US army spent over $6 trillion in 20 years fighting the Talibans in Afghanistan only to lose the battle. Similarly, the ‘mighty’ British army were unable to defeat the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and end ‘The Troubles’ until ‘the signing of the Good Friday Accord in 1992.’ Mallam Jega highlighted the point that all ‘conventional armies in this world have difficulty fighting asymmetric warfare, essentially because they are not trained for it.’ This is perhaps one of the most important elements about the problem of insecurity in Nigeria, which is that to resolve it require unconventional strategies.

 

It is very shocking that the speculation about whether Nigerian Armed Forces should deploy the newly procured A-29 Tucano jets to fight insecurity in the country against bandits, insurgents or terrorist was given much attention. Isn’t it true that already the jets have been deployed in the North-West, in Zamfara, Kaduna and Katsina States and have produced some significant successes against the bandits? Is it even true that there is any agreement with the US Government prohibiting Nigeria from using the jets against bandits? Will US government really take steps to block initiative by Nigerian Armed Forces and Nigerian government to use the newly acquired A-29 Super Tucano jets against bandits in the North-West?

 

The whole speculation about the so-called agreement between Nigeria and US Government on the use of the A-29 Super Tucano jets is insulting to both Nigeria and US governments. There are so much interesting coincidences from the speculation about the so-called agreement between Nigeria and US governments on how the A-29 Super Tucano jets will be used, the attack on Abuja-Kaduna train and the report in The Economist. It is as if somebody, somewhere want to discourage Nigerian Armed Forces from fighting bandits in the North-West and therefore want to halt any progress that is being achieved. Recent public debate in the country would seem to be targeted at demoralising Nigerian Armed Forces from fighting the bandits in the North-West and the attack on the Abuja-Kaduna train is being used to emphasise the sophistication of the bandits. If there is anything that truly confirms that bandits are terrorists, the attack on Abuja-Kaduna train attack is it. Afterall, are terrorists not people who threaten the lives of innocent citizens? What is more threatening than the activities of these bandits in the North-West?

 

Interestingly, apologists and self-appointed counsels to the Bandits, such as Sheikh Ahmed Gumi are becoming more confident, and are irresponsibly mobilising opposition against declaring bandits’ terrorists. All the studies about insecurity and banditry in Nigeria only confirmed that the bandits operating in the North-West and North-Central have all the characteristics of terrorist groups. For instance, a study by Dr. Murtala Ahmed Rufa’i, presented at the 15^th Usman Danfodio University, Sokoto Seminar Series, on Thursday, September 9, 2021, titled, I am a Bandit – A Decade of Research in Zamfara State Bandit’s Den, reported that bandits are armed groups with ‘contacts across the Sahel, particularly Libya and Mali’, having ‘huge capital’, ‘in possession of more that 500 AK 47 guns’, and ‘own sophisticated weapons like RPGS and Anti-Aircraft.’ The report indicated that ‘there are over 60,000 weapons in circulation’ in the North-West alone.

 

Any debate about the challenges of insecurity and banditry in Nigeria, which misses this reality is simply uninformed and therefore unhelpful. The arrogance of The Economist, which made them to imagine that they can condemn Nigerian Armed Forces and Government based on some uninformed sentiments reflects the old ideological mindset that was used in the 1980s to impose Structural Adjustment Programmes, leading to the destruction of education and health sectors in most African countries, including Nigeria. In fact, the current problems of insecurity and banditry in Nigeria is partly a direct consequence of the collapse of the country’s educational system, which is why there is estimated over 12 million Nigerian children out of school.

 

There are many recent studies, which have highlighted the objective reality about Nigeria’s security challenges, based on which good recommendations towards addressing the challenges were made. One of such study was also the presentation by an international consulting firm, Nextier SPD (Security, Peace, and Development) to the 27^th Nigerian Economic Summit of October 2021, titled Stemming the Tears – A Pragmatic Approach to Solving Nigeria’s Security Challenge. The study highlighted that ‘in the twelve months to September 2021, Nigeria recorded 890 violent incidents resulting in 3,787 deaths, 340 injured persons, and 2,542 kidnapped persons…A further breakdown of the figures shows that banditry is currently the leading conflict type in Nigeria in terms of number of incidents (606 or 68.1 percent) and number of deaths (2,470 or 65.2 percent), number of injured (211 or 62.1 percent) and number of persons kidnapped (2,487 or 97.8 percent).’

 

The study by Nextier proved the point that the biggest security challenge facing Nigeria today is banditry. At least 6 innocent lives are killed everyday by bandits. Nextier acknowledges that the recent intensification of the fight against bandits, which made ‘authorities in Katsina, Sokoto and Zamfara States imposed a communications blackout in several communities in the states to stop communication among bandits and between them and their informants. Also there has been a squeeze on fuel and food supplies to forests and other hide-outs of the armed gangs. In addition, the limitation has been imposed on cattle movement and the opening hours of local markets in the worst-hit areas by banditry. Those who smuggle fuel to bandits have been arrested. Hundreds of land and aerial troops have been executing the offensive since early September to stop the surge in mass abductions, community raids and sexual violence in the North-West. To further boost military efforts aimed at halting violence in both the North-West and North-Central, the governments of Zamfara, Sokoto, Kebbi, Kaduna, Niger, Katsina and Nasarawa States have agreed to recruit 3,000 special vigilantes in the troubled regions.’

 

The point is, more than before, since July 2021 with the arrival of the recently acquired A-29 Super Tucano jets and their deployment, Nigerian Armed Forces have been achieving successes in fighting bandits in the North-West. As a result of the successes, Nextier noted that bandits are migrating and launching attacks in areas ‘initially peaceful’, which may partly explain the recent attack on the Abuja-Kaduna rail line and train services of Thursday, October 21. A major challenge is the need to build trust to strengthen collaboration between the Nigerian Armed Forces and citizens to end activities of bandits. In the submission of Nextier, ‘the military needs to win “hearts and minds” and build trust with the community to access the information. This strategy will demand significant effort and patience from the military, given the current state of the relationship.’

 

It is very easy to reduce these challenges to commentaries and opinion analysis. Those who aspire to use the security challenges facing Nigeria to gain cheap recognition or political advantages may want to create doubts about the ability of Nigerian Armed Forces to fight bandits or effectiveness of the current strategy with all its successes. Commentaries and opinions that have the objective of gaining cheap recognition or political advantage tend to dismiss or ignore all the body of knowledge being generated in the country about the national security challenges, which is mostly by patriotic non-partisan and non-state actors. A careful review of all the new body of knowledge will for instance recognise that resolving the problem of trust between citizens and the Nigerian Armed Forces is a critical success factor.

 

This was also confirmed in a study by Prof. Aly Verjee, senior Advisor to the Africa Centre at the United States Institute for Peace (USIP) and Prof. Chris Kwaja of the Centre for Peace and Security Studies, Modibbo Adama University of Technology, Yola, Nigeria, in the publication, An Epidemic of Kidnapping: Interpreting School Abduction and Insecurity, which was published in the African Study Quarterly, Volume 20, Issue 3 of October 2021. Verjee and Kwaja specifically noted that ‘Nigerians have good reason to distrust the police and the army. A long-enduring “crisis of legitimacy” in the police…has persisted for decades, because of the entrenched corruption, poor service delivery, and predatory behaviour.’ All the studies, so far agree that resolving the problem of trust between citizens and security officials, especially the police will require some fundamental reforms, which is beyond the simple issue of recruiting more personnel. The whole debate about whether to have state police or not is about the scope of reform to be carried out.

 

The major disconnects in the public debate about security challenges facing the country is that all the important body of knowledge, which ordinarily should assist to guide positions of Nigerian citizens and government are ignored. In the circumstance, public debate become distant from knowledge, engagement with public policy reduced to sentiment, and every challenge facing the country, including security problem, such as banditry easily get politicised. Criticisms and campaigns against APC and President Buhari is hardly supported with alternative proposals. This is the main reason why any defense of APC and President Muhammadu Buhari’s policy initiative is being equated to supporting ‘imposition of Fulani hegemony on Nigerians’ even by some supporters of APC leaders. Public debate then become highly toxic. The fundamental question, which must be asked is, how is APC responding to these developments?

 

This is not about propaganda. It is about the future of the country and about commitment of APC leaders to facilitate initiatives that can support Nigerians to restore citizens’ humanity based on application of knowledge to shape public debates in the country. Unless and until, APC, both as a party and government, can roll out initiatives to direct public debates in the country based on application of contemporary knowledge about existing problems, highly negative interpretation of government initiatives or so-called lack of it will continue to drive public conversation in the country. Inability to take advantages of existing body of knowledge in the country is also responsible for why some leading public officials of government could make illogical statements claiming so-called differences between bandits and terrorists. With all the knowledge that bandits kill at least 6 Nigerians every day, what could be more terrifying?

 

The reality is that information management in the country is taken for granted and capacity to create the right messages that inspire citizens to believe in APC and its government is weak. What initiatives should APC take to strengthen the capacity of appointed and elected functionaries to be able to create the right messages and efficiently disseminate them? Is the party and government information protocols and their functionaries knowledgeable about the operative strategy being used to address the country’s security challenges? Is such a knowledge driven by strong coordination through which both the party, government structures and functionaries at all levels are driven by the insatiable quest to find solutions to every manifest problem?

 

Against the background of years of bad governance in Nigeria, characterised by accumulated anger of citizens, inability of both the party, government structures and functionaries at all levels to drive national processes of information management based on commitment to finding solution to manifest problems will continue to weaken capacity to create the right messages and effectively disseminate them. Such a failure could have relegated APC and its government to exist in the shadow of all previous governments who created the problems in the first place.

 

Should this be the case, how can APC and its government, redesign information management strategy based on which it can moblise Nigerians to commit themselves to the agenda of change as being implemented by the APC Federal Government led by President Buhari? What are the important steps needed to commence the process of redesigning information management in the country and engender commitment of all functionaries of the party and government to the institution of a new regime of problem-solving information management in the country? Under the new regime of problem-solving information management, can APC and its governments develop a new reporting template, which ensures that reports of events by all credible media platforms conform to some minimum verifiable standards? Can the new regime of problem-solving information management seek to strengthen national compliance to existing statutory provisions in the country?

 

Is APC and its government able to develop some coordination structure with the objective of creating both generic and implied messages aimed at communicating initiatives of APC governments to resolve challenges of insecurity? It is important that the capacity of designated structures and functionaries to promote messages that mobilises Nigerians, which ensures that the understanding and causes of events forms integral part of messages as well as recommendations of what is required to solve any possible associated problems triggering the event.

 

These are not hypothetical issues. They are also not about propaganda. It is about the capacity of political leaders and actors to be honest in mobilising responses to challenges. The current structure of information management is part of the problem and must change if APC and its government is to effectively mobilise Nigerians to support initiatives to resolve national security challenges. Failure to recognise this may continue to damage the electoral prospect of APC. Engineering the evolution of the new regime of problem-solving information management is central to the resolution of Nigeria’s security challenges.

 

Part of the objective of evolving a new problem-solving information management is to ensure synergy of activities of the party, government and as much as possible major national players in the business of mobilising Nigerians to contribute towards resolving national challenges. In the context of such a coordinated strategy, there should be some regular consultations to review national challenges and develop common strategies. Part of the task of reviewing national challenges would require that true accounts of events and their causes are established and based on that some agreements reached regarding what is required to address problems, which should cover actions required from non-governmental actors.

 

Without doubt there exist many initiatives driven by some of the existing established structures of government, which needs to be mainstreamed as part of the new problem-solving information management. The campaign by National Orientation Agency, for instance, of change begins with me is one of such initiatives. Perhaps, it needs to be further strengthened and improved such that it highlights the new secure Nigeria being envisioned. How can the change begin with me campaign, also for instance, fit into the strategy of mobilising Nigerians to support the fight to end insecurity in the country, in all its ramification? To achieve that will require some radical reforms of many of the structures of government facilitating the process of information management, including the National Orientation Agency.

 

One problem of information management in the country is funding. Often without funding no initiative is taken and most times the funding is inflated beyond rational reasoning. New approach and orientation are required, which should redesign the work of information managers in all spheres. The new regime of problem-solving information management should be oriented based a commitment to weed out all the superfluous costs that adds no value to the process of information dissemination. In addition, government broadcast stations such as Nigerian Television Authority (NTA), Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria (FRCN), Voice of Nigeria (VON) and News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), among other, should be encouraged to create customised programmes, which should seek to specifically facilitate interface between government officials and citizens involved in the field of enquiry about contemporary challenges?

 

In the context of facilitating engagement between government officials and citizens working in the field of enquiry about critical challenges facing the country, for instance, at least NTA and FRCN with all their national coverage should have a weekly or daily programes at prime times to undertake public reviews of challenges and progress being made to fight insecurity in the country. Based on such reviews, both designated officials of Nigerian security services and non-state actors who have undertaken studies on Nigeria’s security challenges can feature and assist in guiding national debates. This could also facilitate uptake of important recommendations from reports such as those made by Dr. Rufa’i, Nextier, Profs. Verjeer and Kwaja, and many similar studies by important policy cites in the country.

 

The point is, so long as public debates in the country are not guided by knowledge, citizens engagement with public policy will continue to be reduced to sentiment, and every challenge facing the country, including security problems, such as banditry would be politicised, and as such public conversation in the country will remain toxic. How APC can facilitate the reform of information management structures in the country to successfully mobilise Nigerians to support government initiatives will largely determine the electoral viability of the party. Once APC continue to allow speculative and false national debates such as the issue of unfounded agreement between Nigeria and US government on the use of the A-29 newly acquired Super Tucano jets, it is indicative of a weak communication management framework, which may only worsen the challenges facing the country. Inability to use knowledge to guide public debate is what confer legitimacy to so-called editorial opinion by arrogant news medium such as The Economist based on old ideological mindsets. Resolving the security challenge facing the country is about winning the ‘hearts and minds’ of Nigerians!

[Salihu Lukman]

Opposition Politics and Campaign for New Nigeria

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

With the successful conclusion of the PDP National Convention on Saturday, October 30, 2021, credit must be given to leaders and members of the party for being able to manage the process and elect a new leadership for the party. Those who are not members of the party should urge the newly elected PDP leaders to build on the new atmosphere to start a new beginning for the party based on honesty, respect for one another and above all recognising that politics is all about negotiations and agreement. Every negotiation should produce agreement based on majority decisions. Of course, people are free to disagree with decisions of the majority. But such disagreements should respect the rights of the majority to direct how parties, society and nation should be governed. When disagreement turn to rebellion, it is either that those who disagree are not democrats, or they lack the capacity to negotiate and through negotiations win support of majority, or they are very desperate to have their says and ways in dictating how organisations and wider Nigerian society should be governed. It may also be a combination of all the above.

 

Ordinarily, the successful conclusion of the PDP National Convention should only be celebrated by PDP members. However, given the important role the party has played in orienting politics in Nigeria for 16 years between 1999 and 2015, during which Nigerian politics was made to be opposed to negotiations, it is important to acknowledge that the October 30 PDP National Convention is about the first time, since 1999 perhaps, that there is some semblance of negotiations to produce leaders of the party. Whether in the end, the new leaders will be allowed by the power blocs within the PDP to facilitate negotiations, is completely a different matter. By the way, the fact that the party can elect a young person, below 30 years as National Youth Leader means that PDP leaders have recognised that the old culture of arrogance and impunity must be avoided if they are to win the support of Nigerians, which is very positive. This is itself a confirmation that once processes are managed democratically; the right results would be achieved.

 

Every Nigerian should wish PDP, its leaders and party members well. Nigerians should hope that PDP leaders will build on the successes of the National Convention to re-orient their politics based on honesty and respect for one another. Being honest should be about taking responsibility. From all indications, PDP leaders have only moderated themselves and submitted to processes of internal negotiations up to the National Convention because they are out of power at Federal level. It can be predicted that had PDP been the ruling party in the country, the approach would have been different. Probably, as was the case with all previous PDP leaders, new leaders would have emerged without any negotiation and the National Convention would have been reduced to window dressing ritual, legitimising the instructions of a serving PDP President. Perhaps, everything leading to the PDP National Convention happened because there is no serving PDP President acting as the leader of the party. Good enough, being out of power, PDP leaders had to respect democratic process, which raises the hope of especially PDP members that the party is being reformed.

 

The worrisome issue is that notwithstanding some of the departures from the old abrasive PDP, just as Nigerians would want to wish PDP well, it must be pointed out that many of the speeches of PDP leaders at the Convention demonstrated lack of commitment to take responsibility. This is largely because, as far as PDP leaders are concerned all the problems facing Nigeria today is the creation of APC. Almost all the speeches of PDP leaders during the Convention were about winning election in 2023 and returning to power. Sadly, there is no indication, at any point during the Convention, showing how the party intend to solve Nigeria’s challenges. Not even a reference by any PDP leader during the Convention to any provision of the party’s manifesto, which must have gathered dust in the cabinet of INEC. Perhaps, apart from the few founding members of the party, almost all the delegates to the National Convention have never seen the manifesto of the PDP.

 

Recalling that the PDP, in November 2015, through Chief Raymond Dokpesi, then acting as the Chairman of the National Planning Committee for its then National Conference, admitted that it was ‘aware of the errors of the past 16 years, as human beings, we must have made mistakes and we could not meet the expectations of Nigerians, for that we tender an unreserved apology.’ Being honest is about taking responsibility. What were the errors and in what ways has PDP failed to meet expectations of Nigerians? Above all, how does PDP intend to govern Nigeria differently, if Nigerians are to elect them back to power? As much as it is rational for PDP leaders to campaign against the APC and its leaders, being a party that acknowledges its mistakes in 2015, PDP leaders should understand that mobilising Nigerians to vote them should take its bearing from how they want to govern the country differently from the way they did between 1999 and 2015. Anything short of that will be dishonest.

 

May be the last leader of PDP who was honest and was able to take responsibility was late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. This is because after acknowledging that the election that brought him to power in 2007 was fraudulent, he set up the Justice Mohammed Uwais Election Reform Committee, which laid the foundation for the reform of INEC. In addition, after more than six years of denial by the PDP controlled Federal Government of former President Olusegun Obasanjo that Nigerian army wasn’t responsible for the massacre of innocent citizens in Zaki-Biam, Benue State, which took place on October 20 – 24, 2001, in November 2007, late President Yar’Adua visited Benue State and personally apologised. Had the killing of 19 soldiers in Zaki-Biam of October 12, 2001, taken place during the present PDP administration of Governor Samuel Ortom, which led to the retaliation by the Nigerian military resulting in the massacre of innocent villagers, Fulani’s, and President Buhari would have been accused by Benue State Government as those responsible for both the killing of 19 soldiers and the massacre of innocent people of Zaki-Biam.

 

Without doubt, there are certainly leaders in PDP who are honest. The worrisome issue is that such leaders are few and face a lot of frustrations, which partly explains the exodus of many courageous political leaders out of the party. Instead of recognising this reality, the mainstream PDP leaders are in denial, which is why the party continue to delude itself with the belief that it can mobilise Nigerians to elect them back to power by simply claiming that all the problems facing the country is a creation of the APC. Unfortunately, somehow, the APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee led by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni has allowed someone like Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode, who is among the dishonest category of PDP leaders to cross-over from the PDP to APC without any initiative to reform him (Mr. Fani-Kayode).

 

Liberal disposition of APC, combined with in the inability of some of the appointees of APC led Federal Government to manage issues of communication based on strategy of contracting partnership with Nigerians in responding to national challenges, allowed false misleading narrative of failure against APC government and President Buhari to dominate public debate. Consequently, some of the PDP leaders had the audacity to shamelessly accuse APC of being corrupt while addressing delegates during the National Convention at a time when the country is passing through the shock that some of the recovered ‘properties’ from a former Minister of Petroleum under former President Goodluck Jonathan (2009 – 2015), Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke include under wears (bras and pants), estimated at $12.5 million, more than N6 billion.

 

If the value of under wears bought with looted resources of the Federal Government by a PDP political appointee is more than N6 billion ($12.5 million), it can only be imagined how much Mrs. Diezani alone has stolen. This is not to talk of the $2.1 billion funds for the procurement of arms to fight insurgency diverted by Col. Sambo Dasuki, former National Security Adviser under former President Jonathan, which was allegedly used to fund PDP campaigns for 2015 elections. In fact, the new PDP National Chairman, Dr. Iyorchia Ayu is alleged to have collected N345 million out of the diverted $2.1 billion. Other mindboggling disclosures of corruption during the sixteen years of PDP such as cases of subsidy payments fraud, Police Pension Task Force racket, Halliburton, Malabo scandals, etc. are still fresh in the minds of Nigerians.

 

It may be necessary to also request the newly elected leadership of PDP under Dr. Iyorchia Ayu to perhaps investigate the management of funds mobilised for the construction of the 12-storey PDP National Secretariat located on Muhammadu Buhari Way, Central Business District, Abuja, which is now abandoned as a demonstration of commitment to rescue Nigeria. Having mobilised close to N30 billion and expended over N16 billion, a born-again PDP leadership committed to rescuing Nigeria should be able to fix its internal problems first. Like it is often said, charity begins at home. A party that is committed to rescuing Nigeria should first and foremost rescue itself from its internal adversaries.

 

PDP leaders must always remember the saying in law, he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. Having presided over the affairs of Nigeria for sixteen years between 1999 and 2015, what were the specific achievements of the PDP? How many times for instance was the contract for Second Niger Bridge awarded before 2015? How much was disbursed? And what was the level of work done before 2015? These questions can also be asked in respect of Lagos – Ibadan Road project and many other abandoned projects, which were inherited by the APC government of President Buhari. Today, the Second Niger Bridge is more than 50% completed with guaranteed funding and scheduled to be commissioned in 2022. So far, progress has been made by APC led government of President Buhari on abandoned or stalled projects that were inherited, like the Loko-Oweto Bridge, Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, Sagamu-Benin Expressway, the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway, Onitsha-Enugu Expressway, Kano-Maiduguri Expressway, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Obajana-Kabba Road, Ilorin-Jebba Road, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Road, and several others are in progress, with some already close to completion.

 

There are over 900 active road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country. In addition, the Federal Executive Council meeting of Wednesday, October 27, 2021, approved another set of road projects covering 1,804.6 kilometres across the country, estimated to cost N621.2 billion to be executed by the NNPC. Outside road projects, the railways have returned. Acknowledging that both the 168km Abuja-Kaduna Rail and the 42.5km Abuja Light Rail commissioned by President Buhari in 2016 and 2018 respectively were inherited from the PDP, the 156km Lagos-Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail, the first double-track Standard Gauge Rail project in West Africa was started and completed by APC led government of President Buhari and has been commissioned. In addition, the 327km Itakpe-Warri Standard Gauge Rail, was completed by President Buhari’s administration 33 years after construction began. This means all the different administrations of PDP between 1999 and 2015 met the project and left it uncompleted but APC government of President Buhari completed it. Other Rail projects commissioned by President Buhari include Ibadan – Kano, Port Harcourt – Maiduguri, Port Harcourt – Calabar and Kano – Maradi standard gauge lines, all with guaranteed funding.

 

Once the attitude of PDP leaders is to mobilise Nigerians without acknowledging this reality, it means nothing has changed in PDP. It should therefore be expected that PDP campaigns for 2023 will be oriented to mislead Nigerians into voting them into power. To achieve that every problem of the country will continue to be politicised and leaders of PDP such as Governor Ortom would continue to propagate hatred against APC and President Buhari based on so-called ‘fulanisation’ and ‘islamisation’ agenda. This is a variant of ultra-right-wing politics campaign, which is neo-fascist and neo-Nazist, which is being gradually adopted by PDP. Once PDP allowed its politics to oriented based on ultra-right-wing politics, its capacity to regulate the conduct of its elected leaders will be further weakened.

 

Part of the disturbing reality is that there are leaders in APC who unfortunately are also fascinated by politics of ethnic hatred, partly because it has become a way demonstrating their disappointment. While, unlike in the case of PDP, those APC leaders and supporters attracted to politics of ethnic hatred may be angry because they are unable to access elective and appointive opportunities in government, especially at Federal levels, to the extent that there are APC leaders and supporters who accuse APC and President Muhammadu Buhari’s of ‘imposition of Fulani hegemony on Nigerians,’ is indicative of the vulnerability of APC to ultra-right-wing politics. There are many leaders of the APC, who on account of not being appointed into any position in government are angry with President Buhari. On the other hand, there are also supporters of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole led NWC who are unable to reconcile themselves with the decision of APC NEC of June 25, 2020 to dissolve the NWC. All these create some unhealthy internal dynamics within the APC, which contribute to weakening the capacity of the party to appropriately respond and correct all the false narratives against the APC and President Buhari.

 

A major issue, which should unite all Nigerians irrespective of ethnic, religious, political and all other differences, is the issue of insecurity in the country. Recognising that the issue of insecurity remained a major national challenge, it is important that efforts to critically engage government to address the challenges should not be politicised. Where the government get it right, it should be acknowledged. Given that APC administration is taking steps to equip the security agencies and build morale, promote community-led solutions, develop new security infrastructure and operations across land and maritime environments, and address the underlying drivers of insecurity (poverty and youth unemployment), require some acknowledgement especially given that under 16 years of PDP, these were never the case. No doubt, serious challenges still exist, but acknowledging victories and successes recorded in fighting insecurity is a critical indicator of the commitment of any political party towards addressing all the challenges of insecurity facing Nigeria.

 

Therefore, commitment of political parties towards strengthening the current security structure in the country through radical reforms should not be subject of speculation. Issues of amending the laws to enable state governments establish state police for instance, should clearly be outlined in the party’s manifesto and other campaign documents. To the extent that none of this feature in the PDP Convention is indicative of PDP’s lack of commitment to change its approach to politics. If anything, PDP is only interested in getting back to power to continue its extravagant governance style, which convert public treasury to private accounts of elected and appointed leaders. In other words, because PDP failed to address all these issues at the October 30 National Convention, the party and its leaders lost a golden opportunity to demonstrate to Nigerians that they are indeed a reformed party capable of resolving the problems of the country, which they have either created or were unable to effectively address during their 16 years rule between 1999 and 2015.

 

This reality presents a good opportunity for APC and its leaders to demonstrate readiness to continue to manage the affairs of the country. Being a party founded through negotiations, more than anytime, the commitment of leaders and members of the party to negotiate the support of Nigerians is being called to question once more. Capacity of APC leaders and members to honestly respond to national challenges is being contested. Ability to apply knowledge to effectively mobilise Nigerians to endorse or support initiatives of APC and its government towards resolving national security challenges, is now being handled very defensively. Coordination among many leaders of the party in making public statements is weak. To a large extent, this account for the illogical and defensive approach by some senior officials of the Federal Government to attempt to argue that bandits operating in the North-West are not terrorist. With proper coordination in communicating initiatives of government, the explanation of the Minister of Defence, Maj. Gen. (Rtd) Bashir Magashi to the effect that the procedure to declare bandits as terrorists is yet to be completed would have guided all official communications on the matter.

 

As APC prepare for its National Convention, issues of the unity of the country and responses to national security challenges should be priorities. Just like election of leaders, how APC want to continue with the task of responding to challenges of insecurity should be part of the agenda of the APC National Convention based on which a decision is taken at the Convention by way of adopting an amendment to the party’s manifesto through majority votes by delegates. Once that is done, it will assist the APC, its leaders and especially candidates for 2023 elections to mobilise Nigerians to vote the party. At the same time, it will potentially prepare the party to be capable of neutralising PDP’s toxic politics of promoting hatred with the high probability that it can produce ultra-right-wing candidates for 2023 elections.

 

As much as it should be recognised that PDP was able to open itself to negotiation leading to the emergence of new leadership, to the extent that it failed to take advantage of the National Convention to simulate some internal negotiation within the party about how challenges facing the country should be responded to by a PDP government suggest absence of any commitment to work for a new Nigeria. May be as part of the efforts by the new PDP leadership to start a new beginning, they will initiate new processes of negotiating these issues. If that is to be the case, it will be necessary that the new PDP leaders take their bearing by taking responsibility in terms of honestly accepting their errors when they had the opportunity to rule Nigeria between 1999 and 2015. Anything short of that will expose the PDP and its leaders as being dishonest.

 

APC must therefore use its National Convention to demonstrate its commitment to change Nigeria. Apart from electing leaders, the manifesto of the party should be subjected to amendment debate. As part of the commitment to change Nigerian politics, APC must unambiguously commit itself to the unity of Nigeria based on governance initiatives founded on the principles of fairness and equitable access to resources and opportunities by all Nigerians from every part of the country. In addition, APC must commit itself to developing the productive potentials of every Nigerian and every part of the country. The issue of national development must be oriented based on clear strategies to develop the economy of every part of the country. Issues of industrialisation, human capital development through correspondingly aggressively high public and private investment in education and health sectors of the country must be prioritised. This should mean that commitment of political leaders to issues of development planning must be strengthened, and the Nigeria public service must be appropriately reformed and rebuilt to manage initiatives for national development.

[Salihu Lukman]

Internal Party Democracy and Politics of Candidates’ Nomination

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Background

 

On Tuesday, November 9, 2021, the expanded APC Tripartite Consultative Committee meeting chaired by the Vice President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo held at the Banquet Hall of the Presidential Villa, Abuja. Members of the APC Tripartite Consultative Committee include the Chairman of the APC Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC), HE Mai Mala Buni, Senate President, HE Ahmed Lawan, Speaker, House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila, Chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum, HE Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum, HE Kayode Fayemi, Deputy Senate President, Sen. Ovie Omo-Agege, Deputy Speaker, House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Idris Wase, Chief of Staff to President Buhari, Prof. Ibrahim Gambari, Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami and Secretary of the APC CECPC, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe.

 

The expanded meeting of Tuesday, November 9, in addition to these appointed members, was attended by Progressive Governors and all elected APC representatives in the two APC chambers of the National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives). The agenda of the expanded meeting was the proposed amendment to the Electoral Act, which specifically require all political parties in the country to adopt direct primary for the nomination of party candidates for election. The decision to hold the expanded meeting was taken at previous meeting of the APC Tripartite Committee with the aim of facilitating synergy between members of the National Assembly, Governors, and the party on the proposed amendment of the Electoral Act.

 

APC: Direct Vs Indirect Primary

 

The desirability for using direct primary to nominate party candidates is popular given that indirect method, which require only delegates from among elected party executives at Wards, Local Governments, States and National levels is considered very corrupt and anybody who has money can buy his/her way to emerge as candidate. The belief is that delegates used during party primaries, who are few, relative to the size of party membership are loyal to Governors and therefore end up doing the bidding of Governors by electing only aspirants chosen by Governors. In addition, the delegates are alleged to also be very corrupt, which makes party primary to be very expensive because aspirants must virtually purchase the vote of every delegate. Nigerians, especially members of political parties detest the indirect method, partly because it is believed that it is the cause of almost all the leadership challenges facing the country whereby wrong people emerge into leadership positions simply because they can buy the ticket to contest elections.

 

APC emerged in 2013 with the commitment to bring about political change in the country. One of the changes envisioned by the founding leaders of the party was the adoption of the direct method, which is to broaden the participation of members, not just few delegates, in the process of electing party candidates at all levels. Between 2013 and 2015, there were internal debates in the APC to develop the necessary infrastructural platforms that should allow all members of the party to elect both leaders and candidates of the party. Under the Chief Bisi Akande Interim Management leadership, substantial investment was undertaken towards establishing computerised membership Data Centre for the whole country, located at No. 10 Bola Ajibola Street, off Allen Avenue, Ikeja, Lagos. Sadly, PDP government, under former President Jonathan Goodluck, vandalised the Data Centre on November 22, 2014 based on the claims that the Department of State Security (DSS), which carry out the attack, acted on a petition, which alleged that the Data Centre was being set up to ‘clone INEC Permanent Voters Card with the intention of hacking into INEC database, corrupting it and replacing them with their own data’ (Premium Times, November 23, 2014).

 

As highlighted in Chapter II – Party Funding and Scope for Internal Democracy, in the publication Power of Possibility & Politics of Change in Nigeria, published in July 2019, ‘the internal dynamics that pushed for the establishment of the Data Centre included challenges during the conduct of the party’s Congresses and Convention between April and June 2014. One of the projections before the Congresses was to expand the process of electing party leadership at all levels beyond the scope of a limited number of party delegates, which should cover all members of the party. Partly, on account of experiences during the conduct of Ward Congresses in April 2014, which exposed the problem of conducting all-members’ inclusive elections for party offices without authenticated membership records, the Chief Bisi Akande Interim Leadership initiated the establishment of the Data Centre.’

 

Issues of maintaining verifiable membership register is a condition precedent for any new framework, which can allow credible election to be conducted within any political party based on the direct method. This is mainly because it is the membership register that is expected to be used to accredit members of the party during the election. This issue has been a major point of internal debate in APC since 2014. Ahead of every election, it always comes up. Since the time of the Interim Leadership of Chief Bisi Akande, the decision has been to use expanded delegates, involving majority members of the leadership beyond the few that are designated as delegates as provided in the APC constitution.

 

It is believed that through direct method, involving all party members, problems of imposition of leaders and candidates, vote buying, rigging, manipulation, associated with indirect methods of the delegates system will be reduced. The expectation is that direct primary will bring political party leaders closer to members, and consequently citizens closer to elected representatives. Inability of APC to institutionalise the direct method as the preferred option for electing leaders and selecting candidates of the party for election is a major source of disappointment for many party members and leaders especially given the way all the problems associated with the indirect method has also manifested in the APC.

 

The campaign therefore to get the APC return to its founding vision should be welcome by every committed party member, which may have been responsible for why President Muhammadu Buhari continued to insist that APC must be controlled by the people, on account of which he continued to push the party to adopt direct primary. Recall that, ahead of the 2019 election, President Buhari chose direct primary method to confirm his emergence as the candidate of the APC Presidential candidate for the 2019 election. The party’s National Convention would have been sufficient to confirm his nomination through majority votes. Instead of limiting his emergence to only delegates at the National Convention, he requested that members of the party should also be allowed to participate in the process of endorsing his candidature as the Presidential Candidate of the APC for a second tenure.

 

Although, many may argue that such a decision was academic exercise, it however influenced the decision of the National Executive Committee (NEC) in terms of the methods to be used to produce candidates of the party for the 2019 elections at all levels. This is because the decisions of NEC of August 30, 2018, inspired by the position of President Buhari was that stakeholders of the party in every state should decide the method – direct, indirect or consensus – that will be used for the nomination of candidates in the states. Lagos, Kano and Niger States opted for the direct primary. Except for few states such as Zamfara, in virtually all the other states, the indirect method was chosen. Zamfara opted for consensus, which was partly responsible for all the acrimony against the choices of candidates’ that resulted in the electoral disaster that rob the party of all the hard-earned electoral victories of 2019.

 

Expanded APC Tripartite Consultative Committee and Proposed Amendments

 

Noting that both the two chambers of the National Assembly have passed the proposed Electoral Act amendment bill on October 12, 2021, which among others require all political parties in the country to adopt the direct method of conducting party primary for the nomination of candidates and a conference committee involving representatives of the two chambers (Senate and House of Representatives) was working to harmonise the amendment, the expanded APC Tripartite Consultative Committee meeting of November 9 would have been expected to influence the final amendment to guide the work of the conference committee. Notice for the meeting was issued by the party, dated 4^th November, 2021, signed by the CECPC Secretary, Sen. Akpanuduedehe. Certainly, all members of the APC Tripartite Consultative Committee, including the APC leadership in the National Assembly should have been aware of such expectation.

 

Interestingly, before the meeting, which was scheduled to hold, 5.00 pm Tuesday, November 9, on that very day, the plenaries of both the Senate and the House of Representatives considered the report of the conference committee on the Electoral Act amendment and adopted the report and passed the new Electoral Act amendment bill. With such development, the expanded Tripartite Consultative Committee was confronted with a fait accompli. The passed Electoral Act amendment Bill by both the Senate and House of Representatives contained the provision requiring that all political parties in the country should adopt direct method of conducting party primary for the selection of candidates. Section 87(1) of the bill provided that ‘A political party seeking to nominate candidates for elections under this Bill shall hold direct primaries for aspirants to all elective positions, which shall be monitored by the Commission.’

 

In addition, new Sub Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were inserted in the Electoral Act, which made the following provisions:

 

·         Sub Section 3: The procedure for the nomination of candidates by political parties for the various elective positions by direct primaries shall ensure that all aspirants are given equal opportunity of being voted for by members of the party and given opportunity to have agents for the purpose of monitoring the primaries.

 

·         Sub Section 4: The procedure adopted for the direct primaries shall be spelt out in a guideline to be issued by the political party and filed with the Commission at least 14 days before the primary election.

 

·         Sub Section 5: A political party shall maintain register of its members and provide in the guideline for the conduct of the primaries that the register of its members shall be used for accreditation for the primaries.

 

·         Sub Section 6: The Commission shall deploy personnel to monitor the primaries in all the centres where the direct primaries are held.

 

·         Sub Section 7: Every aspirant cleared by the party to contest at the primary not later than fourteen days to the primary shall be entitled to a copy of the guideline for the conduct of the primaries in which he or she is participating.

 

The Issues

 

With these provisions, once assented to by the President, it will be mandatory for every party in Nigeria to use direct method, involving every member of the party, to nominate candidates for elections. If the objective of compelling political parties to adopt the direct method is to ensure credible process of nominating party candidates, additional provisions covering issues of how membership records of political parties should be kept, and processes and procedure required under the Act to satisfy admissibility of members of the party during direct elections should be well outlined. For instance, in the case of national elections, Part III of the Electoral Act dealing with National Register of Voters and Voters’ Registration made comprehensive provisions specifying details of National Register of Voters and Voters’ Registration, Continuous Registration, Qualification for Registration, Transfer of Registered Voters, Powers to Print and issue Voters Register, Powers to Print and issue Voters’ Card, Custody of Voters’ Register, Display of the Copies of Voters’ List, among many other provisions.

 

The amendment being proposed take many of these issues for granted. It is possible that these are matters for internal decisions of political parties, which may be why the new Sub Section 4 being proposed expect parties to adopt procedure, which ‘shall be spelt out in a guideline to be issued by the political party and filed with the Commission at least 14 days before the primary election.’ However, any commitment to affirm the right of political party members to participate in the process of electing party leaders and candidates for elections must be unambiguous. When for instance the only thing that exist as means of identification of party members is ordinary piece of paper and records of members exist only in hardcopies available perhaps to only Ward officials and National Secretariat of the party, it leaves much room for manipulation and extraneous practices.

 

Beyond the sentiments in favour of direct primary therefore, there is the need to properly outline a clear administrative framework under the law, which will guide the process and guarantee that all the bad practices associated with the indirect method are eliminated. Understandably, part of the sentiment informing the actions of members of the National Assembly is that Nigerians have little or zero confidence on the disposition of party leaders, who are alleged to be under the direct control of Governors. Largely because of this perception there is ongoing media campaign blackmailing Governors that they are the ones perpetrating all the bad practices associated with the indirect methods and therefore the reason why they are against the adoption of direct primary.

 

The truth however is that with the state of things in APC whereby in virtually all states with serving Governors, they (Governors) are in charge. The proposed amended law with all its ambiguities would instead strengthen the capacity of Governors or any leader who is in control of structures of the party to manipulate the process of nominating candidates. In states such as Delta, Sokoto and Taraba, for instance, where there are no APC Governors, leading members of the party in the National Assembly are the people in charge. There are other states such as Adamawa, Rivers and Bayelsa and at least eight other states where Governors are not responsible for the possible undemocratic practices taking place.

 

Besides, the issue of using the indirect method as a means of imposing candidates through corrupt practices, almost all elected representatives in the National Assembly are as guilty as Governors. From the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives to all the APC and House Representatives members, they must have all paid for every vote they got during internal party primary leading to their election. At that time, they must have been very good loyal partners of Governors.

 

By the way, there are at least twelve former Governors currently serving as APC Senators. While negotiating to emerge as Senators, they must have also been working to ensure the emergence of their preferred choices who are currently serving as Governors through the dreaded indirect method. Could these former Governors who are currently serving as Senators claim to be innocent of all the undemocratic practices associated with the indirect method? Could the current serving Governors be the only promoters of the bad undemocratic practices of imposition, vote buying, etc. through the indirect method?

 

Part of the underlying problems of Nigerian democracy is the problem of poor relation between members of executive and legislative branches. There is always a constant fight between Governors and members of the National Assembly of almost all states. Poor relationship between Governors and members of the National Assembly from states is partly responsible for high turnover rates of elected Senators and House of Representatives members. The turnover rate is estimated to be as high as 80%. Other factors that must be responsible for the high turnover rates would also include personal lifestyles of many elected representatives, which alienate them from their constituents. The relationship between most elected representatives and their constituents is largely transactional, which produce envy and, in many respects, undermined their electoral viability. On both the two issues of poor relationship between Governors and elected representatives, on the one hand, and relationship with constituents, how can the adoption of direct primary address the problem of high turnover rates?

 

As things are, based on proposed new Section 87 of the amended Electoral Act, which leave many open spaces for manipulation in the law, problems of internal democracy within parties may only get worse. Resolution of all the challenges of internal democracy within political parties require high measure of honesty from political leaders at all levels. It will be highly insincere for members of the National Assembly to attempt to play the ostrich by pushing the blame of lack of internal democracy within parties to only Governors. Once that is the case, instead of party leaders working as a united body to ensure that the adoption of direct method of electing party leaders and candidates for elections produce a truly new democratic framework, which eliminate problems of vote buying, imposition and all the vices associated with the indirect method, it can only potentially be another source of pains and disappointment for party members and Nigerians.

 

Direct Primary as a Cover

 

In several respects, the issue of compelling parties to use direct method for internal party elections as part of the Electoral Act is also popular perhaps because increasingly many political party members and leaders have lost confidence that parties can on their own adopt internal rules that can truly allow for direct primary. Otherwise, ordinarily the choice of direct primary should be decided internally within parties. To a large extent, it is also a matter that should define the ideological orientation of parties. There are political parties that operate as closed shops, implying that the process of decision-making is limited to some few interests. Under such a situation, parties would outline processes of qualification to be part of the decision-making process. Once the electoral law limits the choices of parties, it may undermine the provisions of the constitution with respect to freedom and political liberties. Lawyers and human right activists may want to cross-check all these.

 

It is worrisome that APC members in the National Assembly are the ones pushing for this amendment. Rather than leaders of the party negotiating among themselves on what needs to be done to produce internal agreement to resolve all challenges facing the party, increasingly structures of the party are being abandoned and other structures outside the statutory organs of the party are being used to attempt to address perceived problems. This creates problems of confidence in the capacity of structures of the party to address challenges facing the party. The whole scheming pushing party leaders to use structures outside the statutory organs of the party may not be even about addressing challenges facing the party but perhaps about realising political aspirations of some party leaders and power blocs.

 

The whole debate about adopting direct method as part of the Electoral Act is mainly an APC agenda. There may be a calculated attempt by a section of APC leadership whose interest is to hoodwink APC members and Nigerians with the direct primary dummy. If the truth is to be told, direct method of selecting candidates within the APC began to be corrupted under the dissolved National Working Committee led by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. There were instances during 2019 elections, when the process of nominating APC candidates for election was manipulated using the direct primary, largely because no credible membership register existed since the November 22, 2014 vandalisation of the APC Membership Data Centre by the DSS. There was very little effort to re-organise and rebuild the APC membership record. It was only around February/March 2020 that the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC placed some newspaper advertorials inviting biddings from interested service providers to assist the APC to establish computerised membership data register.

 

Although no reference was made to the previous APC membership data centre of 2014 in the advertorial, the invitation for bidding suggested non-availability of a computerised membership register. There was of course occasional reference by Comrade Oshiomhole that the membership register of APC has been uploaded on the Cloud. The question of access to such membership register has remained an unresolved puzzle, which was why the APC Caretaker Committee under the leadership of HE Mai Mala Buni had to undertake membership registration and revalidation exercise. The major challenge of the new APC membership register is that it is manually stored. Interestingly, some of the promoters of the current amendment to the Electoral Act campaigning to include the direct primary of conducting party primary in the Electoral Act were against the decision of the APC Caretaker Committee to undertake membership registration and revalidation exercise.

 

It is quite suspect that isolated aggressive campaign to include the issue of compelling parties to adopt direct primary to nominate candidates for election is being promoted by respected APC leaders without corresponding commitment of ensuring that the process of producing a verifiable membership register for the APC is finalised. Once direct primary is adopted without clearly unambiguously defined political party membership management framework, incidences of manipulation and crude practices leading to worse forms of imposition of candidates by leaders of political parties, will be the new order. In the piece Internal Party Democracy and Prospects for New Nigeria, some of the inflated results of direct primary in APC during the 2019 elections were highlighted.

 

The vulnerability of direct primary to manipulative intrigues of political leaders was further confirmed in the just concluded Anambra Governorship election. The APC candidate in the election, Sen. Andy Ubah, during the APC primary election was said to have emerged with 230,201 votes. But he only got 43,285 votes during the election. Some measure of honesty is required from all leaders to address problems of internal democracy with political parties in Nigeria. No doubt, Nigerian democracy need to be deepened to broaden the participation of party members in the process of selecting party candidates. But given the way some APC leaders are desperately and aggressively campaigning for the adoption of the amended Electoral Act as passed by the two chambers of the National Assembly, with all its ambiguities, makes it suspect.

 

The Way Forward

 

The whole insertion of the provisions requiring political parties to adopt the direct method in the Electoral Act would appear to be an afterthought. This is because, the original bill, which was subjected to joint public hearing by both the Senate and House of Representatives on Wednesday, December 9, 2020, at the National Assembly complex in Abuja didn’t contain the insertion of Section 87 Sub Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. There was only the insertion of Section 87(1 and 2), which provides that:

 

1. Sub Section 1: It seeks to enact a new section 87 on the nomination of candidates by parties for elections by prescribing maximum fees payable by aspirants and restricting nomination criteria strictly to relevant provisions. Specifically, the bill states that total fees imposed by a political party shall not exceed N1million on a House of Representatives aspirant; N2 million on a senatorial aspirant; N5 million on a governorship aspirant and N10million on a presidential aspirant.

 

• Sub Section 2: ‘compels a political party not to impose nomination qualification or disqualification criteria, measures or conditions on any aspirant or candidate for any election, except as prescribed under sections 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 177 and 187 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).’

 

It was during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill after the public hearing in July 2021 that the Speaker of the House, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila moved motion for the amendment to allow direct primaries to be part of the amendment.

 

In the case of Senate, after passing an amendment bill, which did not include the requirement to compel parties to adopt direct method for election of candidates, following a ‘motion for Re- Committal of some Clauses of the Electoral Act No.6 2010 (Repeal and Re- enactment) Bill, 2021 (SB. 122) to the Committee of the Whole as sponsored by the Senate Leader, Senator Yahaya Abdullahi, All Progress Congress, APC, Kebbi North’ on October 12, 2021, Sections 87 (3, 4, 5, 6, 7) were inserted and passed.

 

It will be important therefore to appeal to both the Senate President, HE Ahmed Lawal and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila and all the leaders of the National to provide the needed leadership for the country to have the right legal framework, which can guarantee the administration of direct primary by political parties in the country as a means of entrenching internal democracy during the process of nominating party candidates for elections. The proposal passed by the two chambers of the National Assembly on November 9, 2021 is highly inadequate and leaves more room for manipulation, which may produce more disaster for the country beyond what the nation is going through under the indirect method.

 

Accordingly, it is strongly recommended that given that the whole controversy about the proposed Electoral Act amendment is limited to the new insertions in Section 87, the National Assembly should consider reworking issues under Section 87 to make it unambiguous. The reworked new provisions should go through all the legislative processes including public hearing to enable Nigerians also contribute to making the law. This is a very sensitive issue, which no Standing Order of the National Assembly should be used to block the democratic rights of Nigerians in contributing to the law.

 

While the reworked Section 87 is being processed as recommended, the National Assembly may wish to adopt all the other amendments and transmit them to the President for assent. Unless leaders of the National Assembly are interested in blocking the possibility of amending the Electoral Act and want to shift the blame on President Buhari, it would be very inappropriate politically to expect the President to assent to the Electoral Act amendment with the provisions in Section 87 and all its ambiguities. The leadership of the National Assembly should take responsibility and not pass the buck.

 

Finally, all APC leaders must be appealed to, so that they are able to understand and appreciate that the challenges facing both the party and the nation require strong unity, especially among leaders. No leader should have the illusion than old methods of imposition of candidates by any means – direct or indirect – can guarantee electoral victory. As much as APC members and Nigerians want the internal process of nominating candidates for elections to be broadened to engender wider participation of party members, no political leader should attempt to introduce loose arrangements so that figures can be produced in the name of results for party primary. APC has worked hard in 2015 and 2019 to earn the confidence of Nigerians. No APC leader should take that for granted.

[Salihu Lukman]

[Salihu Lukman]

Issues for Successful APC National Convention

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

In the book, Great by Choice, Jim Collins and Morten T. Hansen argued that ‘factors that determine whether or not a company becomes truly great, even in chaotic and uncertain world, lie largely within the hands of its people. It is not mainly a matter of what happens to them but a matter of what they create, what they do, and how well they do it.’ Company may as well be any organisation, community or society. Whether such organisation, community or society can become great is a function of what members or citizens are able to do and how well they do it individually and collectively.

 

Success or failure may simply reflect ability or inability to come to terms with the need to take responsibility in any given situation by individual members and act in ways that should contribute to producing desired outcomes. Even when members or citizens can take responsibility, organisations, communities or societies may graduate to bigger challenges, in which case, initiatives meant to respond to old challenges may be inadequate. Therefore, ability of leaders to expeditiously recognise such new reality and initiate appropriate responses become a critical determining factor for success or failure, however defined.

 

Without doubt, the world has been going through very difficult period since 2019. The presence of Covid-19 virus imposes additional challenging realities, which has crippled economies, destroyed businesses and human lives. In Nigeria, in addition to challenges imposed by Covid-19, problems of insecurity have graduated from insurgency to sophisticated acts of terrorism by so-called bandits. Unfortunately, public debate around these challenges is limited to partisan considerations with hardly any substantive specific recommendations by political leaders.

 

Consequently, challenges are reduced to partisan choices and the debate narrowed to what is happening without necessarily linking it to the bigger question of what needs to be done and how it should be done. Even when leaders initiate the right responses, excessive politicisation based on partisan choices is used to dismiss such actions. For instance, in relation to addressing the problem of insecurity in the country, the Federal Government has commenced the recruitment of 10,000 police personnel as well as increased the salary of police by 20%. These are hardly recognised by opposition politicians and critique of government.

 

While it is true that 10,000 additional police personnel may be inadequate to mobilise enough responses to Nigeria’s current national security challenges, it is important to recognise that within the context of the present institutional and legal framework whereby management of police services is exclusively the responsibility of the Federal Government, 20% salary increase and additional 10,000 police personnel in the country are commendable. Part of the problem of responding to national challenges in the country, is the false mindset that government has all the resources required. Such mindset is responsible for why in most cases public conversations hardly acknowledges costs of initiatives. For instance, how much it will cost the Federal Government to recruit additional 10,000 police personnel and award 20% salary increase is simply taken for granted.

 

Unless and until Nigerians come to terms with the reality that financing government initiatives is the collective responsibility of all citizens, capacity of government to implement initiatives that can meet the expectations of citizens will remain weak. The whole debate around reforming the Nigerian police for instance such that whether community or state policing can support the recruitment of more police personnel is practically about how much resources can be mobilised to sustainably manage the operations of the police force. Currently, the total number of police personnel in the country is less than 400,000.

 

With less than 400,000 police personnel, it simply means an average of about 500 per Local Government, which is far more than what exist. In fact, coming from Zaria Local Government of Kaduna State, there are far less than 250 police personnel in all the police stations across the Local Government. Together with Sabon Gari Local Government, with combined population of about 1.5 million, there are less than 500 police personnel. Officially, the Federal Government is said to be working on a plan to recruit additional 280,000 more police personnel in all the 774 Local Governments. The additional 10,000 therefore is a far cry. 10,000 additional police personnel mean an average of about 12 police in each of the 774 Local Governments. If the target of 280,000 additional personnel is to be met there should be at least 350 more police personnel in each Local Government.

 

Achieving the target of recruiting enough police personnel is a function of how much financial resources can be mobilised. The risk of recruiting, training, providing arms and meeting the operational costs of the police without guaranteed funding could only compound the problem of insecurity in Nigeria. Sadly, we exist in a country where citizens only think in terms of what they can get from government and not what they can contribute to strengthen the capacity of government to meet citizens’ expectations. Largely because of such mindset, during the sixteen years tenure of People’s Democratic Party (PDP), between 1999 and 2015, at a time when Nigeria earned trillions of Naira annually from sales of crude oil alone, when oil sold for more than $100 per barrel, PDP leaders converted government revenue to private wealth. Typical case was when under former President Goodluck Jonathan, in 2014, $2.1 billion meant to procure arms to fight insurgency in the North-East was shared among PDP leaders as inducement for 2015 elections. The current PDP National Chairman, Dr. Iyorchia Ayu, got about N350 million out of the money.

 

Unlike the PDP administration, under the APC led government of President Muhammadu Buhari, the biggest investments in weaponry and equipment are being undertaken. Hundreds of new platforms are being acquired for the Army, Air Force and Navy. The Nigeria Air Force has received 23 new aircraft since 2015, including the newly acquired A-29 Tucano jets. The Navy has similarly acquired its first new Landing Ship Tank (LST) since 1979. The Administration has also launched a Nigeria Police Trust Fund. Sadly, public discussion in the country is taking place as if nothing is being done. Opposition politicians and critics of government have even argued that these are wrong investments. Some have argued that rather than invest in acquiring arms, including the A-29 Tucano jets, government should have recruited more military personnel.

 

There is no doubt that Nigeria needs more military personnel, just like the country needs more police personnel. Some security experts have suggested that to end the war against Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East, there is the need to deploy not less than 200,000 ground troupes. Now, there is less than 50,000 ground troupes in the whole of the North-East, which is partly responsible for the inability to hold on to liberated territories after defeating Boko Haram insurgents.

 

Without doubt, government has succeeded in strengthening the capacity of Nigerian security personnel across all services to be able to respond to national security challenges in all parts of the country. The fact that Nigeria is still faced with the current security challenge arising from activities of terrorists and insurgents, require deeper introspection from citizens. It is true that problems of corruption in Nigeria must be won to ensure that government resources are optimally directed towards resolving national challenges. Reality of corruption should however not continue to serve as excuses for why citizens should not take responsibility. Once, as citizens, Nigerians continue to indulge ourselves with the false notion that government has all the resources, government’s initiative will continue to fall below public expectation, irrespective of partisan choices.

 

As things are today, only workers in public and private sectors pay taxes. Businesses and private citizens are mostly defaulters. Largely because of endemic culture of default in payment of taxes by citizens, Nigerians have gradually taken over government responsibilities. Instead of paying tax to government and expect government to provide security, Nigerians recruit personal security guards for homes and businesses. With that, Nigerians incurs expenditure multiple of what could have been the value of tax to government. Similarly, instead of paying tax to government to ensure that public schools and hospitals are managed efficiently and effectively, Nigerians patronise private schools and hospitals and pay prohibitive rates far below standard services. Even teachers and health workers are active practitioners in the default culture that pervade the Nigerian tax landscape.

 

Because of problems of insecurity, farming activities is on the decline. For the last three years, many farm owners have become absentee farmers. For those who have valid Certificate of Occupancy for their farmland are required to pay ground rent to governments to retain ownership of their farmland. For a farmland as small as 10 hectares, ground rent charge per annum may be up to N50,000. Once paid, such money goes into the revenue pool of the government, with hardly any commitment to dedicate any part of it to address the problem of insecurity affecting farming communities. Also because of poor organisation of farmers, but more because most farmlands don’t have valid Certificate of Occupancy issued by governments, nobody is making any demand for waivers of payment of ground rent or any form of reliefs, not even the affected owners of the farmland.

 

Coupled with challenges created by Covid-19 realities in the last two years, economic activities have been on the decline. Yet, Nigerians want to maintain the same consumption habits. Trade unions continue to demand the same level of wages, if not increased wages, even when production activities are on the decline. Both Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC) continue to insist on payment of subsidies on petroleum products even when challenges of mobilising more financial resources to address the problem of insecurity demand that government must restructure its expenditure. NLC, TUC and indeed all Nigerian trade unions believe that it is the sole responsibility of government to mobilise all the needed financial resources. Already, as things are NLC has already issued strike notice to protest any proposal to withdraw subsidy on petroleum products, scheduled for January 27, 2022.

 

Why is it impossible to recognise the changing nature of our societies, which has created bigger challenges? It is so easy to argue that people are the government but when it comes to taking responsibility to address national challenges, the focus is limited to public officials. Given all the security challenges facing the country, why is it not possible for Nigerians, including NLC and TUC to negotiate that instead of spending estimated N1.8 trillion on petroleum subsidy, the money should be directed to strengthen Nigerian security services. Instead of the so-called proposal of paying monthly allowance of N5,000 to 40 million Nigerians, wouldn’t it have makes more economic sense to use the N2.4 trillion to recruit more police and military personnel?

 

Imagine NLC, TUC and civil society leaders in Nigeria directing their energy towards negotiating agreement with government to apply financial resources creatively towards addressing national security challenges by recruiting more police and security personnel in the country. Also imagine that details of the negotiations, for instance, cover the recruitment of 500,000 additional police and 250,000 military personnel in the country. Specifically, in the case of conditions of service of police and military personnel, there is the need to place these services on enhance conditions of services to justify the sacrifices they will be required to make, including loss of lives.

 

How can Nigerian politics be oriented to achieve all these? Politics should be elevated to negotiate these matters. With 2023 elections just about a year away, how are political parties and leaders responding to these challenges? The reality is that, left alone, it will be reduced to partisan choices based on contest of personalities. Nigerians must take steps to ensure that partisan choices come with all important agreements to guarantee the right initiatives from government to address all the national security challenges facing Nigeria. Specifically, the right initiatives should be about combined economic choices which Nigerians must accept to guarantee adequate security of lives and property in the country.

 

Nigerians must break away from all the fallacies that deceptively guarantee certain levels of consumption habits in the country at the expense of productive activities. Ability of government to succeed in resolving the current national security challenge will be dependent on the capacity of Nigerians to support government to mobilise all the financial resources required to recruit, train, fund and provide arms to all Nigerian security services. How much sacrifices Nigerians at all levels are ready to make will determine how quickly government can succeed?

 

As a party, APC need to do everything necessary to refocus national debates towards strengthening the initiatives of President Buhari led government to produce the desired outcome of securing the country. Strengthening the capacity of APC led Federal Government to produce the desired outcome, in the short run, is about massive recruitment of police and military personnel in the country, in addition to the investment that has been made towards procurement of arms, including the A-29 Tucano jets. In the long run, it is about providing good conditions of services and sustainable funding framework for the operation of police and security services in the country.

 

As a party preparing for its National Convention in February 2022, we must appeal to APC leaders to include debate about what needs to be done by all APC government to mobilise the support of Nigerians to bring to an immediate end the current national security challenge in the country. Recommendations that emerge from the Convention should guide the process of reviewing the APC’s manifesto. Unlike other parties, including the PDP, APC must continue to set the needed political agenda to drive the process of mobilising Nigerians for change.

 

As a party envisioned to be social democratic, in addition to the challenge of insecurity facing the country, the issue of massive mobilisation of financial investment towards the development of education and health sectors in Nigeria must also be debated at the Convention. Having demonstrated political commitment towards infrastructural development in the country, which has led to the revival of rail transportation and reconstruction of road networks in the country, APC must initiate the rebirth of public education and public health in the country through similar massive investment to build new schools and hospitals, rehabilitate old ones, mass recruitment of teachers and provision of teaching materials. These are not issues that can be achieved based on the current budgeting structure in the country at all levels.

 

As we say goodbye to 2021, therefore, APC leaders must focus the planning for its February National Convention towards mobilising the support of Nigerians to contribute in every way necessary, including making personal sacrifices to create the New Nigeria every citizen desire. The New Nigeria citizens desire will be a product of collective responsibility, shared values and sacrifices and therefore guaranteed security and abundant wealth. Success or failure will be practically about how much sacrifices APC leaders are able to convince Nigerians to make. Once the debate at APC Convention in February is limited to who emerge as leaders of the party without addressing these fundamental issues, the ability of APC to mobilise Nigerians to build a New Nigeria would have been sacrificed. APC leaders have since 2013 demonstrated capacity to mobilise Nigerians based on clear political agreements. The February 2022 National Convention shouldn’t be an exception.

 

Happy New Year 2022!!!

[Salihu Lukman]

Plausibility of February 2022 APC Convention:

Open Letter to APC Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

Ordinarily, there should be no need to be doubtful about whether our party, APC, will be having its convention in February 2022 or not. Recall that after the end of the year 2021 meeting of the Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) on Monday, December 20, 2021 and in the APC 2022 New Year Message, both signed by the Secretary, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe, there was confirmation that planning for the National Convention has commenced. Members and the general public have been put on notice that relevant committees will be setup. The major gap, however, is that no date or details of Committees, their membership and terms of reference, were given.

 

Largely because of the gap, the public speculation is strong that the Convention may not hold in February. It is quite worrisome that speculations about the Convention are allowed to create strong doubts as to when the Convention will hold. It is very clear that there is a decision about when the Convention will hold. It is public knowledge that following consultations between APC Governors and President Buhari, February was agreed as the date for the Convention. This was announced to State House Media Reporters by His Excellency, Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, Chairman, Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) on Monday, November 22, 2021, immediately after a meeting with President Buhari.

 

The whole issue around whether the Convention will hold in February 2022 was therefore settled. The CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni is vested with the responsibility of implementing the decisions. Inability to commence the necessary planning to hold the Convention and communicate it to members and all stakeholders, including the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as required by the law is what is responsible for all the suspicion and speculation that the Convention may not hold in February 2022 as earlier announced.

 

Speculation about the Convention not holding in February 2022 began to be strong when a letter written by Sen. Orji Uzor Kalu to the APC CECPC Chairman, His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni, dated December 13, 2021, calling for the postponement of the Convention was widely reported in the media. Sen. Kalu was said to have suggested that instead of the February 2022 Convention, ‘a simultaneous event’, combining ‘presidential primary and election of National Working Committee members’ hold ‘on the same day and venue to avoid rancour and litigations.’ This suggestion basically means possible extension of the tenure of the CECPC by another six months.

 

It is very difficult to understand the logic of such a recommendation. In fact, if anything, going by the recommendation, it means that the CECPC will be saddled with the additional responsibility of organising all party primary for all positions for the 2023 elections. If Anambra 2021 Governorship elections is any reference, the argument about avoiding ‘rancour and litigation’ cannot be sustained given that on December 20, 2021, Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja ruled that Sen. Andy Ubah, APC candidate for the Anambra 2021 Governorship election was never a candidate of the APC following a suit filed by one of the aspirants of the APC, Chief George Moghalu who argued that the party failed to conduct a valid primary. In addition to the suit, it is also public knowledge that following the declaration of Sen. Andy Ubah as the candidate of the APC for the Anambra 2021 Governorship election, notable party leaders in Anambra, including Sen. Chris Ngige declared their resentment.

 

In the end, with the support of the CECPC, Sen. Andy Ubah was the official candidate of the party. Had APC won the Anambra 2021 Governorship election, the December 20, 2021 High Court judgement clearly indicated that another Zamfara would have played out. All these are confirmation that management of internal party contest during party primary are being handled very recklessly even by the CECPC. Unfortunately, since Anambra election no party organ has met to review what has happened. With Ekiti and Osun election primary about to hold and to be managed by the CECPC, there is the urgent need to appeal to all party leaders to learn the appropriate lessons and avoid the crude show of power whereby candidates of the party are imposed without following party and electoral rules.

 

It is very difficult to excuse the CECPC from the campaign to postpone the February Convention. If the CECPC is not interested in the postponement of the Convention from the agreed February 2022 date, why is it difficult to make formal announcement about the date and venue of the Convention? Statutorily, by the requirement of the Electoral Act, the party is expected to serve at least 21 days’ notice of the Convention to INEC. Which basically means that if the Convention is to hold any day before February 28, 2021, the notice to INEC should be given on or before February 7, 2022. That being the case, the temptation could be to argue that there is more time. Some reminders would be necessary at this point.

 

First, in June 2020, when the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party dissolved the Comrade Adams Oshiomhole led NWC, one of the expectations was that holding the Convention in December 2020, would have free the party from all the tempestuous atmosphere created around national elections. It would also have provided the needed atmosphere to review issues in the party before the process of selecting candidates for elections. All these would appear to have been forgotten and lost. And for whatever reasons, arguments are now being given about why ‘presidential primary and election of National Working Committee members’ hold ‘on the same day and venue to avoid rancour and litigations.’ Anyone campaigning for ‘presidential primary and election of National Working Committee members’ hold ‘on the same day and venue’ simply want a situation whereby any possible dispute around presidential primary will submerge the emergence of leaders (NWC members) of the party.

 

This leads to the second ugly scenario being setup by those campaigning for the postponement of the Convention, which is the possibility that all candidates of the party from all the 36 states of the country to be submitted to INEC by the same NWC members whose elections may be disputed would be in jeopardy and subject of litigation. Once that is the case, we would have succeeded in making the 2019 Zamfara electoral disaster a national phenomenon in 2023. Is that what the CECPC members under the leadership of His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni want to subject the party to?

 

The third issue is that both the CECPC and by extension all leaders of the party should be fair to President Buhari. The President has so far, with very good reasons, endorsed all the prayers of majority party members and leaders. Beginning with the June 25, 2020 dissolution of the Comrade Oshiomhole led NWC, to the extensions of the tenure of the CECPC. Understandably, the President want to ensure that the capacity of the party to manage its internal affairs is strengthened. The need to develop the infrastructure to guarantee participation of members in the process of candidates’ selection required that more time is given for the CECPC to execute membership registration and revalidation exercise. No doubt, the CECPC did a good job in this respect. Unfortunately, the relevant department in the party’s National Secretariat, Organisation, is not able to competently take the process of preserving the membership records of the party to the point whereby party membership are displayed or can be accessed, in any way possible.

 

The fourth issue is that with the suspension of meetings of organs of the party, notably NEC and National Caucus, capacity of leaders of the party and members to get the CECPC to be accountable and take all the needed guidance from party leaders is weakened. This is partly responsible for the momentary anger by APC representatives in the National Assembly following the conclusion of Wards, Local Governments and States’ Congresses who felt shortchanged allegedly by Governors on account of which they inserted the clause on compulsory Direct Primary on all political parties in the amended Electoral Act. Again, ordinarily, if organs of the party are meeting, especially NEC and National Caucus, aggrieved members would have used the platforms of these organs to contest issues and seek redress. The attempt to impose Direct Primary on all political parties by aggrieved APC representatives in the National Assembly was borne out of desperation to seek redress of perceived act of injustice by the CECPC.

 

Fifthly, since the suspension of meetings of organs of the party, internal debate in APC is very low. A lot of things are happening in many states with grave consequences to the electoral fortunes of the party. To be far to His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni and the CECPC, within their limited capacities, they have taken some initiatives. The reality, however, is that without superior decisions of organs of the party, in particular NEC and National Caucus, many leaders of the party in states have acted or are acting almost disrespectfully to the CECPC and Hs Excellency, Mai Mala Buni. A typical example is the raging war of attrition going on in Imo State. Apart from the war of attrition going on in Imo State, the broader question of uniting leaders of the party in all states ahead of the 2023 election is proving to be very impossible.

 

It is very clear that since 2013, when APC emerged, its electoral strength is derived from the unity of party leaders. This is being eroded systematically since the 2015 election. It became worse with the scandalous management of party affairs under the Comrade Oshiomhole led NWC. With the emergence of the CECPC in June 2020, His Excellency Mai Mala has done an excellent job by bringing down tension within the party. Sadly, all the good work of the CECPC under His Excellency Mai Mala is about to be destroyed once it yields to the temptation of staying longer than February 2022.

 

At this point, His Excellency, Mai Mala, party leaders and indeed all members of the party need to be reminded that the one most important political legacy, which we must all support President Buhari to bequeath to the nation is a functional, responsive and representative party. At the moment, no registered political party in the country is functionally responsive and representative. The truth is that all parties function only as platforms for election. The APC is about the only party that has been going through internal contests to make it functionally responsive and representative. It is a very hard internal struggle, which must be sustained and won to justify the confidence of Nigerian electorates since 2015.

 

APC was produced out sacrifice by leaders and members of all the legacy parties that merged in 2013. Both the merger process and the process of contesting the 2015 and 2019 elections made leaders of the party to undertake objective review of national challenges especially since 1999. Very honest debates, which aggregates the expectations of Nigerians took place within the party, which endeared both the party and its candidates for elections to Nigerians. This was the foundation laid for both the 2015 and 2019 electoral victories.

 

It will be foolhardy to expect that the popularity of the APC will be sustained in 2023 without undertaking similar objective reviews. It would be such objective reviews that would assist the party to renegotiate and retain the support of Nigerians. Also recall that it was the process of reviewing challenges that enabled President Buhari to develop the policy priorities of APC led Federal Government since 2015. And to be fair to the President, he has been very faithful to all the agreed priorities despite all the slanderously sectional campaigns promoted by the opposition against his person, his government and the APC. The President has provided leadership to the party and the nation in a very trying time. Notwithstanding all the odds, he is able to reinvent governance and prove that there can be strong correlation between politics and physical development of the country, which was lost under the sixteen years of PDP.

 

In all these, the President has maintained a very dignified honesty by always recognising and accepting challenges, notwithstanding many of the landmark achievements of the administration. The issue of insecurity, especially in the last two years, is one issue that every party leader must be very concern. There are many false narratives out in the public domain which only a process of comprehensive review will strengthen the capacity of the party to combat opposition propaganda that the current challenge of insecurity is a confirmation that President Buhari and APC have failed. Sadly, people who have shared money meant for the procurement of arms to fight insurgency in the country in 2014 are today parading themselves ahead of 2023 elections as the saviours of the nation.

 

APC leaders must wake up to the responsibility of providing the needed political leadership to the country. We must remind APC leaders that the process of setting the right agenda to drive governance in the country post 2023 must begin with strong internal debates within the party. No one should imagine that agendas set in 2014 or 2019 are sufficient to respond to contemporary challenges, which post 2023 governance will be expected to respond to. If anything, it may also be important to emphasise the fact that to respond to contemporary challenges facing the country would require massive investment in human capital development in the country. This will call for a deliberate and aggressive policy to mobilise large scale public investment to rebuild public schools at all levels. The correlation between collapse of education since the mid 1980s, rising levels of unemployment and insecurity are very glaring. As a party, we must come up with practically convincing answers, which should form the basis of public support by Nigerians to guarantee victory in 2023 elections.

 

The burden of responsibility to strengthen the capacity of the APC to put itself on a vantage position to commence internal negotiation around all these issues is on the CECPC, especially, the Chairman, His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni. Inability to discharge this responsibility or avoid it by toying the path of a deceptive campaign for postponement of Convention can only spell doom for the APC and return Nigeria to the hands of those who laid the foundation for all the challenges facing the country.

 

By way of an appeal to APC leaders, as much as the question of who emerge as the candidate of the party is very important, it is not only who emerge as a candidate of the party that can win the election. But how united are party leaders behind the candidate will be a more determining factor. President Buhari, with all his mass support in the Northern part of the country, may not have won the election in 2015 without the unity of all APC leaders from every part of the country. All APC leaders must be reminded that, there is no one political leader in the country that enjoy convincing mass support of any region of the country.

 

Therefore, the process of internal debates within the APC to enhance the confidence of party leaders from every part of the country and by extension Nigerians to support any potential candidate of the party should be oriented around agreement on what needs to be done to address national challenges. In fact, ability of the party to manage internal party contest for the emergence of Presidential candidate for instance, will be dependent on the kind of confidence that would have emerged among party leaders during internal debates. Party leaders and all members should try to see the bigger picture and work for stronger internal unity within the APC. The only reason why some leaders, perhaps including the members of CECPC, are attracted to campaign for postponement for the Convention is the deceptive belief that any candidate who emerged, whether elected or imposed on the party can win the 2023 elections. This is a big lie!

 

Finally, we must also appeal to the CECPC to ensure that the February 2022 Convention is not just about electing NWC members. There must be some reflections about the challenges facing the country, with priority focus on problems of insecurity, rebuilding public education and health through mosilisation of massive financial investment in these sectors. As part of the review of public education and health, consequences of avoidable strikes actions and how to bring an end to what has become clearly destructive to these sectors must be considered. Conclusions and recommendations from the Convention should guide the review process of the party’s manifesto and bring out some of the campaign agenda of the APC for the 2023 campaigns.

[Salihu Lukman]

February APC National Convention Require no Consultation

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Progressive Governors Forum

Abuja

 

In the afternoon of Tuesday, January 12, 2022, there were media reports attributed to sources close to the APC Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) claiming that the APC National Convention is postponed from February to June 2022. Shortly following the news of the alleged postponement, the Secretary of the CECPC, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe issued a statement of rebuttal, calling on the general public to ‘completely disregard fake news on the reported suspension of the planned National Convention’. The statement further informed the public that the CECPC ‘is already embarking on consultations with party stakeholders to prepare the ground for a rancour-free National Convention.’ Sadly, the statement, like previous ones from the CECPC didn’t announce any date and venue for the National Convention. Very disappointingly, the statement said ‘sub-committee on budgeting and other substructures will be set up in due course.’

 

This is a slap on the face of Nigerians and an insult on party members. How can a statement from ‘a focus-driven, process-oriented political party’, make such a scandalous statement allegedly assuring that a Convention scheduled to hold in February without indicating a date and venue for the Convention? If subcommittees, whether for budget or anything are to be set up, to perhaps mobilise funds for the Convention, why are they not set up with just about two weeks to the end of January?

 

Somehow, it is difficult not to conclude that the CECPC is intentionally promoting speculations around the APC National Convention by claiming to embark on ‘consultations with party stakeholders to prepare the ground for a rancour-free National Convention.’ Recall that on November 22, 2021, the Chairman of Progressive Governors Forum (PGF), His Excellency Abubakar Atiku Bagudu led a delegation, which include the CECPC Chairman, His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni, to President Muhammadu Buhari to finalise consultations on the date of the Convention. Immediately after the meeting with President Buhari, His Excellency Bagudu announced the agreement reached with President Buhari to the effect that the Convention will hold in February 2022.

 

With such an agreement, the responsibility of the CECPC is to go ahead and start organising the Convention. With almost two months after, the CECPC has not issued any notice of the Convention to anyone. Not even the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which by the provision of the Electoral Act as amended is required to be given at least 21 days’ notice. It is very difficult not to conclude that both the Chairman and all members of the CECPC have no respect for President Buhari, which is responsible for why they are doing everything possible to sabotage decisions validly taken to hold the APC National Convention in February after consultation with the President.

 

For whatever reasons, it would appear that the leadership of CECPC are enjoying all the public speculations maligning Governors and some other senior leaders of the party as working to stop the APC National Convention from holding in February 2022. This is most unfortunate.  The truth must be told, the responsibility of organising the February 2022 APC National Convention rests squarely with the CECPC. At this point, it will be necessary to remind all members of the CECPC and by extension all leaders of APC that part of the reasons that made it very necessary to dissolve the Comrade Adams Oshiomhole led National Working Committee (NWC) was the disrespect for leaders and members of the party, especially by Comrade Oshiomhole, the former National Chairman of the party. It was on record that during the tenure of Comrade Oshiomhole as National Chairman, the recommendations of party leaders and members were hardly considered.

 

The CECPC leadership have returned the party back to mode of open disrespect for any recommendation given. It is even worse now given that the CECPC is ready to sacrifice the future of the party. Clearly, what is steering us in the face is that all the bad leadership records under Comrade Oshiomhole led NWC is about to be met and outstripped by the present CECPC. This clearly raises question about political leadership recruitment approaches in the country. Unless this is addressed, as a party, APC may continue to change leaders, but the problem will remain. APC, being a party envisioned to facilitate the process of political change in Nigeria, must appropriately use the present challenges to begin to introduce changes to the process of political leadership recruitment in Nigeria.

 

However, the first challenge now is to ensure that the CECPC has no option but to organise the APC National Convention in February 2022 as decided based on all the consultations that has taken place. The CECPC must be told that all consultations about organising the Convention ended with the meeting with President Buhari on November 22, 2021 and therefore the CECPC leadership should stop lying to Nigerians and APC members. The CECPC should also stop claiming that it is waiting for the meeting of Progressive Governors before it takes all the necessary decisions to commence the process of organising the Convention. Such a claim is not only dishonest but also taking the support of Progressive Governors for granted, which is why Progressive Governors have been reduced to punching bags of all party members regarding all the challenges facing the party.

 

Progressive Governors, like all party members will not associate themselves with any act of disrespect to decisions validly taken in consultations with President Buhari. They will not take the responsibility of actions or inactions of the CECPC. Every responsibility of organising the Convention is vested with the CECPC. Therefore, in the event that the CECPC is unable to implement the decision to hold the Convention in February 2022, as decided, the leadership of the CECPC should honourably resign to save the APC, its leaders (including Progressive Governors) and members from the current spate of avoidable public embarrassment, simply because the leadership of the CECPC have decided to disrespect the decision to hold the APC National Convention in February.

 

At this point, we must appeal to all APC leaders to take the issue of leadership recruitment beyond the question of loyalty. Given that already, 2023 electoral atmosphere is gradually setting, the temptation that choices of leaders of the party will be based on permutation for 2023 will be very significant. Once that is the case, the probability will be high that the soul of APC will be sacrificed in the process of assembling new leaders. Party leaders need to adopt some minimum guiding principles to determine the qualification of potential party leaders especially the National Chairman. Some of the recommendations include:

 

1. Any potential candidate must have good relations will party leaders at national level, especially President Buhari.

 

2. The candidate must also have good relations with all party leaders in his/her state, including the Governor, where there is an APC government.

 

3. It should be a strong advantage when the aspiring person has played any role during the merger negotiation that produced APC and has been consistent in the party since 2013. This means such a parson would have the needed institutional memory to recognise and respect sacrifices made by party leaders and members to make the merger that produce the APC successful.

 

4. It should be a strong disadvantage when any aspiring candidate has records of defection from the party or any of the legacy parties that merged to form the APC.

 

5. Finally, public service experience will not only be an advantage but a measure of determining the democratic credentials of the candidate. Any candidate with public service experience at whatever level without incontestable records of achievements, such a person can not inspire any party member and by extension Nigerians into believing that his/her leadership can bring any good electoral fortune for the party.

 

Without any fear of contradiction, ideally, APC should have been the pride of Nigerian democracy given that it is the only party in the political history of Nigeria that successfully go through political merger negotiations and produced a new party. It is also the only opposition party in the history of Nigeria that defeated a ruling party in 2015. Unfortunately, reckless party leadership is diminishing all these excellent political credentials. APC leaders must wake up to the responsibility of resolving the leadership challenges facing the party. Part of what is required at this point is to commence leadership engagement towards consensus building on a number of these issues and assess all the so-called aspirants. Where necessary, APC leaders may wish to stretch the search for a National Chairman beyond current aspirants.

 

APC need a National Chairman who is humble, with very good relations and respect among both party leaders and members. Steps must be taken to ensure that APC National Chairman and other members of the NWC do not reduce themselves into extorting parting leaders, especially aspiring candidates. APC leaders must take every step to avoid vesting the responsibility of the National Chairman of the party on another ‘emperor’ who will end up conducting affairs of the party with absolute disrespect and contempt for decisions taken. APC need a National Chairman who can provide every level playing field for the internal party electoral contest for 2023. Any new National Chairman of APC who can lead the party to electoral victory in 2023 must not be a surrogate to any aspirant for 2023 Presidential contest. Similarly, such a person must be ready to control other members of the NWC from demonstrating bias in favour of any candidate for 2023 Presidential contest within the party.

 

Being a humble National Chairman, such a person must be ready to subordinate himself/herself to party leaders at local levels. A situation whereby as National Chairman, the person become overbearing to leaders at state level must not be acceptable. There should not be any debate or contest about who should exercise leadership at state level. The model should be what exists between President Buhari and leaders of the party in Katsina State. It is a known fact that President Buhari doesn’t interfere with activities of the party in Katsina State based on which party leaders in Katsina State are able to take every decision on party matters. However, the National Chairman and party leaders at state level should be encouraged to develop structured processes of consultations to ensure that the political interest of the National Chairman is protected in the state. Similarly, the National Chairman must also accept to protect the political interest of other leaders from the state, especially any serving Governor of his home state.

 

Beyond the National Chairman, APC leaders must also take every necessary step to elect very competent Deputy National Chairmen (North and South). It is important that the two Deputy National Chairmen to be elected are people with integrity. In addition to Deputy National Chairmen, positions of National Secretary, National Legal Adviser, National Organising Secretary and National Publicity Secretary must be head hunted. Individuals with good records of public service, very competent and committed to the party should be identified based on which the positions are zoned to states where they come from. The approach to blind zoning and trusting the judgement of party leaders to produce candidates who would occupy these offices will only produce cronies with hardly any consideration about their competence. If any of these offices are to be zoned to any state, it must be based on clear identification of particular party leaders from the state.

 

The more the party continue to allow the leadership of the CECPC to continue to hold everyone captive and refuse to commence the process of organising the February APC National Convention, the more party leaders would have supported the CECPC in weakening the electoral prospect of the APC. Largely on account of delaying the implementation of decision to organise the February APC National Convention, there is hardly any internal party preparation for the 2023 electoral contest beyond individual leaders declaring their personal aspirations for offices. Without any prejudice to the aspirations of leaders, it is important that the party is able to set some minimum standards for the 2023 campaigns so that individual aspirants can orient their internal party mobilisation around those minimum standards. APC must not make the mistake of orientating its internal party mobilisation for the emergence of candidates for 2023 elections, especially Presidential Candidate only based on personality contest.

 

Personality contest will only weaken the APC and undermine the capacity of the party to link its 2023 electoral contest with the achievements of the party, especially the Federal Government led by President Buhari. Once that is the case, the party will be strengthening the false opposition narrative about the failure of APC and President Buhari. If APC want to unassailably win the 2023 elections, it must take all the necessary steps to correct this false narrative. This can only start happening if everyone, APC leaders and members, rise to the challenge of ensuring that the CECPC faithfully implement the decision to organise the APC National Convention in February 2022. A major indicator for this would also include a review of the APC manifesto at the Convention.

 

Unless the CECPC has given itself the new responsibility of being the political and electoral undertaker of the APC, it must stop promoting some subversive campaigns suggesting that it is undertaking ‘the immediate task of addressing contestations within the Party, litigations, fallouts of recently conducted Congresses and generally reposition the Party ahead of the National Convention.’ Once this is the case, it simply means the CECPC’s new objective is probably to take APC to its political grave. This should not be acceptable!

[Salihu Lukman]

Politics of Change: APC on the Brink

Open Letter to APC Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

 

It was the American Historian, Timothy Snyder in his book On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, who warned that ‘anticipatory obedience’, which means ‘adapting instinctively, without reflecting, to a new situation… is a political tragedy.’ This is a warning that can easily be dismissed mainly because it is about accepting or rejecting actions and decisions of political leaders. It simply suggests that there are ways in which accepting actions and decisions of political leaders can be tragic. This could imply promoting some degree of rebellion with the potential consequences of citizens not being able to influence actions and decisions of leaders, which will negate the main essence of democracy.

 

Democracy being a system of government, which produce leaders through elections presupposes that elected representatives would enjoy the support of citizens. On the other hand, on account of being supported, it is also expected that citizens would influence actions and decisions of leaders. This is believed to form the basis of trust between leaders and citizens. However, when all these are taken for granted, the tendency for political leaders to require citizens to be blindly loyal create the false belief that all actions and decisions of leaders are right and any disagreement or criticism by any person unacceptable, if not criminal. Without any attempt to review the presentations of Snyder, situations which makes political leaders to expect absolute loyalty (anticipatory obedience) to every action and decision of leaders produces the political tragedy of citizens distrusting representatives and governments they elected. This is not a very difficult proposition to acknowledge.

 

In Nigeria, since 1999, distrust between citizens and elected representatives and governments has been a major challenge, which in many respects makes politics predictably very difficult to engage. Politics is reduced predominantly to a vocation for people aspiring to contest elective offices. Responsibility of citizens is correspondingly limited to endorsing the aspirations of political leaders for elective position. The thin line has always been the challenge of reconciling aspiration to hold elective offices with the capacity to effectively meet the needs of electorate. Inability of political leaders to be tolerant to disagreements and criticisms reduces democracy to a vicious cycle of controversies and conflicts, often pitching leaders against citizens and citizens against leaders.

 

Why should political leaders expect citizens to be blindly loyal, but citizens should not expect leaders to be tolerant to criticisms and disagreements? It defeats the whole essence of democracy if at all times citizens must support every action and decision of leaders. Why did we as a nation fought against military regimes, if election would only produce leaders who takes offence at any position which question their actions or decisions? This reality perhaps confirms David Runciman’s sensational argument, in the book, How Democracy Ends when he asserts that ‘CONTEMPORARY REPRESENTATIVE democracy is tired, vindictive, paranoid, self-deceiving, clumsy and frequently ineffectual. Much of the time it is living on past glories. This sorry state of affairs reflects what we become. But current democracy is not who we are. It is just a system of government, which we built and we can replace. So why don’t we replace it with something better.

 

Democracy is certainly tired when the challenge of reconciling aspiration of leaders to hold elective offices with the capacity to effectively meet the needs of electorate remained elusive. It will be ‘vindictive, paranoid, self-deceiving’ when political leaders are intolerant to disagreements and criticisms, but citizens should be blindly loyal. Both the intolerant leader and the blindly loyal citizen will be vulnerable to making stupid blunders, which could mean dashed expectations on both sides. The big loser would most likely be the leaders because the expectation of winning votes of citizens to return to office may never materialise, except if elections are manipulated. This is invariably the result of ‘living on past glories’ with the false consciousness that leaders can win elections, fairly or unfairly, without meeting the expectations of citizens.

 

As a nation, this has been a challenge. It was precisely this very reality that confer strong legitimacy to the vision to form the APC with the merger negotiation of the old legacy parties – Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Congress for Progressives Change (CPC) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). The emergence of APC in 2013 gave hope to Nigerians that beyond defeating the PDP in the 2015 general elections, elected leaders produced by the APC would initiate processes of political change. Expectedly, politics of impunity, disrespect for rules, which was what the PDP represent would become history. Recall that for sixteen years under the PDP, between 1999 and 2015, the PDP, as a party, was not allowed to develop the capacity to manage internal negotiations. Whenever organs of the party meet, party leaders only take instructions from elected representatives. Positions of elected leaders, especially the President become the decisions of the party. Any leader who disagrees with especially the President is muscled out of office.

 

Without recalling all the incidences whereby leaders of the PDP were forced out of office, especially during the tenure of former President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999 – 2007), it suffices to point out that Nigerian democracy was cheapened to the level of autocracy. Elections both within parties and at national level were sham. Results of so-called elections were produced even before votes were casted. Conscious that elections would always be manipulated to favour elected leaders, acts of impunity and refusal to respect and consider demands being made by citizens became rampant. These were the issues that APC needed to change.

 

Certainly, in the buildup to the 2015 elections, there was relatively fair contest in APC, which strengthen the confidence of Nigerians on APC’s commitment to change Nigerian politics. Virtually, all candidates of the party for 2015 elections won the party primary. For the first time, since 1999, problems of internal litigation because of imposition of candidates were significantly reduced. But once the 2015 election was won, systematically, many elected representatives began to drift back to the old PDP ways. Consequently, by the time of the 2019 elections, mismanagement of internal contest in APC was rampant. Unlike in the case of the PDP whereby overbearing behaviour of the President was the source of the problem, in our case in APC, it was imperial conduct of national leaders of the party, especially the National Chairman that was the challenge.

 

Again, unlike the case of the PDP, APC was extremely lucky to have a leader in President Muhammadu Buhari who doesn’t meddle in the affairs of the party. Sadly, this became the license for party leaders to abuse the trust of both the President and majority of party leaders and members. Overtime, this has damaged the profile of the APC to the point whereby, based on the conduct of leaders and some elected representatives of the party, it is difficult to associate the APC with its founding vision of change. Problems of intolerance to disagreements and criticisms, with some leaders expecting members to be blindly loyal is becoming a common attribute. Views of party leaders become dominantly decisions of party organs. Even when consultations take place and there is a clear decision, so long as the decisions are not what some few party leaders want, those decisions will not be implemented. It doesn’t matter whether President Buhari was part of the consultations, and in agreement with the decision. Propensity to disrespect decisions and party leaders, including the President, is very high today in APC.

 

This reality is very disturbing. APC today, wasn’t the APC of the period 2013 to 2015. Perhaps outside President Buhari, there are very few elected leaders in APC who are still committed to the founding vision of the party to provide leadership to change Nigerian politics. Given where the nation is coming from under PDP, changing Nigerian politics would require departure from requiring citizens to be blindly loyal to elected leaders. It should require that citizens and party members are free to disagree and criticise elected leaders. In other words, politics of change should produce elected leaders who should be highly tolerant and where possible even accommodate disagreements and criticisms as part the process of decision making.

 

This may sound like wishful thoughts. The truth however is that our dear APC is being held captive by some few leaders whose interest is only about imposing themselves as candidates for elections. So long as that is the case, it means what we have as APC today wasn’t the party negotiated and produced out of our legacy parties. Rather than the envisioned party, which allows for internal debates and disagreements among party leaders and members, based on which there could be negotiations and agreements, APC today has been diminished to only an election platform, which is what the founding leaders and members wanted to change. The commitment to change the profile of political parties beyond being election platforms was precisely part of why Nigerians supported the APC in 2015.

 

Every founding leader and member of the APC must rise to challenge of arresting the drift in the party. Few individual leaders of the party must not be allowed to continue to impose themselves and destroy a party with potentials to provide the needed democratic platform for negotiated resolutions of all the problems of Nigeria. As it is today, APC is the only party where contestation is taking place. Again, thanks to President Buhari who is providing unbiased leadership to the party, it is possible for ordinary members to express themselves, including disagreeing with decisions of leaders of the party. This unique leadership of President Buhari has helped a lot to sustain the hope of both party leaders, members and Nigerians desirous of political change.

 

Beyond the unbiased leadership of President Buhari, there is the need for all party leaders and members committed to the politics of change to ensure the emergence of party leaders at the February 26, 2022 National Convention who must be tolerant to criticisms and disagreements and should not expect members to be blindly loyal. Above all, if APC is to return to its founding vision of driving the process of change in Nigeria, it must produce leaders who would be able to compel elected representatives produced by the party to be accountable to Nigerians. As argued in previous interventions before now, some of the minimum guiding principles to determine qualification of potential party leaders especially the National Chairman include:

 

1. Potential candidates must have good relations will party leaders at national level, especially President Buhari.

 

2. Candidate must also have good relations with all party leaders in his/her state, including the having good relations with Governor, where there is an APC government.

 

3. It should be a strong advantage when the aspiring person has played any role during the merger negotiation that produced APC and has been consistent in the party since 2013. This means such a parson would have the needed institutional memory to recognise and respect sacrifices made by party leaders and members to make the merger that produce the APC successful.

 

4. It should be a strong disadvantage when any aspiring candidate has records of defection from the party or any of the legacy parties that merged to form the APC.

 

5. Finally, public service experience will not only be an advantage but a measure of determining the democratic credentials of the candidate. Any candidate with public service experience at whatever level without incontestable records of achievements, such a person cannot inspire any party member and by extension Nigerians into believing that his/her leadership can bring any good electoral fortune for the party.

 

After the February 26, 2022 National Convention, if APC is to return to its founding vision of being a party committed to changing Nigerian politics, the new APC leaders must ensure that structures of the party meet as and when due as provided by the party’s constitution. Once decisions are taken at meetings, the new party leaders must ensure expeditious implementation. Implementation of decisions must not be determined based on the convenience of leaders, which sadly is becoming the reputation of the APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC). The chapter of endless postponement of decisions must terminate with the tenure of the current CECPC.

 

APC leaders must wake up to the responsibility of returning the party to the era when party leaders are tolerant to criticisms and disagreements. Both party leaders and elected representatives must not expect ‘anticipatory obedience’ from both party members and Nigerians. Not expecting ‘anticipatory obedience’ should be part of what will endear the party and its candidates to Nigerians based on which winning elections can be guaranteed just as it was the case in 2015 and 2019. These are minimum requirements that should instill some level of humility in both party leaders and elected representatives. Anything short of this will endanger the APC and weaken the commitment of the party and its leaders to drive the politics of change in Nigeria.

 

Finally, it is important to once more appeal to APC leaders to ensure that the February 26, 2022 National Convention is not just about electing National Working Committee (NWC) members. There must be some reflections about the challenges facing the country, with priority focus on problems of insecurity, rebuilding public education and health through mosilisation of massive financial investment in these sectors. Conclusions and recommendations from the Convention should guide the review process of the party’s manifesto and bring out some of the campaign agenda of the APC for the 2023 campaigns. A major indicator for this would also include a review of the APC manifesto at the Convention.

 

The campaign to return APC to its founding vision must have strong expression and resonance at the February 26, 2022 National Convention. The current drift, which is systematically destroying the APC must be arrested based on all the outcomes of the National Convention. Any leader working to undermine the National Convention should be sanctioned. Party members need to appeal to party leaders at all levels to return APC to its founding vision, which encourages internal debates and negotiations based on which agreements are reached and respected. APC, being a party of change, encourages members to be critical. A party of change must promote internal debates. Leaders of the party should not expect ‘anticipatory obedience’ from members and Nigerians. That is the APC founded on the sacrifices of leaders and members of our old legacy parties, it is the APC that the February 26, 2022 National Convention must return to!!!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Politics of Change: APC on the Brink

Open Letter to APC Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

 

It was the American Historian, Timothy Snyder in his book On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century, who warned that ‘anticipatory obedience’, which means ‘adapting instinctively, without reflecting, to a new situation… is a political tragedy.’ This is a warning that can easily be dismissed mainly because it is about accepting or rejecting actions and decisions of political leaders. It simply suggests that there are ways in which accepting actions and decisions of political leaders can be tragic. This could imply promoting some degree of rebellion with the potential consequences of citizens not being able to influence actions and decisions of leaders, which will negate the main essence of democracy.

 

Democracy being a system of government, which produce leaders through elections presupposes that elected representatives would enjoy the support of citizens. On the other hand, on account of being supported, it is also expected that citizens would influence actions and decisions of leaders. This is believed to form the basis of trust between leaders and citizens. However, when all these are taken for granted, the tendency for political leaders to require citizens to be blindly loyal create the false belief that all actions and decisions of leaders are right and any disagreement or criticism by any person unacceptable, if not criminal. Without any attempt to review the presentations of Snyder, situations which makes political leaders to expect absolute loyalty (anticipatory obedience) to every action and decision of leaders produces the political tragedy of citizens distrusting representatives and governments they elected. This is not a very difficult proposition to acknowledge.

 

In Nigeria, since 1999, distrust between citizens and elected representatives and governments has been a major challenge, which in many respects makes politics predictably very difficult to engage. Politics is reduced predominantly to a vocation for people aspiring to contest elective offices. Responsibility of citizens is correspondingly limited to endorsing the aspirations of political leaders for elective position. The thin line has always been the challenge of reconciling aspiration to hold elective offices with the capacity to effectively meet the needs of electorate. Inability of political leaders to be tolerant to disagreements and criticisms reduces democracy to a vicious cycle of controversies and conflicts, often pitching leaders against citizens and citizens against leaders.

 

Why should political leaders expect citizens to be blindly loyal, but citizens should not expect leaders to be tolerant to criticisms and disagreements? It defeats the whole essence of democracy if at all times citizens must support every action and decision of leaders. Why did we as a nation fought against military regimes, if election would only produce leaders who takes offence at any position which question their actions or decisions? This reality perhaps confirms David Runciman’s sensational argument, in the book, How Democracy Ends when he asserts that ‘CONTEMPORARY REPRESENTATIVE democracy is tired, vindictive, paranoid, self-deceiving, clumsy and frequently ineffectual. Much of the time it is living on past glories. This sorry state of affairs reflects what we become. But current democracy is not who we are. It is just a system of government, which we built and we can replace. So why don’t we replace it with something better.

 

Democracy is certainly tired when the challenge of reconciling aspiration of leaders to hold elective offices with the capacity to effectively meet the needs of electorate remained elusive. It will be ‘vindictive, paranoid, self-deceiving’ when political leaders are intolerant to disagreements and criticisms, but citizens should be blindly loyal. Both the intolerant leader and the blindly loyal citizen will be vulnerable to making stupid blunders, which could mean dashed expectations on both sides. The big loser would most likely be the leaders because the expectation of winning votes of citizens to return to office may never materialise, except if elections are manipulated. This is invariably the result of ‘living on past glories’ with the false consciousness that leaders can win elections, fairly or unfairly, without meeting the expectations of citizens.

 

As a nation, this has been a challenge. It was precisely this very reality that confer strong legitimacy to the vision to form the APC with the merger negotiation of the old legacy parties – Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Congress for Progressives Change (CPC) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). The emergence of APC in 2013 gave hope to Nigerians that beyond defeating the PDP in the 2015 general elections, elected leaders produced by the APC would initiate processes of political change. Expectedly, politics of impunity, disrespect for rules, which was what the PDP represent would become history. Recall that for sixteen years under the PDP, between 1999 and 2015, the PDP, as a party, was not allowed to develop the capacity to manage internal negotiations. Whenever organs of the party meet, party leaders only take instructions from elected representatives. Positions of elected leaders, especially the President become the decisions of the party. Any leader who disagrees with especially the President is muscled out of office.

 

Without recalling all the incidences whereby leaders of the PDP were forced out of office, especially during the tenure of former President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999 – 2007), it suffices to point out that Nigerian democracy was cheapened to the level of autocracy. Elections both within parties and at national level were sham. Results of so-called elections were produced even before votes were casted. Conscious that elections would always be manipulated to favour elected leaders, acts of impunity and refusal to respect and consider demands being made by citizens became rampant. These were the issues that APC needed to change.

 

Certainly, in the buildup to the 2015 elections, there was relatively fair contest in APC, which strengthen the confidence of Nigerians on APC’s commitment to change Nigerian politics. Virtually, all candidates of the party for 2015 elections won the party primary. For the first time, since 1999, problems of internal litigation because of imposition of candidates were significantly reduced. But once the 2015 election was won, systematically, many elected representatives began to drift back to the old PDP ways. Consequently, by the time of the 2019 elections, mismanagement of internal contest in APC was rampant. Unlike in the case of the PDP whereby overbearing behaviour of the President was the source of the problem, in our case in APC, it was imperial conduct of national leaders of the party, especially the National Chairman that was the challenge.

 

Again, unlike the case of the PDP, APC was extremely lucky to have a leader in President Muhammadu Buhari who doesn’t meddle in the affairs of the party. Sadly, this became the license for party leaders to abuse the trust of both the President and majority of party leaders and members. Overtime, this has damaged the profile of the APC to the point whereby, based on the conduct of leaders and some elected representatives of the party, it is difficult to associate the APC with its founding vision of change. Problems of intolerance to disagreements and criticisms, with some leaders expecting members to be blindly loyal is becoming a common attribute. Views of party leaders become dominantly decisions of party organs. Even when consultations take place and there is a clear decision, so long as the decisions are not what some few party leaders want, those decisions will not be implemented. It doesn’t matter whether President Buhari was part of the consultations, and in agreement with the decision. Propensity to disrespect decisions and party leaders, including the President, is very high today in APC.

 

This reality is very disturbing. APC today, wasn’t the APC of the period 2013 to 2015. Perhaps outside President Buhari, there are very few elected leaders in APC who are still committed to the founding vision of the party to provide leadership to change Nigerian politics. Given where the nation is coming from under PDP, changing Nigerian politics would require departure from requiring citizens to be blindly loyal to elected leaders. It should require that citizens and party members are free to disagree and criticise elected leaders. In other words, politics of change should produce elected leaders who should be highly tolerant and where possible even accommodate disagreements and criticisms as part the process of decision making.

 

This may sound like wishful thoughts. The truth however is that our dear APC is being held captive by some few leaders whose interest is only about imposing themselves as candidates for elections. So long as that is the case, it means what we have as APC today wasn’t the party negotiated and produced out of our legacy parties. Rather than the envisioned party, which allows for internal debates and disagreements among party leaders and members, based on which there could be negotiations and agreements, APC today has been diminished to only an election platform, which is what the founding leaders and members wanted to change. The commitment to change the profile of political parties beyond being election platforms was precisely part of why Nigerians supported the APC in 2015.

 

Every founding leader and member of the APC must rise to challenge of arresting the drift in the party. Few individual leaders of the party must not be allowed to continue to impose themselves and destroy a party with potentials to provide the needed democratic platform for negotiated resolutions of all the problems of Nigeria. As it is today, APC is the only party where contestation is taking place. Again, thanks to President Buhari who is providing unbiased leadership to the party, it is possible for ordinary members to express themselves, including disagreeing with decisions of leaders of the party. This unique leadership of President Buhari has helped a lot to sustain the hope of both party leaders, members and Nigerians desirous of political change.

 

Beyond the unbiased leadership of President Buhari, there is the need for all party leaders and members committed to the politics of change to ensure the emergence of party leaders at the February 26, 2022 National Convention who must be tolerant to criticisms and disagreements and should not expect members to be blindly loyal. Above all, if APC is to return to its founding vision of driving the process of change in Nigeria, it must produce leaders who would be able to compel elected representatives produced by the party to be accountable to Nigerians. As argued in previous interventions before now, some of the minimum guiding principles to determine qualification of potential party leaders especially the National Chairman include:

 

1. Potential candidates must have good relations will party leaders at national level, especially President Buhari.

 

2. Candidate must also have good relations with all party leaders in his/her state, including the having good relations with Governor, where there is an APC government.

 

3. It should be a strong advantage when the aspiring person has played any role during the merger negotiation that produced APC and has been consistent in the party since 2013. This means such a parson would have the needed institutional memory to recognise and respect sacrifices made by party leaders and members to make the merger that produce the APC successful.

 

4. It should be a strong disadvantage when any aspiring candidate has records of defection from the party or any of the legacy parties that merged to form the APC.

 

5. Finally, public service experience will not only be an advantage but a measure of determining the democratic credentials of the candidate. Any candidate with public service experience at whatever level without incontestable records of achievements, such a person cannot inspire any party member and by extension Nigerians into believing that his/her leadership can bring any good electoral fortune for the party.

[Salihu Lukman]

Politics of 2023 and Negotiation for Quality Leadership

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

 

An association of ‘about one hundred eminent businessmen, political, media and civil society leaders, including 14 current governors, 13 former governors as well as three former senate presidents’ announced their presence in Nigerian politics on Wednesday, February 9, 2022. Prior to the announcement, there were speculations linking the group with plans to mobilise support for Mr. Godwin Emefiele, Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to join the 2023 Presidential contest as a possible successor to President Muhammadu Buhari. In a statement, jointly signed by Kashim Iman and Nduka Obaigbena, on Wednesday, February 9, 2022, the ‘association’, while denying that they are not working for the emergence of Mr. Emefiele as a Presidential candidate, however declared that ‘it is only interested in the quality of leadership that will emerge at all levels in 2023’ and confirmed that it held a retreat in Lagos over the weekend of February 4 – 6, 2022.

 

Although details about the membership of the association and how it intends to achieve its objectives are still very sketchy, it is a multi-partisan platform. According to the Conveners of the meeting, Kashim Imam and Nduka Obaigbena, ‘seven persons, from three or more political parties, who had already publicly declared their aspirations to lead the country were desirous of working with other patriots for non-partisan greater national goals.’ From all the reports emerging from the meeting, the lists of leaders who attended the meeting gives strong credibility that such a group can influence the outcome of the 2023 electoral contest in Nigeria. The big question is whether the ‘association’ can have life beyond the initial media noise. This will require leadership and strategic responses to manage expectations of many of the people who attended the meeting.

 

Conveners of the meeting must recognise that almost everyone in the meeting had different expectations. The most difficult one to manage will be the expectations of those who have already declared interest to contest for 2023 Presidential election. This group of participants will want to reduce such a viable platform to avenue for recruiting supporters. And partly because structures of almost all our parties are weakly democratic, which constrained capacity of aspirants to access party members, many aspirants will want to use such platform to gain visibility based on which they got some mileages in internal party contests, which may not be bad after all.

 

The emergence of this ‘association’ therefore presents an opportunity to critically assess the capacity of our parties to serve as effective and competent negotiating platforms for the emergence of ‘quality leadership’ in Nigeria. Without any doubt, the capacity of our parties to produce the kind of leadership Nigerians aspire is weak. Left alone, individuals with strong financial muscles, whose vision may be narrow, hardly going beyond access to public resources would have advantage. Therefore, the new political value potentially being created by a group such as the ‘association’ is the possibility of opening the political spaces in the country, including within the current big parties (APC and PDP) to produce higher quality leaders that what would have ordinarily been the case in 2023. It will require some superior organising to produce such a higher quality desired different outcome, which is why such an initiative require the support of all patriotic Nigerians.

 

In addition, given the profile who those involved this new initiative, no matter the strength of any potential Presidential candidate on the platform of any party, there are individuals in that meeting of the ‘association’ who with the right political strategy can diminish any aspirant or candidate. A major challenge facing the ‘association’ is the question of developing the needed organisational framework. In developing such organisational framework, it may perhaps be necessary to recommend that the group should primarily develop some minimum criteria, which should qualify political party candidates to succeed as ‘quality leaders.’

 

To ensure that the ‘association’ is also working to strengthen Nigeria’s democracy, some benchmarks should be set about how internal party processes should facilitate the emergence of ‘quality leaders.’ For instance, the issue of internal acceptability and how a party candidate emerges based on popular votes of party members or delegates should be specified. Without pushing the ‘association’ to adopt any standard, issues of how party leaders are united after party primary, role of money (vote buying) during primary, etc. should be determining factors. These debates that are not happening in any of our parties, which are desirable if Nigerian democracy is to truly develop. If anything, it can be argued that these are debates that consciously being blocked by the dominant power blocs in both APC and PDP. Any political leader who refuses to acknowledge this reality is simply living in denial. To move the country’s democracy forward requires that political parties, especially APC and PDP who have higher probability of winning the 2023 elections at all levels should internalise these debates based on a strategy of contracting internal agreements.

 

There are also very difficult issues around fair representation in the country, which is producing all manner of agitations. The easiest manifestation of this is the clamour for power shift to the Southern part of the country. Many party leaders across the major parties – APC and PDP are clamouring for this without corresponding initiative to open internal party negotiations based on strategy to achieve agreement. In fact, in the case of PDP, it is almost conclusive that no negotiation is being considered on this matter. It can be said without fear of any contradiction that if internal primary election is to take place in PDP today, a Northern candidate will emerge. The potential that PDP will produce a Northern candidate present a very strong challenge to the APC, which will affect the emergence of a ‘quality leader’ as the Presidential candidate of APC. How is the ‘association’ going to manage complex issues such as this to produce the desired outcome of creating a new Nigeria out of 2023 electoral contests?

 

The other dynamic is also the question of providing level playing field for candidates from all parts of the country. There are many leaders across the country and in both PDP and APC who could have qualified to emerge as candidates with all the ‘quality leadership’ credentials being envisioned with reference to any leadership qualification. But absence of level playing field in our parties is discouraging these individuals from presenting themselves for consideration. This is partly responsible for why across every part of the country, and in virtually all our political parties, the most qualified candidates for ‘quality leadership’ are hardly in the race for 2023 contests. How is the ‘association’ going to open up the space within our major political parties to ensure that the best and most qualified ‘quality leaders’ are in the race for 2023 electoral contests?

 

It is one thing to contest and win elections, it is another entirely to manage leadership based on capacity to initiate strategic development initiatives. Part of the sad reality is that many of those who have declared their ambition for 2023 are only animated, going round the country holding meetings with so-called party leaders. Many of them are simply positioning themselves to harvest victory out current challenges facing the country. It is so pathetic that so-called leaders of PDP for instance who have had the opportunity of managing this country for sixteen years without anything to show as development legacy, are going round the country talking of how they intend to rescue the country. It clearly suggests a push to ensure that the contest for 2023 is founded based on falsehood. Once any candidate conducts his/her campaigns based on falsehood, such a candidate must be disqualified from being considered as a ‘quality leader.’

 

Both APC and PDP leaders, and indeed every politician, across all political parties must be made to organise their campaigns based on honesty. Requirement for honesty during campaigns should ensure that all candidates who merit being recognised as ‘quality leaders’ must accept challenges, take responsibility and in cases where they fail, accept their shortcomings. No politician should be allowed to take advantage of the frustration of Nigerians as a strategy for winning election. If a group such as the ‘association’ want to reposition the country, it needs to take all the difficult steps to compel some degree of honesty among politicians. As a member of APC, I have no difficulty expecting that APC leaders will accept challenges, take responsibility and accept shortcomings. At least, President Buhari is providing leadership in this respect.

 

Once 2023 political campaigns in the country are conducted based honest and comparative assessments of challenges since 1999, it will not be difficult to ensure that the emergence of ‘quality leaders’ in 2023 is based on strong commitment to resolve national challenges. As part of such a commitment, the ‘association’ must initiate processes of national reflections about the challenges facing the country, with priority focus on problems of insecurity, rebuilding public education and health through mosilisation of massive financial investment in these sectors. It is good that the ‘association’ has already established three sub-committees on National Security, Economy and Nigeria in Transition. Given that there is now a National Development Plan 2021 – 2025, it is important that the campaign for 2023 elections prioritise attainment of the various development targets provided in the new national development plan.

 

Attainment of development targets as a multi-partisan commitment must be one of the priority goals of the ‘association.’ A situation whereby politicians reduce issues of national development targets to partisan rivalries must be discouraged. Similarly, we must as a nation, get out of the current narrow mindset whereby some political leaders cheaply politicise issues of national security. The question of reorganising national security structures through appropriate mobilisation of national resources to guarantee effective and efficient responses to issues of criminality, banditry and terrorism across every part of the country based on multi-partisan commitment must be put in place before 2023 elections. There is also the challenge of initiating a strong campaign for national orientation, which should necessarily include mobilising local resources to support the work of civil society groups in the country. A situation whereby Nigerian civil society must rely almost hundred percent on funding from foreign sources is unacceptable.

 

Similarly, as part of the review of public education and health in the country, consequences of avoidable strikes actions and how to bring an end to what has become clearly destructive to these sectors must be considered. Already, ASUU is threatening to go on strike. There must be initiative for negotiated responses to all these challenges, including politically negotiated agreements as part of a long-term strategy of rescue this country. Every patriotic Nigerian should commend the initiatives of the ‘association.’ In addition, Nigerians should in encourage members of the ‘association’ to do everything possible to force internal negotiations, which should lead to agreements within political parties leading to the emergence of ‘quality leadership’ in 2023 at all levels in Nigeria. A stitch in time saves nine!

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

A fine essay.

Impressive analysis even as you do not try to conceal your pro-APC bias.

This is your first essay I'm reading, since in my earlier more limited understanding I saw you simply through the lens of what I understood as the  limitations of your APC partisanship.

My having to read you eventually, and acknowledge the value of your stance in spite of it's limitations, suggests to me the power of creative persistence.

As one sustains what one does while critically examining it's validity, even those who did not earlier give one credit could be compelled to do so.

Congrats on your dedicated political activity.

Thanks

Toyin

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536DA1C95F983E09B59670CAE2F9%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Success or Failure: APC and Campaign for 2023

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

The Africa Editor of US Financial Times, David Pilling, in an opinion article in the January 31, 2022 edition pose the question, ‘What is Nigeria’s Government For?’ With all the attributes of being a politically sponsored promo, campaigning against the government of President Muhammadu Buhari, Pilling’s article signposts what is to come in the months ahead leading to the 2023 general elections. Chock-full sentiments, laden with inauspicious interpretation of Nigerian reality aimed at influencing public opinion will dominate both local and international media. Very conveniently, indices of economic performance in the last seven years will hardly feature largely because the aim is to whitewash the government of President Buhari as a failure. With very harsh conclusions of ‘Nigeria has sleepwalked closer to disaster,’ there is no empirical evidence to support the claims of failure other than poor attempt to appeal to the emotions of innocent Nigerians.

 

To be fair to Pilling, the only two attempts to present indices of economic reality is that the federal budget is about $30 billion and ‘it takes estimated $2 billion to get a president elected.’ While he is right that the size of Nigeria’s federal budget is about $30 billion, the estimated $2 billion to get a president elected is largely speculative. It is simply aimed at rubbishing Nigerian democracy, which is why he made the insinuation that ‘those who pay will expect to be paid back.’ May be since the US is the model of democracy Nigeria is copying, Pilling should have volunteered information about the cost of electing a US president and how charitable organisations funds campaigns to elect US Presidents without expecting any pay back.

 

The disrespect for truth and common logic is very glaring. Otherwise, how can Nigeria be ‘sleepwalking’ under President Buhari but ‘if Yemi Osinbajo, the technocratic vice-president, were miraculously to make it through the campaign thicket and emerge as president, the hearts of Nigerian optimists would beat a little faster.’ What distinguishes Vice President Osinbajo from President Buhari that one can be good and the other bad? Is Vice President Osinbajo not discharging his responsibility based on approvals and directives of President Buhari? Isn’t his (Vice President Osinbajo) so-called success not simply a reflection of the confidence President Buhari vested in him, on the one hand, and his loyalty to the President, on the other?

 

It is simply very damaging to Vice President Osinbajo for anyone to seek to project him as a good person while President Buhari and the government he serves are bad. It is even more grievous to condemn Nigerian aspirants for the presidential race as ‘familiar candidates… mostly recycled old men.’ If we condemn presidential candidates in Nigeria as ‘recycled old men’, the world should celebrate the young presidential newcomers in the most successful democracies, including the United States. It is quite contemptuous and an abuse of privilege for anyone who claim to support the development of democracy in Nigeria to dishonestly makes the kind of unhelpful remark made by Pilling.

 

Perhaps, it is important to admit that Pilling is only responding to the unfortunate reality that while President Buhari and other Nigerians in his government are busy initiating responses to Nigeria’s intractable challenges, many Nigerians, especially some leaders saddled with the responsibility of steering the affairs of APC have become overconfidence to the point of imagining that there is no need to start strategising for the 2023 elections. So much time is being lost debating whether APC is ready for the February 26, 2022 National Convention. While as APC we have frozen ourselves, others have moved on and are already planning the defeat of APC.

 

Beyond, Pilling and his likes outside the country, PDP leaders are daily mobilising for 2023. A party, which performed so badly has suddenly found new voice that is very loud. As APC, with all that the government of President Buhari is doing and many of our state governments, most times, our voices are only louder when we are distressed. Sadly, most causes of our distress come from normal political contests, which suggests incapacity on the part of some of our leaders. Problems of capacity is largely a reflection of poor leadership recruitment strategy, which is not peculiar to APC. It is more pronounced now in APC because being the governing party at Federal level elude part leaders and members with a strong self-belief of high probability for electoral victory. This was the case in PDP before 2015, which largely facilitated their defeat.

 

APC leaders must wake up to the reality of preparing for 2023 campaigns. Without good preparations, APC campaign for 2023 will be reactive and defensive. PDP leaders and their international sympathisers such as Pilling will continue to set the tune for the 2023 campaigns, which will continue to present APC and its government under the leadership of President Buhari as a failure. We must appeal to APC leaders, especially the leadership of the APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni to free the party from the current high level of uncertainty surrounding the February 26, 2022 APC National Convention. It is important that the Convention is allowed to produce the needed excitement around all the contests at the Convention. Being the National Convention, it should be the highest opportunity to celebrate the party and begin to mobilise every party member to recommit himself/herslf ahead of the 2023 electoral contests.

 

Without doubt, preparing for 2023 electoral contests for APC, being the governing party, come with a lot of challenges. As a party, APC must not put itself in a difficult position of campaigning based on propaganda, which in the end will seek to dismiss challenges facing the country and rationalise every action of governments controlled by the party. APC leaders must recognise challenges and objectively assess initiatives taken by governments. Where there are manifest weaknesses recognise and accept shortcomings as reflection of commitment to remedy the situation. It is only when there is such commitment that party leaders will be able to win the confidence of Nigerians and to that extent win their support. Winning the support of Nigerians should be the orientation of APC campaign for 2023. APC leaders must remove every illusion that being governing party will guarantee electoral victory. In fact, being governing party come with high disadvantage because power is always unpopular.

 

Part of what we need to remind APC leaders, ordinary members and by extension Nigerians, is that as a democracy that is gradually stabilising with more than twenty years experience, the question of issue-based campaigning should no longer be hypothetical. When PDP and their sympathers such as Pilling are broadcasting that APC and its government under President Buhari has failed, we must as loyal party members and patriotic Nigerians be able to prove that, to the contrary, we have succeeded with empirical evidence. For instance, what has been the size of federal budget during the sixteen years when PDP rule this country as compared to the $30 billion today? Has it stagnated, shrank or expanded? What is the ratio of capital to recurrent budgets under PDP as compared to today? What is the success rate of budget implementation?

 

Specifically, what are the key projects successfully implemented both under PDP and today under APC? While acknowledging that critical reforms initiatives were implemented during the sixteen years of PDP such as Treasury Single Account (TSA), Integrated Personnel and Payroll Information System (IPPIS) and Government Integrated Financial Management Information System (GIFMIS). Landmark legislative frameworks were also put in place such as Public Procurement Act, Administration of Criminal Justice Act, Pension Reform Act, Freedom of Information Act, Pension Reform Act, and Electric Power Sector Reform Act. These are pieces of legislations that strengthened the capacity of government to manage challenges in the country.

 

Of course, in terms of poverty alleviation and job creation, there were YouWIN and NAPEP. And in infrastructural development, it is to the credit of PDP governments between 1999 and 2015 that they started and almost completed the Abuja-Kaduna Standard Gauge Rail Line and the Abuja Metro Rail. PDP governments also started the construction of Zungeru Power Plant, as well as new Airport Terminals in Lagos, Kano, Abuja and Port Harcourt. There was also the rehabilitation of Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, which was initiated by the PDP governments. There are many projects initiated and executed by PDP governments in various sectors of the economy. How successful were these initiatives and what were the costs?

 

For APC, in the last seven years, the key highlight of success is in infrastructure. Most of the projects started by PDP have either been completed or nearly completed. Beyond the ones that were started, project such the second Niger Bridge, which was conceived by the PDP is scheduled for completion. There is the Lagos-Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail conceived by the APC government of President Buhari and completed. There are many road projects at various stages completion. The Petroleum Industry Act initiated by the PDP government of former President Olusegun Obasanjo is now a law.

 

Since November 2015, large scale agricultural intervention has been initiated by the government of President Buhari, which has supported over 3.1 million smallholder farmers of 21 different commodities. With the intervention, Nigeria is becoming increasingly self-sufficient in food production. There is also the ambitious social investment programme introduced since 2016. It is the largest safety net intervention programme in Africa and one of the largest in the world.

 

How can we assess initiatives implemented under the APC as compared to the PDP? While it is convenient for PDP to campaign based on hypothetical estimation of the failure of APC, it is important that APC leaders, and, more importantly, Nigerians use empirical assessments of achievements of both PDP and APC to determine issues of success or failure. However, recognising that the issues of insecurity inherited by the APC led government of President Buhari remained a major national challenge and is largely the current source of national frustration, it is important that assessment of performance of APC government is not reduced to opinions of individual politicians. The reality is that both President Buhari and all APC leaders acknowledged the enormity of the challenges of insecurity in the country. This is in recognition of the fact that notwithstanding all the achievements of the APC administration in other sectors of the economy, once the problem of insecurity persists, it means the government has failed.

 

Noting also that APC administration is taking steps to equip the security agencies and build morale, promote community-led solutions, develop new security infrastructure and operations across land and maritime environments, and address the underlying drivers of insecurity (poverty and youth unemployment), encouraging reports are emerging from the various theatres of operation. Just on Thursday, February 10, 2022, His Excellency, Babagana Zulum, after a meeting with President Buhari informed journalist that over 30,000 former Boko Haram terrorists have surrendered to Nigerian armed forces. Based on all the evidence, Governor Zulum expressed the optimism that the war against Boko Haram insurgency in the North-East will come to end in 2023.

 

With incidences of banditry in the North-West and North-Central producing more cases of kidnappings and abductions of citizens, including schoolchildren, capacity of Nigerian security agencies to prevent and arrest criminal activities of rebellious groups in all parts of the country are legitimate concerns of all Nigerians. There is also the challenge of preventing or managing conflicts arising from activities of herdsmen, which have provoked all manner of conflicts between Fulani herdsmen and other citizens, especially farmers, across every part of the country. Criminal activities associated with herdsmen also increased incidences of banditry, kidnappings and abductions of citizens.

 

The narrative around this, promoted by the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and their supporters, including Pilling is that challenges of insecurity facing the country is a confirmation that President Buhari and APC have failed Nigerians. Citing campaign promises of APC in 2015, undertaking to end insecurity, fight corruption and build the economy, problems of insecurity in the country is being used to mobilise Nigerians against the APC and President Buhari. Part of the politics is also aimed at mobilising support to defeat the APC in 2023 elections.

 

Consequently, there appears to be some disconnect between politics and the need to unite Nigerians to work together to address the nation’s security challenges. Opposition politicians and their supporters are unreceptive to efforts to mobilise Nigerians to forge strong unity towards ending insecurity in the country. It is therefore a good mark of leadership, notwithstanding the desperate grandstanding politics for 2023 by PDP and its supporters for President Buhari to acknowledge that Nigeria is passing through period of momentous challenges. No doubt President Buhari is not in denial of Nigeria’s security challenges. Acknowledging the challenges is indicative of the commitment of President Buhari and by extension APC leaders to end the problem of insecurity facing the country.

 

Therefore, as part of the preparations for 2023 campaigns, based on strategic initiatives to win the confidence of Nigerians, APC leaders must be very proactive in providing information to citizens about progress being made and challenges. It is our responsibility as the governing party to take every necessary step to depolitise the campaign against insecurity in the country. How can a party and its leadership, which diverted $2.1 billion meant for procurement of arms to fight insecurity to their private pocket even have a voice about who has succeeded or fail? Such a party and its leadership should be hiding in shame.

 

Given all that is happening to our democracy, there must be independent initiatives to engage the debate about comparative review of Nigeria’s experiences under sixteen years of PDP and seven years of APC. There is the need to engage this review based on sectoral consideration to support the leadership of APC to develop the needed capacity to mobilise Nigerians to see beyond the opportunist strategy of PDP leaders and their sympathisers, which is to exploit the frustration of Nigerians to win their votes in the 2023 general elections. The review of achievements under sixteen years of PDP and seven years of APC is also to compel the PDP to go beyond propaganda in its campaign to win the 2023 elections. If PDP is to develop any capacity of defeating the APC in 2023 elections, it must be compelled to accept its failings, recognise the successes of APC and to that extend commit itself to proposing concrete initiatives beyond hypothetically false rendition of its successes before 2015.

 

Every information regarding the assessments of both PDP and APC since 1999 will be verifiable. In this 21^st Century age of super information highway, issue-based campaign must be the orientation of partisan politics!

 

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Interesting new title of yours in relation to APC.

I suspect the APC is better sold by admitting certain facts about Buhari's inadequacies.

These inadequacies are glaring. I wonder if ignoring or downplaying them is not sucidal for APC.

As for Buhari as opposed to Osinbajo, how can one legitimately describe a man who has not developed himself significantly, has no profile of any kind of productivity beyond entry into the army before completing secondary school, military service of no particular perhaps, execept perhaps  victory against Maitasine, entry into  power through a coup, followed by political appointment of controversial activity, and since then known for nothing besides perpetual struggles to regain power, and having got it, destroyed the multi-ethnic and multi-religious platform that enabled him get it, becoming a prominent ethno-religious nepotist and terrorism enabler, with a man of continous professional development throughout his life, whose interventions in national politics while the other man was away on recurrent medical leave out of the country, on the country's money,  brought a breath of fresh air to the nation, addressing the SE challenges in a humanistic manner rather than through  the threats of the other man, the extremist ethnocentrist?

Any argument trying to sell APC through identification with Buhari may be dead on arrival. 

Buhari was useful only as a means of mobilising votes garnered through his decades long self positioning in relation to the right wing tendencies that dominated the Muslim North, a culture that has enabled Boko Haram and the current nation wide but now focused in the North terrorism by Fulani herdsmen militia and Fulani brigands and kidnappers.

Many in the Muslim North and certainly many in the Middle Belt taste mud in their mouths at the thought of Buhari.

What does APC stand for beyond Buhari?

I hope to try to go beyond the exonerations of Buhari that open the essay and read the claims about what his govt has achieved.

Thanks

Toyin

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB5536BC3E7496B4D53A79906BAE329%40LO0P123MB5536.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

APC Convention: Caretaker or Undertaker

Open Letter to President Muhammadu Buhari

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

Your Excellency, every committed leader and member of our great party, All Progressives Congress (APC), is very apprehensive that with less than two weeks to the scheduled February 26, 2022 National Convention, preparations are very low key, to put it very mildly. There is no indication that sub-committees have been setup to drive processes of organising the Convention. Every day, we wake up with different speculation about either Governors will be meeting to decide on zoning or Governors are going to be meeting with Your Excellency, etc. Communication from the Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) is very poor and hardly gives confidence that the leadership of the CECPC, especially the Chairman, His Excellency Mai Mala Buni and the Secretary Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe are making any effort to mobilise all leaders, members and Nigerians sympathetic to the party as parts of preparations for the National Conventions.

 

Based on the schedule of the Convention as issued by the CECPC Secretary, Sen. Akpanudoedehe on January 19, 2022, Sales of Forms to all aspirants is supposed to commence February 14, 2022. As it is, today, February 15, 2022, forms are not available anywhere and the excuse from all available sources is that unless zoning of offices to be contested are decided, forms will not be available. Why has the CECPC not conclude on zoning up to now? When will they conclude on it?

 

Looking at the schedule of the Convention, the CECPC is expected to publish Convention Sub-Committees on Saturday, February 19, 2022. The question is, has the Sub-Committees been setup and are already working? If they have, what are these Sub-Committees and who are the members? If not, when will they be setup? What are the details of these Committees and their mandates, which is to be implemented within less than one week to the Convention?

 

Your Excellency, the way the CECPC is approaching the organisation of the National Convention gives enough ground to suspect internal sabotage. Is leadership of the CECPC working to ensure that the Convention doesn’t hold on February 26, 2022? Recall that initially, the Convention was scheduled to hold December 28, 2021. Through consultations, it was moved to February 5, 2022. Unfortunately, we found ourselves, as a party, in the embarrassing situation of having to contend with speculation about alleged ambition of His Excellency, Mai Mala Buni to manipulate his emergence as the substantive National Chairman of the party, which means reluctance to organise the National Convention and handover to an elected leadership. Somehow, here we are, from February 5, 2022, the Convention had to be moved to February 26, 2022.

 

Even while consultations were going on leading to the decision to move the Convention to February 26, 2022, there were media speculation that the leadership of the CECPC want the Convention moved to either May or June 2022. Some sponsored media campaigns were openly promoted to canvass for these positions. Although the alleged ambition of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni to emerge as the substantive National Chairman is very difficult to believe, however, with the way the leadership of CECPC under his watch is sluggishly handling organisation of the National Convention, it gives strong credibility to the speculation.

 

As things are, the CECPC leadership is using sophisticated strategies to force the hands of party leaders, including blackmails and wildcat promises of electoral opportunity to emerge as candidates of our party for the 2023 elections. This is very unfortunate and must be redressed urgently. Your Excellency, as the moral leader of our party, and one of the leading initiators of the merger negotiations that produced the APC in 2013, you never demanded automatic ticket to emerge as the Presidential candidate of our party. You contested with other four aspirants in the December 10, 2014, in a keenly contested primary election in Lagos and became our Presidential candidate. That was the orientation you provided. Why should the leadership of the CECPC be setting the stage for destroying a veritable democratic tradition, which was one of the important attractions that guaranteed our party the historic victory of the 2015 general elections?

 

Your Excellency, we are faced with a very critical situation, as a party. Sadly, we have some leaders in our party, including the leadership of the CECPC who believe that they can manipulate every situation to impose their choices on the party without going through the needed processes as establish in the constitution of the APC. We can’t be a party of change and overlooked situations whereby these very leaders continue to take us and the country back to the dark days when party politics is reduced to the circus of undemocratic practices. This is a very painful reality, which must be urgently redressed.

 

Your Excellency, beyond manipulating situations in the party to impose their choices on party leaders, members and Nigerians, these few party leaders led by the leadership of the CECPC are very intolerant to criticisms. This is no longer the party, Your Excellency, together with all the founding leaders negotiated to establish. It is quite nostalgic to recall that some of us even opposed Your Excellency’s aspiration to emerge as the Presidential Candidate of our party in 2014. But that did not prevent you from relating with us as loyal members of our party. Now, even if one support the aspirations of some of our leaders but disagreed with them on any issue, such a person risked being declared enemy.

 

Consequently, debates are hardly taking place in the party. The leadership of the CECPC have also ensured that meetings are hardly taking place. The only meeting now taking place is the meeting of Progressive Governors Forum (PGF). So long as meetings are not taking place, ability of leaders and members of the party to hold the leadership of the CECPC accountable will be weak. Conscious of the fact that party leaders and members are weak in holding them accountable is about the only reason why these leaders have a strong self-belief that they can continue to succeed in manipulating situations in the party to their advantage, including undermining the National Convention of the party.

 

Many party leaders and members are greatly at pain that, as a party, we are sinking deeper and deeper in more and problems. A Caretaker Committee, which is expected to open a new democratically vibrant life for the party, facilitate internal party contests, is more and more becoming an Undertaker Committee working to end every democratic life existing in the party by blocking every internal party contest. Everything in the party is being reduced to decisions of some party leaders. If the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC was highhanded, intimidating and trampling on the democratic life of party leaders and members, the CECPC led by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni is administering poison, thereby destroying every democratic practice in the party and preparing every stage for the burial rite of APC as a party. This may sound harsh, but it is the sad reality.

 

Your Excellency, just like you were able to rescue the party from the tightfisted grip of Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC, you will need to also take every urgent step to rescue the party from the reprehensible leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni-led CECPC. The fastest way that can happen is by ensuring that nothing is allowed to prevent the National Convention from holding on February 26, 2022. In addition to ensuring that issues around zoning offices and setting up all the Sub-Committees for the Convention are decided immediately and sales of forms to aspiring candidates also commenced immediately, it may be important to hold a consultative meeting with all critical stakeholders, especially members of the National Caucus of the party.

 

The opportunity of a consultative meeting with members of National Caucus will provide the opportunity to speed up processes of preparations for the National Convention. Your Excellency, it is important to emphasise the point that APC is a product of sacrifices by leaders and members of our legacy parties. The CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni must be compelled to provide honest leadership to the party based on sacrifices. As we therefore prepare to elect new leaders for the party, we need to appeal to all leaders to approach the process of party leadership selection based on good assessments of the credentials of those being selected. As is often said, once beaten, twice shy; or is it twice beaten, thrice shy?

 

The downward spiral in the quality of party leaders at national level must be halted by ensuring that the next leadership to emerge at the February 26, 2022 National Convention are committed leaders with all the democratic credentials and experiences to return the party to its founding vision. I have no doubt that one of the legacies Your Excellency will want to bequeath to this generation of Nigerians, and indeed future generations is a truly progressive and democratic All Progressives Congress (APC). May Allah (SWT) guide Your Excellency and all APC leaders to put APC back in the direction of providing the needed political leadership to facilitate politics of change in Nigeria. Amin!

 

February 15, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Kindly find attached, the first Bi-Weekly Briefing Paper, which is a comparative review of performances of PDP’s sixteen years and APC’s seven years in government. The Bi-Weekly Briefing Papers will seek to promote issue-based campaigns during the 2023 elections. Issue-based campaigns should be about correct and honest assessment of challenges facing Nigeria based on which campaigns of political parties and candidates proposes policy responses by governments they control when elected. Ability of political parties and their candidates to propose policy responses, which meets the expectations of Nigerian should be primarily the determining factor for electoral victory.

 

As a founding member of APC, committed to supporting APC leaders to facilitate politics of change in Nigeria, all briefing papers will be designed to serve as both resource materials to promote the APC and its candidates, as well as presenting the achievements of APC led government of President Buhari in very clear and unambiguous terms, and as a response to the inaccurate and convenient claims of PDP leaders.

 

The objective of the Bi-Weekly Briefing Papers is two-fold. The first is to put Nigerian governance reality in proper perspective by recalling all the records under the various governments led by PDP between 1999 and 2015 and compare them with experiences under the APC since 2015. The second is to support Nigerian democracy to develop so that 2023 campaigns begin to shift in the direction of contest for ideas. As much as invariably the contest for ideas will eventually be reduced to contest of candidates represented by personalities, those involved must be political agents of political parties driven with vision of how Nigeria should respond to challenges and develop as a nation.

 

This Bi-Weekly Briefing Paper #1 present an overview of economic performances of governments under the PDP and APC from 1999 to 2000. With verifiable evidence, allegations that APC led government of Present Buhari is mismanaging the economy is interrogated. The challenge of poverty and insecurity were reviewed. Issues of debt and allegation that APC led government is mortgaging the future of Nigerians are also examined. Claims about the so-called ‘achievements’ of PDP led governments were reviewed based on experiential evidence, which are verifiable.

 

It is very necessary to appeal to APC leaders to recognise that Nigeria, being a democracy, require that our party, APC, is proactive and take steps to set the tune of the campaigns for 2023 election. Setting the tune for the 2023 campaigns is mainly about correct and honest assessment of challenges and how the APC, being the governing party, is working to resolve the challenges. With all the records of bad governance under the sixteen years of PDP, on the one hand, and the initiatives being implemented by the APC led government of President Buhari, the question of comparative review of performances of both PDP and APC as drivers of the Federal Government shouldn’t be a matter of convenient claims by any politician, especially opposition politician, including PDP leaders.

 

APC need to put itself on the roadmap for the 2023 electoral contest. The current unhealthy scheming around the APC National Convention by some party leaders, which is creating uncertainty is injurious to electoral prospect the APC. Situation of uncertainty is making PDP to have the advantage of commencing electoral campaigns for 2023 unchallenged. This must be stopped immediately by mobilising APC leaders and members to respond proactively to the challenge of 2023 electoral contests.

 

While the first Bi-Weekly Briefing Paper is an overview of performances of PDP and APC as managers of Federal Government, subsequent ones to be released every two weeks will undertake specific sectoral analysis, in the hope that they will support the aspiration that 2023 electoral contest in Nigeria will begin to move in the direction of issue-based campaigns.

 

It is my hope that you find the Bi-Weekly Briefing Papers resourceful.

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC Convention: Mutiny by Yahoo Yahoo Politicians

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

It is no longer questionable that our party, APC, is being held captive by small group of dishonest leaders whose only interest is to impose themselves as either Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidates for 2023 elections. Led by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni, who is entrusted to work with other twelve members of the Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC), saddled mainly with the responsibility of organising the APC National Convention to elect new leaders of the party, sadly majority of the CECPC members have been reduced to observers as meetings hardly take place and even when meetings hold, decisions are hardly implemented.

 

Beyond members of CECPC, even the Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) is being disrespected, its decisions and leadership are now being snubbed. His Excellency Mai Mala Buni, in flagrant disregard to every known procedure of managing affairs of the party relate only with His Excellency Yahaya Bello of Kogi State, His Excellency Hope Uzodinma of Imo State and His Excellency Dapo Abiodu of Ogun State based on the plot to retain His Excellency Mai Mala Buni as Chairman of the Party up to the time of conducting the primary that will produce candidates for 2023 elections. The other person who is also active in this political ponzi scheme is the CECPC Secretary, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe, who is also aspiring to emerge as the Akwa Ibom Governorship candidate of the APC for 2023 elections.

 

Interestingly, perhaps except for His Excellency Dapo Abiodun, three of them – His Excellency Mai Mala Buni, His Excellency Yahaya Bello and His Excellency Hope Uzodinma – are all aspiring to become either Presidential or Vice-Presidential candidate. Although His Excellency Mai Mala Buni is not open about his ambition, some of the speculation promoted by people very close to him is that once he is the one to organise the primary to produce candidates for 2023 elections, he stands a good chance to emerge as the Vice-Presidential candidate, or even the Presidential candidate, if the North is to produce the Presidential candidate. In the case of His Excellency Hope Uzodinma, he is being alleged to be aspiring to emerge as a Vice-Presidential candidate to a Northern candidate. Already, His Excellency Yahaya Bello has declared his aspiration to emerge as the 2023 Presidential candidate of the party.

 

As for His Excellency Dapo Abiodun, he is being guaranteed a second term ticket to emerge as the Ogun State Governorship candidate for 2023 election, which is to block any potential contest given the strong opposition he faces from the former Governor of the state, Sen. Ibikunle Amosun. Beyond guaranteeing His Excellency Dapo Abiodun second term ticket, His Excellency Mai Mala Buni has attempted to make similar offers to all first term Governors of APC. Some of these stories flying around are almost like tales by moonlight, but from every indication, they are true scripts being acted by His Excellency Mai Mala Bunu and his associates.

 

Consequently, there is so much uncertainty created, just to ensure that the party is manipulated to meet the aspirations of these dishonest leaders. Sales of forms to aspiring candidates for party offices to be contested at the National Convention was to commence on Monday, February 14, 2014. The speculation was that forms cannot be sold until zoning of offices are finalised. Following the departure of President Muhammadu Buhari to the EU-AU Summit in Brussels, the argument became that zoning will only be finalised after his return. Then it became that there was disagreement among Governors on zoning. The latest is that some Governors are opposed to some offices of the party coming to their zones because of their Presidential or Vice-Presidential ambitions.

 

As things are, today being February 21, 2022, the National Convention is just five days away. Sub-Committees to handle specific responsibilities of organising the Convention were expected to have been announced on Saturday, February 19, 2022. No information has been provided by the CECPC. Now that President Buhari has returned from the EU-AU Summit, the old deceptive argument about Governors having meeting with President Buhari to decide on zoning and other matters related to the Convention has started again. Why should the CECPC wait for meeting of Governors and President Buhari before it setup sub-committees to organise the National Convention? If Governors and the President are the ones to organise the National Convention, why do we have CECPC? It is either that the leadership of the CECPC is incompetent or it is deliberately using the meeting of Governors and President Buhari to create uncertainty in the party as part of the plot to achieve its dubious plan of blocking the Convention from holding.

 

Recall that both His Excellency Hope Uzodinma and His Excellency Yahaya Bello met President Buhari before he departed Abuja for the AU-EU Summit. And His Excellency Hope Uzodinma, while addressing the media hinted at the possibility of shifting the date of the Convention. In recent times, there has been so much speculation about shifting the APC Convention by two weeks. As part of the justification for postponement by another two weeks, issues of INEC bye-elections in some federal constituencies across the country also scheduled for February 26, 2022 are now being brought up. The date for the bye-election is known even before the date of the Convention is fixed. Why should we wait until this late hour before adjusting our calendar? Why should adjusting our calendar because of INEC bye-election require two weeks? How can INEC bye-election explain refusal to constitute sub-committees or even decide on zoning?

 

It is clear that Mai Mala Buni is opposed to organising the APC National Convention on February 26, 2022 or any time soon. Consequently, he is working with other dishonest leaders, notably, Yahaya Bello, Hope Uzodinma, Dapo Abiodun and some few others. For all that matters, as far as Mai Mala Buni, Yahaya Bello, Hope Uzodinma and Dapo Abiodun are concerned, even if there is decision to postpone the Convention by another two weeks, or any time soon, they will do everything to sabotage it and ensure another postponement. It is a mutiny against the authority of the party and all its designated leaders, especially President Buhari, being carried by very dishonest people who can best be described as Yahoo Yahoo politicians. They are busy recruiting more dishonest and questionable leaders such as Uzor Kalu and they are moving to recruit some state party leaders into their fold. Everything must be done to rescue APC from the hands of these Yahoo Yahoo politicians represented by Mai Mala Buni, Yahaya Bello, Hope Uzodinma, Dapo Abiodun, Uzor Kalu and their associates.

 

All committed leaders and members of the APC must initiate the process of disciplinary enquiry against these dishonest leaders. If there was any doubt about the reprehensible conduct of these dishonest leaders and the fact that they are working to destroy the APC because of their selfish interest, by now it should be very clear to all discerning leaders and members. Both PGF, its leadership, President Buhari and all leaders of the party should take every step to reorganise the leadership of the CECPC. Mai Mala Buni and the Secretary, John James Akpanudoedehe should as a matter of urgency and in the overall interest of saving the APC should be replaced and removed as members of the CECPC. The CECPC has very good competent and trustworthy leaders among the other eleven members to pilot the affairs of the party and organise a successful National Convention immediately.

 

In addition, all collaborators in this Mai Mala Buni led Yahoo Yahoo political fraud, aimed at undermining the party and its leadership, which if not arrested will destroy the APC, involving Mai Mala Buni, Yahaya Bello, Hope Uzodinma, Dapo Abiodun, Uzor Kalu, John James Akpanudoedehe should be sanctioned. Steps should be taken to disqualifying them from all electoral contests, as well as holding any leadership position, both within the party and in governments controlled by the party. APC must have zero tolerance for dishonest politicians.

 

As a party, APC must come out very strongly against every dishonest conduct by political leaders, no matter the positions they hold. APC must do everything possible to enforce discipline among leaders, which should include sanctioning leaders who betray trust or undermine the capacity of structures and functionaries of the party to implement decisions of organs. If APC is to project its slogan as a party of CHANGE, dishonest and reprehensible conducts such as the ones being exhibited by Mai Mala Buni, Yahaya Bello, Hope Uzodinma, Dapo Abiodu, Uzor Kalu and some few others must be punished!

 

As a party, APC is now in a state of emergency. Any slip will destroy the party. This is not the period to allow dishonest political leaders gamble with the survival of the party and by extension weaken the nation’s democracy. Everything must be done to restore some minimum standards of conducts by leaders at all levels. Every party leader and member must wake up to the challenge of saving the party. APC is a product of sacrifices by leaders and members. Every sacrifice is required now to save the party.

 

May Allah (SWT) guide us to rescue APC from the current endless munity by Yahoo Yahoo politicians led by Mai Mala Buni and associate and return the party to its founding vision. Amin!

 

February 21, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC vs PDP

 

A Comparative Review of Performances in Government

 

Infrastructural Development:

Road, Railways & Aviation

 

Bi-Weekly Briefing Paper #2

March 2, 2022

 

 

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

Background – Theoretical Context

 

A leading member of the PDP and a former Minister of Aviation during former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration, Mr. Osita Chidoka, as a Guest Columnist in Thisday Newspaper of Friday, February 25, 2022, in the back page under the title, Minister Fashola and the Difference between APC and PDP, argued that ‘infrastructure projects’ impact on the economy is two-fold, short-term economic boom due to increased spending and hiring until the project is complete. Once over, the temporary hires return to joblessness. The long-term benefit includes facilitating trade, movement, and industry and can support economic growth. However, the infrastructure would not unluck growth and individual prosperity without investment in human beings.’ He tried to rationalise his argument that ‘infrastructure would not unluck growth’ with unsubstantiated reference to ‘a 2016 study published in Oxford Review of Economic Policy vol 32’ where he claimed that the author using evidence from China argued that ‘investing in unproductive projects results initially in a boom, as long as construction is ongoing, followed by a bust, when forecasted benefits fail to materialise and projects, therefore, become a drag on the economy. Where investment are debt-financed, overinvesting in unproductive projects results in the build-up of debt, monetary expansion, inability in financial markets, and economic fragility. While infrastructure is essential for economic growth, it must be in tandem with other determinants of economic growth.’

 

First, both the language and the opinions in the submission by Mr. Chidoka, which is supposedly a response to presentation made by Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola, Minister of Works and Housing to Kano Progressive Youth Wing of All Progressives Congress is disappointing and either deliberately designed to misrepresent both theoretical and empirical conceptions in the debate around infrastructural development or complete ignorance of basic economic logic, which should guide decisions and initiatives of political leaders regarding a country’s investment decisions in relation to physical structures and facilities such as transportation, communication, power, water, etc., otherwise known as infrastructure. If a political leader of the status of Mr. Chidoka could generalise investment in infrastructure as ‘unproductive projects’, it may only confirm the gap between knowledge and governance in the Nigerian context, which weakened and disconnect democracy from being strongly committed to national development and reduces political debates to elementary literary arguments.

 

Second, it is also doubtful if Mr. Chidoka’s submission is representative of the thinking of PDP leaders. To be fair to the PDP and all its governments between 1999 and 2015, they demonstrated good understanding of the importance of public investments in physical structures and facilities, which was why they initiated many roads, railways, and aviation projects during their sixteen-year tenure. What may be an issue was the lack of, or weak commitment to execute these projects, which was why they were unable to commission any of the projects they started after sixteen years of managing the affairs of Federal Government of Nigeria. In fact, there were many instances whereby projects became either abandoned or funds were released but hardly anything done before 2015. Mr Chidoka’s inability to provide any empirical evidence about how during the sixteen-year tenure of PDP infrastructural development initiatives ‘were in tandem with other determinants of economic growth’ may have been responsible for the poor attempt to misrepresent economic arguments with the generalised submission of ‘unproductive projects.’ Given that Mr. Chidoka had nothing on PDP’s record to compare with initiatives of APC under President Buhari, therefore all public expenditure on infrastructure must be either ‘debt-financed’, ‘overinvestment’ or ‘unproductive.’ This is alarmingly untrue and can only be excused if presented by a secondary school social club debater.

 

The role of infrastructure in economic development is well documented and settled in the development literature. Indeed, if there is anything being debated at the level of intellectual discourse, amongst economists and econometricians, it is not the imperative of infrastructure but the numerical magnitude of its importance or significance. Pioneer and contemporaneous efforts in the field suggest a positive relationship between infrastructure development and economic growth and report robust positive coefficients. For instance, many scholars and a sizable number of studies have responded to the question of whether public expenditure in relation to investment in infrastructural development is productive. As far back as March 1989, the Journal of Monetary Economics, Volume 23, Issue 2, presented a report of investigation as to whether all government expenditures are productive using production function in which output depended on public capital, private capital and employment. The result showed that the elasticity of output with respect to public capital was between 0.34 and 0.39. This result was interpreted to mean that the marginal productivity of public capital is 70 cents to a dollar.

 

Other studies such as the one by Robert Eisner of Northwestern University, USA, ‘Infrastructure and regional economic performance: comment,’ New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue of September 1991, and Ford and Poret, ‘Infrastructure and private-sector productivity,’ OECD, 1991, using macro time series approach all found evidence that marginal product of government capital is higher than the marginal products of private capital. Many studies have demonstrated empirical results showing the positive indirect effect, crowding-in effect, as well as the direct effect as an input factor, and showing a strong linkage between public infrastructure and the private sector, particularly after economic crises. In other words, investment in infrastructure stimulate growth of economic activities.

 

The generalisation by Mr. Chidoka suggesting that investment in infrastructure is unproductive is simply dishonest. In fact, such generalisation contradicts the policy direction of all PDP governments between 1999 and 2015, which was for instance well-articulated in Chapter Seven of the National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS) document of the former President Olusegun Obasanjo administration, which had as one of its targets ‘Mobilisation of national resources to facilitate the development of strategic economic infrastructure that improves the general effectiveness of Nigeria as a preferred investment destination.’ This is a clear demonstration that even PDP governments, since 1999, recognise the importance of public investment in developing Nigeria’s infrastructure to stimulate economic activities in the country. Could Mr. Chidoka have served PDP government without understanding the theoretical orientation and commitments of PDP governments on matters such as infrastructural development? Could his (Mr. Chidoka’s) unfamiliarity with the commitments of PDP government account for why he was unable to make any attempt to highlight achievements of PDP governments?

 

Empirical Context – Road, Railways & Aviation

 

Without any doubt, one of the areas APC Administration of President Muhammadu Buhari departs radically from all PDP administrations is the drive to develop road, railways and aviation infrastructure across every part of the country. APC led Federal Government has boldly pursued reforms aimed at laying a solid and sustainable foundation for the greatness of Nigeria in these areas. More roads and railways infrastructure are being built and/or completed since 2015, than in the sixteen years under PDP between 1999 and 2015. Several landmark infrastructure initiatives are being implemented.

 

Presidential Infrastructure Development Fund (PIDF), Infrastructure Company (InfraCo), Highway Development Maintenance Initiative (HDMI), Sovereign Sukuk Bonds, and the Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme have been initiated to mobilise and coordinate application of national resources to execute specific projects. These are unprecedented initiatives in developing and upgrading national infrastructure. Equally unparalleled is President Buhari’s commitment to completing abandoned and unfinished projects inherited from previous PDP administrations.

 

For instance, the 327km Itakpe-Warri Standard Gauge Rail was completed by APC led administration of President Buhari 33 years after construction began. The 168 km Abuja-Kaduna Rail project, and the 42.5 km Abuja Light Rail project, both inherited from previous PDP administrations, were completed in 2016 and 2018 respectively. The second Niger Bridge, originally conceived decades ago, is now more than 50 percent completed, and scheduled for commissioning this year (2022). Similarly, the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, which has defied every administration since 1999 is scheduled to be completed also this year (2022).

 

In the area of roads and bridges, work has since resumed on several stalled, abandoned or solution-defying road projects that were inherited from PDP administrations, like the Loko-Oweto Bridge, Sagamu-Benin Expressway, the Enugu-Port Harcourt Expressway, Onitsha-Enugu Expressway, Kano-Maiduguri Expressway, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Obajana-Kabba Road, Ilorin-Jebba Road, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Road, and several others are in progress, with some already close to completion. A brand new bridge in Ikom, Cross River State, has just been completed, which replaced the dilapidated steel truss bridge originally built five decades ago.

 

Construction work on the Second Niger Bridge, a contract awarded multiple times between 2002 and 2015, during the sixteen-year tenure of PDP governments, but constantly stalled for lack of funding, finally kicked off in 2018, with guaranteed funding, for the first time in the history of the project. In 2017, construction finally commenced on the Bodo-Bonny Bridges and Road (linking Bonny Island to the Rivers Mainland), a project first mooted decades ago, and awarded a number of times without success under PDP administration.

 

Although it can be acknowledged that all PDP governments between 1999 and 2015 recognise the importance of public investment to develop the nation’s infrastructure, one of the evidences that best highlight lack of commitment is how much goes into the federal government’s annual budget. For instance, in 2015, the total budget for Federal Roads by the outgoing PDP government of former President Goodluck Jonathan was 18 billion Naira. This kind of abysmally low funding translated to abandoned or slow-moving road projects across the country. The APC administration of President Buhari increased the funding in 2016 to 260 billion Naira.

 

Through increased budgetary provisions, combined with funding initiative under the PIDF, InfraCo, HDMI, Sukuk Bond and Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme, APC led administration of President Buhari is, according to the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, executing around 900 active road contracts, covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000 km of Federal roads and highways across the country, out of a total of 35,000 km of Federal roads in existence. The financing jinx for large-scale infrastructure projects was resolved with all the landmark and innovative methods. Specifically, PIDF, in 2018, provided $650m seed funding and Sukuk bond has mobilised over one billion dollars. Under the HDMI, the Federal Government is expecting capital investment of N1.13 trillion. Twelve (12) roads are being considered for Value-Added Concessions in the first phase with employment potential estimated at about 50,000 direct jobs and 200,000 indirect jobs.

 

Accordingly, APC administration of President Buhari has commissioned the 156 km Lagos-Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail, the first double-track Standard Gauge Rail project in West Africa (and the first Standard Gauge Rail project in Nigeria to be started and completed by the same administration). Other landmark projects being completed include the Bodo-Bonny Road in Rivers State, Apapa-Oshodi-Oworonshoki Expressway, Loko-Oweto Bridge connecting Benue and Nasarawa States across the River Benue, Port Harcourt-Enugu Expressway, East-West Road (across Delta, Bayelsa, Rivers, Akwa-Ibom and Cross River States), the new Ikom Bridge in Cross River, Abuja-Kaduna-Zaria-Kano Expressway, Keffi-Akwanga-Lafia-Makurdi Road, and many more.

 

In Aviation sector, New International Airport Terminals have been completed and commissioned in Abuja and Port Harcourt, while those in Lagos and Kano are being completed. In addition, brand new Runways have been constructed in Abuja and Enugu, in 2017 and 2020 respectively. In May 2016, the APC led administration of President Buhari launched its Aviation Roadmap, with the aim of transforming the sector, in terms of safety, infrastructure and economic viability. Major highlights of the Roadmap include the Establishment of a National Carrier, Development of Agro-Allied/Cargo Terminals, Concessioning of the Major International Airports, Establishment of Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) Center, Establishment of an Aviation Leasing Company, Development of Aerotropolis (Airport Cities), Establishment of an Aerospace University, Designation of 4 International Airports as Special Economic Zones, Upgrade of Accident Investigation Bureau (AIB) and the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT).

 

Since the launching of the Aviation Roadmap, the Ministry of Aviation has focused on implemention. In terms of infrastructure, the new Terminals of the Port Harcourt, Abuja and Kano International Airports, inherited from the previous PDP administration, have been completed, while the new Lagos Terminal is very close to completion. Brand new Runways have been constructed at the Abuja and Enugu International Airports, in 2017 and 2020, respectively.

 

More than a dozen airports around the country have had Low Level Windshear Alert Systems (LLWAS) installed, to improve flight safety. Investigations revealed that the Sosoliso and ADC plane crashes of 2005 and 2006 respectively were caused by the absence of LLWAS in the airports. The Lagos and Abuja Airports have had the Category 3 Instrument Landing System (ILS) installed - which provides the capability for landing safely and accurately in conditions of near-zero visibility.

 

The Concession process for the Lagos, Abuja, Kano and Port Harcourt International Airports - the four main International Airports in the country - is ongoing, with completion of the process scheduled for this year (2022). A significant portion of the investment into the Aviation Sector has been focused on resolving issues and bridging gaps inherited from previous PDP Administrations. One example is the payment of pensions owed to staff of the defunct Nigeria Airways. President Buhari approved that the backlog of almost twenty years be cleared, and has released the funds. The reconstruction of the Runways in Abuja and Enugu were also long overdue, but neglected by previous PDP governments. Investments that should have been made over the decades are now finally being made.

 

Under the APC led government of President Buhari, the Nigerian College of Aviation Technology (NCAT) has acquired several new training aircraft, and has been recognised globally by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. Among other things the NCAT now has a brand new Boeing 737 Full Flight Simulator, as well as a fully-automated Fire and Smoke Aircraft Training Simulator, which now means that Nigerian personnel no longer have to be sent to Cameroon for training on tackling aircraft fires and smoke, which was the case throughout the sixteen years of PDP tenure between 1999 and 2015.

 

The Accident Investigation Bureau (AIB) now has a world-class Flight Safety Laboratory, which means that Airplane Recorders, popularly known as “Black Box”, no longer have to be sent abroad for analysis. Furthermore, the AIB is now actively providing technical support and services to other African countries, including assisting Sierra Leone to set up its own Accident Investigation Agency, in 2021.

 

On the matter of the new private-sector-led National Carrier, the Minister of Aviation, Sen. Hadi Sirika, has assured that the establishment process is still on course, with a target commencement date for operations in Q3 2022. In May 2021, President Buhari approved the designation of the 4 major International Airports in the country as Special Economic Zones. The procurement processes for the establishment of an Aviation Leasing Company, a Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) Center, and an Aerospace University are also all ongoing.

 

In the railway sector, in addition to Lagos-Ibadan, Itakpe-Warri Standard Gauge Rail lines and the Abuja Light Rail, APC led government has also initiated the Kano-Maiduguri Standard Gauge Rail, and the revamping of Port-Harcourt-Maiduguri Narrow Gauge Rail. Financing negotiations is also ongoing for Ibadan-Kano Standard Gauge Rail Project. There is of course the Kano-Maradi 387 km Standard Gauge Rail, for which construction work commenced in February 2021.

 

Conclusion

 

Debate about what differentiate APC government from all previous PDP government in relation infrastructural development should not be reduced to literary debates. It is about looking at all the evidences. It will be imprudent to seek to develop or conjecture some theories to nullify concrete evidences of APC’s achievement. In fact, failure to recognise evidences by PDP leaders such as Mr. Chidoka demonstrate unwillingness to learn from their past mistakes, which could mean if they come back to power, they will make the same old mistakes of running government based on weak or lack of commitment to prioritise investment in infrastructural development.

 

Comparative debate about what differentiate APC from PDP require some measure of honesty not denial. It is not about grandstanding but recognising how far Nigeria’s democracy has evolved and the extent to which it is facilitating national development. When politicians of the status of a former Minister of the Federal Republic such as Mr. Osita Chidoka reduces debate about initiatives of government to the level of literary debate, only demonstrates high contempt for national development. Mr. Chidoka and PDP leaders need to grow out of their prebendal politics of sharing government revenue, which ends up in private accounts of public officials. Government revenue should be invested in tangible projects that would facilitate and support the growth of economic activities. Nigerian politics and democracy must prioritise the execution of these tangible projects across every part of the country, which is the focus of the APC led government of President Buhari.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Rescuing the APC: A task for all Party Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

The sensational but mischievously planted news in some media is that President Buhari has sacked His Excellency Mai Mala Buni as APC CECPC Chairman and replaced him with His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello as Sole Administrator. This is a clear misrepresentation of all the internal contest in APC aimed at rescuing the party from the mutinous leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe and their few collaborators. The truth is that President Buhari, like most party leaders and members is highly disappointed at the serial cases of deliberate efforts by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni and his associates to block the APC Convention from holding based on alleged personal ambitions. Between November 2021 and January 2022, the APC Convention had to be postponed three times because of deliberate refusal to initiate most the processes required, such as booking the venue for the Convention and serving the statutory three weeks’ notice to INEC.

 

In addition, there were other serious allegations against the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala, which include the discovery that his group, since November 2022, had obtained a Court injunction against the Convention and are waiting until three or two days to the Convention before serving it on the party to succeed in blocking the March 26 APC Convention from holding. The plot is that His Excellency Mai Mala want to continue to run the affairs of the party and conduct the party’s primary where candidates for 2023 elections would emerge. Based on that there are specific allegations of His Excellency Mai Mala striking some deals with some Presidential aspirants to ensure their emergence as the Presidential Candidate of APC for the 2023 elections.

 

Some of the allegations suggests extorting monies from these aspirants, including someone who is yet to join the party. It is being alleged that campaign offices for the aspirant are already being opened even before such a person joined the party. All these highlight problems of trust, which the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala represented. A good confirmation of why it will be difficult for party leaders and members to continue to invest any trust on the His Excellency Mai Mala leadership of the Caretaker Committee is the attempt to constitute another zoning Committee after there is decision between President Buhari and Progressive Governors on zoning, based on which stakeholders of the party at zonal levels are to finalise negotiations on positions to go states.

 

As far as His Excellency Mai Mala is concerned, his interest is supreme and together with the Secretary of the CECPC, Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe and their collaborators outside the CECPC, they must block the APC Convention from holding on March 26. As part of the plot, once they heard that President Buhari has agreed with some party leaders that necessary to save the party should be taken, which require change of the CECPC leadership, they decided to present it in the media that the President has sacked His Excellency Mai Mala Buni as the Chairman of the CECPC and appointed His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello as Sole Administrator.

 

This is mischievously designed to present both the party and President Buhari as being undemocratic. To the contrary, internal organs of the party with all the statutory powers to effect all the necessary changes will be used to give effect to all the aspirations of President Buhari, party leaders and members to rescue the APC from the decidedly depraved leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala. Anybody that will emerge as a replacement of His Excellency Mai Mala and the Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe as Chairman Secretary and Secretary will have all the requisite mandate of the organs vested with such responsibility as provided by the Constitution of the party.

 

This is the time when His Excellency Mai Mala and Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe and all their collaborators are required to demonstrate their loyalty to the party and President Buhari. Attempts to delimitimise the process of changing the leadership will only confirm their undertaker mission rather than serving as leaders of the CECPC. All party leaders and members should support other members of the CECPC to rise to this occasion by ensuring that they effectively enforce collective leadership in the CECPC at this critical point in the life of the APC. Similarly, all leaders and members of the party must be vigilant to ensure that the new leadership of the party to emerge from all the internal contest currently going on are leaders that will faithfully implement all decisions, especially the scheduled March 26, 2022 APC Convention.

 

If anything, what is going on in APC today proves that it is the only party where internal contest is taking place. It is the only party that acknowledges its challenges and confront them without any pretense. Thanks to the leadership of President Buhari, APC is going through a very tedious and difficult process of rebirth. Part of the challenge facing the party has to do with internal betrayals by trusted leaders. However, with the courageously unbiased leadership of President Buhari, in the last two years, the party is able to confront its leadership challenges. Nigerians must be reminded that the leadership challenge facing the country, however defined, cannot be remedied without a democratically functional political party with a leadership that is honest and trustworthy. This will not be achieved through denials. In other words, any party whose leadership is corrupt and dishonest can only produce corrupt and dishonest leaders in government. Since 2020, APC has been going through processes of internal leadership cleansing as part conscious of efforts to ensure the emergence of honest and trustworthy candidates for 2023 elections.

 

As party loyalists, we must remain vigilant, confident and courageous to continue to support and engage all our party leaders to take all the painful decisions, which are needed to ensure that the March 26 APC Convention restore all the democratic structures of the APC and put the APC back on the path to electoral victory in 2023. APC is a party, which in its short period of existence has proven that leadership is about trust. Once a leader betrays the trust invested in him, the needed democratic process and structures will be activated to reorganise and produce new leaders who will honestly serve the party. May Allah (SWT) continue to guide all our APC leaders to put APC back in the direction of providing the needed political leadership to facilitate politics of change in Nigeria. Amin!

 

March 7, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Surrogate Politics of Timid Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

Events in APC require constant vigilance by all committed party members and leaders. Without doubt, the days ahead, leading to the March 26, 2022 National Convention, will define both the survival, the democratic orientation and the quality of leaders of the party. Whether APC will produce both party leaders and candidates for the 2023 elections who can justify the trust invested in them, depends a lot on how all the current leadership challenges facing the party is resolved. Beyond electing new leaders and setting the stage for the 2023 electoral contests, how APC navigate through attempts by some of its leaders, including His Excellency Mai Mala Buni and his collaborators, to block the Convention from either holding as scheduled or electing new leaders who support and respect decisions taken by broad section of leaders and members of the party will be the main test.

 

Since Monday, March 7, 2022, when His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello and the other ten members of the 13-member APC Caretaker and Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) announced their resolve to ensure that the March 26 APC National Convention hold, there have been deliberate attempts to question the legitimacy of decisions taken by the APC. Media reports are deliberately planted to suggest so-called confusion in the party. Some party leaders and members have declared opposition to His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello and the CECPC and are mobilising Nigerians to only recognise His Excellency Mai Mala as the only person who should preside over the affairs of the party. While some can disclose their identity in declaring their opposition, some timid leaders who are not so courageous, do so using surrogates.

 

Perhaps, it is important to recall that the decision to setup the CECPC with His Excellency Mai Mala as Chairman was taken by the APC NEC of June 25, 2020. With the initial tenure of six months, the NEC of December 8, 2022, extended it expectedly another six months. From six months, it became one year, and as it turned out to be, it is now endless, with the risk of eventually terminating the political life of the party. All these happened because both President Muhammadu Buhari, other party leaders and members trusted that His Excellency Mai Mala will provide honest leadership and implement every decision taken, leading to the emergence of new leaders for the APC. Had His Excellency Mai Mala lived up to the trust invested in his leadership of the party, at the minimum APC Convention would have been history and there wouldn’t have been any debate questioning the legitimacy of any serving Chairman of the party.

 

The fact that His Excellency Mai Mala has consciously and deliberately led APC to the present embarrassing situation, is most unfortunate. One would have expected that both His Excellency Mai Mala, his associates of surrogate supporters and timid leaders will be more concerned about what should be done to resolve all the leadership challenges facing the APC. In fact, anyone who love His Excellency Mai Mala should be more worried in protecting his honor as a political leader by ensuring that he doesn’t become a letdown who stand opposed to majority decisions of party leaders and members. Ideally, if His Excellency Mai Mala share the vision of all the founding leaders of the party of making the APC truly democratic and progressive, it will be expected that he will be willing to make every personal sacrifice to demonstrate his support for the decisions of the party. That was the legacy demonstrated by Chief Bisi Akande, Dr. Ogbonnaya Onu, Chief Tony Momoh of blessed memory and many founding leaders of the APC.

 

Remarkably, that was also the legacy left by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. With all our grievances against Comrade Oshiomhole’s leadership, APC members and leaders must acknowledge that once the mood in the party tilted against his leadership, he accepted the decision of the party and made the personal sacrifice to recognise the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala. Faced with similar rising opposition to his leadership, His Excellency Mai Mala and his associates of surrogate supporters and timid leaders are now using all manner of campaigns in the media to undermine the capacity and effectiveness of the party to initiate processes of leadership change. Although no words have been heard directly from His Excellency Mai Mala, many so-called close associates, including Sen. James John Akpanuduedehe have declared their opposition to decisions and actions taken by the APC since Monday, March 7 when His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello and all the other ten members of the CECPC resolved to provide collective leadership to organise the March 26 APC National Convention.

 

Painfully, APC has found itself in a situation whereby people who are once trusted with leadership are now using surrogate supporters to undermine decisions taken by, if not destroy, the party. Those of them who are leaders are timid and lacks the courage to speak openly. Instead of speaking openly, they prefer to sponsor others to do the dirty jobs for them. Part of the most important lessons which the party must learn out of all the unfolding reality are two. The first is that every trust invested in any leader must be qualified. Specific to the leadership of the party, every leader must be accountable to organs of the party. What happened to APC under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala was that the decision to dissolve all the organs of the party at all levels created the unfortunate gap, which was exploited by His Excellency Mai Mala and his associates to derail the process of rebuilding the party. Related to that was also the fact that members of the CECPC were not able to assert themselves early enough to ensure that both His Excellency Mai Mala and Sen. James John Akpanuduedehe are accountable to the CECPC. Combination of all these made it possible for His Excellency Mai Mala to imagine that he has the power of prerogative over decisions taken in consultation with party leaders, including President Buhari.

 

The second lesson borders on issues of political leadership recruitment. The assumption that what is required to endorse, sponsor or nominate any person to emerge as a leader is being innocuous. Although, being innocuous may not have been the reason why His Excellency Mai Mala was chosen as the Chairman of the APC CECPC, it may have also been a strong consideration. Certainly, his experience as the National Secretary of the APC between 2014 and 2019 would have been the most important recommendation. In addition, his good relationship with all party leaders and President Buhari must have been the most important recommendation. Combinations of all of these must have convinced all those who nominated him that APC will be safe in his hands. No one would have ever thought that this is where his leadership will take the party to. With His Excellency Mai Mala, if anything, being innocuous is proved to be much more dangerous.

 

This highlight the need for thorough background checks before people are invested with leadership responsibilities. The whole essence of screening is supposed to facilitate processes of background checks. Unfortunately, this has been reduced to some lousy checks of educational qualifications of aspirants for political offices, often reduced to verifying certificates obtained. This shoddy approach to leadership screening is responsible for why there are many people occupying leadership positions who are not qualified to hold those positions expect with reference to so-called educational qualification. Experiences in managing responsibilities in previous assignments should be the reference point in terms of how much trust can be invested in any person. Perhaps, had a thorough background check been done on His Excellency Mai Mala before emerging as National Secretary of APC in 2014, the party may have been saved from its current travail long ago.

 

Be that as it may, however, one would have expected a humble Mai Mala to have made some efforts to measure up to the challenge of providing selfless leadership to the party. Instead, what keeps coming out is that His Excellency Mai Mala together with his associates of surrogate supporters and timid timid leaders turned the party into their personal estate. From Anambra to Ekiti, Osun and all the bye-elections whereby the party presented candidates for elections, there are endless allegations of extortion of money directly from aspirants. Similarly, there are already allegations of deals with some Presidential aspirants, including someone who is yet to join the party. Part of the deal also alleged that His Excellency Mai Mala is negotiating to emerge as a running mate to the so-called would-be candidates. Other allegations, include attempt to arm-twist first term Governors with offers of automatic tickets for second term. Innocent Senators and members of the House of Representatives are also being offered automatic tickets for 2023 electoral contests.

 

Through all these dishonest methods, His Excellency Mai Mala was able to recruit the audacious surrogates and timid party leaders working to undermine decisions to hold the APC March 26 National Convention. As part of the plot, they are now circulating a letter from INEC, signed by Rose Oriaran-Anthony, Secretary to the Commission, in which the legality of both the March 26 APC National Convention and the March 17 APC National Executive Committee (NEC) are being questioned. From all available information, the APC CECPC led by His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello has effectively already responded to this letter from INEC through which they are able to affirm both the sanctity and legality of both the March 17 and 26 APC NEC and National Convention respectively. Both INEC, and by extension, all Nigerians must be reminded that both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act recognises the authority of all the relevant organs of the party to manage its affairs. This was affirmed by the Supreme Court judgement with respect to Ondo State election, which further affirmed the authority of the APC CECPC to manage and direct the affairs of the party.

 

Therefore, INEC and all Nigerians committed to the democratic development of the country must not play into the self-serving scheming of His Excellency Mai Mala and his associates of surrogate supporters and timid leaders working to undermine decisions taken by the APC. All APC leaders and members must rise to the challenge of bringing His Excellency Mai Mala, his surrogate supporters and associated timid leaders to account for the bad name they are giving the APC today. His Excellency Mai Mala and Sen James John Akpanuduedehe should explain why they failed to initiate implementation of decisions to hold the APC National Convention. Related to this, they should explain why they failed to bring to the notice of leaders of the party the Court injunction served on the party since November 18, 2021 restraining the party from organising the National Convention.

 

There are known collaborators of His Excellency Mai Mala who have colluded with him to ensure that all attempts to organise the APC National Convention are blocked. Three Governors who are known and must also be called upon to account for their roles in undermining decisions to organise the APC National Convention are His Excellency Yahaya Bello of Kogi State, His Excellency Hope Uzodinma of Imo State and His Excellency Dapo Abiodun of Ogun State. There are other party leaders, including Sen Uzo Kalu who have actively supported His Excellency Mai Mala to undermine the decision to organise the National Convention of the party. The March 17, 2022 APC NEC should initiate processes of disciplinary hearing in line with provisions of the APC Constitution to sanction all these leaders if found guilty.

 

Every step must be taken to ensure that APC emerge stronger, and no future leader of the party can attempt to undermine the decisions of the party. Unlike other parties, especially the PDP, who allowed individual leaders of their parties to undermine collective decisions, APC is working to strengthen its structures to ensure that internal democracy translate to collective leadership. All past National Chairmen of the party, notably, Chief Bisi Akande, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and Comrade Adams Oshiohmole have demonstrated capacity to make personal sacrifices to support the vision of the party to emerge as a distinctively democratic and progressive party. His Excellency Mai Mala and all his surrogate supporters and timid leaders must therefore be called to order if APC is to return to its founding vision. May Allah (SWT) guide the March 17 APC NEC to initiate all actions that will guarantee a successful March 26 APC National Convention. Amin!

 

March 11, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Political Leadership Recruitment: Appeal to APC Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

The emergence of APC in 2013 presented new ray of hope and opportunity to address problems of political leadership recruitment in Nigeria, especially the big issue of producing successors to President and Governors. Experiences during the sixteen years of PDP were cases of last minute and impulsive decisions influenced by considerations of factors of loyalties to current leaders. Arbitrary decisions influenced choices of leaders, often creating big gaps leading to the emergence of leaders who have little or no capacity to meet public expectations. This reality further entrenches problems of accountability, with many leaders flagrantly converting public resources to personal wealth. Mainly because leadership recruitment based mainly on consideration of loyalty is not a function of commitment to principles or values, even where so-called loyalists succeed current leaders, problems of political disagreements between past and current leaders continue. Consequentially, this has negatively impacted on governance through policy reversals, with successor leaders behaving worse than leaders from the opposition.

 

As a party envisioned to facilitate the process of changing Nigerian politics, APC leaders and members must be reminded that the most important determinant for political change at this crucial point in the nation’s political development is initiatives to change the orientation of political leadership recruitment. The reality is that leadership recruitment in APC, as it is today, is not fundamentally different from what exists in PDP. Partly because it is not different, we have produced leaders, both in government and in the party, APC, who at best, are typical PDP leaders. These are leaders who only succeed in reducing government and party management to a Bureau De Change.

 

However, unlike PDP, in our case in APC, internal contest in the party is effectively mobilising opposition against such leaders. The current contest going on in APC is a typical example. Although the contest is partly to ensure that the March 26, 2022 APC National Convention hold and produce new leaders, it must be stressed that the quality of the new leaders of the party being expected to emerge from the Convention should begin to change, if APC is to meet public expectations. For instance, the internal opposition against His Excellency Mai Mala Buni’s leadership of APC Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) is largely because of all the numerous cases of allegations of corruption against him. How different from His Excellency Mai Mala will the new leaders of the APC after the March 26 National Convention be? Will the new leaders continue the business of extorting aspirants for elective positions and to that extent continue to run party management as a Bureau De Change?

 

How the party treat allegations of corruption against the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala will substantially determine the nature of new leaders to emerge. Many of the allegations against His Excellency Mai Mala are already public knowledge in the media. From Anambra to Ekiti and Osun primary, there are allegations against about extorting money from aspiring party leaders for Governorship. Part of the media report alleged that the discovery of how much money could be made from conducting primary is responsible for why His Excellency Mai Mala is doing everything necessary to ensure that APC National Convention is delayed and merged with the process of party primary to produce candidates for the 2023 elections. The speculated expectation is that the opportunity to organise APC primary to produce candidates for 2023 election will provide the opening to make ‘good business.’ There are already allegations against His Excellency Mai Mala that he has started extorting money from some of the emerging Presidential aspirants. Although no details are available, there are speculations that one of the aspirants who is alleged to have made some payment is yet to join the party. Yet, party campaign offices are being speculated to begin to spring up for the would-be aspirant expected to join the APC, as part of the deal.

 

There was also specific allegation against His Excellency Mai Mala bordering on extorting money from party leaders, including serving Governors, involved in disputes arising from the party Congresses. First term APC Governors are being alleged to have been offered automatic tickets. Similar automatic tickets are also being alleged to have been offered to APC Senators and House of Representatives members. If Anambra State 2021 Governorship primary is to be the yardstick, automatic tickets would mean that highest bidders will emerge as the APC’s candidates at different levels. Serving Governors, Senators, House of Representatives members, etc. will be required to match the amount given by aspiring highest bidders. Based on that, dishonest party leaders will be given the responsibility of returning highest bidders, just like His Excellency Dapo Abiodun was the returning officer of the APC Primary election in Anambra State, which declared Sen. Andy Uba as the winner with more than two hundred thousand votes. Yet, in the main election, APC could barely poll fifty thousand votes.

 

Beyond the new APC leaders to emerge from the March 26 National Convention, how is the APC going to take steps to block bad leaders such as His Excellency Yahaya Bello from emerging as standard bearers of the party for 2023 elections. The case of His Excellency Yahaya Bello requires some bold decisions by the APC as a party, which should include acknowledging that his actions as Kogi Governor contradicts the commitment of the party for good governance as represented by the provisions of the APC constitution and manifesto. Take the case of N19.3 billion salary bail out given to Kogi State by the Federal Government, which was deposited in an unlawful bank account domiciled with Sterling Bank Plc. The money was recovered in November 2021 by the EFCC and returned to the CBN.

 

Interestingly, while the controversy of the seizure of the N19.3 billion salary bail out is yet to be resolved, in February 2022, Kogi State announced the commencement of payment of N30,000 minimum wage. By the end of February 2022, media reports emerged that Kogi State workers, instead of receiving the new minimum wage of N30,000, received only percentages of their old salaries, some as low as only 25%. Part of the media reports suggest that there are workers who have received as low as N2,000 as salary for February 2022. Amid all these, His Excellency Yahaya Bello is going round the country shamelessly campaigning for his so-called emergence as the Presidential candidate of the APC for 2023. With such records of anti-people and anti-workers policies, APC must take steps to disclaim the government of Kogi State under Governor Yahaya Bello. In addition, he is one of the few APC leaders collaborating with His Excellency Mai Mala to undermine the decision to organise the Convention of the APC, perhaps in expectation that His Excellency Mai Mala, as APC Chairman, will manipulate the process of electing the APC’s Presidential candidate in his (Yahaya Bello) favour.

 

We must appeal to all APC leaders, especially Governors, to recognise that the weight of political responsibility of producing new leaders for the APC is in fact a very strong test of whether the party can continue to justifiably earn the confidence of Nigerians. Will leaders, especially Governors, undertake the crucial task of performing background checks for aspiring candidates and dispassionately, even if painfully, select both party leaders and party candidates for elections, beyond issues of loyalty? The crucial task before APC leaders is to ensure that leadership selection process produce trustworthy leaders both as party leaders and as candidates for elections.

 

In fact, the quality of party leaders will substantially determine the quality of candidates the party will present for elections. Once party leaders make the mistake of producing Bureau De Change managers as APC leaders during the March 26, 2022 National Convention, the probability will be very high that there will be many bad eggs emerging as standard bearers of the party for the 2023 elections. Already PDP leaders have dug their political grave when for instance they elected people who shared $2.1 billion meant for arms procurement to fight insecurity as National leaders of the PDP. Till today, PDP leaders continue to arrogantly and contemptuously ignore this foundational reality of public trust in politics. This is among many other factors why the PDP is still very unpopular among Nigerians. APC must fundamentally take every step necessary to produce new orientation for political leadership recruitment in the country as we approach the 2023 elections.

 

Therefore, starting with the March 26, 2022 APC National Convention, APC leaders, especially Governors should demonstrate stronger commitment towards recruiting tested and trustworthy leaders. As much as possible, situations whereby good leaders only emerge ‘accidentally’ must begin to be reversed in Nigeria based on carefully planned initiatives under the APC. As part of the process of planning for the emergence of trustworthy leaders’ issues of getting current leaders to account for their actions or inactions will be necessary. For instance, His Excellency Mai Mala should be made to account for all the allegations of extorting money from aspiring candidates and party leaders. It is only when His Excellency Mai Mala is made to account for such charges that successor leaders would avoid toying such path. Similarly, there should be investigation into the conduct of party primary in Anambra, Ekiti and Osun to determine the truth or otherwise of the allegation of corruption against His Excellency Mai Mala.

 

APC, as a party, need to also take a special interest in what is going on in Kogi State. It is embarrassing that a government produced by the party will demonstrate that level of rascality. If PDP can tolerate such public rascality as was the case under for instance the inglorious era of Ayodele Fayose in Ekiti and many other PDP state governments across the country, APC must decisively disown what is coming out of Kogi State under Governor Yahaya Bello. If necessary, APC should declare opposition to what is emerging as the governance credentials of Governor Yahaya Bello, including taking every necessary step to save the people of Kogi State from the influence of Yahaya Bello in determining who succeeds him.

 

Every step must be taken to ensure that APC emerges as a distinctively different party from PDP and other parties especially on the question of leadership recruitment. While in the case of PDP and other parties, issues of leadership recruitment are considered as given based on the received wisdoms of political leaders, in APC these issues are being debated and contested, which explains all the dynamics around the March 26, 2022 APC National Convention. If anything, the contest for the emergence of trustworthy political leaders in APC is a contest for the unfettered development of Nigerian democracy. Nigerian democracy cannot develop unless the right conditions within parties are created for the emergence of trustworthy leaders both as party leaders and candidates for election. May Allah (SWT) continue to guide both leaders and members of APC to strengthen internal contest for the emergence of trustworthy leaders. May He also give victory to only trustworthy people to emerge both as leaders of APC and candidates. May He also save the party and all the structures of government at all levels from falling into the hands of Bureau De Change leaders. Amin!

 

March 14, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Consensus Vs Open Contest in APC

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

smlu...@gmail.com

Freelance APC Campaigner

 

Electing Party Leaders through Consensus

 

Since the commencement of negotiation for new leadership in APC, starting with Ward Congresses, the decision of the APC CECPC is that new leaders will be elected through consensus. This imply that stakeholders will reach agreement on specific individuals who will emerge as party leaders. So far, the process has achieved some degree of success as the new leaders of the party from wards to local governments and states have emerged through consensus. There were instances of disagreements, which the party’s reconciliation committee under the leaders of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu has succeeded in resolving many of the cases.

 

With the National Convention scheduled to hold March 26, 2022, the process of achieving consensus is similarly expected to produce new national leaders. Already, following meetings of the CECPC, Progressive Governors and other party leaders with President Buhari, some initiatives aimed at achieving consensus leading to the emergence of new national leaders have commenced. A zoning formula has been reported to be agreed and the President is reported to have expressed his support for the emergence of Sen. Adamu as the consensus National Chairman of the party around whom the negotiation to achieve consensus for other positions is expected to be achieved. Progressive Governors were reported to have been mandated by the President to work with the CECPC and achieve agreed consensus on all party positions.

 

Party Activities and attempts to Undermine Consensus

 

Incidences within the last few days appear to be almost questioning whether any negotiation is taking place within the party to achieve consensus. From uncertainty about whether the party’s National Convention will hold, circumstances have been created whereby directives of President Buhari, who is unquestionably the leader of the party, to negotiate consensus leading the emergence of new leaders seems to be discarded. Conflicting directives to party leaders allegedly from the President are allowed to appear in the public. Every time new directive appears, party leaders and members complied, and new realities also emerges in the party.

 

For instance, when on Sunday, March 6, 2022, on the day President Buhari went to London, the information emerged that President Buhari instructed Progressive Governors to initiate processes of leadership change in the party given the reluctance of His Excellency Mai Mala, the APC CECPC Chairman to implement decisions to hold the party’s National Convention, party leaders and members welcome the decision, which accounts for the legitimacy enjoyed by all the eleven members of the CECPC who immediately rallied themselves around His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello who was vested with the responsibility of acting as APC CECPC Chairman in the absence of His Excellency Mai Mala who was out of the country for medical treatment.

 

Immediately, activities of the party around preparations for the March 26, 2022 National Convention were strengthened. The CECPC under His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello began meetings almost on daily basis. Decisions taken were implemented immediately and communication with party members and the public regarding preparations for the National Convention was very regular, unlike under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala. Newly elected States’ leadership of the party were inaugurated, an action which should have been carried out long ago but deliberately stalled as part of the plans to sabotage the National Convention. With the inauguration of States’ leadership of the party, the meeting of the National Executive Committee (NEC) was scheduled for Thursday, March 17, 2022. The scheduled NEC meeting was also designed to begin to return the APC back to normal operations as provided by the party’s Constitution.

 

The NEC being the second highest organ of the party has the powers to take decisions, which should guide party operations in between National Conventions. Under the APC constitution, the NEC is required to meet every three months. The last time the NEC met was December 8, 2020, when in view of the challenges facing the party, and trusting that the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala will faithfully and honestly implement decisions taken leading to the emergence of new leaders, transferred its powers to the CECPC. As of December 8, 2020, the expectation was that the tenure of the CECPC would not go beyond six months, implying that by June 2021, the APC National Convention would have taken place and new party leaders would have emerged. Sadly, His Excellency Mai Mala began endless postponement of the National Convention, and it became clear to everyone, including President Buhari that the CECPC leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala has abused all the trust of party leaders and members, with allegations of corruption against the Chairman and Secretary, His Excellency Mai Mala and Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe respectively.

 

Changes in CECPC and Syndicated Media Campaigns

 

With the emergence of His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello as Acting CECPC Chairman on March 7, 2022, and all the actions taken to implement decisions leading to the Convention, confidence of party members and leaders began to be restored. Some few party leaders who collaborated with His Excellency Mai Mala to sabotage the decision to organise the National Convention, however, began media campaigns aimed at undermining the legitimacy of actions taken by the CECPC under His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello. Mostly done through surrogates, the campaigns include planting syndicated report of a coup against His Excellency Mai Mala, leading to the emergence of His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello as Acting Chairman of the CECPC.

 

The CECPC Secretary, Sen. Akpanuduodehe, on Monday, March 7, 2022, walked out of the meeting of the CECPC chaired by His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello. Then news of his resignation and subsequent rebuttal by him emerged. As it turned out, the CECPC actually passed a vote of no confidence on the Secretary in with provision of Article 21(vi) of the APC, which affirms the power of organs of the party to take such actions based on two-third votes by members of the organ. The resolution for vote of no confidence against Sen. Akpanuduodehe was passed by ten out of thirteen members of the CECPC. Thereafter, the CECPC announced that Prof. Tahir Mamman is the Acting Secretary and Barr. Ismail Ahmed is the spokesperson. Throughout the week of March 7 – 14, Sen. Akpanudoedehe was conspicuously absent from the APC National Secretariat and didn’t attend meetings of the CECPC, although on Friday, March 11, 2022, he was reported to have visited the APC National Secretariat but did not attend the CEPCP meeting, which ongoing at the time of his visit.

 

As part of the syndicated news reports aimed at undermining decisions and actions taken by the CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello, there was the false report that thirteen APC Governors were threatening to leave the party if the decision to change His Excellency Mai Mala as Chairman of CECPC is achieved. Some party leaders, including Governors Nasir El-Rufai and Rotimi Akeredolu SAN of Kaduna and Ondo States respectively responded with the information that only three Governors, not thirteen, are supportive of His Excellency Mai Mala. The three Governors are Yahaya Bello of Kogi, Hope Uzodinma of Imo and Dapo Abiodun of Ogun States. The remaining eighteen Governors and the Deputy Governor of Anambra State are supportive of initiatives being taken by the CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello.

 

Conflicting Presidential Directives and London Lobbies by Party Leaders

 

Around the same period, during the weekend of March 11 – 13, there were reports about President Buhari returning His Excellency Mai Mala as the Chairman of the CECPC. Then on Sunday, March 13, there was the statement by Mallam Garba Shehu, Senior Special to the President on Media and Publicity, informing APC leaders about President Buhari’s warning drawing attention to the electoral consequences of the open leadership contestation in the party and calling for order. By Monday, March 14, the report was that party leaders including His Excellency Mai Mala, His Excellency Kayode Fayemi and His Excellency Nasir El-Rufai have traveled to London to meet with President Buhari. No details of the meetings emerged. The feeler, however, was that President Buhari met Governors Fayemi and El-Rufai and endorsed preparations for the March 26 National Convention initiated by the CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello and accordingly confirmed that he will be attending the scheduled March 17 NEC meeting of the party.

 

Before the weekend of March 11 – 13, there were media reports about some party leaders, including Sen. Hadi Sirika, Minister of Aviation, Mallam Abubakar Malami, Minister of Justice, Mallam Adamu Adamu, Minister of Education and Hon. Farouk Adamu Aliyu, meeting the President in London. This report of the visit by Sen. Sirika, Mallam Malami, Mallam Adamu and Hon. Aliyu was remotely associated with all the lobby to influence decisions of the President regarding the need to achieve consensus leading to the emergence of new leadership for the APC. Interestingly, the presence of these longtime political associates of President Buhari in London may have been responsible for many of the reversals of decisions taken by President Buhari regarding the party’s leadership contestation.

 

The four leaders – Sen. Sirika, Mallam Malami, Mallam Adamu and Hon. Aliyu were political associates of President Buhari since 2003 when he first contested for President under the All Nigeria Peoples’ Party (ANPP). Part of what has emerged suggest that their mission to London was to get President Buhari to alter the decisions reached with Progressive Governors and other party leaders on zoning party positions. Particularly, they wanted the President to unilaterally change the decision to get the Deputy National Chairman North moved from North-East to North-West so that Hon. Aliyu can become the President’s anointed candidate. Recall that there was a discredited zoning list purportedly signed by the President, dated February 25, 2022 with Hon. Aliyu, who is from North-West as the agreed candidate for Deputy National Chairman North, instead of allowing it for the emergence of someone from the North-East as agreed. In that discredited zoning list, the position of National Secretary was given to South-East and not South-West as was later announced by the CECPC.

 

Consequently, by the evening of Wednesday, March 16, 2022, news about the President reversing his earlier directive to Progressive Governors and party leaders to the effect of changing the leadership of the CECPC emerged. Conveyed in a letter to His Excellency Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, Chairman Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) directing a ‘return to status quo ante’ on the leadership of the CEPCP, with photo images of President Buhari together with His Excellency Mai Mala in the company of Mallam Adamu, the President effectively reversed his earlier instructions. By the morning of Thursday, March 17, 2022, Sen. Akpanuduedehe announced the cancellation of the scheduled March 17 NEC and attempted to alter the composition of Convention Committees announced by the CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Sani Bello. Members of the CECPC had to immediately to enforce the vote of no confidence on Sen. Akpanuduodehe to stop further attempts to reverse decisions taken on the March 26 National Convention. His Excellency Mai Mala who returned to the country on Thursday, March 17 had to issue a statement affirming the sanctity of all decisions taken by the CECPC under the leadership of His Excellency Sani Bello.

 

Return of Old attempts to Impose Party Leaders and Candidates

 

Part of the sentiment being used by the London lobby team of Sen. Sirika, Mallam Malami, Mallam Adamu and Hon. Aliyu was to ensure that the old Congress for Progressives Change (CPC) leaders are not ‘marginalised’ in the new APC leadership to emerge from the March 26 National Convention. These are old opportunistic argument, which were self-serving used by some few vested interests around the President to impose themselves as party leaders and candidates. There were many instances leading to imposition of candidates during elections, which undermined the electoral viabilities of parties associated with the President. From the ANPP in 2003 and 2007 to CPC in 2011, this has been the reality. Often, individual politicians with these self-serving agenda have used it to impose themselves on party members as candidates for elections. Although there are many instances whereby imposed candidates win elections, there are also many instances when acts of imposition destroyed the electoral advantages of the parties leading to the loss of elections. This was partly the reason for the large-scale defeat of CPC in 2011 election in Kano, Kaduna, Bauchi, Katsina and many states.

 

Perhaps, it needs to be highlighted that while the team of ‘CPC London lobbyists’ used the CPC sentiment to push for the anointment of Hon. Aliyu as Deputy National Chairman North, they were not interested in the reversal of the speculated anointment of Sen. Adamu as the President’s choice for the National Chairman in favour of Sen. Umaru Tanko Al-Makura, who is by far the most qualified former CPC leader aspiring for the position of National Chairman. Noting that Sen. Adamu was never a member of CPC, unlike Sen. Al-Makura who was the only elected CPC Governor in the country between 2011 and 2013 when CPC was dissolved into the current APC, why shouldn’t any CPC lobbyist prioritise the case of National Chairman over and above a Deputy National Chairman? This partly highlights the limitations of all the scheming influencing many of the President’s decisions to reverse decisions he took around all the leadership contestation in the party. Why should the President endorse Sen. Adamu over Sen. Al-Makura as the National Chairman of the APC? Didn’t Sen. Al-Makura defeat Sen. Adamu, which made the CPC to have the only State, Nasarawa, it won in 2011?

 

Sen. Al-Makura has led the APC to victory in all elections in Nasarawa State since 2015. In fact, it could be argued without any fear of contradiction that Sen. Adamu was compelled to leave the PDP because of the domineering electoral influence of the APC in Nasarawa State under the leadership of Sen. Al-Makura. Every rational consideration would expect President Buhari to choose Sen. Al-Makura ahead of Sen. Adamu. But the same old irrational and illogical decisions leading to imposition of candidates in ANPP and CPC have found their wat to APC and may have influenced President Buhari’s decision for Sen. Adamu over Sen. Al-Makura. These irrational and illogical decisions are driven by people who are opposed to political contests because they must impose themselves at all costs using their close relationship with President Buhari. Largely because they hardly have much electoral significance, meaning that on their own they can hardly win elections, instead, they just want to ride on decisions of the President to anoint them as candidates based on which they may succeed in bulldozing their way to emerge as elected leaders and candidates.

 

Partly because the so-called CPC lobby around President Buhari wasn’t about getting trustworthy people to emerge as APC leaders during the March 26 National Convention, the objective may have been to bring in people who can do the hatched jobs of imposing some so-called CPC old leaders as candidates for 2023 elections. Noting that, for instance, both Mallam Malami and Sen. Sirika are aspiring to emerge as APC Governorship candidates for Kebbi and Katsina States respectively, this may be the major consideration for the lobby around Hon. Aliyu to become the Deputy National Chairman North. Also noting that both Mallam Malami and Sen. Sirika are facing strong opposition within the party in their respective states, Kebbi and Katsina, the suspicion that they want Hon. Aliyu as Deputy National Chairman North so that he can do the hatched job of producing them as candidates by whatever means cannot be dismissed.

 

Recall that Hon. Aliyu was alleged to be at the centre of most of the allegations of corruption against the leadership of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole during the 2019 elections, the probability that he will collaborate with aspirants for elective positions to impose candidates cannot also be wished away. There were specific allegations against Hon. Aliyu of extorting huge amounts of money as Chief of Staff to Comrade Oshiomhole from some aspirants for the 2019 elections. Part of the information was that Hon. Aliyu parted ways with Comrade Oshiomhole on account of these allegations. Although these are allegations, however, to the extent that Hon. Aliyu is yet to put up any public defence to clear himself should discourage anyone from promoting him for any party leadership position in the APC.

 

Unilateral Reversal of Decisions Create Open Contest

 

By some default, therefore, while desperately pushing the President to anoint people like Hon. Aliyu as consensus candidates, these ‘CPC lobbyists’ have inadvertently created situations whereby there is the strong likelihood for an open contest in APC during the March 26 National Convention. Instead of working to support the President to win the cooperation of all party leaders, including the speculated choice of Sen. Adamu as the consensus National Chairman, an unregulated situation has emerged ahead of the APC March 26, 2022 National Convention whereby everybody is free to join the contest for the position of National Chairman. One of the mistakes of the so-called old CPC members, including the ‘CPC London lobbyists’, is to elevate the respect of party leaders for the President to the level of compelling obedience without recognising that it is a mutually reciprocal respect. Unlike what obtained under the CPC, whereby President Buhari was largely the singular electoral asset of the party, in the case of the APC, President Buhari, although the dominant electoral asset, other party leaders are also electoral assets in varying degrees, which was the added factor responsible for the electoral victory of 2015 and 2019.

 

Once President Buhari is made to unilateral change party decisions, and to that extend therefore create unregulated conditions for leadership contest, he is made to effectively undermine the respect he enjoys among APC leaders. Beyond creating an unregulated situation, an unhealthy condition has also been created whereby the President being a moral leader is being projected to be directing party leaders based on his presidential powers. With or without presidential powers, President Buhari has earned his position as the leader of APC. His unique personality as someone who is truly loved by very ordinary citizens remarkably earned the APC its electoral victory of 2015 and 2019. Party leaders and members will always respect instructions coming from President Buhari. Therefore, party leaders and members, by extension all supporters of President Buhari must appeal to so-called ‘CPC lobbyists’ to stop undermining the President’s authority through the attempt to impose party leaders and candidates for election.

 

Expanded Democratic Space in APC

 

The good thing, however, arising from the actions of the ‘CPC London lobbyists’ by getting the President to issue conflicting directives to Progressive Governors and party leaders, thereby disrupting negotiations for the emergence of consensus leaders is that it has in some ways mobilise internal rebellion within the APC, which will lead to open contests for all positions in the party in the March 26, 2022 National Convention. Given open contests, it is doubtful if any attempt by the President to influence the emergence of any leader, including the speculated anointment of Sen. Adamu for the position of the National Chairman can succeed. Thanks to the ‘CPC London lobbyists’, the democratic space in APC has been expanded beyond what it would ordinarily have been. For the first time, since 1999, internal party contest in a major Nigerian political party, APC, which is also the governing party, will most likely experience full blown contests for all leadership positions whereby winners may emerge irrespective of speculated choices of the President, and by extension, possibly all other party leaders.

 

Unintended, the ‘CPC London lobbyists’ have also helped to inadvertently expand the democratic space for internal party contest for the emergence of candidates for 2023 elections. In other words, by their actions, they have weakened the high possibility that the party’s candidates for 2023 elections will emerge through consensus. This new reality is very much needed to challenge Nigerian political parties to comply with basic democratic tenets of free and fair internal contests for the emergence of party leaders and candidates for elections. This is perhaps very much needed to return the APC to its founding vision such that it can recover all its electoral advantages.

 

Acknowledgement and Appeal

 

The unfolding dynamics in APC, which by some default is expanding the democratic space within the party is made possible due to the liberal leadership of the President. Associates of the President should also respect decisions the President take jointly with other party leaders instead of undermining his liberal disposition by seeking to get him to reverse decisions he jointly take with other party leaders. It was the liberal disposition of the President that allows him to respect positions of party leaders, based on which he subscribes to decisions and delegate implementation to competent structures of the party. If the President can respect other party leaders, why should other associates of the President exude any form of disrespect or contempt for other party leaders in whatever way?

 

Accordingly, APC leaders and members should appeal to both President Buhari and his old political associates in the old CPC to refrain from acts that will undermine the authority of the President as the leader of the party. The President needs to recognise that being the leader of the party, imposes on him some level of propriety, which requires that once decisions are taken through meetings, it will require at least another meeting to change decisions taken. In every respect, the decisions of the President as conveyed in the letter to His Excellency Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, PGF Chairman of March 16, 2022 directing a ‘return to status quo ante’ could have been achieved from the London meeting with Governors Fayemi and El-Rufai. The letter to the PGF Chairman was avoidable and unnecessary.

 

So-called old CPC leaders should stop projecting the President as a leader of only a section of party members. The President is the leader of all members of the APC and all Nigerians. Some of the so-called old CPC members, should also be reminded that, in their own rights, they have what it takes to successfully negotiate their emergence as leaders and candidates of the party without resorting to the undemocratic practices of imposition. Many of them are highly respected leaders of the APC and therefore, given free and fair environment for electoral contests within the APC, they can win elections to emerge as party leaders and candidates for elective offices. APC leaders and members should therefore appeal to these old CPC leaders to properly integrate themselves in the structures of the APC and develop the needed confidence to freely negotiate for leadership positions in the party based on ability to mobilise support to win majority votes. May Allah (SWT) bless the new democratic space in APC and support the emergence of new APC leaders based on majority votes at the March 26 APC National Convention. Amin!

 

March 18, 2022

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Succession and 2023 APC Presidential Candidate

Open Letter to President Muhammadu Buhari

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

40 Blantyre Crescent

Wuse 2, Abuja

 

During the consultative meeting with Progressive Governors, on Tuesday, May 31, 2022, Your Excellency unambiguously conveyed the resolve to provide every needed leadership for our great party, APC, to remain strong and united to improve our electoral fortunes. Highlighting some of the internal policies, which allowed ‘first term Governors who have served credibly well …to stand for re-election’ and ‘second term Governors …accorded the privilege of promoting successors that are capable of driving their visions’, Your Excellency solicited for ‘reciprocity and support of Governors and other stakeholders in picking’ your successor, ‘who would fly the flag of our party for election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2023.’

 

This simply means that you want to exercise the same privilege, which is being exercised by Governors in determining who succeeds you as the standard bearer of our party, APC, for the 2023 Presidential election. Ordinarily, this should not be a problem. Both party members and leaders will always trust Your Excellency’s judgement. However, the big worry is whether loyal party leaders and members should just reduce themselves to being ordinary observers when very sensitive issues with very high potential to diminish and damage Your Excellency’s revered status in the country is being considered. Noting that the current phenomena of poor relations between predecessors and successor governors are largely a product of poorly instituted political succession arrangement in the country, which is impulsive and imposing, it will be highly risky to adopt the same succession framework as it can erode all your lifelong achievements as someone who contribute a lot to strengthen Nigerian democracy.

 

Perhaps, it is important to emphasise that your contribution towards strengthening Nigerian democracy should not be reduced to your emergence as the elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2015. Your most important contribution has to do with the leadership role you played in facilitating the merger negotiations of opposition parties, which produced the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2013 and eventually also providing the highly inspirationally measured leadership, which defeated the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) in 2015. As President of the Federal Republic and leader of APC, you have continued to provide that measured leadership, which has been largely responsible for our electoral victories since 2015. More than anytime, at this point, when you will not be on the ballot in 2023, your measured leadership will be much more required to guarantee us sustained electoral victory.

 

Recalling the unfortunate third term agenda of former President Olusegun Obasanjo and how that eventually eroded all his achievements as a leader, it is necessary to caution against any transition initiative that risked being unpopular. Any initiative that potentially took away the rights of party members to elect candidates would potentially mobilise Nigerians against the party and rubbish Mr. President. This was the case in 2007, which eventually pushed the PDP into wholescale rigging mode such that elections results were announced even before counting processes were concluded. It was so bad that even late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua who was the main beneficiary had to acknowledge that it was a bad case.

 

Noting that today the PDP is more desperate now to return to power, our party must do everything possible to take the upper moral standing. Already, the PDP has oriented its 2023 campaigns based on lies and deceits. For instance, although it is very convenient for them to complain about the sharp divisions that exists in the country today and heap the blame on APC, by the way they went about nominating their Presidential candidate, they took Nigerians for granted and ignore every reality facing the country. Outside weeping every sentiment against the APC, they completely fail to outline any proposal in terms of how they want to unite Nigerians.

 

As a party, APC must be able to demonstrate much more sensitivity to the challenges of national unity by ensuring that the eventual standard bearer for the 2023 Presidential election embodies commitment to equity and justice as the underlying principles sustaining the corporate existence of Nigeria as a united country. This is not just about representation in terms of where the candidate comes from but mainly about the negotiation framework leading to the eventual selection of the candidate. In the case of the PDP, negotiation was limited to monetary transactions with the less than 1000 delegates who eventually elected Alh. Atiku Abubakar as the Presidential candidate of the PDP. With all the limitation imposed by the current Electoral Act, the delegates at the APC Convention who will be electing our Presidential candidate will not be less than 4000. For a party with more than 40 million members, this is a far cry and will be weak in terms of being democratically accountable in terms of decisions of delegates reflecting expectations party members. Once the choice of delegates correlates with expectations of over 40 million party members, invariably, it will most likely equate with the expectations of majority of Nigerians.

 

It is important therefore to caution our party that we must keep faith with basic tenets of democracy as our major campaign message to Nigerians for the 2023 elections. This was eloquently highlighted in Your Excellency’s message to our Progressive Governors when you stated that ‘the key to electoral successes is the ability to hold consultations and for members to put the nation above other interests.’ The temptation for leaders to choose their successors is democratically risky and very costly. If in 2013/2014, Your Excellency, could submit yourself to internal democratic process, it is important that your successor also follow the same process.

 

It may also be necessary to highlight that a major disadvantage with succession arrangement whereby Governors chose their successors is that it negatively affects relationship between the successor and the predecessor, which undermine capacity to influence actions or inactions of successors by their predecessors. Your Excellency, since the period of negotiating the merger that produce our party APC, I have been a proponent of ensuring that our party take every step to preserve our leaders who could exercise moral authority. This means that leaders who are highly respected on account of their standing in society should not hold elective or appointive positions. It was for that reason that I openly campaigned against your aspiration to emerge as the Presidential candidate of our party for 2015 election.

 

Sir, recall that one of my arguments was that as President, the capacity of party leaders to influence your decisions will be weak. Without going into details, Your Excellency, this has come to pass. The big fear is that combining both legal and moral authority, being our President, if you are to nominate your successor to what extent can other party leaders influence your decision? If party leaders are unable to influence your decision with respect to the choice of successor, what will be the guarantee that your choice can aggregate the expectations of Nigerians?

 

Your Excellency, I ask these questions without prejudice to the unflinching confidence of party members in terms of your personal disposition to make all sacrifices necessary and make the best decision for our party and our nation. Notwithstanding, however, there is the overriding requirement to appeal to you to kindly resist the temptation. I would have wished we have enough time for open debate within our party. Unfortunately, as things are, we have less than one week to settle this matter. Sadly also, combination of inherited reality, and perhaps vested interests of some party leaders, processes of internal debates around this matter are being impeded. Even meetings of NWC are not exploring these issues. Even logistical issues of organising the National Convention are being handled informally. And as far as our National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu is concerned, relating with you and probably directly communicating positions of members of NWC, is his exclusive jurisdiction, which limits you to selective perspective that may only be self-serving to some party leaders.

 

Being a party, which came with the promise of change, how our leader can directly access the views of party members is important. At the risk of again being projected to be against some party leaders, I want to appeal to all party leaders to unite in showing restraint at this point of transition. I want to strongly appeal to Your Excellency to kindly continue to make every sacrifice necessary to provide measured leadership to our party and our nation. Your revered status was earned not by following so-called conventions, which have narrowed our democracy. You have always summoned the courage to initiate leadership responses that are selfless based on commitment to principles of justice and equity.

 

I am confident that Allah (SWT) will guide you into taking the right decisions that would broaden the democratic scope in APC, continue to endear our great party to Nigerians and facilitate our electoral victory in 2023. Like in the case of December 10, 2014 APC National Convention, everything will be done at the June 6, 2022 APC National Convention to guarantee level playing field for all aspiring Presidential candidates of our party. Any recommendation to the contrary will be inimical and injurious to the electoral fortunes of our great party, APC.

 

May God protect our democracy and bless our nation, Nigeria. Amin!

 

 

[Salimonu Kadiri]

​Thank you, Salihu Moh. Lukman for your open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari on his request to select his APC successor as President of Nigeria in 2023. Since I don't want to be diplomatic, I truly believe that although President Buhari looks very honest personally, his political actions since 2015 have not been honest. He allowed the New-PDP to seize the National Assembly in 2015 and later side-lined major political partners that collaborated with him to form APC that later ensured his election as President of Nigeria. As his eight years presidential tenure is approaching its end, the APC administration is in the hands of former PDP politicians that crossed over. Therefore, Buhari's APC mantra of change in 2015 has become the retention and implementation of PDP ideology in 2022.

The President of Nigeria must come from somewhere in Nigeria and his/her religion and ethnic origin are not parts of his required qualifications to perform the duty of transforming Nigeria to a welfare state economically and industrially. That a public official in Nigeria, including the President, is incompetent and performing badly has nothing to do with his/her ethnic origin and religious affiliation. President Buhari was elected to serve all Nigerians through his appointed Ministers. Although he is from Northern Nigeria, his failure in office must not and cannot be blamed on all Northerners. Therefore, it will be fraudulent to claim that Buhari has been ruling Nigeria on behalf of the North since 2015 when in reality all Nigerians are victims of poor governance irrespective of religious faith and ethnicity. No number of ethnic incantations or religious chants, as Nigerians have experienced, and to cite some examples, would conjure forth functional crude oil refineries or would generate and distribute electricity. We should all understand that Nigeria's problem is not from which ethnic group in Nigeria the President belongs but the ability of the president to govern efficiently to the benefit of all citizens.

The demand of President Muhammadu Buhari that APC governors should allow him to pick APC presidential candidate for the 2023 presidential election is absolutely dishonest and undemocratic. When Buhari became APC presidential flag bearer in 2015, he contested the primary against not less than five other candidates. And in 2019, being the incumbent President, there was consensus within the Party that he should be the flag bearer in that election without the need to go through primary contest. Thinking along ethnic line, Buhari and some people around him had decided that the Presidential candidate of the APC should come from the North in spite of the conventional agreement within the party that presidential power should rotate between the North and the South every eight years. Buhari and his cohorts want to renege on that gentleman's agreement but they are not honest to come out openly. Following the deadline given by INEC, the PDP and APC, like many other political parties in Nigeria, had fixed their primaries to be at the end of May 2022. After the PDP had fixed the date of its presidential primary INEC suddenly announced six days extension of its original deadline for presidential party primaries thus allowing APC to shift its presidential primary to June 6. It must be suspected that the extension of date of the presidential primary by INEC had secretly been requested for by President Buhari. And INEC, which is supposed to be a neutral umpire, granted the request. Politics is not dirty but dirty people playing politics can bring dirt into politics. With the PDP presidential primary concluded and the result showing a Northerner to be its presidential flag bearer, Buhari now wants to singularly pick a Northerner as APC presidential flag bearer under the pretext that only a northern APC candidate can defeat Atiku Abubakar, the PDP presidential candidate.

The presidential candidate of the APC in the 2023 presidential election can be any of the twenty-five aspirants who have paid to contest in the APC presidential primaries and President Muhammadu Buhari as one of the delegates has only one vote. He should exercise his right to vote for the presidential candidate of his own choice but he cannot compel others to vote for his preferred candidate. This is because President Muhammadu Buhari cannot guarantee that his chosen successor will be a good President for Nigeria, if he wins. SINCE 2015, PRESIDENT BUHARI HAS, WITH THE AID OF A SMALL CLIQUE GOVERNED NIGERIA. HE SINGULARLY CHOSE HIS MINISTER OF FINANCE AND GOVERNOR OF CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA. SEVEN YEARS IN OFFICE, THE EXCHANGE RATE OF NIGERIAN NAIRA TO ONE U.S. DOLLAR DEPRECIATED FROM 198 NAIRA TO A DOLLAR TO, NOW, 590 NAIRA TO A DOLLAR. PRESIDENT BUHARI IS THE SUBSTANTIVE MINISTER OF PETROLEUM RESOURCES AND HE HAS SINGULARLY APPOINTED DIRECTORS OF THE NNPC AND NIGERIA'S CRUDE OIL REFINERIES, BUT WHILE HIS GOVERNMENT EXPORTS CRUDE OIL AT $100/BARREL, IT IMPORTS REFINED CRUDE OIL AT $130/BARREL. PRESIDENT BUHARI SINGULARLY CHOSE HIS MINISTER OF POWER BUT AS THE TCN GENERATES AND DISTRIBUTES DARKNESS FOR NIGERIANS, THE NATION BECOMES SOLE IMPORTER OF UNIT GENERATORS. PRESIDENT BUHARI HAS SINGULARLY CHOSEN HIS SECURITY AND SERVICE CHIEFS, ALL WHO ARE NOW DOLLAR MILLIONAIRES. BUT WHILE THE SECURITY AND SERVICE CHIEFS ARE INCAPABLE OF FINDING THE WHERE-ABOUTS OF KIDNAPPERS AND BANDITS MENACING CITIZENS, ALHAJI SHEIK AHMAD GUMI AND MALLAM TUKUR MAMU ARE BUSY WALKING IN AND OUT OF THE FOREST WHERE THEY PARLEY WITH BANDITS AND KIDNAPPERS DAILY. The list can be made longer but it will suffice to say that in every sphere of governance, the choice of executor of government programmes by President Buhari has been fatal failures. In his seven years in office, President Buhari chose small men with little brains to run his government and Nigerians have seen the results to understand that with small men and little brains not much can be achieved. Therefore, President Muhammadu Buhari cannot and must not be allowed to pick his successor in the impending primary election of APC presidential candidate.

S. Kadiri  

---

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>
Sent: 01 June 2022 03:36
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Succession and 2023 APC Presidential Candidate

 

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB6446FFC58A779579D1A5BCE0AEDF9%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Cornelius Hamelberg]

Re - “With the PDP presidential primary concluded and the result showing a Northerner to be its presidential flag bearer, Buhari now wants to singularly pick a Northerner as APC presidential flag bearer under the pretext that only a northern APC candidate can defeat Atiku Abubakar, the PDP presidential candidate.” ( S. Kadiri )

If, as Baba Kadiri has repeatedly told us in this forum, as a matter of principle - including in this thread, religion and ethnic origins are not the quality sine qua non  presidential qualifications for “transforming “ Nigeria into the much desired, successful nationhood, then why all the fuss and furore also being extended and amplified via Jibrin Ibrahim’s megaphone article, “Buhari's Faux Pas”?

Surely, the APC has to be purposeful and pragmatic about fielding a candidate that can deliver a crushing or at least a bruising defeat of  Buhari’s Fulani brother and rival, Atiku Abubakar? 

Or, behind the scenes, are they ( the Fulani Buhari & the Fulani Atiku) in cahoots to perpetuate the continuation of “Fulani domination” and the Southern sob-story about “ Northern hegemony”? 

 It’s the kind of conspiracy theory that could gain much traction should Brother Buhari’s APC  now said to be mostly dominated by the old foxes brigade of the PDP, decide to field a South-Easterner as their preferred APC flag-bearer. Or a South-South man,  like Goodluck Jonathan?  

Hopefully, “ not bloody likely !” is the response to such a demographically unsound conjecture - and furthermore,  dear Bola Tinubu, once a foregone conclusion as the crown prince and heir-apparent who partially bank-rolled Brer Buhari the last time around, is reported to be pissed about latest developments being orchestrated and mismanaged by internal enemies and some of the woebegone ingrates. 

As Wole Soyinka's Brother, William Shakespeare put it, “How sharper than a serpent's tooth it is to have a thankless child.”

Both Baba Kadiri and Jibrin Ibrahim and the rest of us understand that in the current circumstances,  if an APC flag bearer should not be a Northerner, then it’s most likely that Atiku Abubakar will reap a grand majority of the Northern votes. The oyster shells and cowrie beads say that Tinubu could deliver the APC victory that’s being prayed for.

Ethnicity and religion are therefore of the uttermost relevance in this dire situation, where victory is the aim and the blessing being sought.

At worst, the sticklers of principle over pragmatism. could limply accuse  His Imperial Majesty Presidential Brother Buhari of being “autocratic”. A good sensed, well-balanced, victory-oriented autocrat.

Given the above considerations and the realities of the ethnoreligious compositions of  Nigeria’s electorate, I’m sure that by the time Professor Mobolaji E. Aluko has worked out the demographics that are likely to govern the February 23, 2023, Presidential elections  -as a forecast and not as a tearful or joyful postmortem that Professor Alukjo usually serves us after every Presidential election, we should have a better pre-knowledge about how the votings going to go. once the flag bearer and running-mate of the APC Candidate are announced.  And of course when in due course of time Obasanjo’s good friend A>tiku also announces who is going to be his running mate. Last night I was astounded by some of what was featured on Peter Obi’s Facebook account   even after he has thrown in the towel 

Here he is, showing some good spirit 

[Cornelius Hamelberg]

Once again, Re - Baba Kadiri’s assumption:

“With the PDP presidential primary concluded and the result showing a Northerner to be its presidential flag bearer, Buhari now wants to singularly pick a Northerner as APC presidential flag bearer under the pretext that only a northern APC candidate can defeat Atiku Abubakar, the PDP presidential candidate.”

Many a time the rhetorical Baba Kadiri has asked, “ Will mere prayers give us light and electricity?” - implying the Yoruba adage, 

“ God helps those who help themselves” 

and the Quranic assurance patently addressed to the Muslims of the so called “ Northern Hegemony ”, the Nigerian Muslims of the predominantly Yoruba West, the  Delta South, and the few and far between to be found in  the Eastern regions of Nigerian Igboland: 

“Verily Allah does not change a people's condition unless they change their inner selves. And when Allah decides to make a people suffer punishment, no one can avert it.”

In the coming months leading to the date with fate, Saturday, 25th February 2023 when, God willing, if nothing untoward happens, the Nigerian Presidential Elections  will be held, Nigeria being such a religious nation, in the South, Bishop David Oyedepo and some of Nigeria’s top Pentecostal pastors will be reporting to their congregations about their visions and warning the nation about their premonitions, the Pentecostal prophets will be speaking in tongues and translating to the laity, their prophecies about righteousness and unrighteousness and their prophetic announcements of the outcomes of the forthcoming elections will be many, their prayer and revival camp meetings will be continuous - as Paul instructed “ pray without ceasing” and we are to assume that they have been praying and will be praying without ceasing, for good government, good governance, good leadership, release from the evil forces of witchcraft, they will be continuously quoting Paul :

“Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God”

In standing against the wiles of the devil, I suppose that  they will  be wrestling mostly against political principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”

They will also be praying  for deliverance from the shackles of injustice and poverty, they will be conducting nationwide prayers for  peace and prosperity,  they are praying and will be praying, “Lord hear my prayer and let my cry come unto thee ”, world without end, Amen 

I’m sure that in his heart, Baba Kadiri resonates with the sentiments expressed in the prayers and the universal lines of scripture. From the second verse stanza of the Sierra Leone National Anthem these lines are sung:

“We pray that no harm on thy children may fall,

That blessing and peace may descend on us all”

 In Sierra Leone too, politics is predicated on the axis of the North - South dichotomy, the North -South polarisation; I almost said, “the North- South axis of evil”. In today's Sierra Leone, it’s the South that is currently “ in power” - not  “in office”, but in POWER. and Sierra Leone’s current president Julius Maada Bio is affectionately known as Pa-o.pa ( Pow–O-Pow ) which means with the legitimate or illegitimate use of force, as is necessary, my will be done! , just like his namesake and role model, Julius Caesar, not Julius Nyerere. But what do I know? I was last in the country more than fifty-two years ago. In the good old days,  when it came to international football and cricket, the country was usually united but when it came to general elections,  as usual, the country would be terribly divided, along the North - South Axis. The motto of the political party currently in power is “ One Country, One People”; it’s a good ideal that both Sierra Leone and Nigeria’s  many peoples should endeavour to live up to, with the understanding of Lincoln’s prerequisite for progress and human rights, that  “A house divided against itself cannot stand”

We all understand that “God willing, if nothing untoward happens, the Nigerian Presidential Elections will be held - however,  in the chaos that seems to loom ahead and may ensue if the APC vetting process should get out of step - and you don’t have to be a Pentecostal prophet or a Yoruba Babalawo to know that, in spite of what some well-informed people insist, there might very well be a military coup -  the army stepping in to reduce the chaos will postpone the elections to a later date or even indefinitely until the security situation is returned to some kind of normalcy…

Up to a point, so far, the speculation has been abstract, ethnically biassed speculation with lots of pious, self-righteous proclamations as if the speculators are unwilling to acquiesce to the reality that in a democratic nation  it’s  “ the majority carries the vote”

Bearing that in mind, the most relevant question now is, what and who does Baba Buhari himself want? Has he indeed said that “only a northern APC candidate can defeat Atiku Abubakar, the PDP presidential candidate.”? 

The consequences of a misstep here could be dire. Apart from Baba Kadiri himself being down to earth, always telling some uncomfortable home truths and shooting from the hip, what says Ayo Olukotun the dean of Nigeria’s political commentators who has yet to give his verdict on the fast approaching mess? At this germane moment, what says Nigeria’s intellectual mafia, on one side Chinweizu Ibekwe ( like Torbjörn Tännsjö) more middle of the road, predictable and stable, Biko Agozino, a Northern voice worthy of greater attention, Aliyu Tilde, more establishment apologia and explication Salihu Mohammed Lukman, reasonable interrogations of the mess in process/ snaillike progress, Jibrin Ibrahim coupled with my own personal hero in the Human Rights and Democracy sphere, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani ?  

What says Gloria Emeagwali? 

Okey Iheduru, a man of psychological insights into the psyche of some of the top brass in the Nigerian military  -  in the chaos that may ensue, is there going to be a coup?  

Normally, ( nothing to do with the Yar'adua - Goodluck Jonathan paradigm  - unfortunately,  Yaradua quenches and Goodluck steps into his shoes ) one would have thought that the humble,  competent, serious, immensely likeable, scrupulously clean and unobtrusive, Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo who performed so well during Buhari's leaves of absence - away in Merry England for medical consultations, would have been anointed by Brer Buhari as his successor since long ago……

On Thursday, 2 June 2022 at 15:46:57 UTC+2 ogunlakaiye wrote:

[Salihu Lukman]

Issues for APC 2023 Presidential Campaign

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

40 Blantyre Crescent

Wuse 2, Abuja

 

In his acceptance speech, on Wednesday, June 8, 2022, having won the Presidential primary election of the APC, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu emphasised that we ‘must work to ensure PDP does not return to power after 16 years of colossal failure.’ Given the way the contest for the Presidential primary went, the challenge of uniting APC leaders to work for the victory of the party in the 2023 general elections and defeat all opposition parties, including PDP is certainly an important precondition for winning the 2023 elections. Without doubt, the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the APC, once more prove that APC is a party that is commitment to addressing all the political challenges of the country. Given the cheap and reactionary campaign in APC aimed at pushing delegates at the National Convention to copy the PDP by electing a Presidential candidate from among Northern leaders, emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu demonstrated the superiority of the APC to other parties in the country in terms of providing level playing field to party members to compete and win internal party contests.

 

Against very strong sentiments and dominant ethnic and religious politics, which weigh heavily against Asiwaju, both within the APC, but perhaps more promoted by a very sectarian and conservative strategy of winning cheap votes of Nigerians by the PDP and their sympathisers, which led to the emergence of Alh. Atiku Abubakar as the PDP Presidential candidate for the 2023 elections, Asiwaju Tinubu emerged as the Presidential candidate of the APC. Being a Muslim from the Southern part of the country, the belief among many Nigerians, is that he may not attract the votes of citizens from the dominant Christian Southern parts of the country. And given contemporary challenges of producing a Presidential ticket, which should balance both ethnic and religious factors in the country, an Asiwaju Tinubu candidature is more likely to be lopsided to win the votes of dominant Muslim North.

 

This perception dominated internal debates in APC leading to the National Convention for the Presidential primary. Some party leaders attempted to manipulate the Convention in favour of the Senate President, Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the so-called consensus candidate. The process of producing the consensus was reduced to some manipulative strategy of invoking the name of President Buhari as the singular source of decision. Thanks to the commitment of President Buhari to ensure that all party leaders are consulted, the undemocratic approach of imposing a consensus candidate was defeated, and the primary election involving 23 aspirants held on June 7, 2022. Eventually, fourteen (14) aspirants contested the primary election as nine aspirants withdrew.

 

Asiwaju Tinubu won the contest indisputably. With his victory, the debate has now shifted to the choice of running mate. As usual, conservative and reactionary ethno-religious consideration are colouring the debate. Question of Muslim – Muslim ticket, implying that another Muslim from the North will most likely be Asiwaju’s running mate. Leading party members are already becoming strong advocates for or against a so-called Muslim – Muslim ticket. This debate is reproducing the old pre-convention reactionary and conservative campaign. If choices of leaders are dictated by ethno-religious factors, Nigerian politics will continue to be disadvantageous to many sections of the country. For instance, only Christian Southerners and Muslim Northerners will continue to have advantages. Most of those trying to use religious arguments to influence the choice of running mate for Asiwaju Tinubu are impliedly arguing that a Christian Northerner can only win Presidential election if his/her running mate is a Muslim from Southern Nigeria. In the same way, this will be politically disadvantageous, if not impossible for any Christian from the North or Muslim from the South to win Presidential election. Such a backward national mindset must be changed.

 

The challenge facing Nigerian politics is about opening the democratic space. It is not going to be easy, but Nigerians must be challenged to make hard choices. Important as ethnic and religious identities are, addressing challenges facing the country, require that political leaders are not allowed to ride on cheap sentiments of religion and ethnicity to opportunistically win elections. If Nigeria is to move forward, 2023 Presidential campaigns must not reduce important debates of moving Nigeria forward to sentimental considerations of ethnicity and religion. If the truth is to be told, both Islam and Christianity, as well as all our ethnic factors have been used in equal measure to hold Nigeria at a standstill. Many so-called religious and ethnic leaders have used and are still using religion and ethnicity to pollute the minds of Nigerians against one another. If Nigerian politics is to overcome the adversities of these so-called religious and ethnic leaders, religious and ethnic backgrounds of leaders must be subordinated to experiential attributes of persons being considered for leadership.

 

Perhaps, it is important to stress the point that whatever is the final choice of Asiwaju Tinubu and APC leaders with respect to who emerges as the running mate, the 2023 Presidential election will be keenly contested, irrespective of religious and ethnic identity of both Asiwaju Tinubu and whoever the running mate may be. APC leaders must acknowledge the fact that the 2023 elections present another golden opportunity for the APC to re-invent itself. With the landmark initiatives of President Buhari’s government in the last seven years, challenges of insecurity are being used by opposition parties, especially PDP, to falsely alleged that APC has failed. The claim is that APC government has mismanaged the economy, divided Nigerians and created insecurity. Part of the arguments is that Nigeria is now the ‘poverty capital of the world’, alleging also that the so-called poor performance of APC led government of President Buhari contrasts with so-called ‘achievements’ of sixteen years of PDP between 1999 and 2015. Many PDP leaders and their supporters have even claimed that if PDP failed to win the 2023 election, Nigeria will collapse.

 

APC must, as a party, use the 2023 Presidential campaign to effectively counter all these false narratives. Part of what must be done to achieve that is about developing effective communication strategy, which has been one of the strong weaknesses of both the APC as a party and as a governing party at Federal level. APC’s 2023 Presidential campaign must effectively correct all these false narratives and convincingly confirm to Nigerians that, President Buhari’s APC government has put Nigeria back on the roadmap to national development. APC’s 2023 Presidential campaign must use evidence-based politics to showcase the initiatives of President Buhari-led Federal Government.

 

A major objective of APC 2023 Presidential campaign should be to correct all the false narratives being propagated by opposition parties that APC government has failed. The campaign should instead focus more on showcasing the achievements of APC-led Federal Government, which is about rebuilding the country. For instance, achievements in the areas of social investment, infrastructure and agriculture can effectively provide APC’s contrasting scorecard. Since emerging as the governing party in 2015, APC Federal Government has implemented National Social Investment Programme (NSIP), which is far more than what any government in the past has done. Founded on four pillars of N-Power, Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT), Home Grown School Feeding and Government Enterprise and Empowerment Programme (GEEP), millions of poor Nigerians are benefiting from these initiatives. For instance, GEEP has disbursed N36.9 billion in interest-free loans of between N50,000 to N350,000 to more than 2.3 million Nigerians. Under the Home-Grown School Feeding Programme, 9.9 million primary 1 – 3 pupils in 54,952 public primary schools in 35 states are benefiting. Additional 107,000 cooks have been engaged. In the case of Conditional Cash Transfer, more than 3 million poor and vulnerable households have been registered on the National Social Register, out of which more than one million families are currently being paid N5,000 monthly.

 

In the area of infrastructure, when President Buhari’s administration assumed office in 2015, the total budget for Federal Roads by the outgoing PDP government of former President Goodluck Jonathan was 18 billion Naira, which is only about 25% of the Lagos State roads budget for that year. The persistent skeletal funding translated to abandoned or slow-moving road projects across the country. APC administration increased allocation to the roads budget to more than 200 billion Naira per annum. In addition, more resources were devoted to construction of road and transport infrastructure than any other administration since 1999, and the results are roads, bridges, highways, rail lines and stations, and air and seaport upgrades. Currently, there are around 900 active road contracts covering the construction, reconstruction or rehabilitation of more than 13,000km of Federal roads and highways across the country, out of a total of 35,000km of Federal roads in existence.

 

In the area of agriculture, APC led government of President Buhari established National Food Security Council (NFSC), Agriculture for Food and Jobs Plan (AFJP), National Livestock Transformation Plan, Anchor Borrowers Programme (ABP), Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI) and Creation of an Enabling Environment. Specifically, ABP for instance, implemented by the Central Bank of Nigeria since 2015, provided more than 300 billion Naira to more than 3.1 million smallholder farmers of 21 different commodities (including Rice, Wheat, Maize, Cotton, Cassava, Poultry, Soy Beans, Groundnut, Fish), across Nigeria, successfully cultivating over 3.8 million hectares of farmland. PFI has produced and delivered to the Nigerian market over 30 million 50kg bags equivalent of fertilizer, at reduced prices; and resulted in the revival or construction of no fewer than 40 moribund fertilizer blending plants across the country. Nigeria today has 44 functioning blending plants, with more on the way as a result of the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI).

 

Apart from achievements in the areas of social investment, infrastructure and agriculture, there are other initiatives in other sectors. Initiatives in these three sectors substantiate the point that based on records of performance in government, APC remarkably moved Nigeria forward from the era of waste and large-scale diversion of public resources under sixteen years of PDP government between 1999 and 2015. For instance, recall the numerous cases of diversions of huge sums of financial resources in the guise of petroleum subsidy contained in many reports of investigation panels under PDP governments. There was also the case of corruption under the Police Pension Task Force. The case of $180 million Halliburton; $1.1 billion Malabo Oil; Princess Stella Oduah N255 million Aviation Ministry bulletproof cars; N10 billion jet scam involving the petroleum minister (2011 – 2015) Mrs. Diezani Alison Madueke; and House of Representatives Capital Market probe; and N360 billion service-wide scam are also there. There was also the case of $2.1 billion arms deal involving retired Col. Sambo Dasuki, former National Security Adviser under President Jonathan’s PDP administration.

 

APC must use the opportunity of the 2023 Presidential campaigns to remind Nigerians about these hard facts. Nigerians must be guided to make choices based on evidence and not just sentiment. In many respects, when Asiwaju Tinubu, in his acceptance speech enjoined fellow APC leaders to ‘ensure PDP does not return to power after 16 years of colossal failure’, he certainly must be referring to these issues. Notwithstanding all the achievements of APC-led government of President Buhari, it is however important to recognise the issues of insecurity, which has remained a major national challenge. It is important that assessment of performance of APC government is not reduced to opinions of opposition politicians. The reality is that both President Buhari and all APC leaders acknowledged the enormity of the challenges of insecurity in the country.

 

Noting that APC administration is taking steps to equip the security agencies and build morale, promote community-led solutions, develop new security infrastructure and operations across land and maritime environments, and address the underlying drivers of insecurity (poverty and youth unemployment), the need to rebuild the confidence of Nigerians that post 2023 APC Federal government can effectively respond to all our national challenges, with Asiwaju Tinubu as the President is very necessary. For instance, the need to mobilise large-scale funding to undertake massive recruitment of security personnel – police, military, airforce, naval, etc. must be given priority. Recognising that although serious challenges still exist, and there is still a long way to go in restoring a robust sense of security in the country, it is also very important that APC’s 2023 Presidential campaign is able to develop a far reaching proposals of re-organising and strengthening Nigerian security services to restore peace across every part of the country. The next APC government, under Asiwaju Tinubu should begin to orient itself to outline specific governance reforms that should end dastardly activity of terrorists and criminal elements in every part of the country, in whatever forms.

 

As it is today, all opposition to APC are more interested in using challenges facing the country to further divide Nigerians. APC’s 2023 Presidential campaign must be about uniting citizens to move Nigeria forward. It must be about issues and proposals for nation building. It must be about pushing Nigerians to take all the hard decisions based on respect, equity and fair representation. This is what the Presidential candidature of Asiwaju Tinubu should represent. APC should win the 2023 Presidential Election based on a convincing promise for national unity!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Fallacious Politics of 2023

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

A close friend and comrade recently asked me if I am Obedient, suggesting that I am supporting Mr. Peter Obi, the Presidential candidate of the Labour Party. To say the least, I was very dismayed that anyone could imagine I will support any candidate other than Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. I may excuse any person if he/she is meeting me for the first time. Having come a long way both as activist and learner of politics since my student days in the 1980s, our commitment to politics and the development of Nigeria was informed by a clear vision to build a society founded on equality and justice. Our politics of support or opposition to leaders normally take bearing from our assessment of commitment of individual leaders to issues of equality and justice, which is more a function of producing accountable leaders who will work to meet the expectations of citizens.

 

Somehow, our contemporary reality is that political choices are largely informed by sentiments often based on perceptions without any evidential objective indicator of probable commitment to deliver services and meet the expectations of citizens. It is more a case of blind expectations, which can only lead us to more frustrations and anger with our leaders. Partly because scholarship is very poor today in Nigeria, there are many so-called Obidient supporters who promote outright falsehood and politics hate against other candidates and their supporters. This is unfortunately self-defeatist.

 

As a member of APC, I want to campaign for all our candidates while at the same time respecting our opposition. People are free to make their choices and we should respect that. Once the element of respect is removed from politics of choices of candidates, then democracy risks being downgraded to the level of anarchy. The temptation to indulge in politics of disrespect could be linked to the apparent lack of confidence of winning the election. It is almost a case of if I lose it means the bad people have impose themselves again. Everything is reduced to a contest between the good and the bad. What makes any candidate good or bad, is left to some intuitive presentations by individuals who often reduced political contests to bullying conditions.

 

With reference to the so-called Obidient, as much as we respect their choice, we also must appeal to them to honestly recognise the shortcomings of Mr. Peter Obi as a politician and Labour Party (LP) as a political party. Recognising these shortcomings will be important in convincing Nigerians that they are engaging the contest also as a strategy to reform both the person of Mr. Peter Obi and the organisation of LP as a political party. In terms of the person of Mr. Peter Obi, so far, his characteristics is that of a typical Nigerian politician who is more of an election merchant presenting himself every four years for election, even if it means changing political party.

 

Being an election merchant connote obvious lack of commitment and discipline to be loyal to any political party. This partly explains why Mr. Obi moved from All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) to Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and now LP between 2015 and now. What is the guarantee that his candidature of LP also bears a commitment to develop the LP and get it to overcome all its challenges. Noting that it is a public knowledge that LP has been embroiled in leadership crisis, how is Mr. Obi using his campaign to negotiate the resolution of LP crisis. From a distant point of view, Mr. Obi is in fact indifferent to the crisis facing LP.

 

Beyond being indifferent, Mr. Obi is clearly alien to any ideological standpoint that can bring him close to the working class, which is the primary constituency of LP. Some of us are privileged to have been intellectually and organically connected to that constituency. In fact, I am privileged to have managed the project which conceived and facilitated the initial negotiation between Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and its partners, notably civil society, which produced the LP in 2003. Part of the reality facing LP had to do with the close shop mentality of labour leaders, which blocked the party from being open to other Nigerians outside the mainstream labour movement. This reality blew open in the face of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole for instance when in 2007 after serving his eight years term as President of NLC and wanted to win the 2007 Governorship election in Edo State, he had to syndicate alliance with Action Congress (AC). Interestingly, once he wins the 2007 election, that was the end of the alliance as he moved to AC, while his LP membership became history.

 

Part of what must be recognised in all these debates is that the fallacious politics of 2023 is more about the disappointments of Nigerians with our leaders and the state of the nation. While it is important to recognise the legitimate disappointment of Nigerians with our leaders and the state of the nation, it will remain a fallacy to imagine that a simple choice of a typical election merchant can resolve Nigeria’s challenges. Not just Peter Obi, any other politician with the characteristics of changing political parties for the purpose of contesting elections, such a person is not what Nigeria need today. Without prejudice to my respect for Alh. Atiku Abubakar and Sen. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, they are both in the same category with Mr. Obi. Alh. Atiku has been either a Presidential candidate or aspirant in every election in different parties since 2007. Sen. Kwankwaso has moved from PDP to APC, back to PDP between 2015 and 2019, before finally forming New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) in 2022 and present himself as the Presidential candidate of the party for 2023 election.

 

Out of all the leading candidates, the only one that has never left his party to any party is Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. He is the only one that although he has been a national political leader since he left office as Governor of Lagos State in 2007 that is presenting himself for the first time as a Presidential candidate for the 2023 elections. In addition, he is the only contestant who together with other leaders of APC envisioned the political roadmap for the defeat of PDP. Together with President Muhammadu Buhari they provided the inspirational leadership that successfully negotiated the emergence of APC in 2013. The formation of APC was the first successful merger negotiation of opposition parties in Nigeria. It was also the first opposition to defeat a ruling party in 2015.

 

Without doubt, Nigerians had a lot of expectations. One of the expectations of Nigerians and indeed many of us in APC is that the management of the APC will broaden internal democracy and minimise, if not eliminate politics of imposition of candidates, which is the main characteristics of PDP. Broadening internal democracy is correlated to facilitate the emergence of good accountable leaders. Internal management of political parties and the process of candidates’ selection within a political party are strongly entwined such that once leaders of a political party are weakly accountable to members and interest groups within the party, it will be highly probable that internal process of candidate selection will hardly be representative of the diverse interests of members. Once emergence of candidates is not representative of interests of members of political parties, elected representatives produced by such party are more likely to be unaccountable to electorates.

 

Before highlighting our reality in APC, it is interesting how activist with some clear ideological orientation can suggest that a Mr. Obi who within a week of his exit out of PDP and joining LP can inspire any hope of emerging as an accountable President. In the case of Alh. Atiku, the level of intolerance and mismanagement of internal leadership dispute should frighten every patriotic Nigerian about entrusting the leadership of the country to such a person. Sen. Kwankwoso’s politics present him as philosopher king which only revolves around his person and any opposition will not be allowed.

 

The reality in APC is that party management is weakly accountable to members and interest groups within the party. Party organs are not meeting as provided in the party constitution, which undermine issues of accountability by party leaders. There are internal opposition to this reality, which often contest discretionary decisions by party leaders. For instance, during the last process that produced candidates for the 2023 election within the APC, there were instances of attempts to impose discretionary decisions, which would have led to imposition of Presidential candidate. Thanks to the personal disposition of President Muhammadu Buhari who refused to adopt any discretionary decision to impose a so-called consensus candidate, internal opposition to the attempt by some party leaders to impose a so-called consensus candidate, which led to the emergence of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of our party.

 

The emergence of Asiwaju as the Presidential candidate of APC was the product of open internal contest in APC. Unlike most of the Presidential candidates of the other opposition parties, Asiwaju was not a product of imposition. It can also be argued that Alh. Atiku also won PDP primary. However, the difference between Asiwaju and Alh. Atiku is the ability to successful negotiate and win the support of other party leaders who contested against him. Today, all those who contested against Asiwaju in APC are working for his victory.

 

One of the crimes of Asiwaju as propagated by the opposition is the so-called failure of APC government at federal level. No doubt, like any other nation, Nigeria is faced with challenges. Do these challenges represent failure? No. Both Asiwaju and the party’s Presidential Campaign Council (PCC) have recognise the progress recorded by APC administration of President Buhari and the challenges facing the country. Both Asiwaju and all leaders of APC are never in denial of all the challenges facing the country. In addition, both Asiwaju and all APC leaders have evaluated our performance in government at federal level.

 

The disposition of Asiwaju and all our leaders is to develop the needed strategy on what needs to be done to build on all the successes of President Buhari’s administration. As part of that disposition is the question of further deepening accountability both within the party and between elected leaders and Nigerians. This is a fundamental issue and is at the heart of all the challenges facing the country. For Nigeria to be a truly democratic nation, both political parties and elected representatives must be accountable. Unlike all the other candidates, it is only Asiwaju who is a product of internal struggle within the party for accountability. The candidature of Asiwaju therefore represent the hope for the emergence of accountable leaders. To have accountable leaders require the presence of political parties with accountable management as provided in their rules.

 

There are other subsidiary issues that unfortunately are being used by political opposition to rationalise political choices of individuals. This includes the whole challenge of brain drain, for instance. While it is important to recognise the desire of every human being to access better opportunities, we must, as a nation, avoid generalisations. Nigerians who moved of out of the country in search of greener pastures are in different categories. There are those who legitimately want to excel in their chosen field of endevour international. There are those who just believe that they can only excel outside Nigeria because, for them, Nigeria represents everything that is bad. There is the third category who are simply just adventurous and just want to go into the world and have a feel of the good life that is out there.

 

Somehow, many so-called Obidients have politicise discussions around the issue of brain drain and they use it buttress issues of failure of government. Brain drain is certainly a challenge and if Nigeria is to develop, we must address any condition that makes us unable as a nation to keep our skilled labour force. At the same time, we must also be able to attract our children back home to contribute to the development of the country after studies abroad. The debate about managing these challenges should be separated from that of managing the challenge of some Nigerians who left the country without the requisite skills to enable them access opportunities outside Nigeria. Therefore, while recognising the legitimate voices of Nigerian diaspora professionals about the desire to produce good leaders in the country, we must also be wary about the desperate voices of some diaspora Nigerians whose anger is not limited to our situation in Nigeria, but more a reflection of personal frustration because of being unable to develop needed skills to access the opportunities that took them out of the country in the first place.

 

Be that as it may however, as a nation, our political leaders must be prepared to engage this reality. Addressing this reality is more a function of recognising our diversity and how it manifests in our national challenges. This what Asiwaju, in the foreword to Renewed Hope 2023: Action Plan for a Better Nigeria, eloquently highlighted that “Nigeria is a unique nation, impressive in its diverse character and composition, resounding and hopeful in unity and collective fate. Home to over 200 million vibrant people, Nigeria stands as the most populous nation on the African continent and the largest concentration of Black people on earth. It is beyond debate that we owe the duty of national progress to our progeny and to ourselves.”

 

This is more about our vision to make our leaders accountable and not simple choices of individual candidates. Many of us in APC are supporting Asiwaju as part of our ongoing campaign to continue to build the APC as a progressive party, capable of producing accountable elected representatives at all levels. We do so with full confidence that Asiwaju will build on the legacy of President Buhari, which also include respecting internal debate and contestation within the APC. APC is the only party today in Nigeria that permit internal debate and contestations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Electoral Contests and Public Expectations: Matching Hopes with Realities

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

As Nigerians move closer to February 25, 2023, which is the day when the nation will go to polls to elect President and National Assembly members, the public debate is all about possible winners and losers. Understandably, most Nigerians are obsessed with the issue of proving that their preferred candidates will win the elections. Unfortunately, too, the dominant approach in the debate is the old antagonistic disposition, which reduces electoral contests to a competition between the good and the bad. Consequently, Nigerians blindfold themselves into a game of wit, which overlooked the obvious limitations and shortcomings of chosen candidates. Candidates that are not chosen are damaged, if not criminalised. In the process, respect is completely lost.

 

Perhaps, it can be argued, this is the global reality. However, there is the need to elevate electoral contests beyond the game of wit. Once electoral contests are reduced to game of wit, prospects for democratic development risks being inhibited. I say this with all sense of responsibility and as a Nigerian who is passionate in the political progress of the country as a democratic nation. One of the problematic issues of reducing electoral contests to game of wit is that, by commission or omission, Nigerians tend to take for granted the hard earn successes that have been recorded over the years and throw up some fantasies around candidates who’s only commitment to democracy and political development of the country is limited to the extent that they are on the ballot for election.

 

The emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as APC’s Presidential candidate is a product internal party contest. One of our prides today in APC is that after the Convention that produced Asiwaju Tinubu as our Presidential Candidate, none of the Aspirants who contested against him left the party. Instead, all of them are united behind him and are working for his victory. It may also be important to note that the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as APC’s Presidential candidate was the product of strong internal contest. There may be temptation to narrow the contest to the dynamics around the question of whether there will be an anointed aspirant who would have been crowned as the consensus candidate, which wouldn’t have been Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

The reality was that the contest for the choice of APC Presidential candidate started way back during the tenure of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole as National Chairman of the party. At that time, the issues confronting the party was that of broadening the internal democratic space within the party. Issues of accountability of party leaders under the Oshiomhole-led National Working Committee (NWC) to members were the challenges. Meetings of organs of the party such as National Executive Committee (NEC), National Caucus and Board of Trustees were the key challenge. At that time in 2019, there were attempts to suggest that many of us raising these issues were doing so because we were opposed to the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the party.

 

Thanks to President Muhammadu Buhari’s unbiased disposition, eventually, Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC was dissolved and a Caretaker Committee under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala was appointed, with a short mandate of six months. At the time of the appointment of His Excellency Mai Mala-led Caretaker Committee on June 25, 2020, the expectation was that a new NWC for the party would emerged early in 2021 long before the contest for the emergence of candidates for 2023 elections commences. Interestingly, His Excellency Mai Mala-led Caretaker Committee manipulated its mandate and began to sit-tight into the leadership of the party. It took strong internal contest against His Excellency Mai Mala-led Caretaker Committee to get it to organise the March 28, 2022 National Convention that elected the current Sen. Abdullahi Adamu-led NWC.

 

Of course, by the time of the March 28, 2022 National Convention, already Presidential Aspirants have emerged. Many of them had their preferred candidates for the position of National Chairman. Some of the Presidential Aspirants were able to expand their lobbies to some of the influential people around the President and perhaps succeeded to convince President Buhari to nominate Sen. Abdullahi Adamu for the position of National Chairman. And shortly after the election of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu as the National Chairman of the APC, negotiation for the emergence of a so-called consensus presidential candidate was activated.

 

It may also be important to remind Nigerians that the scheming around emergence of a so-called consensus candidate was ridiculously stretched beyond the APC to include people like former President Goodluck Jonathan and Mr. Godwin Emefiele, the Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria. These were never members of the APC. But with the active collaboration of some influential people outside the APC such as Chief Nduka Ogbaigbena, publisher and owner of Thisday Newspaper and Arise Television, some sophisticated mobilisation of so-called ‘hundred eminent businessmen, political, media and civil society leaders, including 14 current governors, 13 former governors as well as three former senate presidents’ commenced around April 2022. Gradually, this scheming shifted and was entrenched within APC. By May 2023, when the party began to sell its nomination forms to aspiring candidates, forms were purchased by some APC leaders for former President Goodluck Jonathan and Mr. Godwin Emefiele.

 

Eventually, when these schemers couldn’t succeed in popularising both former President Jonathan and Mr. Emefiele as possible contenders to emerge as consensus Presidential candidates for APC, the Senate President, Sen. Ahmed Lawan was recruited and promoted. It is on record that Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, on the eve of the Convention that elected Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the party, announced to NWC members that Sen. Ahmed Lawan was the consensus presidential candidate of the party. Members of the NWC together with Progressive Governors rose against that move and again thanks to President Muhammadu Buhari, the contest for the Presidential candidate of APC was thrown open and Asiwaju won with a wide merging.

 

Part of the dummy that was promoted within the APC to attempt to popularise the choice of a Northerner, Sen. Ahmed Lawan as a consensus candidate was that since PDP had elected Alh. Atiku Abubakar, a Northerner as its Presidential Candidate, we needed to also elect a Northern so that we can win the votes of Northerners. This is completely inconsiderate of the popular agitation for power shift in the country. It is also insensitive of the potential instability that the choice of another Northerner emerging as President of the country could cause. Ahead of the APC National Convention, APC Governors from the North had already declared their opposition against a Northerner emerging as APC Presidential candidate.

 

Combinations of all of these in so many ways contributed towards tilting support of many APC leaders towards Asiwaju Tinubu. Certainly, Asiwaju Tinubu’s personal quality given his track records both as a businessman, politician, and elected Governor of Lagos State between 1999 and 2007 were also there. He has over the years proven himself as a fighter for democracy. This is one characteristic that has defined him and perhaps strengthen him to survive many personal attacks on his person and his integrity. The administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo investigated him on many of the issues that are being used to smear his name such drugs. Renown radical lawyer and human rights activists, late Chief Gani Fawehinmi challenged his academic credentials unsuccessfully in courts. Many journalists and activists questioned his integrity but were not able to establish any proof.

 

Asiwaju Tinubu’s battles didn’t start in 1999 when he became Governor of Lagos State. Although both Asiwaju Tinubu and Alh. Atiku Abubakar could make claims to being members of late Shehu Musa Yar’Adua’s Popular Front and part of leaders of Social Democratic Party (SDP), which produced Chief M. K. O. Abiola as the 1993 Presidential Candidate, but Alh. Atiku vacate the political space for the military in 1993 when they annulled the election, which Chief Abiola won. On the other hand, Asiwaju Tinubu took the risk of joining the vanguard of the struggle against military rule. Both Mr. Peter Obi and Dr. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso were never in the vanguard for the struggle against military rule.

 

As a fighter, Asiwaju Tinubu would appear to be a person with unshaken confidence and capacity to defend himself. Unlike many Nigerian politicians with short term agenda of winning elections, Asiwaju would seem to be looking beyond elections, which may be responsible for why he was not in a hurry to put himself on the ballot since 2007 when he left office as a Governor of Lagos State. Arguably, he is about the only politician that has consistently invested in politicians without being a candidate. His contribution to the merger negotiations that produced the APC as a political party was significant. His passion and commitment to the growth of APC as a progressive party and development of Nigerian democracy is very clear.

 

This has certainly earned him some strong opposition both within and outside APC. Both the PDP and all the other opposition parties including the Labour Party and NNPP knows that Asiwaju Tinubu is the main Presidential candidate to beat. Of course, there are forces within the APC that are also not comfortable with the possibility that Asiwaju Tinubu will be the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Schemers that failed to produce neither Mr. Emefiele or former President Jonathan or Sen. Ahmed Lawan as consensus candidate of APC have unleashed Mr. Emefiele’s so-called cashless policy to damage the APC and the candidature of Asiwaju Tinubu. But like they failed in the case of consensus presidential candidate, they are also failing in their intrigues to damage the APC and the candidature of Asiwaju Tinubu. Like Asiwaju Tinubu emerged as the Presidential candidate of APC despite their machinations, Asiwaju Tinubu will also become elected as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, God willing.

 

As members of APC, we must remain resolute and focused on our commitment to develop our party and our democracy. We must remain focused to return our party APC to its founding vision. We must remind Nigerians that the back born of every democracy is the existence of strong political parties. So far, Nigerian democracy be strengthened to produces accountable political leaders. Sadly, Nigerians, in their frustrations tend to want to submit themselves to power greedy political leaders whose main value is only limited to contesting elections with hardly any commitment to party that present them as candidates. This is responsible for why most of these politically greedy politicians contest on different political parties every election. In fact, they are serial aspirants and contestants for elective positions.

 

Those of us who have been in the vanguard for struggle for the development of Nigerian democracy must seek to shift the debate to the business of building political parties to emerge as truly democratic and accountable institutions. In addition to all the current initiatives to review progress and challenges facing the APC, for instance, we need to also highlight the issue of re-organising the APC immediately after elections. We must regulate the approach whereby immediately after elections, attention shift to the lobby of who gets appointed into government. Fundamental as that would appear to be, if not managed very well, it may also lead to the further weakening of the party.

 

Part of the first issue that should be immediately corrected is the restoration of life to all party organs. A situation whereby key decisions of the party are taken without recourse to formal organs should be corrected. The challenge of accountability also requires that structures of the party meet, and both elected and appointed representatives of the party should be answerable to the structures of the party. This is what party supremacy is about.

 

Democracy is beyond periodic elections; it is a daily affair. Since the formation of APC in 2013, the struggle to build the APC as a democratic, progressive and accountable institution has been a priority agenda. As it is often said, Rome is not built in a day. Certainly, a lot of work is required to develop APC to the level of being the envisioned democratic, progressive and accountable party. Looking at the Nigerian political landscape and compared to all the other parties and candidates for the 2023 Presidential elections, APC’s and Asiwaju Tinubu’s record of commitment to Nigerian democracy, party building and capacity is unparalleled. As APC members, our support for Asiwaju is not just about electing a President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, but also about electing a committed leader who will guide the APC to return to its founding vision.

 

Guiding the APC to return to its founding vision is a catalysig factor for party development and the growth of our democracy. Producing good accountable leaders can hardly be achieved without producing accountable political party institutions. Politicians with hardly any record of commitment and capacity to make sacrifices in defence of democracy outside participating in elections may not be capable of meeting any public expectation. Meeting public expectation is about being accountable, which is beyond elections. The candidature of Asiwaju Tinubu therefore is beyond the 2023 elections; it is about matching the hopes of Nigerians to develop our country and the reality of being faced with the challenge of building the foundational institution of every democracy, which is the political party. That is the founding vision of APC, it remains the pillar of every electoral contest in APC since 2015, and it shall remain so!

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Cashless Economy and Presidential Cabal

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Nigerians are today faced with the most uncertain of times. With national elections few days away and deliberate cash squeeze enforced by a deliberate policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). First announced on October 26, 2022, new N200, N500 and N1,000 were introduced and the old ones were to seize as legal tender by January 31, 2023. Later extended to February 10, with the new policy, Nigerians were directed to deposit old notes in exchange for the new notes. Part of the objective of the policy was also to reduce the amount of money outside the banking system as highlighted by Mr. Godwin Emefiele while announcing the policy that ‘N2.7 trillion out of the N3.3 trillion currency in circulation was outside the vault of commercial banks across the country and supposedly held by members of the public.’

 

To mop up the N2.7 trillion, the CBN imposed some conditions, which required citizens to deposit money in their bank accounts. This assumes that citizens have bank accounts and that bank branches exist in every part of the country. The reality however is that only about 39% of Nigerians have bank accounts. More than 300 out of the 774 Local Governments in the country have no bank branches or cash centres. Where they exist, the bank branches and cash centres are mostly located in the headquarters. Specifically, in terms of cash centres, total number of Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) in the country is less than 20,000.

 

These records suggest the needs to take more extra steps to strengthen the banking system in the country to meet up of the new demands that will be occasioned by the new policy. It will clearly require contingency measures to expand the banking system, such that citizens could exchange the old notes in locations that don’t have bank branches or cash centres such as ATMs. Given that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in November 2021 reported that Nigeria’s banks closed 234 branches and 649, ATMs, should have given a strong warning that the principles of ceteris paribus (all conditions remaining the same) would translate to failure for the new policy.

 

Unfortunately, all these were overlooked. And for whatever reasons, the CBN and the Federal Government continue to delude themselves that the new policy can succeed with a very weak banking reality. In the circumstances, both the old and the new notes have disappeared across every part of the country. Even people with bank accounts can’t access their money. Somehow, because we are approaching election period, the gullibility of Nigerians is being exploited. There are stories around how the new policy is going to block vote buying. There are also other strong narratives about internal sabotage within APC based on how some powerful forces around President Muhammadu Buhari are opposed to the emergence of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, APC Presidential candidate as the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

 

There are also strong concerns about how combination of cash squeeze and fuel scarcity being experienced in every part of the country can lead to unrest and possible postponement of the election. Some have even speculated that all these are aimed at creating a situation that would lead to the enthronement of a so-called government of national unity, whatever that means. All these in some ways remind one of Dr. Reuben Abati’s article of November 14, 2016, The Spiritual Side of Aso Villa. In that article, Dr. Abati lamented how ‘People tend to be alarmed when the Nigerian Presidency takes certain decisions. They don’t think the decision makes sense. Sometimes, they wonder if something has not gone wrong with the thinking process at that highest level of the country.’

 

Nothing best explains what we are experiencing today. How an excellently desirable policy such that would lead to a cashless economy could be designed to fail beat the imagination of everyone. As a member of APC, I can say with every confidence, this wouldn’t have been the objective. It is however worrisome how our party leaders are unable to convince Mr. President to have a rethink about the implementation of this policy. This has created all manner of frustrations both with the APC, across the country and across all segments of society. The only person that possibly is not frustrated with the policy is Alh. Atiku Abubakar, Presidential candidate of the PDP who is supporting the policy, which is why many people argue that the ‘cabal’ around the President want Alh. Atiku Abubakar to win the election.

 

Partly on account of the frustration by APC, governments of Kogi, Kaduna and Zamfara states have taken the matter directly to Supreme Court and have today, Wednesday, February 8, 2023 obtained judgement that has canceled the CBN’s February 10 deadline to end the validity of the old Naira notes. With this judgement, it means that even after February 10, the old notes would still serve as legal tender. The big question is, will this end the current Naira (old or new) scarcity? It may not. If, however, the speculated objective of any so-called cabal is to frustrate the February 25, 2023 elections by either creating conditions that could mobilise electorates to vote against the APC and its candidates, especially Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, God willing it shall not succeed.

 

In all of these, it needs to be clearly stated that throughout the tenure of President Muhammadu Buhari, nothing tests his credential as a converted democrat more than the need to demonstrate more listening ears and compassion at the plight of Nigerians. As a converted democrat, which I believe he is, President Muhammadu Buhari needs to demonstrate that by respecting the Supreme Court judgement and direct the CBN to end the current madness that imposes Naira scarcity in the country and untold hardship for millions of Nigerians.

 

For both APC, as a party, and Nigeria, as a nation, one of the lessons that the current reality imposes is the need to develop our political parties and make them capable of regulating the conduct of elected functionaries. This is not only the case with APC, but also the case with all our parties. Why should we have a challenge with grave consequences on the electoral fortunes of political parties, yet none of the parties contesting the 2023 elections have convened any emergency meeting of their National Executive Committee (NEC)? Yet, we want elections to produce accountable leaders. Once party organs have seized to be decision making platforms, the domineering control of government institutions by so-called cabals will remain strong.

 

Moving Nigerian democracy forward require all of us as Nigerians to be much more honest beyond some partisan permutations about winning elections. As members of APC, we are working hard to win the 2023 elections, but we also will work even more harder to ensure that our next government to be led by Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu will come with more listening ears to Nigerians and fellow party leaders. God willing Asiwaju Tinubu’s APC government must be a remarkable improvement on President Buhari’s government whereby party leaders will through all our organs as provided in our constitution effectively and efficiently take all necessary decisions, which would be respected by Asiwaju Tinubu as President of the Federal Republic, God willing, and all elected representatives.

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

A powerful and moving piece, a historic statement

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB6446A87E24EC7A3B51C881D2AED89%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

2023 Nigerian Presidential Election and Matters Arising

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

His Excellency, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Presidential Candidate of our party, All Progressives Congress (APC) has been declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the President-Elect of the Federal Government of Nigeria in the early hours of Wednesday, March 1, 2023. Polling Eight Million, Seven Hundred and Ninety-Four Thousand, Seven Hundred and Twenty-Six (8,794,726) votes, he defeated his closest rivals, candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alh. Atiku Abubakar and Labour Party (LP), Mr. Peter Obi who respectively won Six Million, Nine Hundred and Eighty-Four Thousand, Five Hundred and Twenty (6,984,520) and Six Million, One Hundred and One Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty-Three Thousand (6,101,533) votes.

 

By every standard, the result of the 2023 Nigerian elections is very close. And however considered, it has produced surprises, which are good indicators that the Nigerian electoral process produces the choices of Nigerians. For instance, the President-Elect, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been defeated by Mr. Peter Obi, LP Presidential Candidate for the first time. Also, President Muhammadu Buhari was defeated by Alh. Atiku Abubakar, PDP candidate. If anything, at least the 2023 Presidential elections should give more confidence to Nigerians that the Nigerian electoral process has matured. INEC should be commended for the management of the 2023 elections. Credit should also be given to President Muhammadu Buhari for providing the enabling political environment for INEC to do its work professionally without political interference by the executives.

 

Unfortunately, the same could not be said about Nigerian democracy. This is because a matured democracy should command the respect of actors in the electoral process. Rather than commanding respect, what characterises the 2023 Presidential elections is utter contempt from fellow contestants and so long as the results doesn’t support the aspirations of some of the fellow leading candidates, it is disputed. As a result, from the beginning of collation of results for the 2023 Presidential elections, there were calls for cancellation of the results by both the leading candidates who have lost the elections and some of their supporters, including a former President of the Federal Republic whose records of interference and manipulation of the Nigerian electoral process is anything but civil or democratic.

 

Perhaps, it should be recognised that foul cries by candidates who lost the elections is also a reflection of the internal dynamics of party politics in the country. The truth must be told that while, as Nigerians, across all interests, we have invested a lot of resources in engaging INEC to reform the electoral process, the same could not be said about political parties and the management of internal party contests. Part of that reality is reflected in the poor management of the process of candidates’ emergence for the 2023 elections. In many respects, LP’s rise to electoral prominence in the 2023 elections is largely through harvesting the grievances of politicians from both the PDP and APC. For instance, Mr. Peter Obi was up to early 2022 a member of the PDP and many LP Governorship candidates were defectors from both the PDP and APC after losing their bids in either the PDP or APC to emerge as Gubernatorial candidates.

 

Unhealthy state of internal party contest therefore, leading to imposition of candidates could be attributed as the source for legitimacy for the disrespectful conducts of candidates and politicians who lost the elections. It is also perhaps the source of challenges leading to some of the avoidable outcomes of the 2023 elections in many states. What distinguishes the APC and its Presidential candidate who is today declared President-Elect is the fact that he represents hope by resisting attempts to impose so-called consensus Presidential candidate within the APC. His emergence as the candidate of our party in June 2022 embodies that narrative. And again, his election as the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a true reflection of that reality too. Without reopening all the dynamics that played out, it is public knowledge that some people at the highest level in APC were opposed to the emergence of Asiwaju Tunibu both as the candidate of the APC and the President-Elect.

 

Part of also what must be acknowledged is that APC had to manage its Presidential campaign almost as if its Presidential candidate is an opposition candidate. For instance, our leaders had to dissociate themselves from a crudely managed cashless policy of the APC Federal Government, which had the attributes of facilitating the defeat of APC in the Presidential elections. That Nigerians, across every part of the country elected Asiwaju Tinubu as the next President of the Federal Republic reflects the trust being invested both in APC as a party and Asiwaju as the President-elect. Without doubt, this is well earned trust.

 

Asiwaju, as a politician has over the years demonstrated strong commitment to building Nigerian democracy. He was, together with many patriotic Nigerians, in the trenches in the 1990s struggling against military rule. From the beginning of the Fourth Republic, first as elected Governor of Lagos State, he was part of the struggle against the culture of executive lawlessness that characterises the tenure of PDP between 1999 and 2015. He was instrumental in the evolution of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) as an opposition party winning six states between 2007 and 2013. Being a visionary leader of the ACN, he was together with other leaders, notably Chief Bisi Akande able to negotiate a pan Nigerian political alliance, leading to the successful merger negotiations of opposition parties in the country in 2013 producing the APC as a registered political party.

 

Against all predictions, not only that the merger of opposition parties in the country was successful, but also for the first time an opposition party successfully defeated a ruling party in 2015. That was made possible by the twin leadership and partnership between Asiwaju Tinubu and President Muhammadu Buhari. Having therefore emerged successfully as the President-Elect of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2023 Presidential election, Asiwaju Tinubu certainly earned this victory. Both as members of APC and as Nigerians, we should be both proud and inspired by this victory to further commit ourselves to the struggle for the development of Nigerian democracy. We should be grateful to Nigerians for investing their trust in both Asiwaju Tinubu as the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in the APC as the ruling party for another four years.

 

At this point, we must, as leaders and associates of the President-elect accept this trust with high measure of humility. We must acknowledge and thank President Muhammadu Buhari for his leadership. In doing so, we should appeal to Asiwaju Tinubu being the new leader of our party to consider this golden opportunity as a call to action to continue the struggle for the development of Nigerian democracy. This will require considerable attention and focus on the development of our party, which will require some internal reform measures to guarantee internal competition within the party. Some of the things that should be immediately done is to ensure that the National Working Committee (NWC) is accountable and respect the constitution of the party.

 

A situation whereby the NWC will operate for almost a year without rendering financial report to any organ of the party is unacceptable. Similarly unacceptable is a situation whereby the NWC will continue to refuse to convene meetings of the National Executive Committee (NEC) as provided in the constitution of the party. Being the leader of the party, Asiwaju Tinubu should avoid replicating the mistake whereby as President of the Federal Republic produced by the APC he will limit his relationship with other leaders of the party to only the National Chairman and some few leaders of the party. He must broaden his relationship with all leaders of the party and mainstream it to nurture the institutional development of party organs. Over the years, we have witnesses how limiting relationship between the President, on the one hand, and National Chairman and few leaders, on the other, that was abused and should be corrected immediately.

 

In all these, we need to also acknowledge that development of political parties in Nigeria today is being encumbered by funding challenges. As things are, all our political parties lack independent sources of funding. As a result, party leaders have been reduced to being surrogates of elected representatives in government, yet we expect parties to regulate the conduct of these elected representatives. In the circumstance, it amounts to sheer mockery to talk of party supremacy. There is no way any surrogate can regulate the conduct of his or her master. Part of the confirmation that party leaders are surrogates will be reflected in the ways and manners personal lobbies for appointments into government will be activated by the same people who would be expected to facilitate internal party negotiations for appointment in the next government to be led by Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

Poor management of negotiations into the Federal Government in 2015 produced the reality of weak influence by the party and its leadership on governments it produced, especially Federal Government led by President Muhammadu Buhari. Consequently, loyal party members who worked hard to produce the victory of the party in 2015 and 2019 had to live with the trauma of producing a government that doesn’t reward the efforts of party members. Strangers and in some instances antagonists to APC became the main players. This must change if our party is to develop democratically.

 

Another point that must be highlighted at this point of victory is the need to be faithful to our electoral promises. One of the shortcomings of parties managing governments since 1999 is that everything is left to the discretion of elected representatives. Requirements to give life to provisions of party manifesto is absent. In fact, many elected representatives are ignorant of provisions of the party manifesto. This needs to change. All party leaders aspiring to be appointed into government must familiarise themselves with provisions of the party manifesto as well as envision how to produce desired outcomes.

 

Related with that is that leaders of the party must have the humility to subordinate themselves to party decisions. A situation where the party will invest time and resources to produce recommendations such as the one produced by the Mal. Nasir El-Rufai Committee on True Federalism and ignored by government is not only unacceptable but should be regarded as anti-party activity. The commitment of leaders to democracy must be reflected in their willingness to implement decisions of party organs.

 

The next era of APC government under His Excellency Asiwaju Tinubu must produce the rebirth of the struggle for democracy in Nigeria. It must signal the era of renewed hope for the development of democracy in Nigeria. It should above all be the era for the institutional development of APC as a political party. Coming from the trenches, Asiwaju Tinubu has no excuse but to chatalyse the development of Nigerian democracy to meet the expectations of Nigerians. Both as Nigerians and as APC members, we will hold Asiwaju Tinubu accountable on these scores. Congratulations Asiwaju Tinubu, Congratulations APC leaders and members, and congratulations Nigerians!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC Internal Dynamics and the Future of Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

This is dedicated to Sir F. N. Nwosu, APC National Welfare Secretary who died in the morning of Thursday, March 9, 2023. May his gentle soul rest in peace and may God Almighty grant the family and all of us his associates the fortitude to bear this heavy loss. In the hope that the piece will contribute to the development of APC as a progressive party under the leadership of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which Sir Nwosu actively campaigned for, but unfortunately will not be alive to witness.

 

The emergence of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the February 25, 2023 Presidential and National Assembly elections present another opportunity to respond to the challenges of uniting Nigerians across all divides. Given the divisive campaigns sponsored by opposition parties, especially around the Muslim-Muslim ticket of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Sen. Kashim Shettima, now President-elect and Vice President-elect, APC need to demonstrate that the politics of uniting Nigerians require unconventional approaches, which goes beyond simple recognition of the dominant groups in Nigerian politics. Over the years, issues of representation in Nigeria were skewed in favour of the three major ethnic groups – Hausa/Fulanis, Yorubas and Igbos. Other groups were relegated to secondary players.

 

Associated with this reality is the lack of consideration for other factors that defined the identity of Nigerians, which include religion and gender. Of course, inbuild in all of these is the demographic factor of age. All these are taken for granted and conservatively assumed that once ethnic factors are considered, however skewedly defined, issues of religion, gender and demography are resolved with them. Whether consideration of ethnic factors alone marginalises other groups is hardly given consideration. Marginalised groups are left on their own to struggle for political survival.

 

Interestingly however, even within majority ethnic groups the other subsidiary identity factors of religion, which potentially debases citizens to status of marginalisation are hardly respected. For instance, the assumption that a Hausa/Fulani person is a Muslim, a Yoruba man is a Christian and an Igbo man is a Christian excludes anyone from such ethnic groups who does not fit into such categorisation. There are Hausa/Fulani people in the North who are Christians. There are many Yoruba people who are Muslims and there are some few Igbo people who are Muslims. Electoral politics constructed based on the old assumption of straight jacketed identity of Hausa/Fulani Muslim identity, Yoruba Christian identity and Igbo Christian identity may not guaranty electoral viability.

 

Beyond the challenge of electoral viability, it also risks mobilising strong opposition largely because it may have to alter political equation in favour of minorities within the major ethnic groups. In summary, this was the challenge, which the APC had to respond with the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the party for the 2023 Presidential election. The big question is whether the choice of a Muslim-Muslim ticket with Sen. Shettima as Asiwaju Tinubu running mate was deliberately designed to broaden the scope of political participation and representation in the country. While acknowledging that it may not have started as a deliberate plan to broaden political participation or representation, it will be important to recognise that it highlights the political ingenuity and capacity of Asiwaju Tinubu to courageously make a choice that deviate from conventional politics to win the support of citizens.

 

Being a Muslim within a majority Yoruba ethnic group who is interested in winning election, it must have been very clear to him that electoral attractiveness to the highly populated North would have to be sensitive to factors of religion in addition to ethnic factors. Of course, following the 1993 electoral template of Chief M. K. O. Abiola and Alh. Babagana Kingibe, with hard work electoral success could be achieved. No doubt, the choice of Muslim-Muslim ticket is a choice, which both the APC and Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the party had to make as electoral strategy. Of course, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP) and the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) have throughout the campaign use the choice of the Muslim-Muslim ticket of the APC as a big campaign issue. They used it to mobilise Nigerians against the APC and all its candidates, especially Asiwaju Tinubu being the Presidential candidate.

 

Now that the election is won by APC and Asiwaju Tinubu, it is important to demonstrate that the Muslim-Muslim ticket of Asiwaju Tinubu and Sen. Shettima is simply an electoral strategy and indeed represent a progressive template for inclusion in Nigerian politics. For this to be achieved, APC and its leadership must not allow individual politics of personal aspiration by potential office holders to drive the process of constituting the next Federal Government to be led by Asiwaju Tinubu and Sen. Shettima as President and Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Individual aspirations by potential office holders may only result in unmanageable contests for positions in the next Federal Government and could further complicate the challenges of inclusive politics in the country. Besides, unregulated contest was what produced the rebellious leadership of Sen. Bukola Saraki and Rt. Hon. Yakubu Dogara in the National Assembly in 2015.

 

APC must avoid past pitfalls and develop proactive strategy of producing a broadly inclusive government post May 29, 2023 under the leadership of Asiwaju Tinubu. For that to happen, first thing first, APC need to acknowledge the groundswell of grievances both within the party and the country and resolved to use the opportunity to setup the next Federal Government to address most of the challenges. It must be acknowledged that the process of producing candidates for 2023 elections itself created so many disputes within the party. In fact, since 2015, many disputes arising from internal party primary to produce candidates for elections have been snowballing and rolling into next electoral contests. Although under the leadership of President Muhammadu Buhari, these disputes were not allowed to undermine the electoral viability of the party, inability to resolve these internal disputes, combined with problems associated with guaranteeing inclusive politics in the country may destroy APC’s electoral viability in future elections.

 

While it is important to avoid witch-hunting individual leaders of the party for their role during the primary that produced candidates for 2023 elections, including those who supported or campaigned against Asiwaju Tinubu, it is important as a matter of strategy to broaden the scope of opportunity to rectify the outlook of the party and use it to also project the politics of an Asiwaju Tinubu led Federal Government as being inclusive. Also, learning from PDP’s mistake of insensitivity whereby the inability to align the outlook of the leadership of the party with the standard bearer of the party for the 2023 Presidential race, which became a source of deep-seated animosity among party leaders, it is important that APC, even before May 29, 2023 when Asiwaju will be sworn in as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, take every step to rectify any situation that may be used to continue divisive campaigns and propaganda against the APC and its control of Federal Government.

 

With a National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, who is also a Muslim, it will be important that every necessary step is taken to inject a change of leadership for the party so that a new National Chairman who is a Christian take over. Part of the advantage of this is that the National Chairman could be retained in North-Central. Noting that the current National Chairman has done an excellent job to manage a successful campaign to win the 2023 election with all the attendant challenges, there should be no difficulty in convincing Sen. Adamu to resign as National Chairman to create opportunity for a new National Chairman of APC to emerge who is a Christian. For that to happen may require Emergency National Convention because if the hierarchy of the current leadership is to be followed, the successor to Sen. Adamu will be Sen. Abubakar Kyari who is a Muslim from North-East.

 

Apart from changing the National Chairman, there is the need to also recognise that the case of Sen. Iyiola Omisore, National Secretary of the party has become a source of stronger dispute in Osun State. Unfortunately, rather than serving as a unifying factor for the party leadership in Osun State, Sen. Omisore is more a divisive factor, which may have been responsible for why APC lost the 2022 Governorship election to a political mediocre whose only qualification in politics may appear to be comic dancing skill. To save Osun State and bring it back to its old standard of national political reckoning, Sen. Omisore would need to resign as National Secretary of APC, and a new unifying National Secretary elected. Beyond Sen. Omisore, similarly, any member of the National Working Committee of the party who is not a unifying leader in his/her state should be changed.

 

In addition, APC must take of the challenge of reconciling its members across the country. The recalibrated APC leadership with a new National Chairman must take up the challenge of reconciling members from every part of the country. APC must never make the mistake of proceeding with the task of constituting the Asiwaju led Federal Government based on business-as-usual strategy. The opportunity of constituting the Federal Government led by Asiwaju Tinubu must be used strategically to reconcile the APC with Nigerians. Every sacrifice must be made by every leader of the party to create the condition for an Asiwaju Tinubu led Federal Government to emerge with strong legitimacy and wider support base by Nigerians.

 

Therefore, side by side with the initiative to recalibrate the APC leadership is the need to properly plan the distribution of key positions in the Federal Government to reflect both ethnic, religious, gender and other demographic considerations. As a party, we must consciously avoid any mistake that could be used by our political adversaries to suggest insensitivity to the inclusion of all Nigerians. APC leadership must take steps to regulate the aspirations of individual leaders to positions in the next Federal Government. Some positions, for instance must be deliberately locked to sections and groups in the country.

 

Some specific recommendations may be necessary at this point. The offices of Senate President and Speaker House of Representatives would have to be locked. Given that the President and Vice President are from South-West and North-East respectively, nobody from either of these two regions should aspire for any of these offices. Opportunist may argue that in the last four years, the South-West also produced the Vice President and Speaker of House of Representatives. We must correct this kind of lop-sided reality as a strategic approach to dousing ethnic and religious tension in the country. With a National Chairman from the North-Central and hopefully a Christian, the North-Central too should also be excluded from aspiring for either the position of Senate President or Speaker of the House of Representatives.

 

Accordingly, the positions of Senate President and Speaker House of Representatives should be zoned to North-West, South-East or South-South. With a Muslim President and a Muslim Vice President, it is only logical to zone the Senate President who is the number three ranking leader of government to either the South-East or South-South who would be Christian. Logically, the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives should be zoned to the North-West. This would have the advantage of acknowledging that the North-West gave Asiwaju Tinubu the highest votes of 2,950,393 representing 33.6% of the votes he won. All other positions in government can be assigned by taking bearing from that.

 

While it may be important to consider including the position of Secretary to Government Federation (SGF) as part of positions to be zoned, Asiwaju Tinubu must avoid the mistake of undermining his government by appointing politicians with zero experience in managing public service institutions to serve as SGF. The office of SGF is in fact the brainbox of government and once a wrong person is appointed into such a position, the delivery capacity of government will be weak. Therefore, the choice of where the SGF will come from is as important as the qualification and public service experience of any person to be considered.

 

Achieving all these would require institutionalised consultations and negotiations involving structures of the party. Asiwaju Tinubu as the new leader of APC should challenge party leadership to make all structures of the party functional in line with provisions of the constitution of the party. A situation whereby key decisions including issues of zoning are handled outside the constitutional structures of the party is unhealthy, unsustainably, and challengeable. APC need to recognise that the Muslim-Muslim ticket it provided for the 2023 Presidential election, if not managed to produce desired outcome of inclusivity to broaden the foundation for wider participations of Nigerians in politics and governance across all divides, could further widen the division among Nigerians, which should be avoided. A successfully well-managed Muslim-Muslim would make a Christian-Christian ticket viably possible. For instance, if a Christian Northerner is to emerge as a candidate for a Presidential contest, the choice of a Southern Christian as running mate should be a viable consideration for a potential electoral victory.

 

Finally, President Muhammadu Buhari’s government for eight operated based on the philosophy of “I belong to everybody and I belong to nobody”. As a result, APC leaders and members had to leave with the reality of producing a government in which they have little or no influence. Many Federal Government appointees inherited from PDP were retained. For instance, Mr. Godwin Emefiele is one of the appointees of Federal Government inherited from PDP in 2015 but retained till the end of President Buhari’s tenure. Similarly, processes of appointments into government positions were handled without consulting party leaders. Consequently, many appointees of government were hardly accountable to the APC and its leadership. An Asiwaju Tinubu led Federal Government must avoid the mistakes of President Muhammadu Buhari administration while building on its strength.

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Re: APC Internal Dynamics and Future of Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Following the statement on the above caption, which I issued on Friday, March 10, 2023, on Tuesday, March 14, 2023 I feature on Africa Independent Television (AIT) Jigsaw, hosted by Mr. Gbenga Aruleba. While on the show, I reiterated my call for our National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and National Secretary, Sen. Iyiola Omisore to vacate their position in the interest of the country, our party and as a demonstration of strong support for Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as President-elect to proceed with the business of constituting an inclusive Federal Government led by him come May 29, 2023.

 

While in the case of the National Chairman, Sen. Adamu, the call is necessitated by the need to douse ethnic and religious tension in the country because of the desperate campaigns led by PDP and LP during the Presidential election, the case of Sen. Omisore is necessitated by his inability to provide the needed leadership in Osun, which cost us the 2022 Osun Governorship election. I further supported my call for Sen. Omisore to vacate his position as the National Secretary with the demand for accountability around the management of campaign funds provided by the party, which was delivered through Sen. Omisore.

 

In response, Sen. Omisore has sent abusive messages and requested his lawyer, Mr. Gboyega Oyewole, SAN, FCArb to ask me to retract my statement, make public apology and pay him the sum of N500 million in compensation for some alleged damages to “his character in the eyes of right-thinking Nigerians.” I am in receipt of the letter from Lords & Temple, signed by Mr. Oyewole, dated 15^th March, 2023 (the letter was actually wrongly 15^th March 2022).

 

Since Sen. Omisore’s response to the request for accountability is to threaten legal action, I have also instructed my lawyers to respond appropriately to his legal threat. However, as a committed party member I insist that the challenges facing us as a party and as a nation are broadly political and limiting our actions to the courts may only distract us from initiating the right responses to resolve the challenge of facilitating negotiations for inclusive government under the leadership of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

 

I want to restate that being leaders of the party, we are obligated to facilitate negotiations through our structures, namely National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Caucus. Unfortunately, as things are, these structures have been frozen by our inactions as members of the National Working Committee (NWC) led by Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore. No meetings of these structures have taken place for almost. In ability to make these structures functional will weaken the capacity to regulate the conduct of party leaders and we risk creating a situation whereby challenges of inclusivity will be further compounded in the country. Already, individual Senators-elect and House of Representative members-elect have begun to aspire to positions of Senate President and Speaker House of Representatives in a very insensitive and reckless manner.

 

May I once again remind all of us, both as leaders and APC members, that APC is a product of sacrifices and more than ever before the challenges we face today calls for sacrifices. Both our National Chairman, Sen. Adamu and National Secretary, Sen. Omisore must demonstrate willingness to make sacrifices to earn the respect and followership of Senators-elect and House of Representative members-elect.

 

I make this appeal respectfully and without any ill-feeling to anyone, including Sen. Omisore. I stand by my position that Sen. Omisore is unable to unite party leaders and members in Osun State, which is responsible for why we lost the election. He is opposed to any demand for accountability and is resorting to acts of intimidation to perhaps manipulate processes of appointment into the Asiwaju-led Federal Government. What makes democracy attractive is the requirement for accountability and Sen. Omisore must be held accountable. We need to have accountable leaders to the process of negotiations to be facilitated by the party.

 

Finally, after 24 years of interrupted democracy, we must not shy away from initiatives that will strengthen internal contest within our party, APC. Part of the big challenge of Nigeria’s democracy is that internal contest is being destroyed. As a result, we produced situations where some leaders act as tyrants. Anyone who expresses views that are not in harmony with thinking of some leaders is condemned. This attitude is responsible for the destruction of PDP as a party and is gradually being entrenched in our party. There should be conscious effort to call these leaders to order!

 

Both as party leaders and Nigerians, we must wake up to the reality that negotiation to form the next APC government under the leadership of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu must depart from the conventional approach of allowing leaders to emerge based on individual aspirations. We cannot risk any further complication of entrenchment of the existing religiously lopsided Muslim-Muslim identity of Asiwaju Tinubu and Sen. Shettima. No legal threat should distract us from addressing this challenge.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Tasks of Negotiating 10^th NASS Leadership

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

It was Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, while declaring to contest for the position of National Chairman of APC on Thursday, May 10, 2018 at the Transcorp Hilton, Abuja, who argued that “party supremacy comes from decisions of the party made by the relevant party organs. The decisions of the party have to emerge from the debate by party organs at various levels, and the conclusions reached will constitute the party’s position on any matter which will then be binding on all the members of the party from the President to every member.”

 

Comrade Oshiomhole must have had at the back of his mind the sad experiences of having to accommodate the rebellious leadership of the 8^th National Assembly who defied efforts by APC leaders to regulate conducts of some APC elected National Assembly members in 2015, partly because of absence of clear decisions of party organs. At the time of inaugurating the 8^th National Assembly on June 9, 2015, the Chief John Odigie-Oyegun-led National Working Committee (NWC: 2014 – 2018) was unable to regulate the conduct of elected party members in the National Assembly, notably Sen. Bukola Saraki and Hon. Yakubu Dogara who respectively emerged as Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives. Their emergence as leaders of the 8^th National Assembly was a defiance against the preference of APC’s leadership for Sen. Ahmed Lawan and Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila for the position of Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives respectively.

 

In 2015, the consultative process for the selection process of the leadership was narrowed to the NWC. No NEC meeting or National Caucus was convened. The party’s Board of Trustees was not constituted. Somehow, the Saraki/Dogara groups in both Chambers of the National Assembly were able to defeat the groups loyal to the party’s NWC. Good enough, this situation was corrected in 2019 and a wider consultative process involving both the NWC, elected members of the two chambers of the National Assembly and other party leaders, including President Muhammadu Buhari was initiated by the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC. This accounted for the successful emergence of the Sen. Ahmed Lawan and Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila-led 9^th National Assembly.

 

As a party, it would seem that APC has relapsed back to 2015 mode of allowing elected National Assembly members to proceed with the business of constituting the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly in an unregulated manner. This is very risky, not just for APC but for the country. Given that as a party, we contested the 2023 elections with a Muslim-Muslim ticket of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Sen. Kashim Shettima, unregulated contest for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly could produce another Muslim as Senate President. In fact, there is also the high probability that a Muslim could also emerge as Speaker of the 10^th House of Representatives.

 

At a time when irrationality has become overbearingly manifest in the politics of the country, no thanks to the so-called Obidient politicians who thrive in peddling lies and falsehood as a strategy to mobilise support, every care should be taken to manage our diversity. It is quite frustrating for many members of the APC NWC that as leaders mandated to provide leadership in managing affairs of the party, we have become onlookers in matters that we should be directing. This must be urgently corrected.

 

The APC NWC led by Sen. Abdullahi Adamu need to become more aggressive in driving the process of negotiating leadership of the 10^th National Assembly. Laidback attitude of the NWC being the administrative organ of the party has produced the embarrassing situations of public disagreement with the National Chairman over the issue of consensus Presidential candidate before the party’s Presidential Primary in June 2022. It is also responsible for some of the disagreements between some members of the NWC with the party’s Presidential Campaign Council (PCC) before the 2023 elections.

 

Part of the challenge is that it has become a practice whereby NWC continue to appropriate powers of superior organs of the party, especially the National Executive Committee (NEC). So long as the NWC continue to govern the party based on the strategy of usurping the powers of NEC, elected representatives of the party will continue to organise rebellion against what could be regarded as positions of the party. We need to strongly appeal to the National Chairman, Sen. Adamu to consider wider consultative process in managing affairs of the party. Adopting wider consultative process will require invoking provisions of the party constitution to convene NEC and National Caucus meetings.

 

This public appeal has become necessary given the flood of aspirants for leadership of the 10^th National Assembly, which if left to continue unregulated could throw up unexpected people in the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly. Should that be allowed to happen may result in producing the undesirable consequences of destroying the electoral viability of APC in future elections. As a ruling party, mandated to provide political leadership to the country for the next four years, everything must be done to sustain the confidence of Nigerians.

 

As a concerned party member and leader, I make this appeal conscious of where we are coming from. We have proven to Nigerians that nothing is impossible in Nigerian politics. We have successfully consummated the first and only merger of opposition parties in the political history of the country. We are the first party to successfully defeat a ruling party. It is therefore not impossible to be the party that can facilitate the emergence of Nigeria as a strongly united country. For that to happen, we need to douse the current ethnic and religious tension in the country.

 

Dousing ethnic and religious tension in the country will require sacrifices on the part of all of us both as leaders and members of APC. Without going into the details of the sacrifices required, we certainly would need to invoke the powers of superior organs of the party where all proposals could be tabled, debated and decisions taken, which should be binding on everyone, including elected representatives in the National Assembly. Perhaps, we need to acknowledge that the critical issue before us as a party today is decision about zoning formula for offices in the National Assembly and in the Asiwaju Tinubu-led government.

 

Partly, because of the ineffectiveness of the party’s National Secretariat, no proposal is on the table for consideration of any organ of the party. Instead, we have many fake proposals circulating with hardly any attempt to initiate alternative proposals for debate within the constitutional structures of APC. It may however interest all of us that the configuration of the leadership that will be assuming office on May 29, 2023 is about the same with that of 1999. Recall that in 1999, we had former President Olusegun Obasanjo and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar respectively from South-West and North-East. Taking bearing from that, we had Senate President from the South-East and Deputy Senate President from North-Central. Recall that also we had the National Chairman of the ruling party from North-Central.

 

In the House of Representatives, we had a Speaker from North-West and Deputy Speaker from South-South. Other positions in the leadership of the National Assembly were distributed accordingly to other zones. Given the challenge of neutralising religious tension in the country, this would appear to be advantageous. For instance, if Senate President is to come form South-East, he would certainly be a Christian. The only problem is the experience of 1999 – 2003, which highlight problems of instability with the South-East holding the position of Senate President. Also, as at 1999, the South-East strongly voted for the PDP to emerge as the ruling party. The same could not be said today.

 

Perhaps, to avoid that, and to compensate the South-South, which gave more votes to the APC, including winning the Governorship election in Cross River and majority members of the Edo State House of Assembly, consideration can be given for the South-South to produce the Senate President. If that is to be considered, then the position of Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives should be given to the South-East. All these are issues to be debated, around which a decision would have to be taken one way or the other. Once there is a decision, it will be binding on everyone.

 

So far, we only have individual aspirations for leadership positions in the 10^th National Assembly. Most of the aspirations hardly recognise the challenges of national cohesion. Unfortunately, most of those aspiring for positions of leadership in the 10^th National Assembly appear to be disrespectful to structures of the party and their membership, including the NWC. Hardly do they show any interest to consult the NWC as an organ or its members individually. Somehow, there is also the demeaning perception that aspiring leaders could always acquire (however defined) the support of party organs. This must be remedied.

 

For instance, I have people from North-West declaring to contest for the position of Senate President without the courtesy of consulting any of us from North-West in NWC. As much as I respect every elected National Assembly member from North-West, I will appeal to those aspiring for the position of Senate President to step down their aspiration in the overall interest of national cohesion and to ensure that in line with our commitment as leaders of the North-West to support the administration of Asiwaju Tinubu to assume office in May 29, 2023 with a good support base from Nigerians across every section and irrespective of ethnic and religious divide.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Questions of Progressive Credentials

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

It is now exactly one year since our election into the National Working Committee (NWC) of the APC led by Sen. Abdullahi Adamu. Having emerged from cycles of internal challenges leading to the dissolution of the Comrade Adams Oshiomhole-led NWC in June 2020 and the appointment of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni-led Caretaker Committee, which manipulated its existence beyond the initial six months given by the National Executive Committee (NEC), what is the scorecard of the NWC? Being a privileged member of the NWC and one of the critiques of both Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC and His Excellency Buni’s Caretaker Committee, have we been able to provide leadership to the party to overcome its challenges? What were even the challenges facing the party from the time of Comrade Oshiomhole and His Excellency Buni?

 

Without going into details, the major challenge facing the party since the time of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun-led NWC, which was the predecessor to the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC was the problem of making the organs of the party functional. Following the electoral victory of 2015, meetings of NEC and National Caucus were frozen for more than a year as opposed to the quarterly meetings stipulated in the party’s constitution. For two years during the tenure of Comrade Oshiomhole, not more than two NEC and National Caucus meetings held. In addition, the Board of Trustees (BoT) of the party, which was vested with the responsibility of intervening ‘in all disputes and crisis in the party to ensure its stability’ was not inaugurated since the emergence of the party in July 2013. The party’s BoT was also given the constitutional responsibility of holding the properties of the party in trust and ‘act as Arbitrators and Mediators in disputes and ensure the enforcement of discipline in accordance with the Constitution of the Party’.

 

The name of the party’s BoT has been changed to National Advisory Council (NAC) and its functions have been substantially reduced to advisory as the name imply at the March 28, 2022 National Convention. Even with that there is hardly any ongoing discussion to constitute the party’s NAC in the last one year. By the provision of Article 13.2B.(i) ‘the National Secretary shall, not later than one month after an elective convention, convene the meeting of the National Advisory Council’. One year after assuming office, the National Secretary has never proposed any action towards the inauguration of NAC.

 

So far, there was only one meeting of the party’s NEC on April 8, 2022. There was never any meeting of the National Caucus. Instead, meetings of the NWC hold without necessarily ensuring that existing constitutional provisions are respected. In the circumstance, critical functions of the NEC, which include approving the national budget of the party as provided in Article 13.3A(xiv) of the Party’s Constitution is simply ignored.

 

Further, Article 13.3A(xv) of the party’s constitution directed the NWC to give quarterly financial reports to NEC. Also, Article 13.4(ii) direct the NWC to present reports and Article 13.4(iv) compel the NWC to present financial report on income and expenditure of the Party. All these have been ignored. Yet, it is public knowledge that the party has earned billions of Naira in revenue from sales of forms to aspiring contestants for the 2023 general elections. We are yet to, as NWC, declare to any organ of the party how much we inherited from His Excellency Mai Mala-led Caretaker Committee and how much was received as donations and contributions for the 2023 elections. Large-scale expenditure, which include the renovation of the National Secretariat complex are being undertaken without any organ of the party exercising the powers of due diligence.

 

As a member of the NWC, I can say without fear of contradiction, all decisions bordering on managing the finances of the party are being taken by the National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and the National Secretary, Sen. Iyiola Omisore. Most members of NWC are reduced to onlookers or at best rubber stamp. All appeals for accountability have fallen on deaf ears. Decision of the NWC to convene NEC meeting in August last year was simply sabotaged.

 

Once the party’s constitution is no longer the guide for managing the affairs of the party, discretionary decisions of leaders take over. Consequently, even what get paid to party officials and organs becomes acts of benevolence by the National Chairman or anyone he delegates. As a result, something as fundamental as the decision on what proportion of the party’s income is paid to States, Local Governments and Wards is exercised solely by the National Chairman and National Secretary. Party staff are hired and fired by the National Chairman and National Secretary without report to any organ, including the NWC.

 

Given all these, there are embarrassing reports of party members who served in Screening, Primary and Appeals Committees for the 2023 elections yet to be paid their allowances. There was also the case of aspiring contestants for party offices during the March 28, 2022 National Convention who voluntarily stepped down in the spirit of facilitating consensus and therefore entitled for refunds of the cost of their nomination forms who are yet to be paid.

 

Now, with the 2023 general elections over and our party emerged victorious in the Presidential, 15 State Governorship and majority positions in the two chambers of the National Assembly, we are faced with the big challenge of regulating the contest for the emergence of leaders of the 10^th National Assembly. With organs not meeting, it can be predicted that the contest will be driven by individual aspirations by aspiring Senators-elect and House of Representative members-elect. Given that we already have two Muslims occupying the highest positions of President and Vice President, any attempt to allow another Muslim to aspire for the position of Senate President, who is the number three highest ranking officer in government will be insensitive, injurious to the unity and peaceful co-existence of the country and damage the electoral viability of our party.

 

To avert this, and as a party envisioned to be progressive will require activation of wider consultative process and negotiations using our constitutional structures, especially the NEC so that decisions taken will be binding on all members, including the aspiring candidates. Being a progressive party specifically requires dynamism, actions, and improvements on how things are managed. Dynamism will require acknowledgement of the realities facing us a nation and as a party vested with the responsibility of providing leaders for the country for another four years, based on which we are able to initiate proposals. One of such realities is the existing ethnic and religious tension in the country. Our proposals should seek to improve on previous experiences of leadership formation during the 9^th and 10^th Assembly.

 

With regards to contests for positions in the 10^th National Assembly, at the minimum we should seek to improve on the experiences of 2019, which effectively regulated the conducts of Senators-elect and House of Representative members-elect ahead of the inauguration of the 9^th Assembly. It is to the credit of the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC that any possible rebellion by members of the 9^th Assembly was blocked, unlike what happened in the case of the 8^th Assembly in 2015. All the indications are there now that no attempt is being made to regulate the emergence of leaders for the 10^th National Assembly with a high possibility for the emergence of self-centered leadership in the 10^th Assembly, which should be averted.

 

As a member of the NWC, I want to publicly register my objection to the seeming inability of our NWC to activate the process of convening meetings of NEC to appropriately take decisions and regulate the emergence of the 10^th National Assembly leadership. In particular, I want to restate my position that the leadership profile to emerge for the country on May 29, 2023 is already taking the coloration of the leadership of the country in 1999 with a President from South-West and Vice President from North-East. Unlike in 1999, we have two Muslims as President and Vice President. It is therefore very compelling that the Senate President should come from either the South-South or South-East. And since the North-West produced more votes to give our party the victory in the 2023 Presidential election, the position of Speaker House of Representatives should be zoned to North-West in line with what obtained in 1999.

 

I want to specifically note that two respected Senators-elect from North-West have made public declaration their aspirations for the position of Senate President. These are His Excellency Abdulaziz Yari and Sen. Barau Jibrin. The North-West has been known for its commitment to progressive politics. Our Governors and other party leaders from the zone were unwaveringly progressive during the contest to produce Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of our party for the 2023 elections. They were forthright in ensuring that nothing is done to threaten the unity and peaceful co-existence of Nigeria, based on which they stood for power shift to the Southern part of the country.

 

Now that power has shifted to the Southern part of the country, as a region, we equally have the responsibility to regulate the conduct of all our Senators-elect from the North-West, including the two Senators-elect Abdulaziz Yari and Barau Jibrin to withdraw their aspiration for the Senate President. All party leaders from North-West must prevail on these leaders to, in the overall interest of the unity and peaceful coexistence of the country withdraw their aspirations to contest the position of Senate President for the 10^th Senate. At the most, they should aspire for the position of Majority Leader of the Senate in line with the 1999 zoning formula in the Senate.

 

Given that no meetings of either the NEC or National Caucus is about to be convene anytime soon, party leaders at Zonal levels should take initiatives to regulate the conducts of Senators-elect and House of Representatives members-elect in the contests for leadership of the 10^th Assembly. President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu should immediately intervene to restore constitutional order in the management of the party affairs. It will be a mockery to continue to bear the name progressive and continue to run affairs of the party based on the personal discretion of the National Chairman and National Secretary.

 

There is also the challenge of urgently reviewing the performance of the party in the 2023 general elections. One of the issues that should be addressed as a matter of urgency is the case of indiscipline by party leaders at all levels. There are highly placed party leaders who have worked against our candidates during the 2023 general elections. This should be investigated, and appropriate disciplinary actions taken in line with provisions of our party’s constitution.

 

Democracy without accountability means dictatorship. Once organs of the party are not meeting as enshrined in the constitution of the party, accountability will be absent, and the character of our party will be autocratic and retrogressive. Asiwaju Tinubu cannot afford to assume office with the baggage of being a leaders of an autocratic and retrogressive APC, which is insensitive to ethnic and religious tension in the country, largely compounded by our inability to regulate the conduct of our Senators-elect and House of Representatives members-elect. Everything must be done to return our party to its founding vision of engendering progressive politics in the country, which is about equitable distribution of power and resources in the country. It is disappointing that one year since our election into the NWC, we have been running the party based on the old mindset of disregard for allowing organs of the party to guide decisions and appropriately allows for wider input by members and leaders of the party in decision making process. This must change urgently!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Cash-and-Carry Contest for Leadership of 10^th National Assembly

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Unfolding developments around the contest for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly is quite worrisome. Apart from the clear disregard for national unity and outright disrespect for Nigerians, especially the persons of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Sen. Kashim Shettima, being the President-elect and Vice-President-elect respectively, some of the aspiring candidates for the positions of Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives are neither concerned about the security and well-being of Nigeria nor are they in anyway disturbed about factors that could erode the electoral viability of our party – APC. These are aspiring candidates for these positions, two of them Muslims from North-West aspiring for the position of Senate President and one of them from North-East aspiring for the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives, who are desperately mobilising support in unethical manner without any regard or respect to the party and its leadership.

 

Certainly, these aspirants know that there is very high probability that once the party is allowed to finalise the processes of zoning positions of leadership, the probability is high that these positions would be zoned to other sections of the country outside theirs. In order therefore to force their way and weaken the party, they are proceeding with mobilising support for their aspirations in a very unethical manner. Some of them, including another aspirant for the position of Speaker of the House of Representatives from the North-West have sent bags of rice and sugar to members of the APC National Working Committee (NWC). There are speculations that some of them are bribing party leaders with huge amounts of money to stop the party from zoning positions. There are also the disturbing reports from House of Representatives members-elect that one aspirant for the position of Speaker from North-East apart from bribing members-elect with huge amounts of money is also offering jeeps to members-elect if they will commit to electing him as the Speaker. This has reduced the contest for the leadership of 10^th National Assembly to Cash-and-Carry.

 

To say the least, this is both disappointing and worrisome. How can APC elected representatives descend so low as to be using unethical methods of cash-and-carry to mobilise support for their aspirations? The two Senators-elect who are being alleged to be involved in such unethical methods are both Muslims from the North-West. Conscious that APC has already produced two Muslims as President-elect and Vice President-elect, it should be very clear that any person whose aspiration for the position of Senate President being the number three highest ranking position in Federal Government, who is a Muslim will not mean well for Nigeria and will be working to undermine the electoral viability of APC as a political party.

 

Any Muslim aspiring for the position of Senate President has no respect for both the constitutions of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the APC. This is because Chapter II, Section 14(3) of the Nigerian constitution clearly outlined that ‘the composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few States or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies.” With two Muslims already elected to be sworn in as President and Vice President of the Federal Republic on May 29, any attempt to consider another Muslim as Senate President will promote the dominance of Muslims in the Federal Government and will be injurious to national unity and peaceful co-existence of Nigeria as a sovereign entity, which must not be allowed.

 

Further, the APC constitution enjoined party leaders and members to “render service at all levels of governance, and to build a nation which will guarantee equal opportunity for all, mutual and peaceful co-existence, respect and understanding, eliminating all forms of discrimination and social injustice among Nigerians, rendering selfless service that will rekindle a deep sense of patriotism and nationalism.” How can anyone aspiring for position of leadership at all levels seeking to bribe his/her way be said to be interested in rendering service? Such a person will only be interested in rendering service to himself and himself alone. Besides, given that both the two persons allegedly involved in this cash-and-carry approach to mobilising support for their emergence as Senate President are Muslims, it will be gross insensitivity to the peaceful co-existence of the country and disrespectful to Nigerians to allow them to continue to aspire for the position of Senate President.

 

In addition, any Muslim Senator-elect aspiring for the position of Senate President is disrespectful to the leaders of the country and the party, including President Muhammadu Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu. However considered, the emerging risks threatening the peaceful co-existence of Nigeria, however manifest, will squarely be interpreted based on the actions or inactions of the political leadership of the country in the persons of President Buhari as the current leader and Asiwaju Tinubu as his successor. Noting that Asiwaju Tinubu in his campaign document Renewed Hope 2023: Action Plan for a Better Nigeria outlined that “Our objective is to foster a new society based on shared prosperity, tolerance, compassion, and the unwavering commitment to treat each citizen with equal respect and due regard”, all aspiring candidates for both Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives in the 10^th National Assembly seeking to emerge through cash-and-carry methods clearly are not committed to the success of Asiwaju-led Federal Government. If anything, they are only seeking to destroy our society and block the government of Asiwaju Tinubu from achieving its objective of fostering a new society.

 

Once aspirants win leadership positions through cash-and-carry methods, their loyalty to the government led by Asiwaju Tinubu and the APC will be weak. Such a person could even hold the Government hostage in pursuance of their personal ambitions, which is known only to themselves. With all these worrisome developments, the passive and almost unresponsive calmness of members of the APC NWC led by Sen. Abdullahi Adamu is giving credence to the speculation that some of these cash-and-carry aspirants for leadership position in the 10^th National Assembly may have bribe the NWC not to initiate actions to zone positions in the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly. Otherwise, why is the NWC unable to convene meetings of organs of the party to invoke Article 13.4(vi) of the APC constitution, which directs the NWC to “propose electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections to party offices at all levels, and procedure for selecting Party candidates for elective offices”?

 

It is very disturbing and highly unacceptable that something as sensitive as electoral guidelines and regulations for electing leaders of the 10^th National Assembly will be left to public speculations. At a time when opposition political parties are practically taken over by combinations of religious bigots and political opportunists who will go to any length to manufacture lies aimed at manipulating gullible citizens to support them, we can’t allow the contest for leadership of the 10^th National Assembly to continue unregulated. Everything must be done to mobilise all committed party leaders and members to call all APC elected representatives aspiring for positions in the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly to order.

 

Accordingly, the APC should take every step to sanction all those mobilising support for their so-called aspirations based on cash-and-carry method. We must appeal to both President Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu to promptly urge our National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and the whole NWC to immediately restore constitutional order within the APC. The audacious impudence of our elected representatives aspiring for leadership positions in the 10^th National Assembly is only a reflection of the dysfunctionality of the organs of the party, which has been the cause of all the leadership challenges facing the party since the time of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun. So long as organs of the party are not meeting as provided in the constitution of the party, decisions required to regulate the conduct of party leaders and members, including the sensitive issue of zoning party leadership will be absent. Once that is the case, leaders and members can go to every extent to achieve their narrow objective of winning election into leadership positions even if that will undermine the peaceful co-existence of Nigeria and the electoral viability of the APC as a political party.

 

Our Governors and all our party leaders must also be reminded about their abiding commitment to the unity and peaceful co-existence of Nigeria, which was responsible for their support for the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as the candidate of our party for the 2023 elections. It can be said without any doubt that the support of our Governors and leaders of the party go beyond the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as our Presidential candidate, which was responsible for why they all mobilised Nigerians to vote for him and emerge the President-elect of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Now that he is elected, that support must also translate to cooperation, partnership, and collaboration to ensure that his government succeeds in renewing the hope of all Nigerians irrespective of our differences across ethnic and religious divides. Therefore, everything must be done to regulate the conducts of all aspiring candidates for leadership positions of the 10^th National Assembly to comply with the constitutional obligation of promoting national unity and peaceful co-existence.

 

All APC leaders and members should be called upon to intervene individually and collectively and kindly call all aspiring candidates for leadership positions in the 10^th National Assembly to strictly conduct themselves ethically with the highest respect for Nigerians and in compliance with the provisions of the constitutions of both the APC and the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which compels everyone to promote national unity and peaceful co-existence of the country. Promoting national unity under the Asiwaju Tinubu-led Federal Government to be inaugurated on May 29 would require that, at the minimum, the Senate President should be a Christian from either the South-East or South-South. In addition, any candidate who is mobilising support based on cash-and-carry methods will not be loyal to Asiwaju Tinubu-led government and therefore a potential risk to such a government. Everything must be done to ensure that the configuration of the Asiwaju Tinubu-led Federal Government command the support of all Nigerians irrespective of our differences.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Restoring Constitutional Order in APC – Not Negotiable

Open Letter to Sen. Abdullahi Adamu

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Kindly recall my letter to you with the subject “Restoring Constitutional Order in APC: Demands”, dated February 5, 2023. The letter outlined nine demands as follows:

 

1. In line with provision of Article 13.4(ii) of the APC Constitution present report of activities for the last one year to the NWC.

 

2. In line with provision of Article 13.4(iv) of the APC Constitution present financial report on income and expenditure of the party for the last one year.

 

3. In line with provision of Article 13.3A(xiv) of the APC Constitution prepare a national budget for the party for the period May – December 2023, which should be ratified by the NWC for the consideration and approval of NEC.

 

4. In line with provisions of Article 13.4(vi) of our party Constitution, which directs the NWC to ‘propose electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections to party offices at all levels, and procedure for selecting Party candidates for elective offices’, the NWC should immediately develop a proposal to zone leadership positions for the 10^th National Assembly and present to NEC for consideration and approval.

 

5. Hold a NEC meeting before May 29, 2023 and 1 – 4 above should be part of the agenda of the NEC.

 

6. Submit the audited account of the party for 2022 that was submitted to INEC to the NWC.

 

7. Setup a committee to review the 2023 general elections and investigate cases of anti-party activities by leaders and members of the party.

 

8. Given the shameful outcome of the Osun 2022 Governorship election and the embarrassing outcome of the 2023 general elections in Osun State whereby we lost all the three Senatorial seats, all the House of Representatives seats and all the House of Assembly seats in the state, the National Secretary, Sen. Iyiola Omisore who is the most senior party leader in the state should immediately resign. In addition, the NWC should recommend to NEC that a high-powered reconciliation committee should be setup to facilitate reconciliation of all party leaders in Osun state.

 

9. In order to demonstrate commitment that we are going to restore constitutional order in the party, actions should commence on all these and NWC should meet within the next two weeks from today, Wednesday, April 5, 2023 to review progress.

 

Today, being February 19, 2023 makes it two weeks since the demands were presented. There was neither acknowledgement nor indication that any of the demands are being considered. Although the NWC met on Monday, February 17, 2023, deliberation of the NWC was limited to ratifying our Governorship candidates for Kogi, Bayelsa and Imo States for onward transmission to INEC. The only conclusion I can reach is that the demands I presented to you are not important. Perhaps, by extension, I can also conclude that given your disposition to run affairs of the party only based on your discretionary decisions without reference to provisions of the APC constitution, your commitment to the party and its electoral viability is weak.

 

Being the National Chairman who is respected by party leaders at all levels, it is worrisome that under your leadership, we will be back to the old problems of being unable to respect provisions of our constitution with respect to convening meetings of organs and ensuring that all our organs are allowed to perform their statutory functions as provided in our constitutions. It is more worrisome given that you are a lawyer by training, a very experienced politician who had the rare privilege of being a two term Governor as well as someone who has been operating at the highest level of national politics since the Second Republic. By any standard, no one will expect a person of your stature and experience in politics to be taciturn when it comes to managing affairs of the party based on respect for the party’s constitution.

 

To say the least, as a member of the NWC, I am scandalised and embarrassed that after one year in office we are yet to have a regular NEC, National Caucus or National Advisory Council (NAC) meetings. All the functions of these organs and the decisions expected from them by the constitution are being taken by you, perhaps in consultation with the National Secretary. When it suits you, the NWC is invited to ratify or approve some of your actions and decisions. As a member of NWC, we have never had any session where we were invited to consider any report of activity in the last one year. Yet, Article 13.4(ii) of our constitution require that the NWC submit quarterly reports to NEC. We have never deliberated on any financial report even when Article 13.4(iv) require that we present quarterly financial reports to NEC. We have never deliberated on a national budget although Article 13.3A(xiv) require that we present one to NEC and get approval.

 

Perhaps, inability to hold quarterly NEC meetings as provided under Article 25.2(i) of the party’s constitution may be the excuse for not having quarterly reports of activities, quarterly financial reports, and national budgets. It can also be argued that the problem of inability to hold quarterly NEC meetings go way back to the era of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and is partly responsible for the crisis of leadership during the tenure of Comrade Adams Aliyu Oshiomhole. By extension, it could be argued too that the culture of running affairs of the party based on the discretionary decisions of the National Chairman did not start with the current NWC.

 

True as this may appear to be, I will imagine that one of the reasons why President Muhammadu Buhari nominated you to serve as the National Chairman is that being an experienced politician with all your track records, the least you can achieve is to be able to rally everybody to respect the constitution of the party based on which organs meet as directed by the constitution and decisions taken accordingly. Partly because we assumed office at the time when nomination of candidates for the 2023 elections was our first responsibility, that may be argued to have created the sense of urgency, which allowed for discretionary decisions to continue in the management of party affairs. But when one considers that the only NEC meeting, we had on April 8, 2022, decided only to allow the NWC to exercise its powers for a period of 90 days, it means that all the sense of urgency permissible to warrant discretionary decisions is only allowed for a limited period of 90 days from April 8. Thereafter, any decision requiring the authorisation of NEC, as from August 2022, must be referred to NEC.

 

With you as the National Chairman, experienced politician and knowledgeable in political jurisprudence, the question of legality of discretionary decisions within the jurisdiction and scope of issues NEC is empowered by our constitution to take decision should be very clear. Because you have chosen to only run affairs of the party based on your personal discretion, you have committed us into sacking our former Directors and appointing new ones without inviting even the NWC to deliberate on it. To the best of my knowledge, all that I could recall is that NWC decided to send all the former Directors on compulsory leave. At no time did the NWC decided that their appointments should be terminated, and new ones should be employed. Assuming the party’s constitution allows you to hire and fire all the staff of the party, the constitution of the party under Article 13.4(ii) has compelled you to present that as part of the quarterly reports to NEC.

 

With respect to national budget, the closest we came to was when the April 8, 2022 NEC approved the cost for nomination forms for 2022 elections. No proposed expenditure of any kind was presented to any organ of the party apart from the budget for the June 2022 National Convention, which was presented to the NWC on the eve of the June 2022 National Convention. Similarly, no report has been rendered to any organ including the NWC about any revenue received by the party. It is however speculated in the media that the party was able to generate over N30 billion from sales of nomination forms to aspiring candidates for the 2023 elections. Our state structures and other lower organs, which statutorily are entitled to shares of the party’s revenue are given very negligible amounts without allowing any organ of the party, including the NWC to make input into what was paid to the states.

 

Large scale financial expenditure is being undertaken without any organ of the party including the NWC allowed to perform any form of statutory due diligence. The National Secretariat has been undergoing large scale renovation and both the costs and details of the contract is not provided to any organ of the party including the NWC. Without a national budget approved by NEC as required by our constitution, all decisions on financial expenditure are limited to your benevolent disposition. Unfortunately, because this is the reality, there are party members who have rendered services during the process of nominating candidates for the 2023 elections that are yet to be paid their entitlements. There is also the decision to refund party members who bought nomination forms to contest for position of party leadership during the March 28, 2022 National Convention that elected us but were asked to stepped down to facilitate our emergence as consensus candidates, but are yet to be refunded.

 

Apart from very clearly unambiguous constitutional directives to the NWC with respect to our responsibilities to NEC and other superior organs such as quarterly reports of activities and financial reports of incomes and expenditure, there are other functions such as requirement for electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections for party offices at all levels as provided under Article 13.4(vi) of our constitution. This is a responsibility given to NEC, and given the outcome of the 2023 elections, which gave us majority in both the two chambers of the National Assembly, require that the NWC should develop proposals for the consideration and approval of NEC. With about six weeks to the inauguration of new government, there is no indication that any proposal is being developed. In fact, no indication that a NEC meeting is being contemplated before May 29, 2023.

 

It is very difficult to comprehend why we should not be holding meetings of party organs to facilitate smooth transition from the current government of President Buhari and the incoming government of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Elementary logic would suggest that meetings of party organs would be required to help manage the process of assuming ownership and responsibility of the programmes, policies, and achievements of the current government by the incoming government. Because this is not happening some of our elected representatives have proceeded to declare aspirations and are going about campaigning in an unethical manner with the highest level of impunity and disregard for the party. At the rate we are going, it is almost a case that, as a party, we are abdicating our responsibility and we are setting a stage for the emergence of a rascally leadership in the two chambers of the 10^th National Assembly, which can hold the Asiwaju Tinubu government hostage.

 

As someone who was part of the advocacy for the merger of our old legacy parties, it is very worrisome that we are working to undo all that we have achieved in Nigerian politics. Being the only party that was a product of merger negotiation throughout the political history of Nigeria, and the only party to have succeeded in defeating a ruling party, it was never the vision of our founding fathers, led by President Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu that we will become a party that is disrespectful to our rules and our constitution.

 

As a reminder, we are a party that was inspired by President Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu to make every sacrifice to lead the process of changing Nigerian politics. Changing Nigerian politics was envisioned to be about respect for our constitution based on which organs are allowed to meet and take decisions. Integral to that is about having party leaders that respect and comply with decisions of party organs. Sadly, we are today surrounded by many party leaders who worked against the party during the 2023 elections. Some of them are among those aspiring for the leadership of the two chambers of the 10^th National Assembly. Yet, the party is not taking any step to take disciplinary action against these recalcitrant party leaders.

 

Certainly, this is not the vision that guided the merger negotiation of 2012 and 2013. We have allowed self-centred and, in many respects, sectarian people to assume position of responsibility within our party simply because we are comfortable with the positions we are privileged to be holding today. The demands for the restoration of constitutional order in APC is primarily to arrest the drift towards the emergence of unaccountable leaders within the party, which can only be achieved by ensuring that all party organs meet regularly as directed by the party’s constitution. These demands are hereby presented to restore constitutional order in the APC and to halt the current drift whereby most decisions of the party are narrowed to discretionary choices of the National Chairman and the National Secretary.

 

If discretionary decisions are allowed to continue to guide the management of the party, self-centred and sectarian approached to managing elections will take over. This can adversely erode the popularity base of our party as was the case in Osun State. This must be arrested immediately and with the urgency it requires. The only way to do that will be to restore constitutional order within the APC. Restoring constitutional order within the APC is about returning the APC to its founding vision, which is non-negotiable. Restoring the APC to its founding vision is about protecting the principles that guided the leadership of President Buhari throughout the last eight years. It is about calibrating the incoming government of Asiwaju Tinubu to ensure that it build on the successes of the President Buhari administration. This will also require that every member of the Asiwaju Tinubu government share in the vision of the party. This is not something that can be left to chances.

 

The party is practically therefore required to manage the process of transition in such a manner that there is indeed continuity while at the same time taking steps to learn from the mistakes of the President Buhari administration. This is one responsibility, which the PDP managed very poorly and, in the end, produced a highly frustrated former President Olusegun Obasanjo who end up destroying his PDP membership card. As a founding member of the APC, we must push for the restoration of constitutional order in APC such that the inspirationally strong relationship between outgoing President Buhari and incoming President Asiwaju Tinubu will remain and would continue to guide the management of both party and governmental affairs.

 

As things are, if allowed to continue, under your leaders as the National Chairman of the party, we are unfortunately setting the stage for destroying the relationship that exists between outgoing President Buhari and incoming President Asiwaju Tinubu. Anyone who is working to destroy a political relationship that inspired the successful achievement of the first political merger negotiation in the political history of Nigeria, which led to the first defeat of a ruling party for Nigeria, don’t mean well for Nigerian democracy.

 

I make this an open letter because it is about campaigning to return the APC to its foundation, which requires that we mobilise all like-minded party leaders and members in this crusade to restore constitutional order in the APC. As a person, I have concluded that everything must be done to compel you to respect the constitution of our party and manage its affairs based on the requirements of our constitution and not your personal discretion. Therefore, by this open letter, I am serving you notice of one week from today, being Wednesday, April 19, 2023 to take all the appropriate steps required to convene a NEC meeting before May 29, 2023 wherein all the issues bordering on the management of smooth transition between the outgoing government of President Buhari and the incoming government of President Asiwaju Tinubu can be considered. If by the end of this one-week notice, no action is taken to convene a NEC meeting as the first step to restore constitutional order in APC, I will not hesitate to take further actions, including approaching our courts to enforce compliance with the provisions of our party’s constitution under your leadership.

 

Like I have argued in my letter to you of December 26, 2022 on the subject “Democracy and Accountability: Concerns about State of Affairs of APC”, “being a party that is committed to enthroning progressive politics as the pillars of developing our democracy and moving our nation forward, these issues should be urgently addressed. Inability to address these issues would continue to undermine our electoral viability.” The current NWC under your leadership should stop acting as a Trojan Horse programmed to destroy our party. Only compliance with and respect for our constitution by allowing all our superior organs, notably NEC, National Caucus and NAC, to function and take decisions accordingly, which should be binding on all party leaders and members can secure our party. This is not negotiable!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Apologies, please slight correction:

 

Restoring Constitutional Order in APC – Not Negotiable

Open Letter to Sen. Abdullahi Adamu

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Kindly recall my letter to you with the subject “Restoring Constitutional Order in APC: Demands”, dated February 5, 2023. The letter outlined nine demands as follows:

 

1. In line with provision of Article 13.4(ii) of the APC Constitution present report of activities for the last one year to the NWC.

 

2. In line with provision of Article 13.4(iv) of the APC Constitution present financial report on income and expenditure of the party for the last one year.

 

3. In line with provision of Article 13.3A(xiv) of the APC Constitution prepare a national budget for the party for the period May – December 2023, which should be ratified by the NWC for the consideration and approval of NEC.

 

4. In line with provisions of Article 13.4(vi) of our party Constitution, which directs the NWC to ‘propose electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections to party offices at all levels, and procedure for selecting Party candidates for elective offices’, the NWC should immediately develop a proposal to zone leadership positions for the 10^th National Assembly and present to NEC for consideration and approval.

 

5. Hold a NEC meeting before May 29, 2023 and 1 – 4 above should be part of the agenda of the NEC.

 

6. Submit the audited account of the party for 2022 that was submitted to INEC to the NWC.

 

7. Setup a committee to review the 2023 general elections and investigate cases of anti-party activities by leaders and members of the party.

 

8. Given the shameful outcome of the Osun 2022 Governorship election and the embarrassing outcome of the 2023 general elections in Osun State whereby we lost all the three Senatorial seats, all the House of Representatives seats and all the House of Assembly seats in the state, the National Secretary, Sen. Iyiola Omisore who is the most senior party leader in the state should immediately resign. In addition, the NWC should recommend to NEC that a high-powered reconciliation committee should be setup to facilitate reconciliation of all party leaders in Osun state.

 

9. In order to demonstrate commitment that we are going to restore constitutional order in the party, actions should commence on all these and NWC should meet within the next two weeks from today, Wednesday, April 5, 2023 to review progress.

 

Today, being April 19, 2023 makes it two weeks since the demands were presented. There was neither acknowledgement nor indication that any of the demands are being considered. Although the NWC met on Monday, April 17, 2023, deliberation of the NWC was limited to ratifying our Governorship candidates for Kogi, Bayelsa and Imo States for onward transmission to INEC. The only conclusion I can reach is that the demands I presented to you are not important. Perhaps, by extension, I can also conclude that given your disposition to run affairs of the party only based on your discretionary decisions without reference to provisions of the APC constitution, your commitment to the party and its electoral viability is weak.

 

Being the National Chairman who is respected by party leaders at all levels, it is worrisome that under your leadership, we will be back to the old problems of being unable to respect provisions of our constitution with respect to convening meetings of organs and ensuring that all our organs are allowed to perform their statutory functions as provided in our constitutions. It is more worrisome given that you are a lawyer by training, a very experienced politician who had the rare privilege of being a two term Governor as well as someone who has been operating at the highest level of national politics since the Second Republic. By any standard, no one will expect a person of your stature and experience in politics to be taciturn when it comes to managing affairs of the party based on respect for the party’s constitution.

 

To say the least, as a member of the NWC, I am scandalised and embarrassed that after one year in office we are yet to have a regular NEC, National Caucus or National Advisory Council (NAC) meetings. All the functions of these organs and the decisions expected from them by the constitution are being taken by you, perhaps in consultation with the National Secretary. When it suits you, the NWC is invited to ratify or approve some of your actions and decisions. As a member of NWC, we have never had any session where we were invited to consider any report of activity in the last one year. Yet, Article 13.4(ii) of our constitution require that the NWC submit quarterly reports to NEC. We have never deliberated on any financial report even when Article 13.4(iv) require that we present quarterly financial reports to NEC. We have never deliberated on a national budget although Article 13.3A(xiv) require that we present one to NEC and get approval.

 

Perhaps, inability to hold quarterly NEC meetings as provided under Article 25.2(i) of the party’s constitution may be the excuse for not having quarterly reports of activities, quarterly financial reports, and national budgets. It can also be argued that the problem of inability to hold quarterly NEC meetings go way back to the era of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and is partly responsible for the crisis of leadership during the tenure of Comrade Adams Aliyu Oshiomhole. By extension, it could be argued too that the culture of running affairs of the party based on the discretionary decisions of the National Chairman did not start with the current NWC.

 

True as this may appear to be, I will imagine that one of the reasons why President Muhammadu Buhari nominated you to serve as the National Chairman is that being an experienced politician with all your track records, the least you can achieve is to be able to rally everybody to respect the constitution of the party based on which organs meet as directed by the constitution and decisions taken accordingly. Partly because we assumed office at the time when nomination of candidates for the 2023 elections was our first responsibility, that may be argued to have created the sense of urgency, which allowed for discretionary decisions to continue in the management of party affairs. But when one considers that the only NEC meeting, we had on April 8, 2022, decided only to allow the NWC to exercise its powers for a period of 90 days, it means that all the sense of urgency permissible to warrant discretionary decisions is only allowed for a limited period of 90 days from April 8. Thereafter, any decision requiring the authorisation of NEC, as from August 2022, must be referred to NEC.

 

With you as the National Chairman, experienced politician and knowledgeable in political jurisprudence, the question of legality of discretionary decisions within the jurisdiction and scope of issues NEC is empowered by our constitution to take decision should be very clear. Because you have chosen to only run affairs of the party based on your personal discretion, you have committed us into sacking our former Directors and appointing new ones without inviting even the NWC to deliberate on it. To the best of my knowledge, all that I could recall is that NWC decided to send all the former Directors on compulsory leave. At no time did the NWC decided that their appointments should be terminated, and new ones should be employed. Assuming the party’s constitution allows you to hire and fire all the staff of the party, the constitution of the party under Article 13.4(ii) has compelled you to present that as part of the quarterly reports to NEC.

 

With respect to national budget, the closest we came to was when the April 8, 2022 NEC approved the cost for nomination forms for 2022 elections. No proposed expenditure of any kind was presented to any organ of the party apart from the budget for the June 2022 National Convention, which was presented to the NWC on the eve of the June 2022 National Convention. Similarly, no report has been rendered to any organ including the NWC about any revenue received by the party. It is however speculated in the media that the party was able to generate over N30 billion from sales of nomination forms to aspiring candidates for the 2023 elections. Our state structures and other lower organs, which statutorily are entitled to shares of the party’s revenue are given very negligible amounts without allowing any organ of the party, including the NWC to make input into what was paid to the states.

 

Large scale financial expenditure is being undertaken without any organ of the party including the NWC allowed to perform any form of statutory due diligence. The National Secretariat has been undergoing large scale renovation and both the costs and details of the contract is not provided to any organ of the party including the NWC. Without a national budget approved by NEC as required by our constitution, all decisions on financial expenditure are limited to your benevolent disposition. Unfortunately, because this is the reality, there are party members who have rendered services during the process of nominating candidates for the 2023 elections that are yet to be paid their entitlements. There is also the decision to refund party members who bought nomination forms to contest for position of party leadership during the March 28, 2022 National Convention that elected us but were asked to stepped down to facilitate our emergence as consensus candidates, but are yet to be refunded.

 

Apart from very clearly unambiguous constitutional directives to the NWC with respect to our responsibilities to NEC and other superior organs such as quarterly reports of activities and financial reports of incomes and expenditure, there are other functions such as requirement for electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections for party offices at all levels as provided under Article 13.4(vi) of our constitution. This is a responsibility given to NEC, and given the outcome of the 2023 elections, which gave us majority in both the two chambers of the National Assembly, require that the NWC should develop proposals for the consideration and approval of NEC. With about six weeks to the inauguration of new government, there is no indication that any proposal is being developed. In fact, no indication that a NEC meeting is being contemplated before May 29, 2023.

 

It is very difficult to comprehend why we should not be holding meetings of party organs to facilitate smooth transition from the current government of President Buhari and the incoming government of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Elementary logic would suggest that meetings of party organs would be required to help manage the process of assuming ownership and responsibility of the programmes, policies, and achievements of the current government by the incoming government. Because this is not happening some of our elected representatives have proceeded to declare aspirations and are going about campaigning in an unethical manner with the highest level of impunity and disregard for the party. At the rate we are going, it is almost a case that, as a party, we are abdicating our responsibility and we are setting a stage for the emergence of a rascally leadership in the two chambers of the 10^th National Assembly, which can hold the Asiwaju Tinubu government hostage.

 

As someone who was part of the advocacy for the merger of our old legacy parties, it is very worrisome that we are working to undo all that we have achieved in Nigerian politics. Being the only party that was a product of merger negotiation throughout the political history of Nigeria, and the only party to have succeeded in defeating a ruling party, it was never the vision of our founding fathers, led by President Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu that we will become a party that is disrespectful to our rules and our constitution.

 

As a reminder, we are a party that was inspired by President Buhari and Asiwaju Tinubu to make every sacrifice to lead the process of changing Nigerian politics. Changing Nigerian politics was envisioned to be about respect for our constitution based on which organs are allowed to meet and take decisions. Integral to that is about having party leaders that respect and comply with decisions of party organs. Sadly, we are today surrounded by many party leaders who worked against the party during the 2023 elections. Some of them are among those aspiring for the leadership of the two chambers of the 10^th National Assembly. Yet, the party is not taking any step to take disciplinary action against these recalcitrant party leaders.

 

Certainly, this is not the vision that guided the merger negotiation of 2012 and 2013. We have allowed self-centred and, in many respects, sectarian people to assume position of responsibility within our party simply because we are comfortable with the positions we are privileged to be holding today. The demands for the restoration of constitutional order in APC is primarily to arrest the drift towards the emergence of unaccountable leaders within the party, which can only be achieved by ensuring that all party organs meet regularly as directed by the party’s constitution. These demands are hereby presented to restore constitutional order in the APC and to halt the current drift whereby most decisions of the party are narrowed to discretionary choices of the National Chairman and the National Secretary.

 

If discretionary decisions are allowed to continue to guide the management of the party, self-centred and sectarian approached to managing elections will take over. This can adversely erode the popularity base of our party as was the case in Osun State. This must be arrested immediately and with the urgency it requires. The only way to do that will be to restore constitutional order within the APC. Restoring constitutional order within the APC is about returning the APC to its founding vision, which is non-negotiable. Restoring the APC to its founding vision is about protecting the principles that guided the leadership of President Buhari throughout the last eight years. It is about calibrating the incoming government of Asiwaju Tinubu to ensure that it build on the successes of the President Buhari administration. This will also require that every member of the Asiwaju Tinubu government share in the vision of the party. This is not something that can be left to chances.

 

The party is practically therefore required to manage the process of transition in such a manner that there is indeed continuity while at the same time taking steps to learn from the mistakes of the President Buhari administration. This is one responsibility, which the PDP managed very poorly and, in the end, produced a highly frustrated former President Olusegun Obasanjo who end up destroying his PDP membership card. As a founding member of the APC, we must push for the restoration of constitutional order in APC such that the inspirationally strong relationship between outgoing President Buhari and incoming President Asiwaju Tinubu will remain and would continue to guide the management of both party and governmental affairs.

 

As things are, if allowed to continue, under your leaders as the National Chairman of the party, we are unfortunately setting the stage for destroying the relationship that exists between outgoing President Buhari and incoming President Asiwaju Tinubu. Anyone who is working to destroy a political relationship that inspired the successful achievement of the first political merger negotiation in the political history of Nigeria, which led to the first defeat of a ruling party for Nigeria, don’t mean well for Nigerian democracy.

 

I make this an open letter because it is about campaigning to return the APC to its foundation, which requires that we mobilise all like-minded party leaders and members in this crusade to restore constitutional order in the APC. As a person, I have concluded that everything must be done to compel you to respect the constitution of our party and manage its affairs based on the requirements of our constitution and not your personal discretion. Therefore, by this open letter, I am serving you notice of one week from today, being Wednesday, April 19, 2023 to take all the appropriate steps required to convene a NEC meeting before May 29, 2023 wherein all the issues bordering on the management of smooth transition between the outgoing government of President Buhari and the incoming government of President Asiwaju Tinubu can be considered. If by the end of this one-week notice, no action is taken to convene a NEC meeting as the first step to restore constitutional order in APC, I will not hesitate to take further actions, including approaching our courts to enforce compliance with the provisions of our party’s constitution under your leadership.

 

Like I have argued in my letter to you of December 26, 2022 on the subject “Democracy and Accountability: Concerns about State of Affairs of APC”, “being a party that is committed to enthroning progressive politics as the pillars of developing our democracy and moving our nation forward, these issues should be urgently addressed. Inability to address these issues would continue to undermine our electoral viability.” The current NWC under your leadership should stop acting as a Trojan Horse programmed to destroy our party. Only compliance with and respect for our constitution by allowing all our superior organs, notably NEC, National Caucus and NAC, to function and take decisions accordingly, which should be binding on all party leaders and members can secure our party. This is not negotiable!

 

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>

Date: Wednesday, 19 April 2023 at 11:20
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB644698BB3A30590488D31739AE629%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Transition Politics

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu is today the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Taking over from former President Muhammadu Buhari on May 29, 2023, having won a keenly contested 2023 elections. President Tinubu’s Road to the Nigerian Presidency wasn’t an easy one. The opposition against him within the APC was as strong and determined as that from the opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP), New Nigerian Peoples Party (NNPP), etc., if not stronger. Unlike in the case of the PDP in 2007 whereby former President Olusegun Obasanjo crowned late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua as his successor and even went ahead to rig the 2007 elections to ensure victory, in the case of President Tinubu, everything was done within the APC to manipulate former President Buhari to oppose President Tinubu’s emergence as the Presidential candidate of the APC for the 2023 general elections.

 

The 2023 Presidential election, which produced President Tinubu was the most keenly contested election, at least since 1999. President Tinubu lost his home State, Lagos to LP. One of the strongholds of the APC, Kano State was also lost to the NNPP. In the case of the results from Kano State, unlike in 2015 and 2019 whereby the PDP was able to win more than 25% of the constitutionally required threshold, in 2023, the PDP was not able to get anywhere near the 25% requirement. The APC also lost some of its strongholds, including Katsina State, former President Buhari home state where the PDP won the Presidential election, although marginally. Luckily, PDP also lost many of its strongholds such as Rivers and the South-East. In many respects, it can be summarised that President Tinubu and APC won the 2023 elections largely because of the combined damage both the Labour Party and NNPP did to the support base of the PDP.

 

Before emerging as the APC Presidential candidate, President Tinubu had to confront a very strong opposition internally within the APC. At the highest level of the party’s leadership, attempts were made to manipulate the emergence of a so-called consensus Presidential Candidate of the party. For instance, the APC National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, on June 6, 2022, ahead of the June 8, 2022 APC National Convention where the party was scheduled to elect its Presidential candidate, informed members of the APC National Working Committee (NWC) that Sen. Ahmed Ibrahim Lawan has been chosen as the consensus Presidential candidate following consultations between former President Buhari, Progressive Governors and other party leaders. Majority members of the NWC had to declare their opposition to such a plot, which was supported by Progressive Governors. Eventually, former President Buhari declined the move to impose a so-called consensus Presidential Candidate and declared support for internal democratic process allowing delegates at the National Convention of June 8, 2022 to elect the party’s Presidential candidate.

 

Prior to the declaration of Sen. Ahmed Lawan by the APC National Chairman as the consensus Presidential candidate, there were all manner of public speculations, throwing up so many strange names of politicians and public office holders as possible Presidential candidates of the APC, which included former President Goodluck Jonathan and Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Mr. Godwin Emefiele. These are people that are not members of APC. If anything, former President Jonathan is a member of the PDP and Mr. Emefiele was first appointed CBN Governor by PDP government of former President Jonathan and was never known to be a member of any political party, including the APC. Early in 2022, there were some public campaign and mobilisation for the emergence of Mr. Emefiele as a Presidential candidate by a group led by Mr. Nduka Obaigbena.

 

There were also some media reports indicating that APC leaders were also considering adopting former President Goodluck Jonathan as a consensus Presidential candidate for the 2023 elections. Interestingly, when the APC began sales of nominations forms for the 2023 general elections, some APC members were reported to have bought Presidential nomination forms for former President Jonathan and Mr. Emefieli. The reality also was that there was intense debate in the country for quite sometimes around power shift between the Northern and Southern parts of the country. With President Buhari completing his two terms tenure of eight years coming from the North, the domineering sentiment in the country was that former President Buhari’s successor should come from the Southern part of the country.

 

Beyond public agitations, however, the big challenge was ensuring that parties produce Presidential candidates who are from the Southern part of the country. Accordingly, cutting across the two leading parties, APC and PDP, both Southern and Northern Governors Forums declared their support for power shift from the North to the South. Unfortunately, PDP Governors were unable to mobilise the support of delegates to ensure the emergence of a Southerner as the PDP Presidential candidate. Instead, Alh. Atiku Abubakar, former Vice President and a Northerner emerged as the PDP Presidential candidate for 2023 elections, defeating his main rival Mr. Nyesom Wike, former Governor of Rivers State.

 

The emergence of Alh. Atiku Abubakar as the PDP Presidential candidate was used by the conservative bloc within the APC as the rationale for why the APC should also field a Northerner as its Presidential candidate. It took the determination of President Tinubu, supported by Progressive Governors, majority members of NWC and many party members to resist and defeat the attempt by the conservative bloc within APC to impose a Northerner as a so-called consensus Presidential candidate of the APC. Credit must also be given to former President Buhari for refusing to endorse Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the ‘consensus’ Presidential candidate of the APC. Had former President Buhari endorsed the choice of Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the so-called consensus APC President candidate, the campaign for power shift from the Northern to Southern part of the country may have suffered a big setback. Good enough, President Tinubu successfully won the APC Presidential primary with 1,271 votes, defeating 13 other aspirants, including Sen. Ahmed Lawan who came fourth in the contest with only 152 votes. Former Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi came second with 316 votes, while former Vice President Yomi Osinbajo came third with 235 votes.

 

The emergence of President Tinubu as APC’s Presidential candidate for the 2023 general elections tested the capacity of both President Tinubu and the APC as a party to remained united. With Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate who is from the Southern part of the country who is a Muslim, the choice of a possible Christian from the Northern part as a Running Mate became an issue both internally within the party and nationally. Certainly, the issue of respecting religious diversity couldn’t be ignored. Conventional Nigerian politics would dictate a balanced religious ticket with a Muslim Presidential candidate and Christian Running Mate. This is a big risk in terms of whether combinations of two personalities from Southern and Northern minorities could produce the votes to guarantee eventual victory.

 

In the end, President Tinubu after consultations settled for the unconventional choice of a Muslim-Muslim ticket with Sen. Kashim Shettima, a Muslim from North-East as his Running Mate. The logic is simple; instead of considering a balanced religious ticket with a ticket of two personalities from Southern minority (Asiwaju Tinubu) and an idle Northern Christian minority, the unconventional choice of producing a balanced ticket of a Southern minority (Asiwaju Tinubu) with a Running Mate from the Northern majority (Sen. Shettima) was made. Combination of President Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima, two Muslims emerging as APC Standard Bearers for the 2023 Presidential elections was highly contested by Nigerians. Perhaps, it also must be admitted that the choice of Alh. Atiku Abubakar as PDP Standard Bearer for the Presidential election although with a Christian, Ifeanyi Okowa, former Delta State Governor as his Running Mate may be regarded as more offensive to the ‘principles of freedom, equality and justice, and …consolidating the unity of our people’ as enshrined in the preamble to the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, as amended, which was what the whole debate for power shift was about.

 

The reality that confronted Nigerians given the choices made by both the APC with respect to the Muslim-Muslim ticket of President Tinubu and Vice President Shettima, on the one hand, and PDP domineering Northern ticket of former Vice President Atiku, on the other hand, makes it very difficult for ordinary Nigerians. With so much ethnic and religious considerations dominating Nigerian politics, making a choice out of a religiously imbalanced APC candidature and sectionalist PDP candidature by ordinary Nigerians, is to say the least, expecting too much. While in the case of PDP, it is a clear case of insensitivity, in the case of APC, it is more a case of taking a conscious risk to win the votes. Taking conscious risk to win votes is more a function of responding to the challenge of perhaps having a ‘minority’ from the Southern part, in the person of President Tinubu, emerging as APC Presidential candidate. Note that minority in this context is only applied relative to the Southern population being predominantly Christians. The challenge in this case is the question of what a candidate should do who is from a ‘minority’ group to win the votes from the majority groups. This is not an easy question to answer. Whichever way answered, it will be contested.

 

This will remain an open debate in Nigerian politics. In the case of the 2023 elections, we are extremely lucky and grateful to Nigerians as a party to emerge victorious. There are many explanations being advanced around the inability of the PDP to manage itself leading to all the manifest contradictions and breakaways, including the emergence of Mr. Peter Obi as the Presidential candidate of Labour Party. Similarly, there was also the fact of Dr. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso’s breakaway from the PDP to form the NNPP. All these are no doubt contributory factors. But by far, a bigger factor why the APC almost lost the 2023 elections was the inability to properly manage internal contestations within the APC. This is largely because, although since its formation, internal contestation within the APC remained very strong, capacity of the party leadership to facilitate internal negotiation within the party, producing agreements that are respected by all remained weak. In addition, the party was unable to use its position as a ruling party both at Federal level and in many states it produced government to its advantage.

 

All these negatively affect the electoral viability of the APC. If the truth must be said, as a party, we didn’t manage electoral victory very well. Since 2015, after winning the Presidential elections, we allowed many PDP appointees to remain in the service of Federal Government, including Mr. Godwin Emefieli who was inherited as CBN Governor. This has produced some gaps in terms of policy implementation aimed at achieving campaign promises. There is also the case of allowing appointees to remain in office even when they failed to meet expectations. This created unhealthy situations whereby many APC supporters felt neglected and therefore demoralised. In addition, there is the inability of APC governments, especially at Federal level to take new initiate as responsive measures to respond to emerging challenges. A good example is the issue of handling security challenges of banditry in the North-West and North-Central. Although, in terms of investment in hardware, arms procurement and personnel recruitment, relative to past governments, APC under former President Buhari has made significant investment, inability to boldly rolled out new initiatives weakened impact of the investment.

 

Being a party founded with the vision of being progressive require unconventional initiatives. In the context of security challenges, for instance, in addition to arms procurement is the issue of mass recruitment of security personnel, which is very inadequate. Part of the age long debate in Nigeria is the issue of decentralising Nigerian Police to allow for State policing. In the last few years, there is sufficient national consensus that there should be State Police, which under the 2017 APC True Federalism Committee, chaired by Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, it was recommended. Unfortunately, nothing was done since then and the APC Federal Government under former President Buhari throughout the last eight years discountenance any consideration in that respect. There was also the case of replacing Service Chiefs whose tenure expired and in the wake of rising insecurity, Nigerians across diverse sections demanded for their replacements, but APC government of former President Buhari hesitated for quite some time to replace the Service Chiefs.

 

All these are issues that provided political oxygen to the opposition against APC during the 2023 elections. Couple with the domineering influence of leaders within the APC who are outrightly conservative or at the least unprogressive, internal dynamics were created to either seek to undermine the development of capacity to both manage the party and enhance its progressive credential to facilitate internal contestation and manage governance. Most times, when internal contestations within the party achieve some progressive leap, the conservative bloc within the party try to push the party back. This was exactly the case when President Tinubu was able to mobilise for the defeat against the so-called consensus Presidential candidate championed by the conservative bloc. With the emergence of Asiwaju Tinubu as the Presidential candidate of the APC, the conservative bloc within the APC came up with the so-called Naira redesign policy and use that to confiscate citizens hard earned money, and thereby almost making it impossible to access cash ahead of the 2023 Presidential elections.

 

And when APC and Asiwaju won the 2023 elections, the structures of the party were blocked from functioning to allow for wider internal democratic consultations, debates and contestations using the legitimate structures provided in the constitution of the party to facilitate internal negotiations to zone leadership of the 10^th National Assembly. Practically, in a manner that is nothing more than suspending the constitution of the party, the National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, supported by the National Secretary, Sen. Iyiola Omisore have blocked all organs of the party from meeting, except the NWC. In the case of the NWC, it is more a case of spoon-feeding members with convenient information. And where challenged as was the case with the court case aimed at restoring constitutional order in the party, the National Legal Adviser, Barr. Ahmed El-Marzuq become handy with spurious legal interpretations, which are anything but legal, bereft of any logic.

 

The same conservative bloc is now spewing up hardcore ethnic Northern arguments against the zoning decisions approved by the NWC following the outcome of consultations between Sen. Abdullahi Adamu-led NWC team with President Tinubu. As if those consultations were not designed to produce agreements, once the NWC approved the recommendation for zoning the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, instead of acting as the National Chairman, facilitating implementation of decisions of organs of the party, he is acting as a factional leader opposing the decision of the NWC. Instead of working for the success of the decision of the NWC through activating meetings of higher organs of the party to confer more legitimacy to the decision of the NWC, he seems to be more interested in ensuring that the 2015 model of rebellious leadership emerge in the 10^th National Assembly.

 

As things are, the biggest challenge for APC of concluding the transitionary journey into the new era of President Tinubu is whether the vision of producing a progressive party managing progressive governance initiatives will be produced. To have a progressive party requires dynamism, action and improvement both in the management of the APC and governments it produced. This is more about responding to challenges facing Nigeria with unconventional initiatives aimed at producing results that will accelerate Nigeria’s march towards democratic development than anything else. Inability to guarantee accelerated Nigeria’s march towards democratic development is the source of frustration for Nigerians and is why Nigerians would find failed and colourless politicians in other parties attractive during elections.

 

Part of the big challenge facing Nigeria’s democratic development is also the apparent oversimplification of democracy to only periodic elections. Important as periodic elections are, the requirement of having parties with developed capacity to facilitate internal competition is fundamental. In fact, internal competitions are supposed to be the backbone for interparty contests. Part of what most be recognised as the source of APC’s approval ratings in 2015 was the expectation by Nigerians that it offers a breakaway from PDP’s dark era of imposing candidates and rigging elections. To be candid, these were legitimate expectations, which at its formative stages between 2013 and 2015, the APC managed very well.

 

With the emergence of President Tinubu, being the leader of the party, will he continue to provide leadership for the fight against conservative take over of the APC? Or will he, like former President Buhari continue to project indifferent disposition to questionable conduct of conservative leaders of the party? If he is indifferent to the development of the party, will he be indifferent to the capacity of his government to implement the manifesto of the party, including his action plan – Renewed Hope – which is derived from the manifesto of the party? Will he run a progressive government, initiating unconventional policies and programmes, challenging Nigerians to relate with the Federal Government with zeal, hope and expectations, thereby opening new frontiers of human endeavour? Or will President Tinubu’s government operate based on business-as-usual practice, recruiting appointees from among familiar foes and therefore hardly able to discipline them when they fail to meet public expectations?

 

President Tinubu’s job is clearly cut out for him. From all available evidence he must have been very prepared. Given, all the internal battles he had to surmount ahead of his emergence as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, he has all it takes to return the APC to its founding vision of being a progressive party. And based on his governance track record in Lagos state, he clearly has both the vision and drive to turn a new progressive leap for the country with a government that is both responsive and representative. As someone who, as he refers to himself – city boy – basically coming from humble beginning, he has no excuse if he fails to roll out unconventional leadership initiatives.

 

The first test of his emergence as the leader of the APC as President of the Federal Republic is whether he will allow leading conservatives to continue to block structures of the party from operating as provided in the APC constitution. It is already a tragedy that two undeniably hardcore conservatives will be given the task of leading the APC as National Chairman and National Secretary. How can a party envisioned to be progressive have such a misfortune? Part of the test will be whether President Tinubu, having agreed together with the APC NWC on zoning formula for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly just sit and watch conservative right-wing elements within the APC use Northern ethnic arguments to mobilise for the defeat of endorsed APC candidates for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly?

 

The take off for the President Tinubu administration will surely define what to expect. The choices are clear. It is either a progressive government led by a reformed and progressive APC with a competent team of dynamic, visionary and selfless appointees both leading the party and governments it produced; or outrightly conservative APC managing business-as-usual government led by unambitious team of appointees whose interest is not more than self-enrichment thereby converting public resources into personal assets. Will the transition ushering President Tinubu produce ‘equality of opportunity, social justice and prosperity for all through the initiatives set forth’ in the action plan Renewed Hope? Or will the transition end up only keeping Nigeria in the backward situation reproducing old and new problems in bigger magnitude? May God continue to produce the resilient Asiwaju Tinubu who is a fighter with capacity for unconventional initiatives as President Tinubu! Amin!

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Thanks for this very rich piece

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB64465BC29E317FC3808104D7AE4B9%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Contestation and Disagreement are Defining Attributes of a Progressive Party

 

Open Letter to APC Leaders:

For the Attention of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Since the release of APC and Transition Politics on Wednesday, May 31, 2022, I have been accused of violating the agreements we reached at the NWC meeting of May 3, 2023 to the effect that I should stop media campaigns and use internal structures of the party to make my demands. First, the agreements of May 3 presuppose that structures of the party would be activated to guarantee internal contestations and debates. So far, the only structure of the party meeting is the NWC. Even the NWC, since the agreement of May 3, no dedicated meeting was convened to consider all the issues that made it compelling to institute the court case aimed at restoring constitutional order in APC in the first place. As a person, no one, not even the National Chairman or National Secretary being the two presiding officers of the party have deemed it fit to invite me for any form of engagement on the issues I raised, which compelled me to institute the legal action against them and the APC. All I see is return to business-as-usual.

 

About a week after the agreement to withdraw the court case was reached, another NWC meeting held on May 10, 2023 where the National Chairman, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu presented report of the consultation meeting they had with Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, then President-elect, on zoning of leadership of the 10^th National Assembly whereby the NWC was informed of the agreement reached to zone the Senate President to South-South and adopted Sen. Godswill Akpabio as the APC’s standard bearer for the position of Senate President and the Deputy Senate President to the North-West with Senator Jibril Barau as the APC candidate. For House of Representatives the Speaker is zoned to North-West with Rt. Hon. Abbas Tajudeen as the candidate, while Deputy Speaker is zoned to South-East with Rt. Hon. Ben Kalu as the candidate.

 

After exhaustive deliberation at the May 10, 2023 NWC meeting, wherein the National Chairman and the other representatives of the NWC to the consultation meeting with Asiwaju, which included Sen. Iyiola Omisore, National Secretary and the two Deputy National Chairmen, Sen. Abubakar Kyari and Chief Emma Eneukwu, responded satisfactorily to concerns raised by fellow NWC members and the NWC endorsed the agreements reached with Asiwaju Tinubu. Of course, one of the concerns raised by NWC members was the issue of why the North-West should be given two positions while North-Central did not have any position in the four positions agreed excluded. Explanations were given by both Sen. Adamu and all those who were part of the consultations leading to the agreement with Asiwaju Tinubu to the effect that all the issues were considered.

 

To my mind, I believe the complains by party leaders and members from North-Central about exclusion are legitimate. However, the way to resolve the grievances would have been to put all the leadership positions in the two chambers of the National Assembly as part of the basket of positions being negotiated. This is in the first place what Article 13.4(vi) of the APC constitution directed the NWC to first undertake by developing a proposed electoral guidelines and regulations to guide negotiations within the structures of the APC. In fact, the proposed guidelines and regulations should have guided the consultations with Asiwaju Tinubu on May 5. Rather, the NWC team led by the National Chairman, Sen. Adamu went to the consultation meeting empty handed.

 

Prior to that time, cash-and-carry contestation by some of the aspirants became the order. And as leaders of the party, we turned blind-eye and just allowed almost everyone to join the race. I raised alarm, appealing to deaf ears, calling on us to take steps to respond to the situation by doing what our constitution directed us to do, which would include convening a NEC meeting to take decision. Recall that our NEC has not met for more than a year. We have managed the party since April 2022 without approved budget as required under Article 13.3A(xiv) of the APC constitution. No report of any kind to any organ, not even the NWC. Yet, Article 13.4(ii) and (iv) require the NWC to submit quarterly reports of activities and finances covering income and expenditure to NEC. Billions of Naira have been expended based on discretionary decisions of the National Chairman and National Secretary. Till date, no member of the NWC can claim to know how much is in all the accounts of the party outside Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore and perhaps the National Treasurer and National Financial Secretary.

 

We have had Osun and Ekiti elections, which cost the party billions without any attempt to review experiences, and in the case of Osun, specifically identify reasons why the party lost the election even when we are faced with the embarrassing situation whereby in Osun, not only did we lose the 2022 Governorship election, but we have also been roundly defeated in the 2023 elections. We lost all the three Senatorial seats, lost all the seats for House of Representatives and lost all the House of Assembly seats. And this is the state where the National Secretary, Sen. Omisore come from. And he seats shamelessly, pompously and pretending to command political influence when he cannot win any election. If we are truly aspiring to be a progressive party, leadership must be earned. Sen. Omisore must give account of his leadership in Osun State in every respect. Osun is the only state in the country today where the party has no single elected representative. Maybe we has Counsellors, who by this trend would be voted out in the next election.

 

A party aspiring to be a progressive party must respect its constitution and at the minimum allow all its organs to meet as enshrined in the constitution. It is not about convenient interpretation, which with respect to the NEC, for instance, it is statutorily required to meet quarterly and the National Legal Adviser, Barr. Ahmed El-Marzuq would brazenly and audaciously seek to manipulate the NWC to imagine that meetings of NEC should be at the discretion of NWC. This is the kind of advice you can only get from any member of the legal profession whose knowledge of the law is so narrow and self-serving, which is most unfortunate.

 

When I instituted the court case on April 27, 2023, my objective is to challenge this false and dangerous attempt to block structures of the party from meeting, which can only lead to destruction of the APC. I was determined to proceed with the case even in the face of the threat to expel me from the party. Like I highlighted at that time, the NWC had no power to expel me. I am however grateful to my colleagues in the NWC, especially fellow National Vice Chairmen who believed that once I withdraw the case we will be provided with opportunity through meetings of structures of the party, which unfortunate has not happened. As things are, it is my view that Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore as National Chairman and National Secretary are the ones who have betrayed the agreements we reached on May 3 and therefore have let all of us in the NWC and in the party down.

 

For instance, instead of convening meetings of structures of the party after the May 10, 2023 decision of the NWC to conclude internal negotiations to zone all leadership positions in the 10^th National Assembly, as NWC members, we were only invited to syndicated meetings to listen to so-called aggrieved aspirants. And in all the meetings, the pronouncements of Sen. Adamu in the presence of media betrays any commitment to defend the decisions of the NWC. Sen. Adamu’s common byline at all the meetings is that in deciding on the zoning, the NWC advise that there should be more consultations. And when Hon. Abbas Tajudeen and his team of supporters from the House of Representatives came to meet the NWC on May 23, 2023, Sen. Adamu was visibly angry when Hon. Tajudeen was referred to as Speaker.

 

To recommend consultations without providing the needed leadership through activating meetings of organs of the party, is, to say the least, dereliction of responsibility. As leaders of the party, if there should be any form of consultation to promote internal democracy within the party, it should be led by the structures of the party as provided in the party’s constitution. In which case, being leaders of the party – NWC – we should be the convening authority. Sen. Adamu, no doubt, is an experienced politician and a very conscious one for that matter. He knows exactly what he is doing by not convening the meetings of organs of the party. By every definition, Sen. Adamu’s politics is conservative and reactionary. Unfortunately, however, based on all the unfolding realities, he is on a reckless conservative and reactionary politician, who, if left unchecked, can pull the party in the direction of committing political suicide. All party leaders and members must wake up to this reality and stop Sen. Adamu from achieving his mission of self destroying the APC.

 

Both Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore, from all available reports appeared to be animated that I have resumed public advocacy on the need to save the APC and ensure that the structures of the party are given life in line with provisions of the APC constitution. Yes, I have resumed public advocacy because all the structures that should have permitted internal debates are being blocked from meeting. For the records, if you want to resume deliberations to consider expelling me from the party, you are free to do so. I will defend myself publicly to the best of my ability. APC, as a party founded with the vision of being a progressive party, must accommodate debates and contestations. Nobody, no matter how highly placed should imagine that the best way to win debates and contestation is to bully and blackmail opponents. I can guarantee you; no amount of bullying will stop the campaign to return APC to constitutional order.

 

By the way, you are free to expel me from APC, but you cannot expel me as citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. APC is not a private property. It is a public political organisation with rule, which must be respected. Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore can block organs of the APC from meeting to the extent that other leaders of the party are willing to permit. No one can block me, in anyway, from discharging my right to engage the issues both as Nigerian and as a member of APC, expelled or not. For your information, I am currently working to document all these experiences, which I will publish, God willing, so that it contribute to the body of knowledge in the development of party politics in Nigeria. Whether you respect my right to hold membership of APC or not, I can proudly say that my publications will remain references for anyone who wish to understudy the APC for the foreseeable future.

 

Perhaps, let me also indulge the National Chairman, Sen. Adamu by informing him that contrary to his campaign of slander against me, I consider myself a very successful person. Unlike the lies he enjoy telling NWC members that I was sacked in five places, in all the places I worked, I left credible records, and they are all there to be verified. Respect begets respect. I respect Sen. Adamu and I will not because of disagreement with his politics slander his person and his reputation. Without doubt, I can confirm to you that I am committed to anything I subscribe to and will always discharge any responsibility given to me that I willfully and willingly accept to discharge. My current position as APC National Vice Chairman North-West is no exception. In discharging my responsibility for that office as provided in the APC constitution, I will do so without fear or favour with the objective of contributing to the development of Nigerian democracy and the APC as a political party registered under the law.

 

The struggle to return APC to constitutional order is about achieving the founding vision of forming a party that is progressive and encourages internal debates and contestations by allowing all the structures provided in the APC constitution to freely operate. Leaders of APC must be friendly to debates, contestations, engagements and should not lay back to find ways of blocking debates using bullying methods and blackmailing opponents. In the last few years, APC has been so damaged to point of being reduced to a party that is in contempt with its own rules. As a person, I believe that all leaders and members of the party must rise to the challenge of restoring APC to its founding vision and one that is undeniably progressive, and not only in name. The struggle continues!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigerian Democracy and the Challenge of Governance

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

The APC Manifesto identified that ‘the challenge facing us as Nigerians is whether we have the will and the courage to unite to radically reform, modenise and move our nation forward – not looking back to the failed policies and practices of the past. It is no longer a question of choice but of will and courage.’ In his campaign document, ‘Renewed Hope 2023 – Action Plan for Better Nigeria’, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, took this forward when he identified that ‘the structural model upon which our national economy has always been based needs major reform. Our economy is unhelpfully designed to export raw materials and import increasingly expensive finished products. Crude oil still provides most of our foreign exchange and represents the primary source of Federal Government revenues. Over the long-term, the revenues from these natural resources export will prove insufficient to meet rising costs of imports let alone support the fiscal obligations demanded by modern democratic governance.’

 

More than anything, the issue of fuel subsidy tests the commitment of President Tinubu and the APC in terms of whether new initiatives will be introduced to courageously unite Nigerians ‘to radically reform, modenise and move our nation forward’. It is about whether we want to continue to spend about 30% of our total revenue as subsidy for importation of fuel. For instance, under the 2023 Federal Government budget, for the first six months, January – June, N3.36 trillion was provided. Between 2017 and 2022, more than N5 trillion was expended on subsidy for the importation of fuel. In 2017, it cost the country N144.5 billion. The cost increased to N722.3 billion in 2018, N551.2 billion in 2019, N102 billion in 2020, N1,780 billion in 2021 and N2,042 billion in 2022. It is projected that between 2017 and June 2023, Nigeria would have expended 26.06% of its revenue on fuel subsidy payment. Nigeria’s 2023 budget is N21.83 trillion. This means that oil subsidy for the first six months already accounted for about 15% of the Federal Government’s budget and if it is to continue, it will account for nothing less than 30% of the Federal Government’s budget by December 2023.

 

The reality therefore is that the challenge of managing the astronomical cost of fuel subsidy payment is the first test of whether President Tinubu’s government will operate based on commitment to deliver on his campaign promises to Nigerians of initiating reform of the economy so that revenues accruing to government can ‘support the fiscal obligations demanded by modern democratic governance.’ Certainly, this will require bold and courageous decisions. But perhaps, more than that, it will require being able to mobilise Nigerians to support the initiative of government. Mobilising Nigerians to support initiatives of government is a function of engagements and negotiations with the aim of winning agreements that will strategically commit citizens to both support the initiatives of government as well as discharge complementary responsibilities.

 

This is more about the relationship that exists between government and citizens, which often is taken for granted. If anything, part of the reasons why relations between government and citizens is most times tense is the absence of a functional framework to facilitate engagements and negotiations with Nigerians on policy issues. It all comes down to questions of representation and responsiveness. Theoretically, representation and responsiveness are more about how different interests are accommodated and promoted in policies of government. Somehow, these are issues that are yet to be reflected in the ways our political parties are organised. None of our registered parties can claim to have developed structures that allow for caucusing such that blocs of interests can strategise within the structures of the political party on how to promote their own interests. Through caucusing within the structures of the party, interest blocs can, for instance, sponsor and promote candidates and use the structures of the party to negotiate policy priorities to be adopted by governments produced by the party.

 

This presupposes that our parties will respect and allow structures provided in their constitution to operate. In our case in APC, for instance, with a conservative and reactionary leadership that is lawless and believe that statutory structures of the party can only meet at its own discretion, it will be a pipe dream to expect that they will allow caucuses to emerge in the first place, not to talk of allowing the caucuses to use the structures of the party to negotiate policies. Aside the fact that the APC constitution provided for the existence of National Advisory Council (NAC), National Executive Committee (NEC) and National Caucus whose membership is diverse and could be adjudged to reflect various interests, these organs have been rendered idle, if not irrelevant. In their place, the National Chairman of the party, Sen. Abdullahi Adamu take decisions on issues that the APC constitution mandated these organs to discharge as he deems fit. Occasionally, he invites the National Working Committee (NWC), to legitimise some of his decisions, which by the provisions of the APC constitution is supposed to be an administrative organ.

 

In addition to these organs (NAC, NEC and National Caucus), the amended APC constitution created three new structures, namely Women’s Wing, Youth Wing and Persons Living with Disability Wing. These are structures that are expected to function as autonomous bodies within the APC structures with their own constitutions, and regulations, which should not conflict with the constitution, guidelines, and policies of the APC. Outside the initiatives of the presiding officers of these three structures – National Women’s Leader, National Youth Leader and National Leader of Persons Living with Disabilities, since April 2022 following the assumption of office of the Sen. Abdullahi Adamu-led NWC, nothing has been done to organise the Women’s, Youth and Persons Living with Disability Wings. Yet, these are potential structures that could facilitate effective representation of critical categories of interests that are adjudged marginalised groups in Nigerian politics.

 

Beyond these structures, the APC constitution also require the establishment of five Standing Committees, namely, Establishment, Finance, Publicity, Intergovernmental and Conflict and Reconciliation Committees. None of these committees have been established so far. Part of the logic of establishing these Standing Committees is to broaden membership participation through ensuring that more leaders of the party take responsibility of managing affairs of the party. Through meetings of all these structures of the party, it should be possible for the party to exercise strong influence in the initiatives of governments it controls. The other advantage is that the party would be able to hold governments it produces and appointees accountable.

 

Inability to ensure that party organs as provided in the APC constitution meets has created a situation whereby governments produced by the APC have weak or no relationship with the party and appointees highly unaccountable. And during the 2023 elections, for instance, there were many alleged cases of anti-party activities by very highly placed government appointees. In fact, the case of the Naira redesign policy is only possible because of the disconnect between the APC Federal Government of former President Muhammadu Buhari and the APC as a political party. Otherwise, how can it be explained that a party interested in winning the 2023 elections will allow a government it controls to roll out such a draconian policy that would confiscate citizens’ hard-earned money about six months to a general election?

 

Therefore, without doubt, part of the challenges of both implementing the APC Manifesto and President Tinubu’s campaign promises is to also prioritise the reform of APC so that it truly become a progressive party led by progressive leaders, or at the minimum democrats who are law abiding and would run the affairs of the party based on the provisions of the APC constitution and not personal discretions. As a party envisioned to be progressive, APC should be developed to grow beyond being an electoral vehicle producing only candidates for elections. APC must in this respect seek to broaden its structures to allow for participation of diverse groups of interests. Already, this is a source of frustration in the country, which political opportunists are taking advantage and unfortunately deceiving Nigerians. The popularity of Labour Party during the 2023 elections is partly a reflection of the frustration of Nigerians with our political parties, including the APC. Nigerians are looking for parties with vibrant structures whose internal debates and contestations would aggregate the diverse interests of Nigerians.

 

Aggregating the diverse interests of Nigerians is about representation and responsiveness, which is what is required to affirm that ‘sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through the constitution derives all powers and authority’ and ‘participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of the constitution as provided in section 14 (2) (a and c) of the 1999 Nigerian constitution as amended. The challenge of giving practical expression to these provisions of the Nigerian constitution is about providing the much-needed leadership to change Nigerian politics? This is about whether the APC government of President Tinubu will come with initiatives that will result in increased participation of Nigerians in the process of governance. Unlike what obtained in the past, whereby elected leaders run governments based on old conventions and, therefore, having weak commitment to new political initiatives, which may be necessary for Nigeria’s democratic development, President Tinubu’s APC government should be able to summon the courage to break the jinx of managing the business of government almost to the exclusion of Nigerians.

 

Breaking the jinx of managing the business of government to the exclusion of Nigerians is about putting in place clear framework for citizen engagement aimed at mobilising Nigerians to support government policy initiatives. This will be much easier for President Tinubu when supported by an open party structure which is already facilitating internal negotiations and contestations. So long as the APC is allowed to continue to operate a closed structure, blocking its organs from functioning and the potential negotiations and contestations that come when party organs are allowed to meet, President Tinubu’s government will lack the needed political legitimacy to win the support of Nigerians especially when it comes to implementing difficult policy choices. No doubt, difficult decisions must be taken to effectively resolve our challenges as a nation. However, in taking those difficult decisions, it will be much easier to implement when government is able to win the support of Nigerians through engagements with organised groups.

 

Often, engagements with organised groups are narrowed to getting groups to accept decisions of government. Once this is the case, it means government will always announce its decisions before it meets with groups. This will also continue to produce situations whereby citizens represented by their organisations will believe that the best way to engage government is through protests. In the case of the fuel subsidy matter, for instance, this was the response of Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC), which was expected. A progressive government managed by a progressive party must seek to change this through citizens’ engagement.  Citizens’ engagement is what will guarantee wider participation of Nigerians in governance through participation in policy formulation. This is what is required to give meaning and practical expression to section 14(2)(c) of the Nigerian constitution.

 

We need to, as a democratic nation, work hard to introduce framework for engagement to facilitate development of strong synergy between government and Nigerian citizens. Looking at the resolutions of most disputes since 1999 with organised groups, the missing element is engagement at the initial stage. We need to break away from our past whereby the operative framework produces a cycle of policy announcement – protest – negotiations. A progressive government should seek to introduce a new framework, which could produce a new orientation of citizens – government relations that would lead to the emergence of policy negotiation – agreement – announcement – implementation.

 

This new orientation will require problem posing communication framework that facilitate consultations to resolve Nigeria’s problems by providing important information that would produce new policy initiatives. Government should be able to acknowledge citizens as true partners especially with respect to resource management, allocation and utilisation, as well as challenging citizens and stakeholders to respond to identified challenges with proposals for alternative policy recommendations. Such a problem posing communication framework would beyond expectation engender spirit of partnership and harmony between citizens and government.

 

Both as a party and government, APC leaders should have the confidence to engage Nigerians directly. It is just unfortunate that with respect to the issue of fuel subsidy we want to allow old arguments and old approaches, which have held the nation to a standstill to continue dominate public debate. It is doubtful if Nigeria’s organised labour are opposed to the withdrawal of subsidy because they will approve that the Federal Government should continue to expend more than 30% of the nation’s revenue on fuel subsidy payment. To what extent will expending more than 30% of the nation’s revenue for fuel subsidy going to advance or promote the interest of Nigerian workers? But once there is no governmental framework to engage organised labour, NLC and TUC may have limited options in compelling government to consider the efficacy of negotiating policy issues.

 

Good enough, the young government of President Tinubu was able to open negotiations with NLC and TUC and already both NLC and TUC have agreed to suspend their planned strike action. However, beyond the suspension of the planned strike action, APC and the government of President Tinubu must consider developing functional partnership with organise labour. The partnership must be strategically to facilitate consultations between organised labour, APC as a party and the governments it controls both at federal and state levels. Common template should be agreed to guide consultations. There are many policy issues that organised labour would be interested and simple courtesy of being in the loop of policy design would help reduce frictions and tension between labour and APC governments and eliminate distractions that come with strikes.

 

Some would argue that NLC has already registered Labour Party. The truth is that NLC lost Labour Party a long time ago. What exists today as Labour Party is a corrupt representation of the Labour Party envisioned by the NLC in 2002. The Labour Party envisioned by the NLC in 2002 was a party to be controlled by people committed to Nigerian working class. For quite sometimes now, Labour Party is the political equivalent of stock market whereby every person aspiring to emerge as a candidate of the party for election, is free to bid so long as he/she has the resources. The reality is that the highest bidder wins the ticket of the party. This is what produced Mr. Peter Obi as the Presidential candidate of the Labour Party in the 2023 elections. NLC and all their partners had no say in the emergence of Mr. Obi and had he won the election, NLC and their partners would have been the first casualty. Besides, NLC and TUC need to come to terms with the fact that they must relate with the government of the day to promote and defend the interests of Nigerian worker. They must relate with the federal government both as a sovereign authority and as the largest employer of labour irrespective of the party in power.

 

Everything considered therefore, it will be easier for organised labour to develop a functional relationship with APC and its governments at all levels and seek to defend and promote the interests of Nigerian workers than for NLC and its partners to reclaim the Labour Party and use it to sponsor candidates and win elections. The question is whether APC will reform itself to make it and governments it produces at all levels veritable political organisation that could facilitate citizens engagement. How President Tinubu being the new APC leader proceed with the task of managing negotiations with organised labour on the fuel subsidy matter will to a large extend determine the orientation of the new APC government under his leadership. Once negotiation is limited to getting organised labour to accept the new policy of withdrawal of fuel subsidy without contracting partnership agreement with organised labour aimed at securing functional relationship to negotiate the roll out of difficult policies, which would be considered necessary to move Nigeria forward, the old distractions of managing strike actions by organised labour would continue.

 

Developing a functional partnership relationship with organised labour, and by extension other groups, require deeper political reforms in the country. To achieve that would also demand more focus in reforming the APC as a pollical party, which may have to compel President Tinubu to ask the APC leadership to organise mid-term National Convention earlier than schedule. Some of the changes for instance required to bring about new leadership who could lead the party to achieve its vision of being a progressive party can only be decided by the National Convention. If, for instance, the party want to correct the problem of having reactionaries and conservatives leaders such as Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore leading the party, organising a mid-term convention is necessary and compelling. The earlier this is done, the better for the young government of President Tinubu especially if he wants to run a progressive federal government, one that can guarantee the participation by Nigerians represented by their organised groups in his government as provided by the 1999 Nigerian constitution as amended.

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Striking 

Was the strike voluntarily suspended or was stopped by a court injunction?

Thanks 

Toyin

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB6446E1E89C6E1C2ADDBF9697AE52A%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Rebuilding the APC to Reform Nigerian Politics:

Task Before President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

With the election of leaders of the 10^th National Assembly concluded on Tuesday, June 13, 2023 and the victory of the nominated candidates of the APC for the two chambers (Senate and House of Representatives), President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, being the leader of the party need to prioritise rebuilding the APC to reform Nigerian politics so that our political parties are developed to grow beyond being mere election vehicles. Rebuilding the APC is simply about returning the party to its founding vision of truly becoming a progressive political party. Prioritising rebuilding the APC to return it to its founding vision is basically about ensuring that all the organs of the party are constituted and allowed to function in line with the provisions of the APC constitution.

 

Since the time of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun as the National Chairman, the National Executive Committee (NEC), which by the provisions of Article 13.3 A is empowered ‘to be the principal Executive body of the party’, discharging ‘the functions of National Convention in between National Conventions’ has not been meeting quarterly as provided under the APC constitution. In fact, between 2015 and today, not more than eight meetings of NEC held when if the statutory requirement of quarterly meetings provided under the APC constitution has been respected, not less than thirty NEC meetings would have held. Had the NEC been meeting as provided in the APC constitution, members would have stronger power in managing affairs of the APC and most of the challenges facing the party could have been resolved based on decisions of organs of the party.

 

As it is now, the management of the party is limited to the discretion of the National Chairman and when it is convenient, he involves members of the National Working Committee (NWC). In few cases, the National Chairman gets the NWC to legitimise his decisions when the APC constitution only assign administrative responsibility of implementing decisions of superior organs such as the NEC, National Caucus and National Advisory Council (NAC) to the NWC. In addition to implementing decisions of superior organs, the APC constitution gives the NWC the powers to make specific proposals to facilitate decisions of organs. So far, powers of superior organs of the party have been illegally usurped by the National Chairman and by extension the NWC.

 

It is quite worrisome that since formation in 2013, the party’s Board of Trustees now renamed National Advisory Council (NAC) was never constituted. Not more than five meetings of National Caucus held and under the current leadership of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu none has held. Lower organs of the party such as Zonal Executive Committees, Zonal Congresses, Working Committees, Executive Committees, Congresses at states, local governments and wards suffer the same problems. Requirement to setup Senatorial District Committees as provided under Article 13.10 of the APC constitution is redundant. Women’s, Youth and Persons Living with Disabilities Wings provided in the APC constitution are left to the discretions of National Women’s Leader, National Youth Leader, and National Leader of Persons Living with Disabilities.

 

Five Standing Committees established by the APC Constitution were never constituted. These are Establishment, Finance, Publicity, Intergovernmental and Conflict and Reconciliation Committees. Perhaps, the slightest exception is Conflict and Reconciliation, which on about three occasions there were attempts. The first one was initiated by former President Muhammadu Buhari when in February 2018 he gave President Tinubu, then as National Leader of the party the task of reconciling aggrieved members of the party. The second was when the leadership of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole around 2019 appointed Chief Bisi Akande reconciliation committee. The third was when the Caretaker Committee under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala appointed the Sen. Abdullahi Adamu led National Reconciliation Committee in 2021. All these instances were not approved by the NEC as required under Article 18(i) of the APC constitution.

 

The sad reality is that the APC as constituted today is only a shadow of itself with a National Chairman that is highly unaccountable running affairs of the party more as a garrison commander. He relates with his colleagues in the NWC just like his appointees. In their name he meets other leaders of the party and seek to manipulate party decisions to suite personal vested interests that is only known to him. Recall the shameful attempt to impose Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the consensus Presidential candidate of the party. In all the so-called consultations he claimed to have had with other leaders of the party on the matter, perhaps except for the National Secretary, no member of the NWC was either informed of the details of the consultations or invited. Similarly, the NWC was never invited to consider any proposal being negotiated. It was only on June 6, 2022, ahead of the June 8, 2022 National Convention that Sen. Adamu invited the NWC only to inform members that a consensus Presidential candidate in the person of Sen. Ahmed Lawan has been chosen. Members were not even given the opportunity to comment on the matter.

 

Similar scenario repeated itself around the negotiation to decide on the candidates of the party for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly. Instead of developing proposed guidelines to guide negotiations within the structures of the party as provided in the APC constitution, Sen. Adamu claimed to be carrying out consultations to the exclusion of members of the NWC and to the exclusion of all structures of the party. But for the steadfastness of President Tinubu, Sen. Adamu would have led the party to a disastrous outcome, which could be probably worse than the rebellious leadership of the 8^th National Assembly. Even after the NWC endorsed the proposal from the consultations by Sen. Adamu and representatives of NWC with President Tinubu adopting standard bearers for the two chambers, Sen. Adamu encouraged opposition to the decision of the NWC and didn’t consider convening superior organs to ensure the decisions of the NWC is respected by all elected representatives of the party in the two chambers.

 

Beyond all these is also a clear case of reckless financial management of the party. With more than N30 billion realised during the sales of forms for the 2023 elections, Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore have embarked on spending extravaganza based on their discretionary decisions without any form of budget as required by the APC constitution. With NEC not meeting as required, they give no financial report to anyone, not even to the NWC. Having got the NWC around July 2022 to approve the suspension of Directors, they have proceeded to employ new Directors as well as more staff at the National Secretariat without recourse to the Establishment Committee, which is yet to be formed. All these have increased the running cost of the party without the approval of NEC.

 

Unlike the vision of establishing a people-oriented progressive party that would facilitate the democratic development of the country, we sadly have in our hand an APC, which is in contempt with its own rules led by a determined and decidedly conservative, reactionary, and undemocratic leadership who are opposed to allowing any form of internal accountability to party organs and members. Consequently, the APC has been reduced to only an election vehicle, like other parties in the country. To the disappointment of many founding members of the party and Nigerians, almost all the undemocratic practices associated with the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) such as imposition of candidates are now common in APC.

 

Critical issues of party funding, for instance, has remained very ad hoc. No defined funding framework has been established. Although Article 22 of the APC Constitution provides that the Party shall be funded through the following:

 

1. Subscription, fees and levies of members;
2. Proceeds from investments;
3. Subventions, donations and fund raising;
4. Gifts and grants by governments, individuals or groups of individuals as allowed by law;
5. Borrowing as approved by National Executive Committee; and
6. Any other lawful means.

 

The only funding so far is fees and levies, which is more limited to cost of nomination forms for party aspiring candidates. Membership subscription, which would have been the main source of funding for the party is yet to be addressed. Unfortunately, even if membership subscription is set and approved by the competent organ of the party, poor membership record and poor organisation of the party at lower levels may become a stumbling block and source of corruption internally within the party. This is partly because, apart from poor membership records, absence of clearly defined financial policy, many zonal, state, local government and ward structures of the party don’t operate any bank account. These structures hardly receive any funding from the National Secretariat.

 

These are issues, which the Finance Committee of the party would have to immediately address. Addressing this would require a return to developing the needed institutional framework for establishing a computerised membership data base. At the formative stages of APC, in 2013 – 2015, there was an attempt to establish one located at No. 10 Bola Ajibola Street, off Allen Avenue, Ikeja, Lagos, which was attacked by the PDP Federal Government of former President Goodluck Jonathan on November 22, 2014 based on the allegation that the APC is using the data centre to “clone INEC Permanent Voters Card with the intention of hacking into INEC database, corrupting it and replacing them with their own data” (Premium Times, November 23, 2014). Since the attack, work was suspended and even when the APC in 2021 had to organise membership registration and revalidation, the manual unsustainable method was used rather than resuming work on the computerised membership data centre.

 

Part of the vision of establishing a progressive party was the expectation that caucuses would emerge within the party to engender interest negotiations. This partly encouraged Governors elected on the platform of the party to organise themselves and formed the Progressive Governors Forum with a Secretariat that was mandated to manage programmes that facilitate the development of policy synergy across APC states. Through the PGF, structures were developed that enabled consultations and capacity development initiatives for functionaries of APC state governments. The programmes managed by the PGF Secretariat were also expanded to facilitate relationship between Progressive Governors and the APC controlled Federal Government as well as the National Assembly leadership.

 

Part of the reality that weaken the initiatives of the PGF is the complete absence of ownership by the party leadership. Apart from the time of Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, there is a complete absence of structured relationship between the NWC and Progressive Governors. During the time of Chief Oyegun, Progressive Governors were meeting with NWC on monthly basis. Through those meetings critical issues and challenges facing the APC as a ruling party were addressed. For instance, the proposal to setup the APC True Federalism Committee led by Mal. Nasir El-Rufai in 2017 came from those consultative meetings between Progressive Governors and the NWC, which was adopted by the APC NEC.

 

Perhaps, it must also be stressed that the inability of the APC to implement the recommendations of the APC True Federalism Committee can be attributed to the weak structures of the APC. With NEC, NAC and National Caucus not meeting, any expectation of influencing the actions of elected representatives at both the executive and legislative arms will continue to be dashed. Worse still, with a conservative, reactionary, and undemocratic leadership, even if organs of the party meet, they will be manipulated to consider extraneous issues and not substantive reports bordering on the challenges of managing the country.

 

Returning the APC to its founding vision is immediate and urgent. To get that started the NWC should convene meeting of NEC within the shortest possible time. Already, there are unconfirmed reports that the NWC is proposing a NEC meeting sometime in July 2023. If a NEC meeting is to hold in July 2023, it is important that the agenda of the NEC is made elaborate to ensure that it is not a window dressing NEC. The NWC should be made to present complete reports of all activities of the party since the assumption of office of the current leadership led by Sen. Adamu in line with provisions of Article 13.4(ii) of the APC constitution. And in line with provisions of Article 13.49(iv) of the APC constitution, the NWC present financial report on income and expenditure.

 

To ensure that the proposed NEC move the party forward and its decisions frees the party from the current ad hoc method of funding the party, the NWC should be made to present a proposed budget covering the operations of the party for at least the next one year. The proposed budget must cover all the operations of the party structures at all levels in line with provisions of Article 13.3(xiv) of the APC constitution. To fund the proposed budget, the NWC should present preliminary proposal to the NEC to mobilise all the funds required to meet all the budget needs in line with provisions of Article 22 (i-vi) of the APC constitution. For emphasis, the budget required should ensure that all the organs of the party should meet as required by the constitution. Therefore, attached to the proposed budget there should be schedule of meetings of all the organs of the party for consideration and approval of NEC. Once such approval is given, there should be no debate again about whether meetings of party organs should be debased to the discretion of the National Chairman or NWC.

 

The other issue that must be on the agenda of the NEC is proposal for establishment of the five standing committees of Establishment, Finance, Publicity, Intergovernmental and Conflict and Reconciliation Committees. Perhaps, the slightest exception is Conflict and Reconciliation as provided under Article 19.1 of the APC constitution. Similarly, the NWC should be made to present clear proposals for the establishment of the Women’s, Youth and Persons Living with Disabilities wings in line with provisions of Articles 12.19, 12.20 and 12.21 of the APC constitution. Similarly, the agenda of the proposed NEC should include the review of the 2023 elections. This is very fundamental to ensure that all the challenges that the APC, our candidates, and our members faced during the election are identified and needed remedial measures put in place to prevent recurrence.

 

To do justice to all these issues and ensure that any proposed NEC is not a window dressing NEC, the party should budget at the minimum two days to allow members exhaustively debate all the issues and take all the necessary decisions needed to transform the party to return to the path of emerging as a progressive party in line with its founding vision. Part of the debate at the proposed NEC must also prioritise the need to assess whether decidedly conservative, reactionary, and undemocratic leaders should continue to lead a party envisioned to be progressive. How that debate is managed and the decision that come from it will be a major determinant of whether the Renewed Hope agenda of APC and President Tinubu will have the requisite internal expression within the workings of the APC.

 

Returning the APC to its founding vision is about developing the structures of the party to competently have all the requisite power and relationship with elected representatives of the party to serve our dear country Nigeria based on the provisions of the party’s manifesto and President Tinubu’s Renewed Hope agenda. As a party, we must wake up and respond positively to the expectations of Nigerians and begin to douse citizens’ frustrations, which is producing so much anger and making our people vulnerable to manipulative antics of political opportunist during electoral contests. This is the minimum, which our agenda of Renewed Hope under the leadership of President Tinubu should ignite and trigger a deeper political reform in the country!

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC: Way Forward

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Following the resignation of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore as National Chairman and National Secretary respectively, there is all manner of speculations as to which way forward. Of course, understandably, most of the speculations, if not all, are driven by interests to control affairs of the party. Regrettably, however, many of the speculations do not share the commitment to either restore constitutional order in the party or return the party to its founding vision of returning to the path of progressive politics. In fact, if anything, some of the speculations, if true, will reduce to nonsense the decision to have a change of leadership, which means that no lessons have been learnt from all the circumstances of the last few years since the emergence of APC as a political party.

 

It is therefore necessary that at this very early stage of negotiating new leadership for the APC, we caution all our leaders that the only way we can justify the exit of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore out of the leadership of the APC is by demonstrating commitment to restore constitutional order in APC and return the party to its founding vision of being a progressive party. These are issues that would appear to be taken for granted and if not engaged could be abused by power blocs within the party, which could lead to the emergence of leaders that are worse than Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore. This must be avoided.

 

First, restoring constitutional order in APC is basically about complying with extant provisions of the party’s constitution. A situation whereby the National Chairman usurped powers of National Working Committee (NWC) and all organs of the party is unacceptably. All organs of the party, namely, National Advisory Council (NAC), National Caucus, National Executive Committee (NEC), etc. must be allowed to function in accordance with provisions of the party’s constitution. The irresponsible culture of asking organs of the party to donate their powers to the NWC, which basically empowers the National Chairman to convert all the resources of the party to personal use must end.

 

Inability to allow organs to function will block any attempt to return the party to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party. Being a progressive party is about ensuring that we can produce a dynamic, action-oriented party that is able to produce governments that can and improve the lives of Nigerians. It is about goal-setting and developing strategies to achieve them. with a clear vision. This is easier said than done. In our context in Nigeria, this is reduced to claims and narrowed to winning elections. Certainly, winning elections is primarily the required precondition to improve the lives of citizens. Being a progressive party will mean that we are able to ensure that organs of the party develop the capacity to hold elected and appointed officials accountable.

 

Holding elected and appointed officials accountable has certainly been a challenge in Nigerian politics and has been a major source of frustration. Returning to our founding vision of becoming a progressive party is about initiating actions within the structures of APC that can strengthen the party to influence the conducts of elective and appointive officials. This is more about the quality of leadership that will take over. It is also about initiatives being introduced within the party to re-orient the management of APC, especially in the context of facilitating negotiations to produce and engage leaders of the party.

 

In terms of negotiations to produce and engage leaders of the party, to what extent are all the relevant power blocs within the party active? What are even the power blocs within the APC, as it is today? Certainly, the President, being the leader of party is the most important power bloc. There are the blocs of Governors, National Assembly Caucus, elders who are recognised in the APC constitution as members of National Caucus. There are other blocs, which are recognised in APC constitution yet to be constituted and to that extent therefore very passive. These are Women, Youth and Persons with Disability who are recognised and empowered to be organised as wings within the party.

 

The extent to which all these power blocs are active in the negotiations to produce and engage leaders of the party will confirm whether necessary steps are being taken to return the APC to its founding vision of progressive politics. Are there debates within the party on how this is to be achieved? Unfortunately, no. Instead, there would appear some deceptive celebrations around the exit of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore, imagining that all the problems of APC have been solved with their exit, which is not true. If anything, the exit of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore provided us with the opportunity to start initiating actions to return the APC to its founding vision, by first restoring constitutional order in the party.

 

Through restoring constitutional order, we can activate some of the power blocs to actively participate in the process of producing and engaging leaders of the party. For instance, elders of the party can have stronger say when the meetings of the National Caucus are restored. Women, Youth and Persons with Disability will similarly have stronger say when the Women, Youth and Persons with Disability wings are constituted with all the complementary structures as provided in the APC constitution. In fact, beyond the Women, Youth and Persons with Disability Leaders, these three wings are expected to have Secretaries who will be members of NEC.

 

So far, as things are, only the President and Governors blocs are active in the negotiation to produce and engage leaders of APC. Already, part of the speculations emerging from the Governors bloc is that Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje is being considered to succeed Sen. Abdullahi Adamu. If this is true, it only suggests insensitivity and taking members of the party for granted. This is without prejudice to the person of Dr. Ganduje. This is because such a choice will completely distort the zoning arrangement that informed the present configuration of the leadership of the National Assembly. With the Speaker of House of Representatives and Deputy Senate President coming from North West and North Central shut out of consideration, to propose the party’s National Chairman to move to North West from North Central will be unjust and almost a political suicide.

 

We must caution our Governors that since the emergence of APC, Governors have served almost as the conscience of the party. Any consideration for such an insensitive and unjust consideration of Dr. Ganduje to become the National Chairman of APC must be discarded. If anything, the position of National Chairman of the APC must be retained in North Central. Part of the challenge of managing the current transition within the party is getting the NWC to properly take the driving seat in managing and facilitating negotiations to produce and engage leaders of the party. The NWC must sit up and guide the unfolding negotiations. No single power bloc should be allowed to appropriate the process.

 

This where the intervention of the President, being the leader of the party would be required to moderate the excessive conduct of any power bloc, especially when such conduct risk further damaging the prospect of returning the APC to its founding vision. At these early stages of President Asiwaju Bola Tinubu’s leadership of the party, he needs to make that strong intervention to guide the process of restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision of progressive politics. Progressive politics must be about inclusion and justice and not some blind and insensitive considerations.

 

[Ashafa Abdullahi]

Returning APC to its founding vision must comply with its Constitution. It's not in APC's Constitution that a President or a Governor is the leader of the party at national and state levels respectively. This Obj-PDP contraption must be abandoned if APC must become a progressive party.

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB6446B229F9D1927919230DB2AE3EA%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Toyin Falola]

Political parties in Nigeria are associations to run for elections, acquire power and share largesse.

 

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/CAGzQHarsnq9JdR8e-7tZ9GdzZoKTqxuGmNMp0qN1gbE1PtnB6A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ashafa Abdullahi]

I agree with you

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/PH0PR06MB9004AA883B88A5D8E5FBCBDBF83FA%40PH0PR06MB9004.namprd06.prod.outlook.com.

[Salihu Lukman]

APC and Question of Party Building

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

One challenge we continue to face in APC is when things become worse after winning an outcome. That was the experience we had after dissolving the Comrade Adams Oshiomhole led National Working Committee (NWC), only to find ourselves stuck with a Caretaker Committee that was unwilling to organise a National Convention, which was its clear mandate. Similarly, after winning the campaign to get the Caretaker Committee organise a National Convention, which produced the current NWC led by Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, in no time the party was returned to the old mode of business as usual whereby statutory organs of the party were frozen. No meetings of party organs were taking place and the NWC became practically an observer whereby the National Chairman and National Secretary basically usurped the powers of all organs of the party.

 

The height of it was when the National Chairman attempted to impose Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the 2023 Presidential Candidate of the party. Progressive Governors and many members of the NWC had to rise to the occasion and check the excesses of the National Chairman, which produced President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the candidate of the party for 2023 elections. The rest, as is often said, is now history. However, we continue to move from one unhealthy situation to another during both the 2023 electioneering campaigns and the process of negotiations to produce leaders of the National Assembly after the elections. It was as if the party under the leadership of Sen. Adamu is either contesting the authority of President Asiwaju Tinubu or at the least working across purposes.

 

With all organs of the party frozen, it was very upsetting for many party members, which was partly why the campaign for Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisoro’s resignations was popular. One could only imaging how frustrating it was for President Asiwaju Tinubu to have to cohabit with a party leadership that was covertly subversive at the beginning of his administration. It will be very understandable if President Asiwaju Tinubu therefore will move to bring in a strong loyalist such as Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje as the next National Chairman having experienced first-hand what a disloyal party National Chairman can do to undermine a government produced by the party.

 

As loyal party members, it is however very crucial that we strongly appeal to President Asiwaju Tinubu that it will be injurious to the party and all governments produced by the party to produce Dr. Ganduje as the next National Chairman of APC without clearing his name of the corruption charges against him. This is very crucial because it will protect the person of Dr. Ganduje, confirm his uprightness, and therefore shield the party from all the negative campaigns against him. We must appeal to President Asiwaju Tinubu not to create a situation that will promote any public insinuation that his government will shield anyone being accused of corruption charges, no matter how close the person may be to him. Rather than seeking to nominate Dr. Ganduje to emerge as the next National Chairman of APC, President Asiwaju Tinubu will end up only doing more damages to the person of Dr. Ganduje and to the party and his administration if Dr. Ganduje is to emerge as National Chairman of APC without clearing the corruption charges against his person.

 

The second issue is whether as the leader of the party, President Asiwaju Tinubu is committed to restoring constitutional order within the APC. Restoring constitutional order would require some demonstration of commitment to give life to the statutory organs of the APC so that the debate about replacing the National Chairman and all existing vacancies, including that of the National Secretary will be done within the structures of the party. Inability to revive statutory organs of the party will suggest that the process of replacing existing vacancies will be manipulated to suite some narrow interests within the party even if it means violating provisions of the APC constitution. If for whatever reasons President Asiwaju Tinubu allow this to happen, it will simply mean that he doesn’t share the commitment to restore constitutional order in APC, and to that extent therefore his commitment to return APC to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party is weak. This will be most unfortunate and will contradict the historical essence of all the struggles President Asiwaju Tinubu has successfully waged on his journey to the Nigerian presidency.

 

It is quite disconcerting to imagine a situation whereby President Asiwaju Tinubu does not share the commitment to restore constitutional order in APC or his leadership of the party will take actions that will make him vulnerable to accusation of not following due process and subverting provisions of the APC constitution. Unfortunately, here we are having to contend with such possibility. As things are, the NWC is not only an onlooker but a far distant observer. The power blocs that are being credited with the speculated emergence of Dr. Ganduje as the next National Chairman, including the Presidency, are not even considering any meeting with the NWC or even the Acting National Chairman. Yet, the NWC has the convening authority for any meeting that can produce the next National Chairman. Sadly, many members of the NWC, for whatever reasons seems to be timid and taking everything that comes their way as given and therefore right.

 

The vision of producing a progressive party cannot be produced with a reticent leadership. As NWC members, we need to appreciate that part of our responsibility is to ensure that all our elected representatives are guided to produce outcomes based on provisions of our manifesto and all our campaign promises. This is a function of the knowledge and skills of individual members. We must challenge ourselves to rise to the occasion by demonstrating the required capacity and competence. A situation whereby we sit in our ‘comfort zones’ and expect our elected representative to come calling and recognising our powers to provide leadership to the party only suggest gap in competence.

 

Part of what must be urgently addressed in the Nigerian context is the unfortunate reality whereby the party is a dumping ground for people whose role is not more than that of serving as surrogates to elected representatives. This has been the PDP model of party building, which has destroyed the PDP. Sadly, as APC, since 2013, we have been unable to produce a different model of party building. This takes us to the third issue, which we must address given the opportunity to fill the vacant position of National Chairman. So long as we uncritically respond to the debate around proposed candidates based on the desire to massage leaders of the party, including President Asiwaju Tinubu, it will simply mean abdicating our responsibility of guiding our leaders to take the right decisions in the best interest of the party and the country.

 

As a party, envisioned to be progressive, we must encourage debates. When issues are raised, members and leaders of the party must not use their disagreement with the issues being raised to seek to gag everybody especially when the issue being raised borders on objections to proposals from party leaders, including President Asiwaju Tinubu. When the party is confronted with proposals with potentials to subvert provisions of the APC constitution, members must be encouraged to engage the issues. Rather than seeking to gag party members and leaders with dissenting voices based on so called arguments about positions of the party organs even when individuals making such arguments have been absent from meetings and therefore highly ignorant about the position of organs of the party, party leaders and members, no matter their positions, should be humble and honest to admit when they are presenting their personal positions. We must not hide under our official designations to claim to be speaking for organs of the party on any issue, except when clearly mandated to do so.

 

The situation we faced today in APC present us with the opportunity to restore constitutional order in APC. Once we don’t use the opportunity properly and restore the sanctity of the APC constitution, we would be laying the foundation for worse things to happen under a new National Chairman. As NWC members we must be seen to be active in the debate of the way forward. A situation whereby President Asiwaju Tinubu and Progressive Governors are being alleged to have decided on Dr. Ganduje as the next National Chairman of APC without consulting other power blocs in the party and without meeting any of the organs of the party, including the NWC, is very risky and potentially damaging to President Asiwaju Tinubu and the party. If this is associated with a President who come from military background, it will be understandable. But to be associated with President Asiwaju Tinubu whose background is outrightly civilian having to lead the struggle for democracy in Nigeria for almost four decades, it will be highly unimaginable.

 

We must therefore appeal to all those sponsoring this campaign to nominate Dr. Ganduje for the position of APC National Chairman, especially His Excellency, Hope Uzodinma, Chairman, Progressive Governors Forum to come to order and allow due process within the party to take its rightful course in the selection process of who become the next APC National Chairman. Nobody, including the PGF, should be allowed to seek to entrench arbitrariness and injustice in the determination of who emerges as the next National Chairman of APC. We must remind everyone, including President Asiwaju Tinubu that so far, the agreed zoning formula in APC seed the position of National Chairman of the party to North Central. Therefore, the relevant section of APC constitution with respect to filling vacancies should be respected. Anything short of that will amount to illegality and will constitute an act of injustice against members of the party from North Central. A party envisioned to be progressive must not be associated with that especially if one of our objectives now is to return the APC to its founding vision of emerging as a progressive party.

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Resignation from APC NWC: Explanatory Note

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Since the news of my resignation from APC NWC broke out, I have received so many queries and responses, all expressing disappointment in one way or the other. My common explanation is that I am just tired having to remain in the fighting mode, campaigning for the reform of the APC. First, it was against the leadership of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole who was my boss and in many respect my mentor for more than sixteen years. Not long after we thought the exit of Comrade Oshiomhole and the whole NWC under his leadership would provide the opportunity to reform the APC and return it to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party did we come to the sad realisation that we had to wage another bitter struggle to get the Caretaker Committee led by His Excellency Mai Mala to organise a National Convention to produce a new leadership.

 

From a tenure of six months, it was almost an impossible task to push His Excellency Mai Mala to organise a National Convention in 27 months. With the emergence of our NWC led by Sen. Abdullahi Adamu, all hopes were dashed when with every passing day we were confronted with reigns of impunity whereby it was as if the constitution of the party was suspended. Almost all organs of the party were frozen and as leaders of the party we were forced to accept illegality as normal and acceptable. Ordinarily, it should be expected that the departure of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore should provide a window of opportunity to return the APC to constitutional order.

 

Sadly, the turn of events in the last 10 days since the resignation of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore suggests to the contrary. Members of the NWC were left in suspense. A meeting of NWC with PGF scheduled for Wednesday, July 19, 2023 was cancelled without any explanation. Suddenly, Sen. Hope Uzodinma, in his capacity as Chairman of Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) converted himself into a receiver manager for the party and begin to act almost as the party’s NWC. Speculation about nomination of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje as nominee of Governors and President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu then started and became stronger each day. Efforts to highlight legal and moral issues which should require a rethink was simply ignored. The dominant view among leaders is that once President Asiwaju Tinubu has decided on an issue, we should just simply work for its success even with all the legal and moral questions.

 

May be at this point, we should publicly state both the legal and moral questions. The legal question is straight forward. Article 31.5(i) of the APC constitution dealing with what to do when there is vacancy clearly stipulate that ‘in the case of a National/Zonal Officer, the State Executive Committee shall propose a replacement to the State Congress and Zonal Executive Committee for endorsement. Thereafter, the name shall be sent to the National Working Committee, which shall be forward same to the National Executive Committee for approval.’ No section of the APC constitution gives anyone, including President Asiwaju Tinubu the power to act in any contrary way. Therefore, if this provision of the APC constitution is to be respected, Nasarawa State Executive Committee of the APC, which is where Sen. Adamu comes from should have the right to propose replacement, which should be endorsed by the State Congress and the Zonal Executive Committee. Following which the name shall be forwarded to the NWC for onward transmission to NEC and approval.

 

Related to this is the fact that negotiations for leadership of the National Assembly ceded the position of National Chairman of the party to North Central. For whatever reasons, to proceed to act arbitrarily and move the position of National Chairman to North West will be unfair and unjust. It simply amounts to taking the people of North Central for granted. Just imagine if the South West where President Asiwaju Tinubu comes from is to be treated by any leader of Nigeria that way. The related moral question is the choice of Dr. Ganduje. Sincerely, it simply means that we don’t attach any importance to the party if with all the corruption allegation against Dr. Ganduje, we find him about the only one in the North West to be recommended. Perhaps, it needs to be stated without fear of any contradiction, if leaders of the North West are asked to nominate five people for consideration to serve in the capacity of National Chairman of APC, I am confident, Dr. Ganduje will not be one of the five nominees.

 

That we are even debating these issues is worrisome. At the risk of sounding very personal, I have made my small contributions to the struggle for democracy in Nigeria. I have also made my modest contributions to the development of APC as a political party in Nigeria. We started campaigning to end military rule long before June 12, 1993 under the leadership of late Alao Aka Bashorun. It will be recalled around April 1991, late Bashorun attempted to convene a National Conference in Lagos, which was blocked by the military government of former President Ibrahim Babangida. That gave birth to the emergence of Campaign for Democracy (CD) under the leadership of Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti. I was privileged to serve as the founding Deputy General Secretary of CD.

 

As young Nigerians passionate for the democratic development of Nigeria, we committed ourselves to those struggles for more than three decades. Having joined partisan politics in 2010 and being a member of the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), it was clear to me after the 2011 elections that the only way opposition parties can defeat PDP is through merger. Having come to that realisation, I was among the few who began public advocacy and campaign for merger. Today, all that is history. My hope is that President Asiwaju Tinubu being privileged to come from a background of struggle for justice and democracy in Nigeria as someone who was in the trenches during the NADECO day, he should not be associated with any decision that will be illegal or immoral not talk of being unjust to any section of Nigeria.

 

If Osun State is debating possible replacement of Sen. Omisore for the position of National Secretary of APC in line with provisions of our party’s constitution, why is Nasarawa State not treated in the same way? Why the double standards? I wish I can pretend to be dumb and blind on these issues. Unfortunately, I cannot. Painful as it is, I want to appeal to President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our leaders to resist the temptations that would project our party and our leaders as champions of illegality and repression. I hold the strong conviction that President Asiwaju Tinubu will not only succeed but lead Nigeria to a new era of unconstrained democratic development. As members of APC, we must provide the critical support to President Asiwaju Tinubu such that rule of law in all its ramification will define his tenure for the next four years. Achieving that would require unwavering commitment to build the APC to develop every needed capacity to function as the regulatory authority holding every leader of the party, including President Asiwaju Tinubu accountable.

 

Perhaps, it is important to clarify that this is not in anyway questioning the authority of President Asiwaju Tinubu as the moral leader of the party. Being the moral leader of the party doesn’t give him the power of exercising statutory functions of organs of the party or unilaterally changing provisions of the party’s constitution. It will amount to setting President Asiwaju Tinubu for failure in the worse possible way to proceed to encourage him to act in a manner that is illegal and immoral. If the scheming to have Dr. Ganduje emerge as the next National Chairman of APC succeeds with all the legal and moral questions, as a party, we would have set the stage for the destruction of our party and God forbids, we would have laid the foundation that will make President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our elected representatives unpopular. God in his infinite mercy will guide President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our leaders to return our great party APC to constitutional order and its founding vision.

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Wow

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB64460283DE3993206D948491AE01A%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Silver Bullet Politics and Challenges of Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

C/o All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Reacting to President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s National Broadcast of Monday, July 31, 2023, Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), dismissed it arguing that it is ‘not the silver bullet Nigerians expected’. Silver bullet simply means that the national broadcast of President Asiwaju Tinubu failed to address the problems facing Nigerians. Given that the main issue, which the national broadcast of President Asiwaju Tinubu sought to address has to do with the hardship facing Nigerians occasioned by the withdrawal of petrol subsidy, beyond the issues contained in the national broadcast, what is NLC expecting?. Among other reasons given by the NLC why the President’s speech wasn’t the silver bullet was that it ‘was completely silent on the repair of our national refineries.’ If the speech was silent on the repair of refineries, does that fall short of the expectations of Nigerians?

 

While acknowledging that apart from the repair of refineries, the NLC identified other four issues as reasons why President Asiwaju’s Tinubu’s July 31 National Broadcast didn’t provide the solutions of the hardship Nigerians are facing, somehow, the NLC was more speaking like a political opposition to President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government. Being a political opposition to the government of President Asiwaju Tinubu, nothing in the proposals contained in the national address merit acceptance as solution to Nigeria’s problems by the NLC. As far as the NLC is concerned, repairs of refineries, unmasking those behind the subsidy fraud, matching public promises with commitment on issue of minimum wage, increase salaries of workers by Federal Government, and promises of palliatives are the solutions to hardship facing Nigerians. Didn’t the July 31 national broadcast attempted to address these issues.

 

Perhaps, not in the language expected by the NLC, certainly some of these issues are addressed either directly or indirectly. Going through the NLC’s statement signed by Comrade Joe Ajearo, President of the NLC, one is tempted to conclude that the main objective of their response was more to dismiss all the policy proposals contained in the President’s address as a justification of why the scheduled national protest being organised by the NLC will go ahead on August 2. The statement completely ignores all the proposals contained in President Asiwaju Tinubu’s broadcast. It is almost as if the NLC response was written even before the broadcast and therefore completely blind of all the proposals. Having served the NLC, and conversant with the tradition of critically and dispassionately reviewing government’s policy proposals, it was disappointing that the NLC reduced its responses to generalised commentary without reference to the specific issues contained in President Tinubu’s national broadcast.

 

As Nigerians, we must appeal to NLC leadership to rise above the narrow sentiment of playing to the gallery based on some deceptively flimsy argument of a so-called silver bullet, if you like silver bullet politics, which is simply egocentric that inconsistent with the interest of Nigerians, including that of the working class. While acknowledging that there would be gaps in the proposals by government and there would be challenges in terms of implementation especially when it comes to guaranteeing that broader interests of Nigerians are accommodated, swiftly dismissing them in the manner done by NLC is unacceptable and will not augur well for our democracy. The mere fact that President Asiwaju Tinubu finds it compelling to address the nation given the difficulties Nigerians are facing since the withdrawal of fuel subsidy is commendable. If anything, this confirms that President Asiwaju Tinubu is not in denial and aspire to ensure that his government is responsive.

 

As argued in the past, part of the challenges of finding solutions to Nigeria’s problems, or silver bullet politics as NLC would want us to consider, is the issue of accommodating the diverse interests of Nigerians in designing and implementing policies of government. Accommodating the diverse interests of Nigerians is about representation and responsiveness, which is what is required to affirm that ‘sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through the constitution derives all powers and authority’ and ‘participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of the constitution as provided in section 14 (2) (a and c) of the 1999 Nigerian constitution as amended.

 

We must admit that the decision to address the nation represent remarkable progress in the management of contentious public policy in the country. It is indeed required to give life to section 14 (2) (a and c) of the Nigerian constitution. In the past, such addresses and proposals contained are only made after protests and strikes. Coming before any strike or protest, it is important therefore, we encourage the government to take forward all the proposals contained in the address and use them to engage targeted organised groups in the country, including the NLC. For instance, the Federal Government should immediately meet with Organised Private Sector to work out modalities for the implementation and disbursement of the proposed N75 billion aimed at strengthening the manufacturing sector ‘to increase its capacity to expend and create good paying jobs.’ The engagement should put in place agreed conditions and framework for the selection of the 75 enterprises to access the N1 billion credit. Part of the conditions should include the minimum number of workers to be employed by each of the beneficiary enterprises.

 

Similarly, government should also engage organisations of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises to set conditions and framework to access the N125 billion being set aside to energise the sector. Criteria for the selection of the 1 million nano businesses that would access the N50 billion Conditional Grant should be agreed. Also, the engagement with organisations of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises should establish needed criteria for the selection of the 100,000 MSMEs that would access the start-ups Conditional Grant of N75 billion being proposed by government.

 

The third category that the federal government should immediately engage is farmers and agricultural associations aimed at putting in place clear framework for the disbursement of 225,000 metric Tonnes of fertilizers. Seedlings and other inputs. In addition, the federal government may wish to use the engagement with this group to explore strategies of achieving the cultivation of 500,000 hectares of farmland and all-year-round farming. Noting that government has earmarked N200 billion from the N500 billion approved by National Assembly, it will be necessary to use the engagement with farmers and agricultural associations to negotiate both ownership and commitment to achieve success.

 

The fourth category of groups that should be engaged immediately is transporters aimed at negotiating implementation of proposed investment of N100 billion to acquire 3000 units of buses. Deeper strategic thinking will be required in engaging this category given that this is the sector that is directly affected by high increases in prices of PMS because of withdrawal of subsidy. The goal of engagement with respect to transporters should be to revolutionise the transport sector, which should lead to the rebirth of public transportation in the country. This would require stronger collaboration with state governments, most of whom already have established transport services.

 

All these issues were swiftly dismissed by NLC with the cheap claim of a silver bullet, which may reflect the knowledge gap in NLC. Leaders of NLC have historically demonstrated humility in engaging policy issues by opening and developing stronger networks with academic and knowledgeable constituencies. It is possible that NLC response to President Asiwaju Tinubu’s national broadcast did not seek to draw input from some the traditional allies of the NLC.

 

Had President Asiwaju Tinubu denied that the withdrawal subsidy has brought hardship to Nigerians and failed proposed measures to address them, the claim that the national broadcast wasn’t the silver bullet Nigerians expected would be justified. Were the proposals contained in President Asiwaju Tinubu sufficient to mitigate all the hardships Nigerians are facing? May be not. If not, one would expect the NLC to go a step further to highlight what will be required. May be the four issues emphasised in the response of the NLC are the proposed additional issues. These are: repairing our refineries, unmasking those behind the subsidy fraud, not matching public promises with commitment on minimum wage, failure of Federal Government to increase salaries of workers, and promises of palliatives are empty.

 

What are the details of all these and what actions are required to achieve them are not contained in the NLC’s statement. The challenge of giving practical expression to section 14 (2) (a and c) of the 1999 Nigerian constitution as amended is about providing the much-needed leadership to change Nigerian politics. This is about the extent to which initiatives contained in the July 31 national broadcast reflects the diverse interests on Nigerians. To the extent that proposals highlighted in the national address cover the interests of workers, organised private sector, micro, small and medium enterprises, farmers and agricultural groups, transporters, etc., wide spectrum of interests are already targeted. The crucial issue would be that of ensuring success in achieving expected results as well as allowing for additional scope to cover other interests of Nigerians not captured in the President’s broadcast.

 

What is required to achieve success especially in terms of engaging Nigerians to affirm that truly sovereignty belongs to the people is to take every necessary step to develop framework for engaging groups and organisations of Nigerians to facilitate policy negotiations and implementation. In the context of NLC, it is about reviving the National Labour Advisory Council (NLAC) and use it to promote tripartism, which is what the challenge of developing and managing palliatives arising from withdrawal subsidy requires. A situation whereby labour organisations use their singular interest to force the hands of government in any direction in managing public policy that affect all Nigerians must be moderated.

 

While acknowledging that what was contained in the national broadcast of President Asiwaju Tinubu of July 31 should be treated as proposals that require further engagement with all stakeholders, including labour, the federal government must take every necessary step to revive NLAC and get NLC and all other labour associations to use the tripartite platform to negotiate policy design and implementation. Being a negotiating platform, labour and organised private sector should be free to also make proposals to be negotiated.

 

Given where we are as a democratic nation, rather than dismiss proposals coming from government, especially when it comes with the kind of opportunity of saving one trillion Naira in two months, responsive and representative organisations such as NLC should be coming up with proposals of what to do with the trillion Nairas that are being saved. Given the challenge of insecurity and the problems of policing the country, can’t we target investing such resources or at least part of it to address some of the security needs of the country. If part of the fear of citizens about state policing is funding, doesn’t this give us the opportunity of pushing the federal government and all our state governments to negotiate sustainable funding framework that can guarantee adequate funding of state police?

 

As a democratic nation, framework for citizen’s engagement aimed at providing what NLC call silver bullet should be to facilitate development of strong synergy between government and Nigerian citizens. The President Asiwaju Tinubu led federal government, being a government produced by a party envisioned to be progressive, should seek to introduce a new framework of engagement between government and organised groups in the country to produce a new orientation of citizens – government relations that would lead to the emergence of policy negotiation – agreement – announcement – implementation. This new orientation will require problem posing communication framework that facilitate consultations to resolve Nigeria’s problems by providing important information that would produce new policy initiatives.

 

Part of the appeal that must be made to all organised groups in the country is to demonstrate corresponding commitment to also share the burden of resolving Nigeria’s challenges. The current attitude of distrust against government, which makes groups to dismiss proposals of government without attempt to present alternatives should be moderated. Similarly, a situation whereby groups, including NLC believe that the only way they can engage government and achieve results is through strikes and protests must change. For democracy to be meaningful, it must be about constant negotiations and engagements to produce agreements.

 

Now that the young government of President Asiwaju Tinubu is about to be fully constituted with ministers appointed, President Asiwaju Tinubu should consider giving all his ministers clear mandate to ensure strong engagement with organised groups. In particular, engagement with NLC and other labour groups must target pre-empting strikes and protests in all sectors. In the context of that, as a democratic nation, we must begin to set benchmarks of allowable limits for all strikes in all sectors. Minister of Labour and by extension ministers in all sectors who fail to operate within such benchmarks must be shown the way out. This is more to ensure that government services in all sectors accommodate the diverse interests of citizens in those sectors.

 

That is the silver bullet, which President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government should give to Nigerians.

 

 

[Oluwatoyin Adepoju]

Beautiful

I would like the following to be also addressed

Is it true that BAT is seeking to borrow some billions from the World Bank in order to address initiatives meant to help Nigerians manage the fallout from the subsidy removal?

If so, what about the trillion described as saved from the subsidy removal?

Would that not make such borrowing unnecessary?

Is it true that some billions of the money intended to be borrowed is to be spent on the legislature?

A member of the legislature defended this proposed expenditure in terms of what he described as the need to improve the working tools of the legislature.

Would that be a wise reason to borrow money and such huge monies?

If the above stated information about the plans of this govt are accurate does it suggest the govt should be trusted?

I'm puzzled bcs of the huge contradictions these issues involve.

If these issues are addressed in the essay I'm responding to I'll be pleased to have the relevant sections pointed out.

Thanks

Toyin

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB6446F30F59B221137EAA658EAE0AA%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

Road to Renewed Hope

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

C/o All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Following the confirmation of 45 out of the 48 Ministerial nominees by the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on Monday, August 7, 2023, transition from the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari to the new era of President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been completed. The newly confirmed ministers will be sworn in and will be expected to manage the business of government and spearhead initiatives aimed at delivering on campaign promises in line with provisions of the APC manifesto and President Asiwaju Tinubu’s Action Plan for a Better Nigeria – Renewed Hope 2023.

 

The big question is whether APC, as a party has grown such that elected and appointed leaders produced by the party are faithful to the commitment to serve Nigerians. Are elected and appointed representatives going to demonstrate knowledge in terms of discharging their responsibilities? How deep is their knowledge and does it come with recommended solutions to the numerous challenges facing the country? Do they (elected and appointed representatives) even have the confidence to apply the recommended solutions?

 

Most times, these are issues that are assumed defending on who is considering them. Without belabouring the issues, both as party members and as Nigerians, we need to be creative in engaging these issues with the firm belief and confidence that the young government of President Asiwaju Tinubu will succeed in resolving most of Nigeria’s challenges. As a democratically elected government, it is our hope that President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government will be responsive and will broaden the scope of citizens’ engagement at all levels and therefore accordingly produce processes of wider participation of organised groups in the business of policy design and implementation in the country.

 

Given that democracy is founded on the logic that political parties should have manifestos, which should highlight ideological orientations and commitments of leaders and members, will APC under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu begin to move closer to its founding vision of emerging as a progressive party with the capacity to regulate the conduct of elected and appointed representatives? Or will the vision of being a progressive party remained only in the name of the party? To what extent, for instance, will elected and appointed representatives produced by the APC, at all levels, initiate policies and programmes based on provisions of the manifesto? How many elected and appointed representatives actually gone through the party manifesto and the Action Plan for a Better Nigeria – Renewd Hope 2023? How many of them are actually able to develop perspectives, which will highlight policy choices in line with provisions of the APC’s campaign promises?

 

Inability to answer these questions positively will suggest the strong likelihood of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government collapsing to business-as-usual mode not long after it assumed office and with that reducing the business of managing government to propaganda aimed at mobilising support for 2027 re-election. Once that is the case, every member and leader of the APC will be compelled to only demonstrate agreement with decisions taken by the government and especially by President Asiwaju Tinubu. Once that is the case, sycophancy will take over and a new transition mode for 2027 will commence even before the young government of Asiwaju Tinubu settles down.

 

What is it that can be done to ensure that truly President Asiwaju Tinubu’s led APC federal government succeed in emerging as a strongly responsive and representative government? For APC to emerge as a truly progressive party beyond bearing the name, President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government must be dynamc, action oriented and therefore competently able to improve on the quality of lives of Nigerians. What this requires at these early stages in the life of the administration is that the government must be able to set clearly define targets, which must be achieved within the next four years. For instance, the government should define annual targets for all sectors and each mandate ministry led by the newly confirmed ministers should be given the responsibility to achieve.

 

Setting those targets and orienting all the newly elected and appointed APC representatives to apply themselves towards meeting them should not be taken for granted. In fact, once Ministers are sworn in and no ministerial targets is given to them by the President, the seed of failure would have been planted. Therefore, the first task before President Asiwaju Tinubu is ensuring that ministerial targets are given and putting in place stronger supervisory and regulatory framework both within government and as a party to ensure delivery.

 

Again, both as party members and as Nigerians, we should support President Asiwaju Tinubu to succeed in bringing APC back to its founding vision of emerging as a truly progressive party capable of regulating the conducts of all elected and appointed APC representatives to be accountable to Nigerian citizens. Supporting President Asiwaju Tinubu should include being able to disagree with him when he takes any decision that is unjust to any section of the country. Both APC members and leaders, as well as Nigerians must be courageous in reminding President Asiwaju Tinubu that any claim of being progressive must guarantee social justice and equity, especially regarding distribution of resources and opportunities in all manifestations.

 

All the challenges that confronted APC and the federal government since 2019 borders on the strong perception by many sections of Nigerians of unfair and inequitable treatment. Contentious as it may appear, being a democracy and especially as a party envisioned to be progressive, we must demonstrate sensitiveness and responsiveness to these perceptions. We therefore must appeal to President Asiwaju Tinubu to demonstrate balanced commitment to providing truly progressive leadership to both the APC and the Nigerian nation as whole.

 

Providing progressive leadership to the APC will require President Asiwaju Tinubu to honestly resolve within himself whether under his leadership he want to resolve the big political problem in the country whereby all our parties are reduced to only serving as an election platform. In 2012/2013, when under our old legacies parties, merger negotiations commenced, the expectation of many Nigerians was that the new party, APC, that emerged will depart from serving only as election platform. Especially, with the adoption of slogan “CHANGE”, expectation was high in the country that APC will distinguish itself as a democratic party and produce new model of party politics in the country.

 

We must as a party admit that between 2015 and now, APC has moved further away from meeting these expectations. Internal contest within the APC has been weakened. Efforts to resolve this problem especially since 2019 has created leadership instability within the APC. All the efforts to resolve the problems of the party end up further worsening the challenges. For instance, the decision to setup a Caretaker Committee under the leadership of Governor Mai Mala Buni on June 25, 2020 with a short tenure of six months produced a monstrous outcome of a sit-tight Caretaker Committee, which had to be forced out of office after 27 months.

 

Similarly, the emergence of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu led NWC in March 2022 was expected to have resolved the leadership challenges facing the party. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case as the APC was plunged into deeper problems whereby all the statutory organs of the party became frozen and the NWC especially the National Chairman and National Secretary became emperors and highly unaccountable to anyone. In addition, the leadership of Sen. Adamu became subversive and covertly antagonistic against Asiwaju Tinubu both during the internal contest to produce the Presidential candidate of the APC for the 2023 general elections and after Asiwaju Tinubu won the election and became the President-elect. For instance, instead of working in harmony with Asiwaju Tinubu as President-elect to nominate candidates for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly, Sen. Adamu opposed and undermined initiatives of Asiwaju Tinubu to produce the current leadership of both the Senate and House of Representatives.

 

No doubt, these are bitter experiences within the APC that must be corrected. In correcting them however, are we focusing on the bigger question of restoring constitutional order, returning the party to its founding vision, and ensuring the development of the APC to be capable of regulating the conducts of elected and appointed representatives? Or is the objective reduced to question of producing simply loyal leaders who will only ensure successful implementation of what President Asiwaju Tinubu want as a leader of the party?

 

In other words, what should APC members and Nigerians expect from the current attempts being made to re-organise the APC under the leadership of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje? Without any attempt to pre-empt the leadership of Dr. Ganduje, it is important to highlight that both Dr. Ganduje and President Asiwaju Tinubu cannot afford to fail. They must do everything possible to succeed in restoring constitutional order, returning APC to its founding vision of becoming a truly progressive party, based on which all elected and appointed representatives led by President Asiwaju Tinubu are both responsive to Nigeria’s challenges and representative of the wider interests of Nigerians.

 

Being responsive to Nigerians is a function of knowledge and competence in managing affairs of government. Being representative is about ability to engage Nigerians and through those engagements being able to accommodate proposals and mainstream them into policies of government at all levels. Will this be the renewed hope Nigerians will expect? Coming days, weeks, and months ahead in the next four years will determine the colouration of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government. As APC members and highly optimistic Nigerians, we must look forward with confidence that President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government will succeed in producing a progressive government supported by a re-organised APC that is truly progressive both in name and indeed, which operate strictly based on its rules and all the laws regulating the conducts of political parties.

 

Emerging as a truly progressive party, APC must unambiguously guarantee social justice and equitable distribution of resources and opportunity both within the party and as a party in control of governments at all levels in the country. Achieving this is what will translate into Renewed Hope for a Better Nigeria.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Disturbing Signals:

Open Letter to President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

C/o All Progressives Congress

North-West Zonal Office

Kaduna

 

Your Excellency, I find it very compelling to send this open letter to you because there are disturbing signals, which if not averted could produce bigger problems and irreversibly destroy our electoral viability as a party. These are issues bordering on whether as a leader, you will be accessible based on which party members and, by extension, Nigerians can influence your decisions as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Noting that democracy is founded on the principles of representation, it is expected that being an elected President, your decisions should be representative of the interest of Nigerians.

 

Without attempting to question your authority and commitment to the wellbeing of Nigeria as a nation, within the short period since May 29, 2023 when you assumed office, there are decisions you took, which are very disturbing to many of us who are loyal party members. As loyal party members, we did not only support you to win the 2023 elections, but we have strong belief that your leadership is what our dear country needed at this critical period of our political development.

 

Perhaps, it is important to highlight that I am making this letter open because having resigned my position as a member of the APC National Working Committee (NWC), I don’t want to make any claim of having access to you in whatever form. Even as NWC member, it was almost impossible to access you after winning the election. Now, given that I resigned because I disagreed with your decision to nominate Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje to emerge as the National Chairman of APC, I don’t expect you to be amenable to meeting a “protestant” like me.

 

To be honest, making Dr. Ganduje National Chairman of APC is the first disturbing signal. Many party members are yet to recover from that shock. With all the uncleared corruption allegation against Dr. Ganduje, you opted to nominate him to become the National Chairman of the party even when Article 31.5(i) of the constitution of APC clearly gave Nasarawa State Executive Committee the power to nominate who should replace Sen. Abdullahi Adamu. Given that Sen. Umaru Tanko Al-Makura is from Nasarawa State, and he has been very loyal to you, it was scandalous that you will opt for Dr. Ganduje with all the baggage of corruption allegation against him. Recall that before the March 2022 APC National Convention, Sen. Al-Makura aspired to become APC National Chairman and President Buhari was influenced to nominated Sen. Adamu over Sen. Al-Makura partly because he was alleged to be loyal you, it defies every logical reasoning that you will ignore provision of Article 31.5(i) to nominate Dr. Ganduje even when the same provision of the constitution was used to nominate Sen. Basiru Ajibola from Osun State as replacement of Sen. Iyiola Omisore.

 

The emergence of Dr. Ganduje as National Chairman of APC send the disturbing signal of being weakly committed to fighting corruption. This is very troubling and is neither representative of the interest of APC members, nor is it representative of the wider interest of Nigerians. If our democracy is to develop to the point of being capacitated to resolve our national challenges, the commitment of our leaders to fighting corruption must never be in doubt.

 

That our leaders in APC accepted the emergence of Dr. Ganduje as APC National Chairman without much resistance produces the second disturbing signal. This is because the absence of resistance was more a reflection of fear, whic is the new reality in APC. Once leaders and members of APC continue to feel threatened that when they express opposition against your decision, we may end up with the bigger danger of creating a police state. This may not arise from any conscious decision coming from you but will be produced from circumstances of having to rationalise or enforce your decisions, which may not be acceptable to party members and citizens. In fact, the first casualties of such reality will be fellow party members.

 

Largely because of the atmosphere of fear surrounding the emergence of Dr. Ganduje as National Chairman, the wider debate of using the vacancies created to respond to the challenge of inclusivity given that we won the 2023 election with a Muslim-Muslim ticket was lost. Rather than even attempting to respond to that challenge and demonstrate that truly we only invoke the Muslim-Muslim ticket as an electoral strategy, in a very insensitive manner we imposed another Muslim-Muslim scenario in the party with National Chairman and National Secretary both Muslims. And we want to claim we are a progressive party? What is the brand of our progressive politics? Certainly, not the one which Nigerians expect, which endears us to citizens on account of which Nigerians gave us the mandate to manage the affairs of government since 2015.

 

The third disturbing signal is the quality of your appointees. Sincerely, Your Excellency, throughout the 2023 electoral campaigns, one of the strong campaign points was that you know how to find talents. When it took you more than eight weeks to nominate your Ministers, the belief was that you are taking your time to identify indisputably proficient people. With due respect to all those you nominated, many party members and extension Nigerians were disappointed. It is clear to any discerning mind that political consideration eclipsed any other factor, definitely no argument about talent can be sustained. As it is, both as party members and as Nigerians, our expectation from your government has crashed.

 

This leads us to the fourth disturbing signal, which is about the management of policy process. When in your inaugural address you declared that petroleum subsidy is gone, it gave many of us the confidence that you have assumed office ready to take all the hard decisions and initiate measures for accelerated national development. Of course, no one expect that process of accelerated development will produce immediate results. But many of us expect that the details of initiatives will be clear and will not be reduced to propaganda. As things are, Nigerians are still waiting to know what the agenda of government is with respect to managing the downstream oil sector beyond saving the amount of money that used to be expended for subsidy payments.

 

The second issue related to management of policy initiatives is the exchange rate of the Naira. Some of us expect that decisions around exchange rate will be integral part of broader economic policy of government. Now, it would appear that isolated decision has been taken to float the Naira without any clear economic policy. The consequence is that the Naira is on a downward swing. Combined with rising cost of transport as a result of withdrawal of subsidy the inflationary pressure on the economy is very high. As a result, living condition is getting worse. At this rate, poverty incidence will be terribly high, beyond any rational expectations.

 

Mr. President, you need to urgently address these disturbing signals coming early in your tenure. No one should deceive you into believing that party members and leaders, and by extension Nigerians are not worried with all these disturbing signals. It will be a disservice to your leadership and to our people if we don’t bring these to your attention. You need to act fast to start correcting these disturbing signals before they become defining attributes of your administration and by extension our party. It is either you correct them, or we sign off any prospect of winning any future election.

 

I am confident that your indisputable commitment to progressive politics will be activated at this early period of your leadership to correct all these disturbing signals. Both as Nigerians and loyal APC members, we believe in your capacity to provide fair leadership. It is our hope that you are still committed to the founding vision of APC, which is progressive politics. And as someone who was in the trenches fighting for democracy in Nigeria, our expectation is that under your leadership, democracy will achieve its representative credentials, based on which the ability of Nigerians to influence your decisions will be high. This is only possible is you take appropriate steps to correct all the disturbing signals arising from decisions taken directly by you. May Allah (SWT) continue to guide you and hopefully through that ensure that it is Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the progressive politician that will rule Nigeria for the next four years! Amin!!!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Opening Door to Renew the Hope of Workers

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

Late in the evening of October 1, 2023, the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mal. Mohammed Idris released a statement announcing resolutions reached between Federal Government and leadership of Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Trade Union Congress (TUC). The resolutions acknowledge decisions of the Federal Government to pay all federal government employees additional N25,000 for the next six months, fast-track provision of Compressed Natural Gas Buses (CNG) to ease public transportation, provide funds for micro and small-scale enterprises, waived VAT on diesel for the next six months, and commence payment of N25,000 to 15 million households from October – December 2023. These are measures announced by President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the Independence broadcast to the nation.

 

Accordingly, among other agreements, NLC and TUC agreed to consider these offers by the Federal Government with a view to suspending the strike action scheduled to commence on Tuesday, October 3, 2023. Shortly following the statement by the Honourable Minister, the Chief of Staff to President Asiwaju Tinubu, Rt. Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila announced that Government has reviewed upward the proposed additional payment to federal government employees from the N25,000 to N35,000. Certainly, this may have been necessitated by demands from labour leaders who were early reported to have rejected the N25,000 offer made by President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

Both the Federal Government and leadership of NLC and TUC should be commended for this development. With that, no doubt the development should encourage NLC and TUC leaders and their members and by extension Nigerians to have stronger confidence in the commitment of President Asiwaju Tinubu and the Federal Government to address challenges facing Nigerians in the face of existing hardship occasioned by the withdrawal of petroleum subsidy and therefore suspend the strike. This is not just about the offers the government made as contained in the Independence Day Broadcast of President Asiwaju Tinubu, but more about the openness with which the government used the offers to engage leaders of NLC and TUC immediately after the broadcast.

 

If past experiences are anything to go by, ideally following the broadcast of President Asiwaju Tinubu, government would have resorted to propaganda and opted for some shadow engagement in the media about how the government has met all the demands of labour. Instead, government invited leadership of NLC and TUC, listen to all their demands and responses to the offers being made. With clear open mind, government was able to agree with the leadership of NLC and TUC that instead of limiting the payment of N25,000 monthly to junior category of federal employees, the payment will be made to all category of federal employees. At the same time, government also agreed with the leadership of NLC and TUC to increase the payment to N35,000 monthly for the next six months.

 

This clearly demonstrated strong commitment by the President Asiwaju Tinubu led Federal Government to manage public policy based on disposition to negotiate with Nigerians and win agreements. This has been the foundational principles of democracy that has been weak or ineffectual. As a young government, less than four months in office, all committed democrats should encourage the President Asiwaju Tinubu led government to build on this. Building on the resolutions reached is not just about commending government and the leadership of NLC and TUC, but to highlight all the challenges that would come with the implementation of the proposals, so that the scope of negotiations is broadened to engender sustainability.

 

Some of the challenges that can readily be identified include for instance what happens at the end of the six months of implementing the additional N35,000 payment to federal employees? Noting that already government has announced its intention to open negotiations for the review of minimum wage in the country, should Nigerians expect that agreement for a new minimum wage will be reach within the six months? If agreement for the new minimum wage is to be reached within the six months, should Nigerians expect that the new minimum wage will not be less than the aggregate of the current minimum wage plus the additional N35,000 being offered for the next six months? In which case, since the current minimum wage is N30,000, should Nigerians therefore expect a new national minimum wage at least N65,000?

 

Before attempting to explore any probability of a new N65,000 minimum wage, perhaps, it will be necessary to first check the implication of additional N35,000 to all federal employees. Based on records of Bureau of Public Service Reform (BPSR), total number of workers in the Federal Civil Service is 720,000, with monthly cost of about N320 billion. Additional N35,000 to all category of federal employees will mean additional N25 billion to the monthly personnel cost of federal government, which is about 7.7% increase. By extension, it means that if minimum wage is to be increased to N65,000, the additional cost to federal government would be less than 10%.

 

What about workers at states, local governments, and organised private sector? Can states, local governments and organised private sector also be given similar offers? Can these categories of employers afford any additional offer? If not, what contingency measure should be taken to capacitate these categories of employers to mitigate the sufferings of their workforce occasioned by the withdrawal of subsidies? Finding answers to these questions is at the root of challenges of managing labour relations in the country. In fact, inability to address these questions is responsible for all the challenges of guaranteeing ability of all employers to comply with statutory provisions of minimum wage in the country. As it is, beyond the Federal Government, many state governments and some big private employers, are already in default of existing statutory provision of national minimum wage of N30,000.

 

In fact, not up to 20 states governments have implement the N30,000 minimum wage. Almost all the 774 local governments are in default. Many would rationalise this with reference to corruption and fiscal indiscipline of political leaders. Without dismissing such allegations, the reality of managing labour relations in the country require higher commitment to find solutions to problems of corruption and fiscal indiscipline by political leaders. Finding solutions to the problems of corruption and fiscal indiscipline by political authorities is a function of strengthening accountability.

 

Most times, issues of accountability are reduced to question of management of existing resources. Part of the received wisdom in Nigeria is that government has all the resources, which is being embezzled by political leaders, especially governors at state level. Many references are made to issues of security vote. If revenue indices are anything to go by, the truth is that Nigeria is poor. With a federal budget of about N20 trillion, which is about $30 billion, Nigeria is operating at about 10% its spending capacity. Countries like Brazil, India, Indonesia and even South Africa are operating budgets of more than $200 billion.

 

At state level, except for Lagos State, none of our state has N1 trillion budget. In fact, most states budgets are below N250 billion. With reference to personnel cost, average monthly costs for state governments are more than N2 billion. Many states generate less than N1 billion monthly. Average receipt from the federation account is between N3 and N4 billion. With such reality, capacity therefore to make additional payments to workers to cushion the effects of high prices of goods and services because of withdrawal of petroleum subsidy will be expecting too much.

 

Yet, given the reality, all employers should be able to copy the federal government initiative of making additional payments. Making additional payments to workers should be condition precedent for a new national minimum wage. The question is whether such condition precedent would be tailored towards strengthening Nigeria’s federalism. Debates about strengthening Nigeria’s federalism with respect to management of labour relations, especially the issue of minimum wage, have produced strong debate about amending the 1999 Nigerian Constitution to move labour matters from the exclusive list to concurrent list. This has produced a strong ideological opposition by the labour unions.

 

Given all the challenges facing Nigeria as a nation, and the need to produce a new template of partnership, it is important that the current negotiation between labour and federal government is used to lay a sustainable foundation for strong partnership with organised labour and employers. Part of the goal should be to introduce strategies to promote growth and competitiveness in all sectors, to improve productivity and wages. Therefore, without putting on the table any recommendation that could have ideological connotation, on account of which therefore would elicit any opposition, the question of increased revenue earnings should be jointly reviewed by representatives of governments (covering federal government and states), employers organisation and NLC and TUC.

 

Reviewing revenue earnings of employers should be objectively done in ways that should strengthen issues of accountability by public authorities in the country. Integral to strengthening accountability by public authority is the issue of setting clearly defined ambitious development targets. Noting that already, President Asiwaju administration has committed itself to achieving $1 trillion GDP in the next eight years, this must be broken down to indices of productivity in the country, which all employers and NLC and TUC should be committed to achieving based on negotiated partnership agreements.

 

Clear legal and institutional frameworks for collective bargaining in Nigeria between all employers of labour, including governments at all levels, and NLC and TUC should be strengthened. One of the things that must be acknowledged is that Nigeria has all the needed laws to facilitate the process of negotiations. These are provided under the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended, Trade Union Act, Labour (Employment) Act, Factory Act, Workmen’s Compensation Act, Trade Disputes (Essential Services) Act, etc. Procedural rules and regulations governing workplaces, including negotiations between employers and employees are provided. Specifically, ILO Convention 98, which guarantees the right to organise and bargain collectively is ratified under the Trade Unions Act. One of the things that can be deduced is that practice of collective bargaining between workers’ and employers’ organisations should be correlated with productivity and revenue indices.

 

A major challenge of Nigeria’s labour relations is the question of whether the needed environment will be created for all actors in the bargaining process to have confidence and commit themselves to producing the desired outcome of higher productivity and therefore higher revenue based on which demands for higher rewards can be sustained. That is what the current reality requires. Without achieving higher productivity and higher revenue in all sectors of the economy based on strategies to promote growth and improve productivity, the current offer of N35,000 monthly to federal employers will not cover all workers and may not translate to sustainability by the federal government in terms of producing a new national minimum wage that will aggregate the new federal government offer.

 

Therefore while commending both the Federal Government and the leadership of NLC and TUC for the landmark resolutions reached on October 1, 2023, which would have removed the threat of the October 3, 2023 strike action, it is important that the negotiation between the federal government, on the one hand, and NLC and TUC, on the other, is expanded to include all employers inclusive of organised private sector and state governments. The negotiations should be oriented to produce agreements to improve productivity and produce higher revenue in all sectors of the Nigerian economy based on which necessary frameworks of partnership agreements between all employers and organised labour in the country should be achieved.

 

This will give life to President Asiwaju’s commitment as contained in Renewed Hope 2023, when he categorically affirms that ‘Show us a door, we shall open it. Show us a road, we shall travel it. Show us a problem, we shall find a way to fix it. Show us an injustice, we shall strive to correct it, no matter how long it takes or how hard it gets.’ Improved productivity and increased revenue are the road to fixing the problem of high cost of living in the country. Putting in place frameworks for negotiation between employers and organised labour is what is required to correct injustice in the workplace in all sectors and in every section of the country. More than anything, this will open the door to renew the hope of Nigerian workers.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

APC: The Inconvenient Reality

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

The emergence of APC in 2013 raised the hopes of Nigerians that the party will provide a different model of party administration such that processes of candidates’ selection and party governance could allow for broader membership participation. Incidences of imposition of candidates and party leadership and allegations of large-scale corruption, which characterises PDP’s sixteen years tenure as a ruling party at federal level and in majority of the 36 states of the federation were also expected to end, or substantially reduced. The operative culture in PDP was that incidences of imposition of candidates made mockery of party primary. Largely because leaders of the PDP who are delegates during party primary were surrogates of aspiring candidates, manipulation of results of primary was the trademark for candidates selection. Similarly, allegations of vote buying during PDP primary was the order.

 

Without going into details, these were problems, which frustrated Nigerians and at the time of the emergence of APC in 2013, Nigerians wanted an alternative model of party administration. Not just an alternative model, Nigerians wanted a model that would eliminate or minimise incidences of imposition of candidates and party leaders as well as guaranteeing proficient and accountable party governance. Given the promise of CHANGE, combined with the popularity of former President Muhammadu Buhari, especially in the Northern parts of the country, Nigerians found in APC a new political adoration with the high optimism of birthing a new party different from what defines the PDP since 1999. The rest, as is often said, is now history – APC succeeded in replacing the PDP since 2015 and became the ruling party at federal level and in majority of the 36 states.

 

How have we as a ruling party performed? Have we been able to present a new model of party governance? Or did we collapse and therefore metamorphosed into another PDP in the name of APC? While as individuals we will have different explanations to the reality called APC today, the reality is that, as a party, it is yet to emerge as the model Nigerians expected when the it emerged in 2013. Incidences of imposition of candidates and allegations of vote buying unfortunately have gradually found strong expression in APC. With serving Governors alleged to be exercising what could be considered monopoly control of party structures at state levels, APC primary is reduced to window dressing activity, producing anointed candidates. Internal party contests are being muscled out of existence. Inducements to party leaders at all levels have graduated beyond rational comprehension.

 

Beyond all these, cost of party nomination forms in APC have become the most expensive in the political history of Nigeria. Recall that in 2014, ahead of the 2015 general elections, cost of APC Presidential and Gubernatorial nomination forms was respectively, N27.5 million and N5 million. In 2019, it was increased to N45 million and N22.5 million for Presidential and Gubernatorial nomination forms respectively. It rose to N100 million and N50 million in 2023 respectively. At this rate, by 2027, the cost of APC nomination form for Presidential election will not be less than N250 million. That of Gubernatorial election may not be less than N125 million.

 

While acknowledging that high cost of nomination forms for candidates for election assisted in mobilising large-scale financial resources for the party, it has also brought about allegations of large-scale corruption by APC leadership especially at national level. For instance, in 2023, APC realised more than N32 billion from sales of forms to aspiring candidates under the leadership of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu. Unfortunately, allegations of mismanagement of the funds accrued to the Party by Sen. Adamu, Sen. Iyiola Omisore and Barr. Ahmad El-Marzuq, National Chairman, National Secretary and National Legal Adviser characterised the two-year tenure of Sen. Adamu between March 2022 and July 2023, which led to their resignations.

 

Apart from allegations of mismanagement of financial resources, there were alleged cases of arbitrary and discretionary management of the party by Sen. Adamu, on account of which virtually all structures of the APC, notably, National Advisory Council, National Executive Committee and National Caucus, were frozen. The National Advisory Council, which by the provision of Article 13.2B(i) requires the National Secretary to ‘not later than one month after an elective convention, convene the meeting …at which its first leadership, including the Chairman, Deputy Chairman, Secretary and other officials that may be deemed necessary, shall be constituted, remained a proposition. The National Executive Committee, which by the provision of Article 25.2(i) of the APC Constitution is required to meet every quarter, met only once throughout the tenure of Sen. Adamu.

 

The reality is that between 2015 and today, APC function with most of its structures as provided in the party’s constitution not operational. Powers of these structures were usurped by leaders of the party, mainly the National Chairman and the President who should be the moral leader of the party mainly expected to act as the conscience of the Party. Between 2015 and 2023, during the tenure of former President Buhari, many party leaders and members were able to leverage the ‘moral authority’ of the former President to contest and seek redress of Constitutional infractions by leaders of the party. This is largely responsible for many of the internal leadership contestations in APC since 2019. Those contestations resulted in changes of leadership of the party at different times.

 

Sadly, experiences since the emergence of President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the new moral leader of the APC produce a new reality whereby potential infractions may be created by initiatives directly coming from the President himself. A typical example is the case of altering the APC’s zoning formula by arbitrarily moving the position of the National Chairman from North-Central to North-West. Even when for instance the North-Central remained shut out of consideration from any of the key positions in the leadership of the two chambers of the National Assembly, the position of National Chairman is being occupied by Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje from Kano State, North-West with North-Central completely merginalised both in the party and in the APC controlled Federal Government led by President Asiwaju Tinubu. Intriguingly, APC leaders are calm, not even leaders from North-Central seem to be disturbed by this new reality. What has really taken over President Asiwaju Tinubu?

 

Arguably, the situation in APC after ten years of existence as a party and eight years as a ruling party is gradually catching up with the low standards set by PDP during its sixteen years. It is quite alarming that a party envisioned to be progressive will be associated with such arbitrary conduct. All these could be explained with reference to ensuring that structures of the APC are allowed to operate as provided in the APC Constitution. If structures of the party are allowed to operate, decisions of party organs would be binding on all leaders including the National Chairman and the President. Why should leaders who claimed to be progressive be opposed to meetings of party organs? If APC leaders are not disposed to allowing party organs to meet based on which they subordinate themselves and therefore become accountable to party members, to what extend would Nigerians expect that elected leaders produced by the APC, including President Asiwaju Tinubu, would be accountable to Nigerians?

 

If care is not taken, at the rate we are indulging our leaders in APC, tolerating, and accommodating undemocratic conduct and, perhaps, illegality, we would end up betraying all the goodwill of Nigerians and with it also erode all the electoral viability of the APC. As things are, with President Asiwaju Tinubu successful to have his way to produce Dr. Ganduje and Sen. Ajibola Basiru as the successors to Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore, gradually they have returned the APC to business-as-usual whereby all structures of the APC remained frozen. Otherwise, what is the explanation that after almost three months since the emergence of Dr. Ganduje and Sen. Basiru as National Chairman and National Secretary respectively, the National Advisory Council is yet to be convened and there is no indication that the National Executive Committee and National Caucus will be meeting any time soon. If part of the wrongdoing of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore is immobilising structures of the party for more than two years, are we about to start witnessing another era of immobilisation of party structures under Dr. Ganduje and Sen. Basiru?

 

Ordinarily, one would expect that given all the controversial circumstances surrounding the emergence of Dr. Ganduje, as the National Chairman who enjoys the confidence of President Asiwaju Tinubu, Dr. Ganduje will take every step to manage the party differently. In fact, given that he came in at a time when all the financial resources generated during the sales of nomination forms were squandered by the Sen. Adamu leadership, it should have served as incentives for Dr. Ganduje to activate structures of the APC and use them to initiate new strategies for financial resource mobilisation. For instance, it is a known fact that notwithstanding provision of Article 22A of the APC, which outlined subscription, fees and levies of members, even with a claimed membership of more than forty million, the APC is yet to fix any rate for membership subscription. What is then the value of having such a large membership?

 

Perhaps, the fact of valueless membership is responsible for low turnout of members to vote for the candidates of the APC during the 2023 elections, which is responsible for why President Asiwaju Tinubu was only able to win the election with votes less than a quarter of the size of the claimed membership of the APC. And having had nasty experiences in the hands of the Sen. Adamu leadership of the party who by all intent and purposes behaved more as covert supporters of opposition candidates, perhaps, it was the main reason why President Asiwaju Tinubu supported the demand for Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore to resign from the leadership of the APC. Does this mean that President Asiwaju Tinubu is not committed to restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision of being a progressive party?

 

Merely asking such a question is heartbreaking. Given all the role President Asiwaju Tinubu played, first during the merger negotiations that produced the APC, to all the sacrifices made producing all the electoral victory of the party since 2015, and finally to the progressively patriotic leadership he provided to block attempts by conservative elements within the APC to impose a so-called consensus Presidential candidate for the APC in 2023, the least APC leaders and members expected is that broader democratic openings, which will guarantee transparent decision making processes in line with provisions of the APC constitution will be the defining attributes of the new leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu. As things are, five months into the tenure of President Asiwaju Tinubu, most APC leaders are as unclear about the direction of party or the government as ordinary Nigerians. For instance, what is the status of the leadership of Dr. Ganduje as the National Chairman of the APC? Is his tenure ending in March 2026? Or is he starting a new four-year tenure to end in August 2027? What happens to other members of the National Working Committee who were elected with Sen. Adamu? In short, when should we expect the next National Convention of the APC?

 

With the constitutional structures of the APC immobilised, Party leaders and members are left in the dark. In addition, will the North-Central continue to be marginalised throughout the tenure of President Asiwaju Tinubu? Why wouldn’t, for instance, Sen. Jibrin Barau, who is from Kano State where Dr. Ganduje come from, be asked to make the sacrifice by relinquishing his position as Deputy Senate President, in favour of a Senator from North-Central? Ideally, these are issues that could be debated internally if structures of the APC are allowed to operate. But because structures have been frozen with Dr. Ganduje conducting the affairs of the party based on business-as-usual practice, even when recommendations are made, they are simply ignored.

 

APC leaders must wake up and actively support President Asiwaju Tinubu to succeed. Success in this case is about restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party. It is simply unacceptable that APC will continue to exist as a party that is in contempt of its own rules. It is also unacceptable that President Asiwaju Tinubu will inspire us to fight against the culture of imposition, only for him to initiate actions that risk compromising him as a leader who tolerate, if not promote imposition within the APC. As loyal members and leaders of the APC, we need to demonstrate both competence and capacity to reproduce best practice initiatives of our leaders. Constitutional order cannot be restored in APC if members and leaders failed to wake up to the responsibility of contesting decisions that are wrong, taken by either President Asiwaju Tinubu or Dr. Ganduje. Once APC leaders and members become tolerant of every decision of President Asiwaju Tinubu and Dr. Ganduje, culture of arbitrariness will be so entrenched such that APC will collapse and become PDP 2.0.

 

As it is today, the only distinction between APC and PDP is that there is strong internal contestation in APC. At least, up to the end of the tenure of former President Buhari, it was possible to contest decisions of all party leaders, including the decisions of former President Buhari as the leader of the party between May 2015 and May 2023. With the way, party leaders and members seemed to be pushed into accepting decisions of President Asiwaju Tinubu with hardly any resistance even when incidences of unfairness against members and sections of the country are obvious, portent both personal risk for President Asiwaju Tinubu as well as obvious political consequences for the APC as a political party. It portends personal risk for President Asiwaju Tinubu because if not moderated he may overreach himself and end up producing the circumstances that would lead to his defeat in 2027. Political consequences for the APC largely because once we are out of power, all the privileges associated with being a ruling party will be lost.

 

Being a ruling party, many party leaders are contented with the privilege of being appointees of governments controlled by the APC. This is quite troubling because, we are hardly worried about the performances of governments controlled by the APC. Which is partly responsible for why the state of the nation is so alarming, the economy is on a downward spiral and instead of mobilising party structures to support the Asiwaju Tinubu led Federal Government, it is business-as-usual. Almost all APC leaders are calling on Nigerians to be patient without any logical explanation. No doubt, hard decisions are required to move Nigeria forward. However, as a party, APC leaders should be clear about all the plans being implemented by President Asiwaju Tinubu, which will produce the renewed hope we promised Nigerians during the 2023 campaigns.

 

In any case, how can we renew the hope of Nigerians if we can not respect our rules? Not respecting our rules simply means inability to renew the hope of APC members about guaranteeing that both President Asiwaju Tinubu and Dr. Ganduje would abide by the provisions of the APC constitution and return the APC to its founding vision of being a progressive party. Once we fail to renew the hope of APC members, the hope of Nigerians can only be imagined. Therefore, it must be unequivocally stated that getting President Asiwaju Tinubu to succeed is not about repeating the rhetoric of renewed hope. It is about being honestly object and selfless to be ready to contest every wrong decision or initiative taken by both President Asiwaju Tinubu, Dr. Ganduje and all APC leaders. As proudly loyal members of APC, we must not allow President Asiwaju Tinubu to collapse into becoming a typical Nigerian political leader whose only mission is to win election.

 

Nigerians invested so much confidence in APC, on account of which they have voted for the party and its candidates since 2015. APC members and leaders have made all the sacrifices required to attract the confidence of Nigerians. It will be a big political tragedy and disservice to Nigerians if APC is allowed to be destroyed by condoning undemocratic practices of imposition and unconstitutional conduct of running affairs of the APC without allowing the structures of the party to be functional as provided in the APC constitution. Democracy is about rule of law. Any party that is in contempt with its own rules cannot produce accountable, representative, and responsible leaders. For APC and President Asiwaju Tinubu to turn a new positive democratic leaf, restoring constitutional order and returning APC to its founding vision of being a progressive party is non-negotiable!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Nigerian Politics of Morbid Desire for Naked Power

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

One of the famous quotes of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo called for ‘urgent and massive need for moral and spiritual reconstruction: the kind which will help to demolish morbid desire for naked power and domination and ensure justice, equity and fair play for all.’ Chief Awolowo died on May 9, 1987, more than 36 years ago, which means he would have made this call more than four decades ago. Certainly, whatever could have prompted him to raise such an alarm wouldn’t have been anywhere near what is being experienced today. ‘Morbid desire for naked power’ has become the political culture in Nigeria. From all indication, it is the incentive that drives virtually all aspirations for political offices, with the primary aim of controlling (dominating) citizens. Once successful, people in power (elected leaders) take decisions arbitrarily. Notion of justice, equity and fair play is reduced to empty political expressions.

 

As Nigerians, we must admit, this is what defines the current Fourth Republic since 1999. We have moved across different leaders, all produced through elections. Imperfect as the elections may be, certainly the leaders have the mandate of Nigerians. The manifest reality of injustices, inequitable representation, and unfairness by elected leaders in the country between 1999 and 2015, was thought to be only associated with leaders produced by the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). This partly accounted for why when leaders of the former legacy parties – Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples’ Party (ANPP) and Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) successfully negotiated the merger that produced the All Progressive Congress (APC), the dominant belief in the country is that a new reality is being created, which will end the political culture of injustice, inequitable representation and unfairness in the country.

 

With former President Muhammadu Buhari and current President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the leaders of the APC, Nigerians believed and supported the APC. Undeniably, the expected ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigeria, with APC in power since 2015, remained a wish. Even with President Asiwaju Tinubu in power today, who has throughout his political career associated himself with late Chief Awolowo’s philosophical and ideological leanings, ‘morbid desire for naked power’ seems to be the driving aspirations of his leadership. Otherwise, how can anyone explain the emerging attributes of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government? Complaints about poor access to the President by many APC leaders is widespread. Capacity of APC leaders to exercise influence on President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government is very narrow.

 

Without any doubt, the orientation, attributes, and behavioural patterns of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government is virtually the same with that of former President Buhari. Both the two are governments produced by APC but interestingly, both APC as a political party and leaders of the party had little or no say in the two governments. Appointments into positions in governments were or are practically carried out exclusively without consulting either the party organs or leaders of the party both during the tenure of former President Buhari and currently under President Asiwaju Tinubu. Criteria and qualifications for appointments were or are known only to the two leaders and their close associates. Consequently, party leaders and members became orphans, perhaps worse than when they were in opposition parties.

 

One important distinction is that in the case of the current President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government, steps are being taken to replace all heads of Federal Government Agencies. This is a complete departure from what obtained under former President Buhari whereby most heads of Federal Government Agencies appointed by PDP Government of former President Goodluck Jonathan were retained virtually throughout the eight-year tenure of former President Buhari, including Mr. Godwin Emefieli, former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. This is mainly responsible for the poor relationship between leaders of the APC and Federal Government appointees even in their respective states. It is also the incentive for most of the cases of anti-party activities by many Federal Government appointees during the 2023 general elections.

 

Interestingly, however, with constitutional organs of the APC not functioning, these disloyal leaders of the APC have not only gone unpunished, but there are also many allegations of some of these recalcitrant appointees being reappointed in the President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government. Like during the tenure of former President Buhari, absence of input by organs of the APC in the decisions of current President Asiwaju is producing the undesirable consequences of loyal APC supporters heading some of the Federal Government Agencies being arbitrarily removed even before the end of their tenure.

 

Organs of the APC, since the 2015 electoral victory, never function as provided by the APC constitution. As a result, Article 13.3A(vii) of the APC constitution, which requires the National Executive Committee of the APC to ‘Examine the actions taken or legislation proposed or passed by any Government, Legislative House or Local Government Area/Area Council and determine what further actions the Party should take’ is rendered idle. Inability to make organs of the party functional and through the meetings of organs hold elected leaders accountable further entrenched the reality of ‘morbid desire for naked power’, which is very disturbing. Sadly, there seems to be attempts by some people in the current President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government and their supporters to explain this worrisome reality with reference to how bad former President Buhari’s government had destroyed the country.

 

As leaders and members of APC, we must take responsibility. Although, many of us were neither appointees nor direct beneficiaries of the former President Buhari’s government, as members and leaders of the APC, we were part of that government, and to that extend therefore coconspirators and liable for whatever is the scorecard of that government. Any claim to the contrary will amount to denial of all our failings or shortcomings and therefore outrightly being dishonest. If at all we are honest, as committed members of the APC, who were part of the vision to negotiate the merger of APC with the foresight of changing Nigerian politics (moral and spiritual reconstruction), we must acknowledge today’s reality, based on which we must reopen a new chapter of political negotiation in the country.

 

Reopening new chapter of political negotiation in the country should be about acknowledging all the shortcomings of both the two governments produced by the APC under the leadership of former President Buhari and current President Asiwaju Tinubu. Honest acknowledgement of shortcomings should at the same time recognise the achievements recorded during the tenure of former President Buhari. Once, as party leaders and members, we allow people in the current government of President Asiwaju Tinubu and their supporters to dishonestly explain their ‘morbid desire for naked power’ based on which they are not disposed to allowing structures of the APC to function as provided in the party’s constitution, ability of the President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government to undertake ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ as proposed by late Chief Awolowo would be enfeebled. Once that is the case, the promise of Renewed Hope, which was our campaign promise will be an empty slogan.

 

APC leaders and members, as part of the demonstration of commitment to ensure that President Asiwaju Tinubu succeed in Renewing the Hope of Nigerians should support the campaign to reopen new chapter of political negotiations in APC with the objective of restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision. Restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision should be oriented to achieve ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigerian politics, which was the dream of late Chief Awolowo as far back as more than four decades ago. If late Chief Awolowo was the ‘best President’ Nigeria never had, why should his claimed political disciple in the person of President Asiwaju Tinubu fail to achieve his dream? Why should President Asiwaju Tinubu allow ‘morbid desire for naked power’ to take over his government?

 

Specifically, reopening new chapter of political negotiations in the country should be about exerting pressure on the APC under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu to retore constitutional order and return APC to its founding vision, which is about ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigerian politics. This is centrally about strengthening mechanism for holding all elected leaders accountable. Absence of this is making President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government to function epileptically. This moment, it is taking excellent initiative strengthening the confidence of Nigerians that it will Renew the Hopes of Nigerians, the next moment, it is producing completely contradictory results eroding all existing expectations.

 

Given our political reality as a nation, it must be emphasised that ‘morbid desire for naked power’ by political leaders is not peculiar to APC. In fact, it is what is consuming the PDP so much so that today, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar is succeeding to destroy the PDP. And Mr. Obi Obi has taken over Labour Party (LP) without any corresponding commitment to build the structures of the party based on which elected leaders produced by the LP can be held accountable. This reality has stagnated Nigeria and hold the nation back into a state of permanent electoral contests. Public debate in the country is all about who should be the leader and never about holding leaders accountable.

 

If anything, the potential to strengthen the structures of any of the existing parties in Nigeria is stronger in APC largely because it is about the only party with strong internal contests aimed at reforming the party. The test of whether President Asiwaju Tinubu is at all a true political disciple of late Chief Awolowo will be determined based on his capacity to initiate actions towards ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigerian politics, which should start with restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision. A situation whereby elected leaders produced by the APC will be allowed to run affairs of governments controlled by the party arbitrarily without permitting organs of the party to guide processes of appointment and decisions, is simply anti Awoism, retrogressive and unacceptable.

 

As party leaders and members, who lived the lives of ‘internally displaced politicians’ virtually throughout the eight years of former President Buhari, and about to start a new era of displacement during the tenure of President Asiwaju Tinubu, we need to appreciate that the fact of our displacement is the product of the non-functionality of the structures of the APC. It doesn’t matter whether it was former President Buhari or current President Asiwaju, or any other political leader for that matter is the President. So long as elected leaders are allowed to function in an atmosphere which renders structures of the party that produced them worthless and inactive, ‘morbid desire for naked power’ will continue to be the political culture and all claims to commitment for ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’, or changing Nigeria as promised by APC will elude citizens.

 

Just like the situation before 2015 whereby Nigerians were confronted with a ruling party, PDP, which was in denial of the challenges facing Nigerian politics that entrenched ‘morbid desire for naked power’, APC is gradually moving into state of self-denial with APC government led by President Asiwaju Tinubu retaining the same behavioural attribute of demobilising APC structures and blocking them from operating in line with the provisions of the party constitution. This portend the danger of being thrown out of power in 2027 just like PDP experienced in 2015. APC leaders (including President Asiwaju Tinubu) and members may wish to delude themselves into believing anything to the contrary, the reality is that there is a limit to which Nigerians can continue to tolerate and accommodate injustice, inequitable representation, and unfairness on account of ‘morbid desire for naked power’ by leaders entrusted with governmental responsibilities.

 

The fact of living with entrenched ‘morbid desire for naked power’ will continue to reduce APC leaders and members to the status of ‘internally displaced politicians’ and problems of injustice, inequitable and unfair representation in both the party and government produced by the APC will continue. Already, in less than six months since the inauguration of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government, insensitive decisions have been take, which marginalised the North-Central in both the leadership of the APC and the leadership of the National Assembly. Not even the emergence of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje as the National Chairman of the APC, who is from Kano State, North-Central has elicited any rational consideration to renegotiate the leadership of the Senate for instance, whereby another person, Sen. Barau Jibrin, from the same Kano State is occupying the position of Deputy Senate President. Ideally, any claim to progressive politics would have compelled President Asiwaju Tinubu, Dr. Ganduje and all leaders of APC to recognise the ‘moral and spiritual’ burden requiring the need to reconstruct the leadership of the Senate to ‘ensure justice, equity and fair play for all’ by replacing Sen. Barau with a ranking Senator from North-Central as Deputy Senate President.

 

Like late Chief Awolowo has argued, the need for a campaign to end ‘morbid desire for naked power’ in Nigerian politics is urgent and massive. Nigerians must not allow serving political leaders to reduce the current challenges facing the country to the cheap question of who will emerge as the next President of Nigeria in 2027. Whether President Asiwaju Tinubu will continue for another four years after 2027 or not should be determined based on his ability or otherwise to restore constitutional order and return the APC to its founding vision of being oriented as a progressive political party. Just like the case of negotiating the merger that produce the APC, which started in 2012, after the 2011 general elections, more than three years before the 2015 general elections, if Nigerian politics is to move forward such that structures of political parties, are activated and made functional, which is a fundamental precondition for ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigerian society, reopening political negotiations in the country aimed at ‘demolishing morbid desire for naked power’ is ‘urgent and massive’ as prophesised by the revered late Chief Awolowo.

 

APC leaders, including President Asiwaju Tinubu have very limited choices in this respect. It is quite worrisome and disappointing that with every change in leadership of the party, respect for rules of the APC as contained in the APC constitution gets further eroded. Very troubling, after ten years of APC existence, the National Advisory Council, which is expected to serve as the conscience of the party is yet to be constituted. The APC has no defined funding mechanism. The party doesn’t operate any budget and doesn’t render financial account to any organ. Almost all operations of the party, including managing its finances is manage in ad hoc manner based on the personal discretion of the National Chairman. These were the main issues, which were responsible for the internal disagreements with the leadership of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore leading to their resignations.

 

Almost three months into the tenure of Dr. Ganduje and Sen. Ajibola Basiru, nothing has changed. If anything, financial management has gotten worse as the APC is unable to meet its financial obligation. Organs of the party are not being mobilised to initiate responses. Outside the National Working Committee, which meets weekly, no organ of the party is meeting. At this rate, it can only be predicted that under the leadership of Dr. Ganduje, the APC will only mark time to produce candidates for 2027 elections. Once this is the case, Renewed Hope agenda as promised by President Asiwaju Tinubu would be reduced to entrenching ‘morbid desire for naked power’ and many APC leaders and members would continue to exist as internally displaced politicians. To avoid this, APC leaders and members must reopen strong campaign to restore constitutional order and return the APC to its founding vision.

 

‘Urgent and massive need for moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigeria to ‘demolish morbid desire for naked power’ is a critical success factor for Renewing the Hopes of Nigerians. Like is often said, charity begins at home, Renewing the Hopes of Nigerians must start with restoring constitutional order and returning APC to its founding vision based on which members can have stronger influences on governments produced by the party, especially the Federal Government led by President Asiwaju Tinubu. The capacity of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government to achieve ‘moral and spiritual reconstruction’ of Nigeria in line with the political foresight and ingenuity of late Chief Awolowo who is supposed to be the political role model of President Asiwaju Tinubu is only possible if structures of the APC are allowed to function in line with the provision of the party’s constitution. Anything short of that will amount to political betrayal of late Chief Awolowo. President Asiwaju Tinubu must never allow history to record him as one of those who betrayed late Chief Awolowo.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Agonising Experience of Being APC Member

Message to APC Leaders

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

Your Excellencies, I want to sincerely express my gratitude many party leaders for tolerating me all these years. Conscious of the fact that I have often taken provocative positions regarding developments within the APC, but despite that many party leaders have been very receptive. I am very humbled and challenged to remained committed to the growth and development of our party. I am convinced beyond all doubts that our party, APC, represent both the present and the future of democracy in Nigeria. APC is not just the ruling party, as it is today, it is about the only party that permit strong internal contests, not just during elections, but even when there are no elections.

 

Without going into details, this was what defines our experiences between 2019 and 2023. In fact, those strong internal contests were the critical success factors for the emergence of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria today. No doubt, President Asiwaju Tinubu provided the needed leadership both as a National Leader and as our Presidential candidate for 2023 elections. The expectation of many party leaders and members is that the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu as the successor to former President Muhammadu Buhari would enable us to reform the party and return it to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party.

 

I wish I can say with confidence that our party is going through such a reform. Sadly, instead of reforming the APC to return it to its founding vision, we are consolidating and emerging as a malfunctioned and despotic party organisation, which is increasingly becoming a replica of the PDP by every passing day. In addition, we today have an APC that is completely in contempt with its own rules. None of the organs of the party is functioning in line with the provisions of the Constitution. Partly because structures of the party are not functioning in lines with provisions of the APC constitution, leaders of the Party are not accountable.

 

Recall that issues of lack of accountability and refusal to allow structures of the APC to operate in lines with provisions of the APC Constitution were the main disagreements we had with Sen. Abdullahi Adamu when he was the National Chairman between April 2022 and July 2023. These are issues that are again rearing their ugly heads under the leadership of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje. Beyond these issues, there are also the problems of funding facing the leadership Dr. Ganduje.

 

At personal level, I have tried to present recommendations to Dr. Ganduje, including a funding proposal for the party. Painfully, I am not able to convince him and the leadership of the party to consider some of the recommendations and proposals. Or, at least, I am not able to get any feedback that my proposal is worthy of consideration. As things are, it is also very clear that access to Dr. Ganduje is becoming narrower and narrower. In the circumstance, one is left with no option but to conclude that I am only being tolerated.

 

I have been a member of APC since its formation. I was privileged to be a member of Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) before the merger and was one of those who started public advocacy for the merger as far back as April 2012. No doubt, because one had summoned the courage to give honest advises to our leaders, including former President Buhari and current President Asiwaju, I only had remote relationship with these leaders. Somehow, many people close to these leaders consider me antagonist, largely on account of many of the provocative recommendations one had make. For instance, I was one of those who campaigned that both the two leaders, former President Buhari and current President Asiwaju Tinubu, should not aspire to emerge as the Presidential candidate of APC in 2015, if the merger negotiation is to succeed.

 

After the merger, I was opposed to former President Buhari emerging as the Presidential candidate of APC for 2015 for the simple reason that combining moral authority with statutory responsibility of being President will undermine the capacity of party leaders to influence his decisions. That has come to pass and today, the model of leadership we are presenting to Nigerians is for serving Presidents to combine moral authority with statutory responsibility. Some may argue, this was also the operative model under PDP.

 

Possibly, yes. But was that not what we wanted to change? Again, recall that prior to the emergence of APC in 2013, problems of lack of internal democracy and the overbearing manipulation of candidates selection process for elections was a source of frustration for Nigerians. Almost all registered political parties, including our legacy parties, operate as closed shops whereby so-called Godfathers are the proprietors of the parties. These so-called Godfathers monopolised the emergence of candidates at all levels.

 

APC emerged with the promise of change. And most Nigerians interpreted this to mean changing the paradigm, which determines the emergence of candidates. Perhaps, in 2014, ahead of the 2015 general election, there was a slight shift in paradigm, which was more liberal and participatory. Between 2015 and 2023, increasingly, APC was corrupted, and Godfathers took over virtually all the processes of candidates emergence. The only exception was the case of the emergence of the Presidential candidate.

 

Of course, in the case of the emergence of the Presidential candidate, there were attempts to impose a candidate other than Asiwaju Tinubu for the 2023 Presidential election. Many party leaders and members rose to the occasion and resisted the attempt. Good enough, we succeeded in defeating the attempt to impose a Presidential candidate. Interestingly, even after that, forces of reaction within the APC attempted to both sabotage and undermine the electoral prospect of the APC and all its candidates, especially Asiwaju Tinubu who was the Presidential candidate. After that was defeated, with Asiwaju Tinubu emerging as the President-elect, we had the irritating experiences of cohabiting with a party leadership that was antagonistic to the leadership of Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

At a time when it was convenient for many to do sit-down-look, some of us rose to the occasion and campaigned for the removal of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore from the leadership of the party. Speaking for myself, I did so not based on any expectation of being rewarded. In fact, if anything, I thought the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu would prioritise returning the party to its founding vision of becoming a truly progressive party. This should have been the best reward for our sacrifices and courage to resist the reactionary attempt to undermine the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu. It was with this in mind that I expressed the ambition of remaining in the party leadership.

 

Events since the resignation of Sen. Adamu and Sen. Omisore on July 17, 2023, suggest that President Asiwaju Tinubu’s priority may be different and may not include returning the APC to its founding vision. Having openly expressed my disagreement about some of the decisions taken, including the emergence of Dr. Ganduje as the APC National Chairman, I don’t expect everyone, including President Asiwaju Tinubu to support all my actions. The least, however, I expect every party leader, including President Asiwaju Tinubu, to acknowledge my contributions both to the development of APC, as well as the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu as the APC Presidential candidate and eventually as President of the Federal Republic.

 

I am not making any claim and I am not demanding anything extraordinary. My expectation is that President Asiwaju Tinubu and all his appointees, especially those saddled with the responsibility of managing his relationship with party leaders and members, should do so with humility and respect to other party leaders and members. As things are, it would have been more rewarding if one had been antagonistic, or opportunistic to the person of President Asiwaju Tinubu. When, for instance, party leaders who were boisterously opposed to the Presidential ambition of President Asiwaju Tinubu are today appointees in the Federal Government, and in the case of Governors such as Sen. Hope Uzodinma, who financed the attempt to manipulate the emergence of Sen. Ahmed Lawan as the consensus Presidential candidate of APC, emerging as the Chairman of Progressive Governors beat the imagination of every founding leader of APC, and in every respect heartbreaking.

 

I have attempted to reach out to many people who are adjudged to be close to President Asiwaju Tinubu, in the hope that one can can make recommendations that can convince President Asiwaju Tinubu to prioritise reforming the APC. At the minimum, it should not be too much to have the expectation that returning the APC to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party should be the priority of President Asiwaju Tinubu. I am only able to succeed in meeting Dr. Ganduje, Chief Bisi Akande, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. Dr. Ganduje is the current National Chairman, and the three others were all former National Chairmen.

 

Apart from explaining circumstances leading to my decision to resign as APC National Vice Chairman North-West, I presented to them my perspectives both in terms of recollections of the internal struggles within the APC leading to the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu, as well as what needs to be done to reform the APC. These are documented and contained in my forthcoming publication, APC and Transition Politics. I have shared the manuscript to these party leaders and was hoping that eventually President Asiwaju Tinubu will agree to write the Foreword to the publication. In fact, Dr. Ganduje agree to assist to convince President Asiwaju Tinubu to write the Foreword. With the hope that both editing the manuscript and negotiation to get the Foreword from President Asiwaju Tinubu will be concluded in about two months, I projected that the public presentation of the publication can take place around the end of November 2023.

 

The idea of the public presentation was more about facilitating some forms of public engagement around the future of our party, APC, and by extension, the future of democracy in Nigeria. As an active member of the party, and someone who has been in the forefront of the struggle for democracy in Nigeria since 1980s, one could see that gradually and systemically, we are crashing to the point where PDP was before 2015. Disappointingly, we are getting to a point whereby, once you are marked as someone whose views are not in agreement with the priorities of elected leaders, access is blocked.

 

As things are, work on the manuscript APC and Transition Politics has been concluded and I am confronted with a brick wall. Access to both President Asiwaju Tinubu, Dr. Ganduje and many of the appointees close to them is hardly available. It is my hope that President Asiwaju Tinubu will write the Foreword. It is also my hope that both President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our elected and appointed representatives today, will always remember that the struggle to reform the APC and return it to its founding vision predates the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. If anything, President Asiwaju Tinubu provided leadership to that struggle and deservedly, he is today the main beneficiary.

 

Therefore, let it be known, blocking access to President Asiwaju Tinubu, or refusal of President Asiwaju Tinubu to be accessible will not end the struggle for the reform of APC. Both President Asiwaju Tinubu and all his appointees must recognise that, indeed, reforming the APC is an integral part of the struggle for the development of Nigerian democracy. APC emerged in 2013 with the historical mission of changing Nigerian politics such that our parties are internally democratic. Incontestably, both former President Buhari and current President Asiwaju gave us the needed leadership to inspire Nigerians into believing and committing their votes to the APC.

 

Eight years after, we are still on the starting line. APC is becoming more and more a replica of PDP with all the negative attributes. We have spent eight years under former President Buhari motionless, in terms developing the needed initiatives for party building. Are we also going to experience another era of zero initiative for party building under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu? Where is then the claim of being progressives? Where then is the justification or any link to being an awoist?

 

It is no doubt agonising and troubling that President Asiwaju Tinubu is starting his leadership tenure of APC by sending a very strong disturbing signal that reforming the APC is not his priority. Because reforming the APC is not his priority, out of all the leadership materials available to the party, Dr. Ganduje is his best candidate. Having achieved producing Dr. Ganduje as the National Chairman, whether party organs are functioning or not, it is not President Asiwaju Tinubu’s headache. It was also the reason why even if the emergence of Dr. Ganduje meant marginalisation of the people from North Central in both the party and the Federal Government, it is not important.

 

Perhaps, we need to remind President Asiwaju Tinubu and all APC leaders about Frantz Fanon’s timeless warning to the effect that ‘Each generation must, out of relative obscurity discover its mission, fulfill it, or betray it.’ President Asiwaju Tinubu and all APC leaders must be reminded about that APC founding mission of changing Nigerian politics, which is basically about internal reforms within our parties to facilitate the emergence of candidates for electoral contest through democratic means. President Asiwaju Tinubu and all APC leaders must not indulge themselves to imagine that simple defeat of PDP and producing former President Buhari and now President Asiwaju Tinubu as Presidents of the Federal Republic of Nigeria equates to the political change Nigerians are desirous of.

 

So long as APC will allow a situation that could be interpreted to mean consolidating the old political paradigm that promote lack of accountability and imposition of leadership, it means betrayal of the founding mission of APC. We can deceive ourselves to imagine that we can continue to succeed in emerging victorious in elections and successful leaders surround themselves with sycophants who only tell them what they want to hear, it will not change the reality of betrayal and it will not protect leaders.

 

As loyal party members, we will continue to campaign for the reform of APC and the reform of party politics generally in the country. Having access to leaders is an advantage. But it is never the sole determinant for a victory. For more than four decades we have been in this struggle. We will remain in the struggle for as long as we are alive. May Allah (SWT) guide President Asiwaju Tinubu, touch his heart to make him appreciate and commit himself to reform the APC based on enlighten self-interest! Amin!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Resolving APC’s Progressive Retrogression

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

Addressing the closing session of the 2023 cabinet retreat for Ministers, Presidential Aides, Permanent Secretaries and top Government functionaries on Wednesday, November 1, 2023, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu enjoined members of the cabinet not to “be afraid to make decisions, but don’t be antagonistic of your supervisor. If they are wrong, debate it. I stand before you and I’ve claimed on several occasions and I’m saying today again as the president, I can make mistakes, point it to me I would resolve that conflict, that error, perfection is only that of God Almighty. But you are there to help me succeed. Success I must achieve by all means necessary.”

 

As loyal members of the APC, and above all, as patriotic Nigerians, we are all here to make the President and Nigerian governments at all levels succeed. Being the father of the nation and the leader of the APC, President Asiwaju Tinubu is the supervisor in chief, and we will not antagonise him. We acknowledge the courage of the President to take all the necessary decisions. But like he enjoined members of his cabinet to debate wrong decisions of their supervisors, it is our hope that he will have the large heart to listen to us when we draw his attention to priority decisions he should be taking, not even mistakes, or perceived mistakes coming from his decisions as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Our objective of drawing his attention to prioritise decisions regarding certain issues is to help him to ‘succeed by all means necessary.”

 

First, the biggest problem many APC leaders have with President Asiwaju Tinubu’s government is inaccessibility. Perhaps, partly because of the challenge of managing pressure from people seeking political appointments in government, the assumption is that everybody seeking to meet the President or people around him will be lobbying for appointment. Although that could be true in many cases, such reality shouldn’t produce indiscriminate barricade. Recognising that problems of accessibility is common to all leaders, being committed to building a progressive party, which should idly be mass based capable of winning public support require leaders to be accessible.

 

Ordinarily, being political leaders produced by a party, in our case, APC, the requirement of influencing decisions of governments and leaders could be achieved through meetings of organs of the party. With organs of the APC frozen, party leaders are left with very little options but to seek audience with elected leaders in government, including President Asiwaju Tinubu. Recalling all the internal contestations within the APC since 2019, which borders on expanding the democratic scope within the party, largely due to inability of organs of the party to meet as required by the constitution, many party leaders expected that under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu the problems will be resolved. With party organs still frozen, even after replacing Sen. Abdullahi Adamu with Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje as the National Chairman, and now combined with inaccessible access to the President, possibility of influencing decisions of government will be remote.

 

Ability to influence decisions of government and elected representatives provides the main attraction for democracy. Part of the assumption is that democracy is founded on the logic that political parties should have manifestos. Prior to 2015, the major political frustration of citizens is that virtually all our parties have manifestos that exist only in the archives of INEC. Processes of merger negotiations of our old legacy parties stimulated strong internal debates and consultations about the manifesto of the APC between 2012 and 2013. The internal debates aggregated public expectations, which made Nigerians to strongly believe that the APC is radically different and therefore potentially and truly going to emerge as a progressive party.

 

There is no need belaboring the point that having won the 2015 election, the APC manifesto was virtually relegated to the same fate as that of other parties in the country. Throughout the tenure of former President Muhammadu Buhari, the APC manifesto was hardly a guide to decisions of government. In fact, many elected representatives and appointees may have served their tenure between 2015 and 2023 without any knowledge of the provisions of the APC’s manifesto. This legimised most of the criticisms against our party and all the governments it produced in the last eight years.

 

It is the hope of many party members and leaders that the unfortunate reality whereby the manifesto of APC is made redundant will change and being a government produced by the APC, the vision of the party as contained in the APC manifesto would guide policy initiatives of the government. Noting that the Renewed Hope 2023: Action Plan for a Better Nigeria was the premise for President Asiwaju Tinubu’s 2023 Presidential campaign, and to that extent therefore one of the important guides for policy initiatives, the extent to which all these are harmonised and unified with commitments contained in the APC manifesto is an important determinant of whether the leadership of President Asiwaju would prioritise building the APC as a truly progressive party.

 

Noting that the APC National Chairman, Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje was at the cabinet retreat, it should be assumed that, however defined, sessions of the retreat would have deliberated on some of these issues. In addition, review of APC’s challenges suggests the need to appeal to leaders, especially President Asiwaju Tinubu to take provisions of the APC’s manifesto much more seriously when designing policies. Beyond provisions of Renewed Hope 2023, it is important that the APC manifesto is used as the primary guide for policy design for all governments produced by the APC, including the Federal Government.

 

As much as party members and Nigerians can hold elected and appointed leaders in government responsible for delivering on campaign promises, party leaders, especially NWC members are ineffective in terms of regulating the conducts of elected representatives. Their ineffectiveness renders provisions of Article 13.4(xi), which required NWC members to ‘examine the activities, policies, programmes and legislation made by governments in the Federation, from time to time, in order to determine their alignment with the manifesto and Constitution of the Party, and when necessary, to make recommendations to the National Executive Committee for its actions’ indolent. The reality is that, just like elected and appointed representatives in government, there are many members of the NWC who are ignorant of the provisions of the APC manifesto. It is even possible that there are many members of the NWC who have never sighted the APC manifesto.

 

Once members of the NWC who are expected to be the custodians of both the APC Constitution and manifesto are ignorant of provisions of the APC manifesto, elected and appointed representatives in government will be weakly committed to delivering on campaign promises. Many would argue that the initiative of President Asiwaju Tinubu to establish a Result Delivery Unit with a Special Adviser to the President, Mrs. Hadiza Bala Usman, as the coordinator would strengthen capacity of the APC led Federal Government to deliver on its campaign promises. As much as that is true, it may not produce the needed ownership by APC leaders, based on which sustainability by future APC governments can be guaranteed.

 

The challenge of ensuring that governments produced by the APC use provisions of the party’s manifesto as primary guide for policy initiatives is even more compelling in the case of state governments. Part of the vision of setting up the Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) was informed by the objective of getting state governments produced by the APC to ‘commit themselves to specific policy actions in their states aimed at promoting the social democratic programmes of APC in line with provisions of the party constitution and manifesto’. Being facilitators of the merger negotiations that produced the APC, the founding members of the PGF, in recognition of the ideological orientation that informs provisions of the APC manifesto, which is social democratic, underpin policy orientation of all APC states to be also social democratic based on which the PGF Secretariat was mandated to facilitate development of initiatives that would produce policy synergy across APC controlled states.

 

Sustainably achieving all these would require corresponding appropriate capacity development within the organs of the APC. A situation whereby, the organs of the party are frozen and elected and appointed representatives in governments at all levels operate in complete isolation from party organs, could produce weak commitment to implementation of party manifesto and when, to the contrary, stronger commitments are produced, may not be sustainable. Absence of strong commitment to the APC manifesto is partly responsible for the unfortunate reality whereby the public perception about similarity between the APC and other parties in the country is getting stronger and almost impossible to contradict.

 

Beyond issues of strong public perception about similarity between the APC and other parties, there is also the troubling reality whereby it is increasingly becoming more expensive to aspire and win elections in APC, perhaps more expensive than in any other party. For instance, cost of APC Presidential and Gubernatorial nomination forms in 2014, ahead of the 2015 general elections, was respectively, N27.5 million and N5 million. In 2019, it increased to N45 million and N22.5 million for Presidential and Gubernatorial nomination forms respectively. It rose to N100 million and N50 million in 2023 respectively. At this rate, by 2027, the cost of APC nomination form for Presidential election will not be less than N250 million. That of Gubernatorial election may not be less than N125 million.

 

In the case of the 2015 general elections, it is most likely that many of those who emerged as the Governorship candidates for APC and won the party primary may have succeeded with far less than One Billion Naira (N1 billion). Although many would imagine such a cost as outrageous, this is most likely to be a very conservative estimate. There are states such as Lagos, Rivers, Delta and Akwa Ibom, which may have cost far above Two Billion Naira (N2 billion) to win the Governorship Primary in 2015. Like the case of cost of nomination forms, the cost certainly increased in 2019 and 2023 substantial.

 

In fact, the most disturbing reality was more reflected in the case APC Presidential primary. While in 2015, we had one of the excellent models of producing a Presidential candidate in the person of former President Muhammadu Buhari who wasn’t a moneybag, and therefore had to rely on the generosity of fellow party leaders and well-wishers to finance the campaign for his primary election in both 2015 and 2019, in 2023 the reverse completely happened as all those who aspired and contested for the APC Presidential primary, including President Asiwaju Tinubu shouldered all the financial burden for their primary campaign. To that extent, it is possible that President Asiwaju Tinubu may have incurred not less than Fifty Billion Naira (N50 billion) to win the APC Presidential primary and emerged as the party’s presidential candidate.

 

After incurring such huge personal expenditure with almost zero contributions from other party leaders, President Asiwaju Tinubu had to also shoulder almost all the cost of the 2023 Presidential election with very negligible contributions from the APC and other leaders, if at all. Certainly, inclusive of the cost of winning the Presidential primary, winning the 2023 Presidential elections may have cost President Asiwaju Tinubu upward of One Hundred Billion Naira (N100 Billion). By every standard, this is very outrageous and alarming. Cascading it down to Governors, it would have cost each of the APC Governorship candidates for 2023 elections not less than Ten Billion (N10 Billion) to win the elections.

 

How a party envisioned to be progressive would be degraded to money politics is quite worrisome. Partly because money politics took over internal party contest during the 2023 elections, contest for the leadership of the 10^th National Assembly became driven by money politics too. It may have cost both Sen. Godswill Akpabio and Rt. Hon. Abbas Tajudeen nothing less than Fifty Billion Naira (N50 Billion) each to win the contest for Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives. What this simply means is that for any person to contemplate aspiring for President of the Federal Republic or Governor of any state, the person must have impossible amount of money running into hundreds of billions. How many Nigerians can afford this from legitimate earning?

 

How is APC going to address this disturbing reality? Or will APC simply turn a blind eye to such a troubling reality? Is this a problem, which President Asiwaju Tinubu want to address during the tenure of his leadership? Or is he going to ignore it since he can afford it? One can deduce that with such high cost of winning elections, it is enough to weaken the bond between elected leaders and other party leaders, which may have created the present problems of accessibility. So long as elected leaders, especially President Asiwaju Tinubu, are inaccessible to other party leaders, the prospect of returning APC to its founding vision of emerging as a progressive party will continue to diminish. And problems of money politics within the APC will be further entrenched.

 

As things are, we must be honest, Nigerian politics cannot continue the way it is today. Many Nigerians, especially APC members, expected that doing away with money politics is one of the changes APC will bring about. Unfortunately, things have progressively got worse. Sadly too, because structures of the party are not functioning, there is no avenue to deliberate all these and make proposals. APC is progressively losing even the little democratic credentials, which in 2015 encouraged Nigerians to expect the possibility of a progressive party emerging out of it. Many Nigerians, including APC members may be tempted to rationalise this unfortunate reality based on the liberal disposition of former President Buhari who was unable to ensure that APC matured into the envisioned progressive party in the last eight years. Consequently, APC virtually was taken over by whatever was PDP, and all its negative values include money politics.

 

How is the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu going to be different? Like during the tenure of former President Buhari, will APC structures remain frozen under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu? If APC structures remained frozen, how can APC become a progressive party? What does being a progressive party means to APC leaders and President Asiwaju Tinubu? Will being a progressive party minimise money politics? How can that be achieved? Minimising money politics will require putting in place comprehensive funding strategy for all activities of the party, including electoral contest. So long as aspirants and candidates are required to bear all the financial burden of winning elections, the extent of being successful may not include transforming APC into a progressive party, which is the primary source of APC’s electoral advantage.

 

It is the hope of many APC leaders and members that President Asiwaju Tinubu will prioritise decisions to return the party to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party. We are confident, he has everything it requires to take every necessary decision. It is in his enlightened electoral interest to so and in the national interest too. Nigerians are desirous of a party that can make access possible to elected leaders, including the President, for other fellow party leaders. Nigerian democracy must resolve the challenge of astronomical cost of winning elections by aspirants and candidates. Will President Asiwaju Tinubu prioritise all these as part of what he wants to achieve during his tenure as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria? May the success of President Asiwaju Tinubu’s leadership also produce a truly progressive APC! Amin!

 

[Emman Ozoemena]

https://globalupfront.com/2023/11/13/resolving-apcs-progressive-retrogression/

Resolving APC’s Progressive Retrogression

8 HOURS AGO

SHARE

By Salihu Moh. Lukman, Kaduna

ALL PROGRESSIVE CONGRESSAPCBOLA AHMED TINUBUNIGERIA

SHARE

PREVIOUS POST

Family Suspects Foul Play As Nigerian Army Captain Reportedly Commits Suicide In Akwa Ibom

NEXT POST

Israel-Hamas War: U.S. Stands On Edge Of Conflict As Attacks On Troops Continue In Middle East

Global Upfront

Receive Alerts On: WhatsApp: CLICK HERE | Telegram: CLICK HERE | Twitter: @Global_Upfront | Facebook: GlobalUpfront | Share Stories With Us: SMS: +2347017610644 | Email: in...@globalupfront.com | To Upload Video: CLICK HERE

SEE ALSO

IMF downgrades outlook for global economy in face of COVID-19

New cannons, missiles bring biggest change to artillery in 40 years

Nigeria: In 23 Years, Students Lose Cumulative 4 Years To 16 ASUU Strikes

Sack Your National Security Adviser Over Lingering Insecurity, Northern Group Tells Buhari

Biden likens Trump to Nazi Goebbels, says he’s ready for debate ‘lies’

Nigeria: Brazil Returnee Excretes 58 Cocaine Pellets at Enugu Airport

Turkey Ready to Help Nigeria End Boko Haram/ISWAP Terrorism, Other Crimes, says Ambassador

Donald Trump calls Fox News ‘dead’ as he steps up feud with the conservative network

Little Hannifa Abubakar and Demise of National Conscience

How to Pull Nigeria From The Brink By Atiku Abubakar

- Connect With Us -

LATEST POSTS

 

13

NOV

Israel-Gaza War: Again, U.S. Strikes ‘Iran-aligned Groups’ In Syria As 2 Israeli...

13

NOV

Prepare For Russian Winter Military Onslaught, Zelensky Tells Ukrainians As Russia Launches...

13

NOV

‘One-chance’ In Lagos: How Criminal Gangs Rob City Commuters

13

NOV

UNIZIK Marketing Department Holds First International Conference Since Inception In 1999

13

NOV

Nigeria Immigration Service Mourns, Says “Our Hearts Are Heavy” As 3 Officers...

TRENDING

 

01

Facing Flight Ban, Uzodinma Says Assault On Ajaero Regrettable, Accuses NLC President...

3 DAYS AGO

02

Pope Francis Forcibly Removes Leading U.S. Conservative, Texas Bishop Strickland After Frequent...

2 DAYS AGO

03

Buhari Orders Probe Of Police, DSS, NSCDC Officers Involved In Aisha Binani’s...

7 MONTHS AGO

04

Veteran Kannywood Actor, Ex-Soldier, Samanja, Dies At 84

1 DAY AGO

05

Tinubu Leads Nigerians To Mourn Army First Female Major General Aderonke Kale,...

3 DAYS AGO

Global Upfront Newspapers, published by AB Publications Ltd, is an independent newspaper with a mandate to produce daily up to date news reports, features, opinions and other special publications that will be useful and trusted by the reading public.

LATEST POSTS

Israel-Gaza War: Again, U.S. Strikes ‘Iran-aligned Groups’ In Syria As 2 Israeli Commandos Killed In Gaza Operation

4 HOURS AGO

Prepare For Russian Winter Military Onslaught, Zelensky Tells Ukrainians As Russia Launches Missile Attacks On Capital Kyiv

5 HOURS AGO

‘One-chance’ In Lagos: How Criminal Gangs Rob City Commuters

5 HOURS AGO

UNIZIK Marketing Department Holds First International Conference Since Inception In 1999

7 HOURS AGO

Nigeria Immigration Service Mourns, Says “Our Hearts Are Heavy” As 3 Officers Die In Fatal Crash Along Kano-Zaria Highway

7 HOURS AGO

NEWSLETTER

Get the latest News and updates of issues from Nigeria, Africa and around the World, direct into mailbox.

© Global Upfront. An Elfeego Development

FacebookTwitterYoutubeEmailTelegramWhatsapp

• HOME
  POLITICS
  ENTERTAINMENT
  EDUCATION
  LIFE
  OPINION
  HEALTH
  DIASPORA NIGERIANS
  WORLD NEWS
  BUSINESS

Get Outlook for Android

---

From: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Salihu Lukman <smlu...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2023 8:58:03 PM
To: usaafric...@googlegroups.com <usaafric...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - APC's Progressive Retrogression

 

--

Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfric...@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDial...@googlegroups.com
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialo...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/usaafricadialogue/LO0P123MB64464E36FD97D32F8969A635AEACA%40LO0P123MB6446.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM.

[Salihu Lukman]

The Cancer Destroying Nigerian Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

During the November 11, 2023 elections in Kogi, Bayelsa and Imo States, the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) Election Analysis Centre highlighted the ‘need to separate the unpredictable technical failures that are due to the operational, logistical and infrastructure challenges of electoral administration in the country on the one hand from the politically instigated failures attributable in the main to deliberate manipulation by candidates, political parties and their proxies in state and society on the other hand. The challenge, therefore, is how to unscramble the nexus connecting technical to politically motivated failures with a view to enhancing the integrity of elections in the country.’

 

In short, ‘politically instigated’ or ‘motivated failures’ due to ‘deliberate manipulation by candidates, political parties and their proxies’ is the main challenge negatively affecting ‘integrity of elections’ in Nigeria. This is certainly not a new revelation. If anything, it only drew attention to the fact that the main problem of elections in Nigeria remains mainly ‘deliberate manipulation by candidates, political parties and their proxies’. ‘Deliberate manipulation’ of election results ‘by candidates, political parties and their proxies’ has been a problem in Nigerian politics since the beginning of the Fourth Republic in 1999. Some may argue that it is as old as politics itself and is not limited to Nigeria. As much as that could be true, what is uniquely Nigerian is the fact that the institution that should have developed the capacity to deal with the challenge become the first casualty of the problem. That institution is the political party.

 

Ideally, every political contest or contest for an election is expected to start internally within parties. Aspiring candidates emerged and parties are expected to conduct internal elections, which produces candidates, otherwise known as party primary. Rules or guidelines to guarantee free and fair contest or equal opportunity to each aspiring contestant are expected to be set by each party for the conduct of the primary. The reality, however, is that although all parties in Nigeria have rules or guidelines for primary elections, copies of which are deposited with INEC, the first act of ‘deliberate manipulation’ starts internally within parties during primary election. In fact, the process of manipulation begins when party leaders are being elected. These are the people expected to produce as well as enforce the party rules or guidelines expected to guarantee free and fair contests internally within parties.

 

Consequently, political practice and culture, across all Nigerian parties, is about recruiting membership based on individual aspirations for political offices. The scenario, therefore, is that once an aspirant has strong financial capability, the party is handed over to the person. Such a person would then proceed to appoint loyalists to serve as party leaders. Issues of membership and participation in political activities, including holding party positions and appointments into governments controlled by the party, are restricted to close associates and supporters, while professional management of the party and disciplinary conduct of members are conveniently ignored.

 

As a result, there is the preponderance of unethical, unfair, and other substandard practices by all political parties and their candidates without any exception in Nigeria. Party offices are manipulated to be controlled by aspiring candidates. All the problems associated with Nigeria’s national elections become manifest at this point. Imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc. emerges from this point. Party leaders are produced through these unethical methods and in return they are expected to produce their sponsors who are the aspirants for elective positions through such methods as party candidates for elections. Once they become party candidates for elections, the next task is to use the same methods of manipulating election results to emerge winners.

 

Manipulation of political contests through imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc., which begin at the level of producing party leaders grew and sadly become political culture that unethically determine winners of electoral contests. Manipulation of political contests are the cells or tumours that grow uncontrollably and spread. Once a party produces its leadership through processes of manipulation, such a party would end up producing candidates through manipulation and the candidates would in turn be seeking to win elections by manipulating results.

 

This was what destroyed the PDP as a party. When the APC emerged in 2013 with the promise of change, many Nigerians, especially founding members of APC expected that being envisioned to be a progressive party meant departure from the culture of manipulation. To be candid, ahead of the 2015 general elections, internal party contests in APC was relatively competitive. There were certainly incidences of vote buying during the APC primary elections in 2014, the scale was however negligible relative to what was the case in PDP. Virtually, all APC candidates who contested the 2015 elections were elected by delegates at party primary. None emerged through imposition, which explains why there were hardly any court cases challenging the emergence of any APC candidate for the 2015 general elections.

 

Unfortunately, by 2023, the situation in APC completely changed negatively. Like was the case in PDP in 2007, whereby almost all the candidates of the party for the 2007 general elections were products of imposition, including its Presidential candidate, late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, imposition of candidates in APC also became rampant. In fact, the attempt by members of the 9^th National Assembly, which was dominated by APC legislators, to insert the clause of compulsory direct primary was a deliberate response to the problem of potential imposition of candidates in the APC. However, unlike the case of the PDP in 2007, there was a strong resistance in APC in 2023 against attempt to impose a Presidential candidate.

 

President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu emerged as the APC Presidential candidate for the 2023 Presidential election after a strong internal contest, including opposition to attempt by people loyal to former President Muhammadu Buhari to impose a so-called consensus Presidential candidate. Strong internal contest within the APC ahead of the 2023 general elections rekindled some belief among Nigerians that there is still some hope that APC can be transformed to emerge as a truly progressive party, based on which problems of manipulation of political contests through imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc. can be resolved. Many APC leaders were confident that under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu, the potential transformation of the party into a truly progressive party would be achieved.

 

About six months since the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu, such confidence can hardly be sustained. If anything, what is very clear is that President Asiwaju Tinubu’s commitment to the development of the APC as a political party may only be guaranteed to the extent that the party will give him what he wants. It is almost a return to the old PDP model of party organisation under former President Olusegun Obasanjo with the requirement of 100% loyalty. Without any attempt to reopen old wounds, the requirement for 100% loyalty was responsible for the graveyard silence internally within the APC when Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje was proposed by President Asiwaju Tinubu as National Chairman. After Dr. Ganduje’s successful emergence, there is also graveyard silence even when Dr. Ganduje continued with the practice of freezing structures of the party. No meetings of organs are taking place almost four months after the emergence of Dr. Ganduje as the APC National Chairman.

 

Given such ugly reality, it should only be expected that the culture of manipulating political contests through imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc. would become entrenched in APC. Like the case in PDP in 2007, it may grow to the point whereby almost all APC candidates for 2027 elections may be produced through imposition. Unless we want to lie to ourselves, as things are, culture of manipulating political contests through imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc. in APC has reached the point where PDP was in 2007. Recall that on May 29, 2007, late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua while delivering his inaugural address to the nation, acknowledged that the election that brought him to power had shortcomings and undertook to ‘set up a panel to examine the entire electoral process with a view to ensuring that we raise the quality and standard of our general elections, and thereby deepen our democracy.’ On August 27, 2007, late President Yar’Adua inaugurated a 22-member Electoral Reform Panel, chaired by Hon. Justice Muhammadu Lawal Uwais GCON. The Panel submitted its report in December 2008 and regarding the state of political parties, the Panel identified that:

 

‘One of the most crucial and yet least developed democratic institutions in the country is the political party system. There are currently 50 registered political parties in the country, most of which are an assemblage of people who share the same level of determination to use the party platform to get to power. As such, it is usually difficult to identify any party programmes or ideologies. The structure of the political parties is such that internal democracy is virtually absent. The political parties are very weak and unable to effectively carry out political mobilisation, political education and discipline.’

 

Given this reality, the Justice Uwais Panel recommended the establishment of Political Parties Registration and Regulatory Commission to, among others, ‘monitor political campaigns and provide rules and regulations which shall govern the political parties.’ The logic that informs this recommendation is the need to unbundle INEC to make it efficient based on which two additional commissions were recommended to be created out of INEC. These are Electoral Offenses Commission and Constituency Delimitation Commission. Specifically, the Election Offices Commission was envisioned by the Justice Uwais Panel to, among others, perform the function of ‘enforcement of the provision of the Electoral Act 2006, the constitutions of registered political parties and any other Acts or enactments.’

 

All the recommendations to unbundle INEC were not considered. Instead, since 2008, successive governments limit their focus to electoral reforms, mainly dealing with strengthening the technical capabilities of INEC to handle operational, logistical as well as developing all the necessary infrastructural requirements for elections. Over the years, at least since 2008, INEC has been strengthened. Unfortunately, political parties in the country have remained what they were as identified by Justice Uwais Panel – ‘assemblage of people who share the same level of determination to use the party platform to get to power… difficult to identify any party programmes or ideologies… internal democracy is virtually absent… very weak and unable to effectively carry out political mobilisation, political education and discipline.’

 

With currently about 91 political parties (as at 2023), the primary focus of all the registered parties is to win elections based on the culture of manipulation of political contests through imposition, vote buying, rigging, etc. It starts at the small level of producing party leaders and grow to become unethical political culture producing winners of every electoral contests. APC with all the vision of emerging as a progressive political party is being destroyed. Suddenly, APC leaders, sadly, including President Asiwaju Tinubu have assumed the overdrive mode of operating with hardly any strong respect for internal democracy within the APC. Otherwise, what could explain the current happenings in APC whereby none of the party organs is functioning as provided in the APC constitution?

 

The reality is that, unless political parties are compelled to respect their rules based on which organs of the parties are allowed to function, problems of manipulation of political contests through imposition, vote buying and rigging would continue. Political parties and many other political institutions would continue to be destroyed. Any proposal for electoral reform in the country must therefore include stronger regulatory framework for the operations of political parties in the country. If INEC is not to be unbundled to produce Political Parties Regulatory Commission as proposed by the Justice Uwais panel, then it should be strengthened to regulate the conducts of political parties in the country, include getting parties to respect their own rules.

 

So long as political parties in Nigeria are allowed to operate in a lawless manner, the problems of manipulating political contests would continue and the ‘challenge …of unscramble the nexus connecting technical to politically motivated failures with a view to enhancing the integrity of elections in the country’ will continue to elude us as nation. At another level, being loyal APC members, we must also appeal to all APC leaders, especially President Asiwaju Tinubu to resist the temptation of overindulging themselves with the false belief that they could continue to succeed to impose their choices on Nigerians. APC leaders must be humble enough to as much as possible bring themselves down to the levels of ordinary Nigerians and have a more listening ear. Inability to listen and have the needed humility to meet the expectation of Nigerians will strengthen the belief of leaders in unethical practices of manipulating political contests. As our Christians brothers and sisters would say, may this not be our portion in APC. Amen!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

End of Progressive Politics

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

The National Working Committee (NWC) of the All Progressives Congress (APC), on Wednesday, November 22, 2023, announced the dissolution of the Rivers State Executives of the party at all levels and appointed a seven-member Caretaker Committee led by Chief Tony Okocha to steer the party’s affairs in the state for the next six months. Interestingly, Chief Okocha who is alleged to be a supporter and political ally of Mr. Nyesom Wike led a delegation of Wike’s loyalists on a courtesy visit to Dr. Ganduje on Thursday, October 6, 2023 where he was reported to have alleged that Chief Rotimi Ameachi, former Governor of Rivers State (2007 – 2015), former Minister of Transport (2015 – 2023), APC Presidential Aspirant for the 2023 general elections and founding member of the APC, worked against President Asiwaju Bola Amed Tinubu in the last election.

 

Even without these allegations, it is public knowledge that Chief Amaechi has taken a backseat. Apart from Chief Amaechi, many other APC Presidential aspirant for the 2023 elections have taken a backseat largely because President Asiwaju Tinubu has not demonstrated any interest to work with them. In the specific case of Chief Amaechi, his political rival in Rivers State, former Governor (2015 – 2023), Barr. Ezenwo Nyesom Wike, since the 2023 general elections has become a strong ally of President Asiwaju Tinubu. Being a strong political ally, Barr. Wike is today the serving Minister of FCT in President Asiwaju Tinubu’s cabinet, if you like the 37^th State Governor in Nigeria.

 

Without any reservation, the reality of Barr. Wike who is a member of the PDP serving in APC Federal Government led by President Asiwaju Tinubu suggest some strong backdoor political negotiations. What could be the details of the negotiations? Could it be that typical of Nigerian politics, APC is negotiating to get Barr. Wike decamp from the PDP and join the APC? Is the APC conceding to handover structures of the party in Rivers State to Barr. Wike? Even without probing deeper into all these issues, already, some APC leaders in Rivers have opportunistically began moving their support from being loyal to Chief Amaechi and now aliening with Barr. Wike. For instance, on Thursday, October 26, 2023, Chief Victor Giadom, APC National Vice Chairman South-South and a long-time ally of Chief Amaechi led a delegation of APC leaders from Rivers State on a courtesy visit to Barr. Wike.

 

Given all these unfolding developments in APC, it is very clear that the NWC decision, dissolving Rivers State Executives of the party at all levels, is preparing the stage for the emergence of Barr. Wike as the new leader of APC in Rivers State. With Chief Okocha, who is alleged to be a political ally of Barr. Wike given the responsibility of serving as Caretaker Chairman, it simply means that all the new emerging executives for APC at all levels in Rivers State will be Barr. Wike’s supporters. And since Chief Ameachi is a political rival of Barr. Wike, all Chief Ameachi’s supporters must be expelled from the APC.

 

This is the dirty politics at play in Rivers State. It is very shockingly coming from leaders of a party envisioned to be progressive. Ideally, progressive politicians are expected to be committed to issues of justice and equity. This would require that when there are allegations of anti-party activities against leaders and members, such allegations should be properly investigated. At personal level, I am one of those who demanded that the NWC should invite the attention of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of APC to review the 2023 general elections and investigate cases of anti-party activities by leaders and members of APC. Inability of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu as the National Chairman to consider many of these demands as part of the requirement to restore constitutional order in APC and return the party to its founding vision was responsible for all the disagreements, I had with Sen. Adamu.

 

Instead of restoring constitutional order and returning the APC to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party, under the leadership of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, dirty politics of expelling political opponents has taken over. The APC NWC is now abrasive, it takes decisions based on convenience without reference to provisions of the party’s constitution. Simply because allegations of anti-party activities are made by a political opponent who is today the sweetheart of President Asiwaju Tinubu, the allegation is confirmed and all party leaders associated with the alleged person are equally guilty and therefore stand expelled. This is most unfortunate and seriously heartbreaking for all of us who are loyal APC members and look forward to the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu for our hope to be Renewed.

 

As a loyal party member who is strongly committed to progressive politics, my expectation is that provisions of Article 21.3(i – vi) shall be invoked to investigate the allegation of anti-party activities against Chief Amaechi by the NWC. This should have started by appointing a fact-finding committee to examine the matter and report to the NWC. Eventually, given that there are enough grounds to establish a prima facie case of bias by the NWC given that at least one of its members, for whatever reason, Chief Giadom, is bias, in line with provision of Article 21.3(v), the NWC lack any jurisdiction to decide on such a matter.

 

The sad reality of all these unfolding development is that, although Article 21.4(i – x) make sufficient provision for appeals by aggrieved members, with organs of the party frozen and only the NWC functioning, decisions of the NWC are supreme. This simply means a return to former President Olusegun Obasanjo era of garrison politics. How could this be happening in APC with President Asiwaju Tinubu as the leader? Is President Asiwaju Tinubu not a progressive politician? Or did he just use the acronym (progressive) to achieve his life ambition of becoming the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?

 

It is very troubling to ask these questions, largely because these were questions, we asked when former President Buhari was the leader of the party, but we were ashamed to accept the harsh reality that our elected leaders, and by extension our party has failed Nigerians. As loyal party members, we had the hope that the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu as the new leader of our party would correct and heal all our troubles. When President Asiwaju proposed Renewed Hope as his campaign slogan, party members welcome it with the belief that we are returning to the founding vision of the party, which will rekindle the era of progressive politics in the country.

 

Being someone who professes to be a disciple of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo, one of the founding fathers of our great nation and incontestably the forebearer of progressive politics, we had no doubt that the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu would return APC to its founding vision. Part of the expectation of many of us in the APC was that at the minimum internal debate within the party will be strong and decision-making process in the party will take its bearing from positions being canvassed. The first shocker was when after the resignation of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu and Sen. Iyiola Omisore as National Chairman and National Secretary of the party respectively, Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje emerged as the nominee of President Asiwaju Tinubu. Taking away the position of National Chairman from North-Central to North-West in a very crude way.

 

Apart from violating internal zoning agreement within the APC, moving the APC National Chairman from North-Central to North-West in the manner that it was done was simply contemptuous of the people of North-Central. This is the kind of decisions that can only be taken under a military rule. Having taken such decision, one expect a review of the internal zoning arrangement within the APC to attempt to pacify the people of North-Central. At the minimum for instance, the position of Deputy Senate President, which is currently being occupied by Sen. Barau Jibrin who come from Kano State where Dr. Ganduje come from should have been moved to North Central. Instead, it is just business-as-usual.

 

Again, at personal level, I cannot but ask the question, did President Asiwaju Tinubu support the removal of Sen. Adamu simply because he wanted to impose someone like Dr. Ganduje as the National Chairman of the APC simply because he needed someone who will not say no to him even when it means destroying the party? Could that be responsible for why President Asiwaju Tinubu has become completely inaccessible to virtually all party leaders? If President Asiwaju Tinubu is commencing his leadership tenure by embracing garrison politics, what will be the coloration of his leadership by the end of his tenure in May 2027? Given such a circumstance, will he be aspiring for a second term?

 

Perhaps, it is important to recall that former President Obasanjo pretended to be a democrat throughout his first term. The organs of the PDP during his first term were very functional and fully in charge. The dynamics of negotiating second term in 2003, which compelled former President Obasanjo to have to subordinated himself to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar were mainly responsible for the high level of political intolerance that characterised the second term of former President Obasanjo between 2003 and 2007. As an administration that was intolerant, it became more and more unpopular. Being intolerant, it blocked almost every opening for internal debate within the PDP. Imposition of candidates for election took over. Consequently, winning election was all about vote buying, rigging, manipulating elections, and writing results.

 

No need to revisit all our ugly electoral past. But APC won its popularity and won the 2015 general elections incontestably because Nigerians trusted the APC when it came with the promise of change. Certainly, under the leadership of former President Buhari, both as Nigerians and members of APC, we were highly frustrated that the promise of change didn’t manifest itself strongly such that the problem of imposition of candidates by political parties, especially by our own party APC is minimised. If anything, instead of changing Nigerian politics, what we witnessed between 2015 and now is that our promising party, APC, has changed to become PDP incorporated in every respect.

 

If anything, the decision of the NWC dissolving Rivers State executives at all levels confirm this reality. If allowed to stand, stage managed congresses will be organised to produce new party executives at all levels who will be loyal to Barr. Wike, the new APC leader in Rivers State. Accordingly, in 2027, Barr. Wike will produce the APC Governorship candidate for Rivers State. Since Barr. Wike has already fallen apart with the current Rivers State Governor, Chief Siminalayi Fubara, the prospect of Chief Fubara coming to APC is foreclosed. Therefore, the strategy of APC in Rivers State for 2027 will be to further fragment the people of the state. Rather than working to unite political leaders in Rivers State, based on which APC being an envisioned progressive party will be seeking to unite Chief Amaechi and Barr. Wike to be members of APC, President Asiwaju Tinubu’s garrison politics will only seek to take advantage of the current division between Chief Amaechi and Barr. Wike. In addition, Barr. Wike will have to incur the political cost of separating from his political godson, Chief Fubara. Even if Chief Fubara achieved all that needs to be achieved as Governor of Rivers State, President Asiwaju Tinubu’s garrison politics will emasculate him.

 

For all these to be imagined under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu, who is regarded to be a progressive politician and a descendant of Chief Awolowo will make Chief Awolowo to turn in his grave. Even Chief M. K. O Abiola have difficulty relating with many of the political decisions taken by President Asiwaju Tinubu in the last six months. At this rate, President Asiwaju Tinubu is practically pushing Nigerians to bid bye bye to progressive politics. With such reality, it simply means, the structures of APC in FCT will also be dissolved to produce new APC leaders at all levels of the party who will be loyal to Barr. Wike. And any state where APC is led by people who might have opposed President Asiwaju Tinubu will similarly be dissolved. Once the circle of imposing stooges as APC leaders at all levels is completed, which started with imposing Dr. Ganduje as National Chairman, the next level of imposition will spread to all other democratic institutions to guarantee the supremacy of garrison politics, which will then affirm all the political choices of APC under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu, whatever that means.

 

This is anything, but progressive politics. With a garrison brand of progressive politics, problems of political divisions in the country will be entrenched. Addressing challenges of marginalisation, inequality and above all welfare of citizens will not be a political priority. At this rate, it will be safer for the country to conclude that APC, as it is constituted today will be incapable of meeting the expectation of Nigerians. Renewed Hope has invariably produced Dashed hope. This is very unfortunate. APC under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu, as it is constituted today, wasn’t the APC we sold to Nigerians both in 2015 and 2023.

 

Something must be done urgently to arrest the current drift towards garrison politics in the name of progressive politics. It is either APC leaders take the needed steps to call both Dr. Ganduje, the APC NWC and President Asiwaju Tinubu to order by restoring constitutional order and returning the party to its founding vision of progressive politics, which should be about unity of party leaders and Nigerians, or the party can as well declare an end to progressive politics in Nigeria. So long as the decision of the NWC to dissolve all party executives in Rivers State at all levels is allowed to stand, it simply means that anyone who is alleged to have worked against President Asiwaju Tinubu during the 2023 elections is expelled from the party. With such declaration, the culture of imposition of candidates at all levels will take over APC. Consequently, elections will not be about the votes of citizens. Winners in elections will only be produced through rigging, vote buying and other manipulative strategies. The earlier every genuine APC leader come to terms with this new reality and begin the process of mobilisation both within the party and at wider levels of national political mobilisation, the better for the survival of democracy in country. A stitch in time, saves nine!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Travesty of Nigerian Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

On Sunday, November 26, 2023, Ogun State Governor, Prince Dapo Abiodun, while featuring on Channels Television’s Sunday Politics, informed Nigerians that ‘President Bola Tinubu inherited an administration that was almost comatose’. Before then, Mal. Nuhu Ribadu, National Security Adviser had on November 13, 2023 at the Annual Conference of Chief of Defence Intelligence disclosed that President Tinubu inherited ‘a bankrupt country’. All these are excuses given to rationalise why Nigerians are going through the current difficult times. No one will dispute the fact that former President Muhammadu Buhari didn’t manage the Nigerian economy well. It is about the only administration that operated without an economic team.

 

However, being an APC government, which succeeded a previous APC government, it is disrespectful to Nigerians to give excuses about the current state of harsh living conditions in Nigeria by blaming previous governments. As members and leaders of the APC, we should take responsibility and take the needed initiative to make life better for all Nigerians. If anything, we should justify the confidence of Nigerians in giving us the mandate to continue to rule the country even after being unable to meet the expectations of Nigerians in many respect. Unarguably, Nigerians voted the APC and President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the last general elections very consciously and confident that under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu the challenges facing the country will be addressed.

 

Therefore, rather than giving excuses, we should be telling Nigerians what we are doing to address their problems. Excuses would only confirm that we are in denial that a government produced by our party is perhaps responsible for Nigeria’s challenges. Once we are in denial, it also suggests that we are going to grandstand when we initiate actions that worsen the situation or fail to initiate actions to resolve the problem. This will simply mean being dishonest, which will narrow our responses to making excuses for our failure or inability to meet expectations of Nigerians. This must be avoided.

 

It is quite worrisome that coming from a party envisioned to be progressive we are giving excuses. How can we Renew the Hope of Nigerians by giving excuses. We must appeal to our leaders to stop giving excuses and take responsibility. If we are to be responsible, we should admit that the current hardship facing Nigerians is largely a product of two critical decisions taken by the government of President Asiwaju Tinubu. The two decisions are withdrawal of fuel subsidy and floating the Naira against other major currencies. No doubt, these are very necessary decisions and President Asiwaju Tinubu deserved every commendation for those bold decisions. Part of what is very glaring is that the decisions were taken by the government without proper planning. Withdrawing subsidy without addressing the question of what needs to be done to guarantee local production, we are bound to have the current mess of skyrocketed increase in prices of petroleum products. Similarly, floating the Naira against other major currencies without taking the needed steps to reduce imports will also produce what we have today whereby the value of the Naira is permanently on a downward slide.

 

Ideally, if we are progressives as we claim to be, we should have timed all these decisions to coincide with when local production would have picked up. Now that the decisions have been taken, what is it that is being done to improve local production? With respect to local production of fuel, there have been so many references in recent times about repairs of refineries and commencement of production by Dangote refinery. Where are we with all these should the information coming from our leaders and not excuses.

 

As loyal APC members, it is traumatic to continue to witness situations whereby the business of governance is reduced to excuses. When we supported the merger of our legacy parties, we were very hopeful that the emergence of our party would change all these. Unfortunately, here we are, contending with the same old reality of excuse making by our leaders in government. That is the bane of our politics, it is the travesty, which characterises Nigerian democracy, which APC promised to change. If for whatever reasons, we have been unable to change it under the leadership of former President Buhari, Nigerians have given us a second chance under the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

Being a party member who is never a beneficiary in every respect of both the government of former President Buhari and the current one under President Asiwaju Tinubu, we feel the pains Nigerians are going through. It is important to appeal to all our leaders not to take Nigerians for granted. Nigerians voted for our party not because they just wanted former President Buhari and President Asiwaju Tinubu to achieve their personal ambitions of becoming Presidents. Our party and our leaders, notably former President Buhari and current President Asiwaju Tinubu were voted largely because Nigerians trusted that our leaders would honestly deliver on their campaign promises. If by whatever yardstick, the conclusion is reached that former President Buhari has failed, our leaders in government at whatever level don’t have the luxury of celebrating it. Instead, we should all be busy working hard to translate such failure to become the success of President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

We must appeal to both President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our APC leaders in government at all levels to resist the temptation of giving excuses. If we at all aspire to return to the founding vision of APC of becoming a progressive party, our leaders, and governments we produced must take responsibility. Taking responsibility is about being honest. When we initiate or fail to initiate actions to respond to challenges, we must accept responsibility. Both in terms of the alleged failure of former President Buhari to initiate the right measures to manage the Nigerian economy during his eight-year tenure and initiatives of President Asiwaju Tinubu to withdraw fuel subsidy as well as float the Naira against other international currencies without proper planning, as APC members and leaders we should take responsibility.

 

The failure or limitations of former President Buhari is our collective failure, in the same way we will also be failing as a party if we allow President Asiwaju Tinubu to fail whether we are part of the government or not. We must appeal to President Asiwaju Tinubu and all our leaders in government to do something urgently to ameliorate the suffering of Nigerians before it is too late. Nigerians are truly going through hard times. No excuses will pacify our citizens. In fact, excuses will not put food on the table of Nigerians. Beyond all the short terms measures initiated by government such as conditional cash transfers to 15 million Nigerians and N35,000 monthly award to federal employees, what is the economic plan to increase local production of goods and services domestically? What are the specific targets, especially in terms of employment, reducing inflation and other economic indices impacting on living conditions of citizens.

 

Speaking both as loyal APC member and ordinary citizen, part of our challenge as Nigerians is that we always trust our leaders, which is why it is very traumatic when our leaders fail us. As much as citizens have high confidence in the capacity and competence of President Asiwaju Tinubu to turn the Nigerian economy around for the better, our leaders and our party must earn the trust of citizens. Excuses cannot be currency of earning the trust of citizens. Rather, concrete achievements should be the currency. When in 2015 we undertook to change Nigeria, it wasn’t just former President Buhari that made the promise, it was all our leaders including President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

If, as is being alleged, former President Buhari’s government handed over a bankrupt or comatose nation to President Asiwaju Tinubu, for President Asiwaju Tinubu to earn the trust of Nigerians, he must first and foremost accept that as APC leader he is equally responsible for the failure of former President Buhari. With the claim of being progressive politicians, we must not allow the travesty that characterise our democracy, which makes politicians and elected representatives to imagine that they can earn the trust of citizens by giving excuses to define the administration of President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Why Political Parties in Nigeria should be Reformed

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

The Fourth Republic, which began on May 29, 1999 was received by most activists in Nigeria with contempt and outright denial. As a privileged leader of the prodemocracy movement in Nigeria, I recall with utmost regret how we refused to participate in the Gen. Abdulsalam Abubakar transition programme that ushered in the Fourth Republic. Being a founding member of the Campaign for Democracy (CD), and a founding member of Democratic Alternative (DA), it is painful to recall how we rationalised our refusal to participate in the transition programme with the argument that ‘it is democracy without democrats’, ‘Abacha politicians have taken over’, etc.

 

Right from our university days in the 1980s, we committed ourselves to radical transformation of Nigeria. We were oriented to be very critical as well as very receptive to criticisms. We were brutally honest to ourselves, which was responsible for why when some of our leaders in Lagos, including Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Dr. Beko Ransome Kuti and Mr. Femi Falana, in 1993, met with Gen. Oladipo Diya as part of their consultation to overthrow the Interim Government led by Chief Ernest Shonekan to bring in the Gen. Sani Abacha administration, we expressed our disapproval by breaking away from the CD to form the DA led by Mr. Alao Aka Bashorun. Mr. Olisa Agbakoba and Mrs. Ayo Ogbe were part of the breakaway leadership that formed the CD. Both are alive to confirm or refute this. Mr. Falana is also alive.

 

The period 1993 – 1999 was quite traumatic for all prodemocracy activists. Being arrested and held in SSS facilities across the country was very common. Going for meetings outside the country and travelling through footpaths across Nigerian borders defined that period. Funding our trips personally to meetings in Lagos and other parts of the country, travelling on night buses on popular ‘attachment’ was our reality. I was privileged to be working with Comrade Adams Oshiomhole at the time in National Union of Textiles, Garment and Tailoring Workers of Nigeria (NUTGTWN). Being my boss who was also committed to prodemocracy struggles, he gave me approvals to travel to prodemocracy meetings and in some few occasions supported me financially, including providing air ticket from Kaduna to Lagos to enable me attend meetings, which were most times on Saturdays.

 

The reality was that we fought for democracy but having won it failed to show up to be part of the political actors in 1999. I recall with very deep regret how our leaders in Lagos, including Mr. Falana reported to us in some of our meetings how our respected Mr. Nelson Mandela, then as President of South Africa sent Mr. Thabo Mbeki to appeal to prodemocracy activists in Nigeria to participate in the transition programme in 1998 but was turned down. Again, Mr. Falana, Mr. Agbakoba and Mrs. Ogbe are all alive to confirm or refute this allegation.

 

The truth is that, as a person, I have spent the best part of my life campaigning for democracy. I have made sacrifices and am still making sacrifices in the hope that our children and future generation will have a nation that is governed democratically. I became an activist not because I wanted a job. If anything, I came from a family that was privileged to have a Minister at the time. To be fair to him, he made every offer to me to make me abandon my activist orientation, but I declined. I remained committed to my belief and lived a life of orphan, which enabled me to have all the love in the world so long as I accept everyone showing love to me as my parent. It is a very difficult task because it requires being able to stand by the truth, including being opposed to my parents when they go wrong.

 

This has remained my guide throughout my adult life. But it also imposes an obligation on me to keep my eyes open and always be ready to move on when I have completed any given task. Moving on necessarily challenges one to find new tasks and responsibilities. This was responsible for my exit out of NLC in October 2006. And it is responsible for my exit out of the APC leadership in July 2023. Having left both the NLC and the APC leadership, I remained committed to their values, which is about justice and equitable distribution of resources in society.

 

In the case of APC, it is a troubling reality. Here we are as a party, just coming out election and very lucky to have President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the leader of the party who was part of the prodemocracy struggle to bring an end to military rule in the country in 1999. My layperson, or innocent person, expectation was that if under former President Muhammadu Buhari we were confused or unable to achieve the vision of making APC a truly progressive party, under President Asiwaju Tinubu, we should have no difficulty in achieving that. Somehow, it would appear politics has taken over everything and business-as-usual has become the orientation.

 

We are not and we will never abandon the campaign for democracy in Nigeria. Whatever is responsible for the current orientation can be surmounted and should be conquered. We will not degrade ourselves to becoming antagonists of our party and President Asiwaju Tinubu. We are confident that our party is blessed with leaders who are capable of initiating processes of reform to return our party to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party. We are also confident that President Asiwaju Tinubu is a committed democrat and truly a progressive politician. We were never wrong in our estimation that out of all the 23 leaders who aspired to become our Presidential candidates for the 2023 general elections, he was best qualified.

 

Therefore, as party members and leaders we must continue to engage him to live up to all the promises we made to Nigerians since 2015. We must work hard and make all the necessary sacrifices to ensure that both President Asiwaju Tinubu and the APC succeed in moving Nigerian democracy forward. Moving Nigerian democracy forward is about promoting political competition in the country. A situation whereby few people have taken over our party, APC, and are doing everything possible to block internal competition within the party is unacceptable and should not be allowed to continue. This was, and still is, the problem of PDP. It was one the fundamental issues APC promised to change in 2015, which won the support of Nigerians.

 

As Nigerian citizens committed to democracy, we must go back to the drawing board and begin the campaign to reform our political parties in Nigeria to guarantee internal political competition. It is only when internal political competition is achieved within political parties that wider national competition can be achieved. Once we fail to guarantee internal competition within parties, the current reality of excessive manipulation, through rigging of elections, vote buying, and other criminality would continue.

 

Since joining partisan politics in 2010, I committed myself to being different, which is quite challenging. I made up my mind that although access to elective and appointive positions will be quite advantageous, it will not prevent me from remaining in the vanguard for democracy in Nigeria. It is a big challenge. To achieve that I committed myself to use the only resource I have now, which my little knowledge. I will continue to use it to mobilise for the reform of our parties to have democracy in Nigeria.

 

Since joining partisan politics, it has been my strength, through which I am able to produce five publications so far. In the last few years, application of my little knowledge to engage our leaders has projected me as a controversial personality, which I am not. Often, inability of our leaders to accept to engage issues create the unhealthy impression of being antagonistic. This was the sad reality that created the rift between Comrade Adams and me. Inability to properly manage our disagreements with Comrade Adams and resolve them democratically led to all the challenges we had with the Caretaker Committee under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala Buni. The challenges we had with the Comrade Adams leadership of APC became a child play under the leadership of His Excellency Mai Mala. By the time our leadership with Sen. Abdullahi Adamu as Chairman was elected on March 26, 2022, the challenges became a jock. Sadly, this reality continues under the leadership of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje.

 

Having left the leadership of the party and being actively involved in all the contestations within the party leading to the emergence of President Asiwaju Tinubu, I decided to document some of the experiences, which is now contained in the publication APC and Transition Politics. Part of the motivation is also to clarify many of the allegations against me that I am against the leadership of President Asiwaju Tinubu. I must say very clearly, I disagreed with President Asiwaju Tinubu’s decision to nominate Dr. Ganduje as the National Chairman of APC but I respect and accept the fact that Dr. Ganduje is today the National Chairman. I also have strong concerns about the direction taken by the Federal Government under the leadership of President Asiwaju. Under the leadership of Asiwaju Tinubu, we have sadly produced an irritating political reality whereby the North-Central region is marginalised. My fear is that at the rate we are going, with all the lowly rating of former President Buhari, if care is not taken, he may turn out to be more progressive.

 

I wish I can have a better channel of direct communication to the President and leaders within the party. Unfortunately, with organs of the party frozen and leaders, especially President Asiwaju Tinubu becoming more and more inaccessible, one is left with no option but the available public channels. In spite of all that, I am confident that like we succeeded in bringing an end to military rule in the country, we will succeed in ending this madness whereby politicians reduce democracy to a game of manipulation.

 

Having succeeded in producing the publication, APC and Transition Politics, a public presentation is being scheduled to hold at 9.30 am Shehu Musa Yar’Adua, Abuja on December 19, 2023. The Public Presentation is oriented to stimulate both reflections and consideration of what needs to be done to return APC to its founding vision of progressive politics. Both the publication and public presentation is not just about APC but about the future of democracy in Nigeria. The goal is to ensure that elected governments and leaders are accountable and responsive to the needs of citizens.

 

Given that APC is the ruling party, the obligation of setting the necessary democratic standards is squarely the responsibility of leaders of the party. Again, given that we are blessed with leaders who were responsible for all the success of both the merger of 2013 and the subsequent electoral victory of 2015, the public presentation will be guided by them. Chief Bisi Akande, who was the founding Chairman of the APC will be the Chairman of the public presentation. Chief Akande, without hesitation, wrote the foreword to the publication. The Keynote Address at the public presentation will be delivered by Hon. Olawale Oshun, the leader of Afenere Renewal Group. Sen. Ajibola S. Basiru, National Secretary of the APC will review the book.

 

Special Guests at the occasion, include Sen. Kashim Shettima GCON, Vice President of the Federal Republic, Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, APC National Chairman, Sen. Godswill Akpabio, Senate President, Rt. Hon. Abbas Tajudeen, Speaker of House of Representatives, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, former APC National Chairmen, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, former Vice President and APC Presidential Aspirant, Chief Rotimi Amaechi, former Rivers State Governor and APC Presidential Aspirant, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, former Ekiti State Governor and APC Presidential Aspirant, Sen. Ibikunle Amosun, former Ogun State Governor and APC Presidential Aspirant, Owelle Rochas Okorocha, former PGF Chairman and APC Presidential Aspirant, Sen. Abubakar Atiku Bagudu, former PGF Chairman and APC Presidential Aspirant, Mal. Nasir El-Rufai, former Governor of Kaduna State, Mal. Uba Sani, current Governor of Kaduna State and all serving Governors of APC.

 

The public presentation of the publication APC and Transition Politics will mark the commencement of structured public engagements aimed at ensuring that our parties are reformed to guarantee internal political competition, which is fundamental requirement for democracy. This is being initiated in line with the principle, which require citizens to organise and not agonise. While acknowledging the wide gap that exists between expectations of Nigerians to have a democracy that permit political competition and the reality of having parties that are nothing but tools of manipulation in the hands of few politicians, rather than limiting ourselves to complains, it is important to set the stage for reflections to produce ideas for possible exploration. Just like the campaign for merger of opposition parties started with reflections and exploration, we are confident that the reform of political parties can start with reflections and exploration.

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Public Presentation of APC and Transition Politics

 

Kind reminder about Public Presentation of the book APC and Transition Politics scheduled to hold 9.30 am on Tuesday, December 19, 2023 at Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Centre, Abuja. Fellow party members and Nigerians committed to the development of democracy in Nigeria can join using the link:

 

https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85079204519?pwd=rr8zPAMbbeZdDonfSdTlMPyfanlayH.1

 

While looking forward to your guidance and a successful public presentation, kindly accept the assurances of my highest esteem and best wishes.

 

Organising Committee

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Kindly find attached the review of the book APC and Transition Politics by Sen. Ajibola Basiru, APC National Secretary.

Salihu Lukman

 

[Salihu Lukman]

[Salihu Lukman]

Book Review

 

Title of Book: APC and Transition Politics Author: Salihu Moh. Lukman

Book Reviewer: Senator Surajudeen Ajibola Basiru Ph.D., BL

 

Transition simply defined is the process or a period from one state or condition to another. Succession on the other hand is defined as the action or process of inheriting a title, office, property etc. In view of the definitions of the term as well as the intrigues narrated in the book it is debatable whether a more apposite title of the book should not be “APC and Succession Politics”.

 

The book is a polemical narration of historical and political developments of the APC and its federal government from the Senator Adams Oshiomhole led National Working Committee up to the emergence of the new leadership of the party with the election of Dr Abdullahi Umar Ganduje and Senator Ajibola Basiru as the National Chairman and National Secretary of the APC. The book is unsparing in his criticisms of action and actors of the events in the book and make insightful comments and recommendation on how the APC can be strengthened and repositioned to be a genuine party of change.

 

The book is the fifth publication by the author, which was produced “as part of the effort to broaden the party’s capacity to access intellectual perspectives that would guide” the development of the All Progressives Congress (APC). See page238. The earlier four publications are listed on page 238 of the book under review.

 

The 238-page book contains Dedication, a foreword, a preface, acknowledgement, appendix which is a copy of letter of resignation of the author from the National Working Committee of the APC dated July 26, 2023, explanatory note on the author’s resignation from the APC on, Prologue, Chapters I to XII on pages 43 to 222. There is also an epilogue on page 223 of the book. The book ends with a short autobiography of the author on page 236 of the book.

 

The preface of about 10 pages is certainly not a usual one as its length could also make it a chapter of the book. The preface is more or less a summary of the preoccupation of the book, which is a summary of events and political intrigues from the dissolution of Adams Oshiomhole-led National Working Committee to the setting up of the CCEPC led by the Governor of Yobe State up to the convention that produced Senator Adamu Abdullah led National Working Committee and the triumph of President Bola Tinubu at the National Convention of the party. The author commented on the political exigencies necessitating the choice of Senator Kashim Shettima, a Muslim from the Northeast. According to the author, even though the emergence of two Muslims as standard bearers was contested by some, the choice of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar as the PDP standard bearer for the presidential poll, although with a Christian, Mr Ifeanyi Okowa, former Delta State Governor, as Running Mate could be regarded as more offensive to the principles of freedom, equality and justice, and … consolidating the unity of our people as enshrined in the preamble to the 1999 Nigerian Constitution which was what the power shift debate was about. Having emerged as the party's leader, the author enjoined President Tinubu to provide the needed leadership for the fight against the party's conservative bloc. The author, however, did not identify who he referred to as the conservative bloc. He further submitted that President Tinubu's job as the party's leader is to restore constitutional order in the APC and return the party to its founding vision of emerging as a progressive party.

 

Another unusual feature of the book is acknowledgement. Of the 8 pages of acknowledgement starting from page 19, the real acknowledgement did not start until the first paragraph of page 25, running to page 26, which only has content of half the page. The bulk of the “acknowledgement” was devoted to the commentary on the reluctance of the CCEPC to organise a National Convention for the emergence of new leadership of the party, the intrigue around organisation of the 2022 National Convention of the APC as well as explanations of the roles of the author up to his emergence as the National Vice Chairman (North west) of the party and his eventual resignation from the National working Committee of the party over the choice of Dr Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, immediate past Governor of Kano State, as the National Chairman of the party after the resignation of the duo of Senator Abdullahi Adamu and Senator Iyiola Omisore as National Chairman and National Secretary of the APC respectively.

 

The author submitted that his resignation from the NWC is a personal one, and notwithstanding that, he disagrees with the nomination of Dr Ganduje as the National Chairman, he is still a "loyal party member and strong supporter of President Asiwaju Tinubu and all APC governments at both Federal and State levels. He further affirmed that "all party leaders and Members must accept and support Dr. Ganduje leadership". See pages 24 to 25.

 

Curiously, the acknowledgement was followed by an appendix, which is a copy of the resignation of the author from the NwC and a 4-page narration titled "Resignation from the APC: Explanatory Note”, whereby the author offered some explanation for his resignation. In the main, the author asserted that his common explanation was that he was just tired of remaining in the fighting mode campaigning for the reform of the APC. He narrated how he was part of the struggle leading to the exit of Senator Adams Oshiomhole, only to contend with the CECPC under Governor Mai Mala Buni and the administration of Senator Adamu Abdullahi. From his explanation, what finally pushed him to resign was what he considered non-adherence to the agreed constitutional formula with the emergence of Dr Abdullah Ganduje as the National Chairman from the North west. Even though he clarified that he was not questioning President Tinubu's authority as the party's moral leader, he asserted that being a moral leader does not give the President the power to change subsisting zoning agreements within the party unilaterally. He nevertheless urged leaders and party members to unite and support Dr Ganduje.

 

It is germane to note that the author's letter of resignation was dated July 26, 2023, and the Explanatory Note was dated July 27, 2023. The eventual emergence of Dr Umar Abdullahi Ganduje as the national chairman and Senator Ajibola Basiru was at the National Executive Committee of the party, which was held on 4 August 2023. Contrary to the proposition that the President acted to change subsisting zoning agreements within the party unilaterally, the NEC resolved to change the zoning formula at the August 4 meeting by agreeing to a resolution to zoning the National Chairman to the North West and the National Legal Adviser to the North Central while retaining other positions in the respective zones. It is imperative to state that zoning of positions is a matter of expediency, and the dynamics of politics can always dictate necessary adjustments. It is obvious that the author fired his gun before the game came out!

 

The prologue is titled APC, and the Challenge of Succession Politics is segmented into five subtopics: the Challenge; Associated Issues of Leadership and Membership Recruitment; Democratised APC and Political Content: Discipline of Party Leaders and Members and Conclusion- inviolability of Succession Planning. The author makes a case for succession planning but that this cannot be a stand-alone initiative. According to him, it may have to be part of “broader initiatives for expanding democratic space for membership mobilisation and participation in party activities and processes of managing governments produced by the party”.

 

Chapter I of the book, pages 43 to 63, titled Caretaker and the Surreptitious Campaign, contains narration about the establishment of the Caretaker Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee CECPC on June 25, 2020, with a six-month mandate within which to organise a National Convention and elect a new leadership of the party. The chapter narrated how the tenure of six months becomes almost indefinite until the National Convention of March 2022. According to the author, the leadership of the CECPC orchestrated and promoted some clandestine campaigns to allow them to organise the National Convention that will produce the party's Presidential campaign for the 2023 general elections. Under the subtopic 2022 National Convention, the author discussed, on a comparative note, the effort to tackle insecurity under the former PDP administration and the APC under President Buhari.

 

He contended that the government has successfully strengthened Nigerian security personnel’s capacity across all services to respond to national security challenges in all parts of the country. He made the case for deeper introspection from citizens in tackling security challenges. He submitted that tackling the issue of security challenges, among other national issues, ought to be part of the agenda of the National Convention of the party. Rather, the campaign for postponement of the convention was being propagated using myriads of subterfuge, including raising the issue of needless further consultation. The author contended that the attraction for the campaign for postponement was predicated on the deceptive belief that any candidate who emerged, whether elected or imposed, could win the 2023 elections. The author posited that the electoral prospect for the 2023 elections was severely affected by the refusal to commence the organisation of the February 2022 National Convention. Therefore, internal party mobilisation for the emergence of candidates for the 2023 elections, particularly the Presidential Candidate, was reduced to a personality contest. It was thus the conclusion that personality contests weakened the APC and undermined the capacity of the party to link its 2023 electoral contest with the party's achievements under former President Buhari. The author passed a damning judgment on the CECPC that it ended up giving itself the new responsibility of being the political and electoral undertaker of the APC.

 

Chapter II of the book, pages 64 to 87, titled "APC on the Brink", is devoted to narration and polemical expose on the politics, intrigues and machinations at play ahead of the eventual holding of the 2022 National Convention, which is the preoccupation of chapter III of the book on pages 88 to 98 of the book. The author commenced Chapter II by deprecating acts of blind loyalty. He pointed out that an intolerant leader and a blindly loyal citizen will be vulnerable to making stupid blunders, resulting in dashed expectations. He pointed out that one of the issues that APC needed to change was the situation under the PDP, particularly under the tenure of former President Olusegun Obasanjo when Nigerian democracy was cheapened to the level of autocracy.

 

According to the author, politics of change should produce elected leaders who should be highly tolerant and accommodate disagreements and criticisms. He, however, claimed that the APC became a captive of a few leaders whose interests are only about imposing themselves as candidates for elections, and this will reduce the APC to another party different from the original conception in 2013.

 

The author made the case that APC leaders must see party politics beyond being but that “it must be capable of reflecting on the challenges facing citizens to produce proposals to respond to them.

 

Under the subtopics titled “Caretaker or Undertaker” and “Mutiny”, in enjoining party leaders to tolerate criticisms and disagreements, the author counselled that both “party leaders and elected representatives must not expect ‘anticipatory obedience’ from both party members and Nigerians”. He deprecated the manner of handling of the organisation of the National Convention and submitted rather strongly that “The way the CECPC handled the organisation of the National Convention gave enough ground to suspect internal sabotage”.

 

According to the author:

 

“If the Comrade Oshiomhole-led NWC was alleged to be highhanded, intimidating and trampling on the democratic life of the party leaders and members, the CECPC led by His Excellency Mai Mala Buni administered poison, thereby weakening, if not terminated, every democratic practice in the party and attempted every stage for the burial rite of APC as a party. This may sound harsh, but it was the sad reality”. Page 72

 

He alleged that some named governors were working with the CECPC leadership  for  their  ambition  and  that  the  CECPC  Secretary,  Sen. John James Akpanudoedehe, was also aspiring to emerge as the APC Akwa Ibom Governorship candidate for the 2023 elections. Therefore, the author posited that so much uncertainty created apprehension among party members and leaders that the CECPC was working to ensure that the party was manipulated to meet the aspirations of these leaders. Page 74

 

There was also narration about how the vote of no confidence of Mai Mala Buni at a meeting presided over by His Excellency Abubakar Sani Bello, Governor of Niger State and the eventual intervention by President Buhari, who facilitated some understanding leading to the withdrawal of the vote of no confidence of His Excellency Mai Mala. Also, the planning and preparation for the March 2022 Convention under Governor Sani Bello was reinforced.

 

The author also narrated the developments as regards the contending position of the emergence of new leaders of the party through consensus or contest, as well as the issue of Zoning of party position and the way that it appeared that the directives of the former President Buhari were not respected on this matter except as regards the election of Senator Adamu Abdullahi as the National Chairman. He pointed out the activities of those he called “CPC London Lobbyists” and their attempt to influence former President Buhari to anoint Hon Aliyu Adamu as Deputy National Chairman North. He wondered why the anointment of Sen. Adamu as the former President's choice for the National Chairman in favour of Sen. Umaru Tanko Al-Makura, who is by far the most qualified former CPC leader aspiring for the position of National Chairman.

 

According to the author, “Often, individual politicians with these self-serving agenda have used their close relationship with former President Buhari to impose themselves on party members as election candidates”.

 

Chapter III was titled “March 2022 National Convention”. The subtopics under this chapter are: ‘Adoption of Unity List as Basis for Consensus’; and ‘New NWC: New Administration or Business as Usual’. The chapter gave narration of the eventual conduct of the APC National Convention on March 26, 2022, whereby a new leadership for the party was elected, mainly through consensus. As signed by all the twenty-two Progressive Governors, the unity list is set out on pages 90 to 93 of the Book. The author pointed out that in view of adopting the Unity List, part of the terms to convince other aspirants who bought the nomination forms include refunding the fee paid for the nomination forms.

 

Notwithstanding the Unity List, the election was conducted for the offices of National Vice Chairman (North-East) and National Women Leader. The newly elected leaders were sworn in on Sunday, March 27, 2022, and the 25 National Working Committee list is set out on page 94 of the book.

 

The setting up and the composition, as well as the report of the Transition Committee, set up by the NWC at its inaugural meeting, are on pages 95 to 98 of the book, but except for the suspension of all the Directors and appointment of new ones, all other issues and recommendations of the Transition Committee were not addressed throughout the tenure of Sen. Abdullahi Adamu. See page 98.

 

“Leadership Recruitment and Negotiation for 2023” is the topic for Chapter IV. The preoccupation of the author in this chapter is about the processes for the emergence of party candidates for the 2023 general elections. The author expects candidates to emerge from the internal contest and not imposition, most often upon the assumption of loyalty. The author’s position is that; “Leadership recruitment based on assumed loyalty is not a function of commitment to principles or values”. He also made a case for succession planning as “the absence of succession planning negatively impacted governance through policy reversals”. The author pungently contended: “The crucial task before APC leaders during the 2023 internal party primary included whether it could ensure that the leadership selection process produces trustworthy leaders both as party leaders and as candidates for the 2023 elections”. He, therefore concluded that “Nigerian democracy cannot develop unless the right conditions within parties are created for the emergence of trustworthy leaders both as party leaders and candidates for election”.

 

The book, also in chapter IV, examined the intrigues around an attempt to impose presidential candidates and possibly the scheme of President Tinubu from the internal democratic contest of the party. The writer alleged that some associates “of former President Buhari attempted every manipulative strategy to instigate the imposition of a Presidential candidate” and that many manipulative strategies were deployed for the purpose of imposition of candidates.

 

The author narrated efforts to bring Mr. Godwin Emefiele, Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and former President Goodluck Jonathan to the presidential contest in the APC.

 

Chapter V is on “Campaign for 2023”. The chapter started by highlighting the opposition's grand strategy to whitewash former President Buhari's APC-led federal government as a failure while commending the former Vice-President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo. The author was quick to point out the danger of this. According to the author, “It was simply very damaging to former Vice President Osinbajo for anyone to seek to project him as a good person while former President Buhari and the government he served were bad” page 112 The author made a case for the issue-based campaign which according to him should not be hypothetical because our democracy with more than twenty years is gradually stabilising. He pointed out that the APC put itself in a difficult position of campaigning based on propaganda with the resulting effect of dismissing challenges facing the country and rationalising every action of its government. He further reasoned that how initiatives implemented under the APC compared to the PDP 16-year rule were assessed as part of the campaign for 2023 should have been the issue. He further submitted that “preparations for the 2023 campaigns should have been based on strategic initiatives to win the confidence of Nigerians, which should have made APC leaders proactive in providing information to citizens about the progress being made and the challenges”. Pages 112 to 118.

 

Under the subtopic “Campaign for Succession”, the author pointed out the implication of the statement made by former President Buhari during the consultative meeting with the Progressive Governors on Tuesday, May 31, 2022, that President Buhari wanted to exercise the privilege of determining who succeeds him as the candidate of the APC for the 2023 Presidential election. However, the author believes that the “temptation for leaders to choose their successors is democratically risky and very costly”. Page 120

 

Therefore, APC leaders must influence former President Buhari to allow party members to exercise democratic rights to elect the party’s presidential candidate. Page 122

 

Chapter VI, “Emergence of Presidential Candidate and 2023 Campaign”, has three sections (See pages 123 to 139. One is the “Last Minute Battle against Imposition of Presidential Candidate”, two is “Negotiation for Running Mate”, and three is “Fallacious Politics of the 2023 Presidential Campaign”. The author narrated the attempt, on June 6, 2022, by the immediate past Chairman of the APC, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, to make Senator Ahmad Lawan the consensus presidential candidate of the APC and how this was resisted by most members of the NWC with a press conference addressed by Alh. Suleiman Mohammed Argungu, the National Organising Secretary. After a meeting of the NWC with the Progressive Governors, which was boycotted by Senator Adamu Abdullahi, it was resolved that delegates at the National Convention would elect the Presidential candidate of the party. This decision was later affirmed at the meeting of the NWC and some Progressive Governors with former President Buhari.

 

The Convention was held on June 7 and 8 at the Eagle Square Abuja. The list of the 23 screened aspirants is on pages 125 to 126 of the book, out of which 9 of the aspirants announced their withdrawal, and therefore, 14 aspirants contested the APC Presidential Aspirants. The names of the 9 aspirants that withdrew from the race and the results of the Presidential primary are on page 126 of the book Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu won with 1 271 votes, with the runner-up, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi getting 316 votes, and the former Vice President getting 235 votes to come third.

 

On the negotiation for running mates, the author noted that religious and ethnic factors had been used in equal measure to hold Nigerians at a standstill and that it is imperative that the religious and ethnic background of leaders ought to be subordinated to the experiential attributes of persons being considered for leadership. Asiwaju Bola Tinubu eventually settled for Senator Kashim Shettima as his Running Mate.

 

In the section on fallacious politics of the 2023 Presidential Campaign, the author commented that many so-called Obidient supporters promoted outright falsehood and politics of hate against other candidates and their supporters and that this was “unfortunately self-defeatist”. Page 133. The writer described both Mr. Peter Obi and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar as political merchants moving from one party to another for the realisation of personal ambition and that of all the leading presidential candidates, it was only Asiwaju Bola Tinubu who never left his party to any party. Pages 134 to I35.

 

“Contending Issues for the 2023 Campaigns” is the preoccupation of chapter VII. The author posited that Nigerians became occupied in a game of wit which overlooked the obvious limitations and shortcomings of the chosen candidate and that once electoral contests are reduced to a game of wit, “prospects for democratic development risk being inhibited”. Page 140. The chapter examined the crisis occasioned by introducing and enforcing deliberate cash squeeze as the general election was approaching. It was believed that the policy was introduced and implemented by a cabal opposed to the emergence of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu. See pages 146 to 151.

 

On this the author submitted that: “For APC as a party, and Nigeria, as a nation, one of the lessons that the reality of the cash squeeze policy imposes was the need to develop Nigerian political parties and make them capable of regulating the conduct of elected functionaries”. Page 149.

 

Chapter VII is on sundry issues around the victory of the APC and matters arising therefrom. The author submitted that foul cries by candidates who lost the election reflect the internal dynamics of party politics in the country and that, in many respects, the Labour Party’s rise to electoral prominence in the 2023 elections was mainly through harvesting the grievances from both the PDP and APC. The writer counselled APC leaders and associates of Asiwaju Tinubu to accept the trust of Nigerians invested in President Tinubu and the party with a high measure of humility and that this requires considerable attention and focus on the development of the APC. He advised President Tinubu to broaden his relationship with all party leaders and mainstream it to nurture the institutional development of party organs. He concluded by stating that an Asiwaju Tinubu- led Federal Government needed to orient itself to avoid the mistakes of former President Buhari’s administration while building on its strength.

 

In Chapter IX, the author x-rayed the ‘State of APC and Post-Election Challenges.’ He identified several challenges bedeviling the party, prominent among which is the problem of making the party’s organs functional. The failure of the organs at all levels, including the NWC, to operate according to the party’s constitution leaves the party to the whims and caprices of National Chairman. Indeed, he was right in stating that once the “party’s constitution was no longer the guide for managing the party’s affairs, leaders discretionary decisions took over.” He pointedly asserted that this contribute to financial recklessness by the Adamu/Omisore without approval by the NWC, mismanaging the rancour- free emergence of leadership for the National Assembly, and indiscipline (anti- party activities) by party members.

 

The Challenge of Governance in Nigerian Democracy was the focus of discussion in Chapter X. He situated President Tinubu’s Renewed Hope Agenda within APC’s manifesto of frontally tackling the issue of how                   to ‘unite to radically reform, modernise and move our nation forward.’ He advocated for engage ment in policy negotiation before announcement and implementation.

 

This is to avoid rejection by organised labour and the public, which in the past has resulted in policy rejection, and policy somersault. APC as a party, he insisted, must initiate policies and programmes based on the provisions of its manifesto.

 

Chapters XI and XII addressed the ‘Challenges of Rebuilding the APC’ and ‘APC

and the Way Forward’ respectively, which contained measures to retool the party on the party of progressive politics for Nigeria's peace, development, and well- being. On this score, he stated:

 

“Returning the APC to its founding vision is about developing the structures of the party to competently have all the requisite power and relationship with elected representatives of the party to serve our dear country Nigeria based on the provisions of the party’s manifesto and President Tinubu’s Renewed Hope agenda. As a party, the APC must wake up and respond positively to the expectations of Nigerians and begin to douse citizens' frustrations, producing so much anger and making citizens vulnerable to the manipulative antics of political opportunists during election contests. Page 210.

 

Furthermore, the 7 recommendations on pages 210-211 will not only ensure good governance but will internalise democracy in the administration of the party based on the dictates of APC’s Constitution and not on personal whims.

 

The book is written in lucid English. It is highly polemical and provide insight into perspective of the author on national issue like security, relationship of party and government and other social groups. On the final note I concur with following statement of Chief Bisi Akande, CFR when he concluded in the foreword to the book:

 

“…permit me the privilege of recommending this book to the reading public. It would make an interesting reading as a literature in political history and as part of the means of achieving our aspirations in party-building. And if our aim is to build the party of our dreams through constructive debates and discussions, such efforts as this must be encouraged in all spheres of party affairs.”

 

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Prebendal Politics and Crisis of Nigerian Democracy

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

In an opinion article, on January 13, 2024, titled The Audacity of Impunity, which reviewed the recent mindboggling revelation of corruption in the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Alleviation under the suspended Minister, Dr. Betta Edu, Mr. Simon Kolawole contended that ‘because  there was a widespread belief that President Bola Tinubu would run a corrupt, laissez-faire administration, some of his appointees decided to hit the ground running by spending public funds with impunity and audacity – and gleefully spitting on due process. There is corruption and there is impunity. And then, there is audacity. From the very beginning, we started hearing salacious stories, or allegations, of bags of dollars being dragged into and out of the offices of powerful government officials; lobbyists and aspiring political appointees spreading goodies around for “facilitation”; and undisguised sleaze in the 2024 budgetary process at every stage.’

 

Although Mr. Kolawole limited the scope of issues, he contended with, to the alleged corruption scandal in the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, it is important to note the implicit recognition of the ‘widespread belief that President Bola Tinubu would run a corrupt, laissez-faire administration’. These so-called ‘widespread belief’ have produced discomforting media reports within less than one year of the administration, which include damaging reports about how the Chief of Staff to the President, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila was alleged to have traded government appointment to highest bidders. President Tinubu had to respond to this on Monday, October 30, 2024 when at the commencement of the weekly Federal Executive Council he declared “absolute confidence in the integrity of my Chief of Staff, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila”. Given the gravity of the allegation, President Tinubu further declared ‘we’re all joining hands to fight corruption.’

 

Most of the alleged reports of corruption in government could hardly be substantiated with evidence. But combinations of growing lack of trust by citizens against public officials and poor communications of government activities made the allegations of corruption against public officials popular. Unfortunately, coming at the beginning of the tenure of President Asiwaju Tinubu, makes virtually every initiative of the government to be enmeshed in corruption allegations. Recall the case of the N2 trillion supplementary budget and how allocation of N5 billion for Presidential Yacht became the subject of public debate. Other issues in the supplementary budget that attracted public debate include allocation of N7 billion for renovation of President’s and Vice President’s official residences in Lagos, additional N2.5 billion for the renovation of Aguda House, N1.5 billion for vehicles for First Lady, another N5.8 billion to replace operational pool vehicles. All these overshadow laudable initiatives such as N5 billion education loan scheme.

 

Around the same period when the N2 trillion supplementary budget proposal was being considered by the National Assembly, the issue of N160 million jeeps purchased for each legislator broke out. This meant total expenditure of N57.6 billion for House of Representatives and N15.8 billion for Senate. And the overall conclusions from all the public debate was that government and public officials were grossly insensitivity to the flight of Nigerians. The major problem, which strengthens all the public suspicion about corruption is that government communication remotely reflects the demands of citizens for improved living conditions, and to the extent of that alienate the government and political leaders. Communication then become passive, reactive and hardly projecting solutions to problems. For instance, when government proposed any budgetary allocation such as N5 billion for Presidential Yacht, or N7 billion for renovation of President’s and Vice President’s official residences in Lagos, or N5.8 billion for operational pool vehicle, etc., how would all those expenditures contribute to improving the lives of citizens?

 

With all the vast huge communication resources and networks at the disposal of especially federal government, why are public officials and government unable to manage public communication efficiently and admirably to spawn support and inspire mass appeal? Why should it be difficult to change passive and reactive communication to responsive, participatory, proactive and problem-solving communication? What is very remarkable is that the inability of communication managers both in government and at the party level to produce responsive, participatory, proactive and problem-solving communication is disastrously the source of opposition politicians strength. In so many respects, the popularity of political opposition to APC and its governments is hardly the case that the opposition is managing public communication differently. It is certainly not also the case that opposition is able to produce responsive, participatory, proactive and problem-solving communication. To the contrary, opposition’s communication is also passive, reactive and not able to project solutions to most of the problems bedeviling the nation, which APC and its governments are considered to be unable to achieve, if not the source of the problem.

 

Why should political communication be just about transmitting raw information in the form it is generated. Why shouldn’t communication of APC and the governments’ it produces be about citizens’ engagement? Given that APC is envisioned to be a progressive party, shouldn’t communication also serve as a means of getting feedback from citizens regarding policies, programmes, projects, actions, etc.? Methodological issues of getting feedbacks from citizens and how it contributes to shaping and reshaping government policies, programmes, projects, actions, etc. should provide the source for public confidence on the party and governments it controls. Once the source of public communication is remotely linked to broader section of society it will at best be a journalistic exercise, having expression only in pages of newspapers, radio and television programmes, and in contemporary times, in the social media handles of public commentators.

 

Accommodating the diverse interests of Nigerians is about representation and responsiveness, which is what is required to affirm that ‘sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through the constitution derives all powers and authority’ and ‘participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of the constitution as provided in section 14 (2) (a and c) of the 1999 Nigerian constitution as amended. Being able to mobilise Nigerians to support the initiatives of government is a function of engagements and negotiations with the aim of winning agreements that will strategically commit citizens to both support the initiatives of government as well as discharge complementary responsibilities. To be candid, this has been absent and has been the source of virtually most of the crises that were responsible for the collapse of all previous Republics in Nigeria. In many respects, this reflects poor relationship that exists between government and citizens, which often is taken for granted. If anything, part of the reasons why relations between government and citizens is most times tense is the absence of a functional framework to facilitate engagements and negotiations with Nigerians on policy issues. It all comes down to questions of representation and responsiveness.

 

Theoretically, representation and responsiveness are more about how different interests are accommodated and promoted in policies of government. Somehow, these are issues that are yet to be reflected in the ways political parties and governments at all levels are organised. None of the registered parties can claim to have developed structures that allow for caucusing such that blocs of interests can strategise within the structures of the political party on how to promote their own interests. None of our governments, including the current Federal Government led by President Asiwaju Tinubu can claim to be organically connected with any organised group of interest based on which its policies and programme initiates could be adjudged to be derivative or reflective of the demands of members of the groups.

 

Inability or failure to make governments representative and responsive such that policies and programmes of governments find their bearing from demands of citizens as represented by organised groups legitimises the belief about ‘widespread corruption’ and in many respects mobilises citizens against governments. Analysing factors responsible for the collapse of the Nigerian Second Republic, Prof. Richard A. Joseph, as far back as 1987 described it as prebendal politics, which reduces governments and the resources it manages to basically control by few public officials. Sadly, here we are in 2024, still stuck with the reality of having to contend with prebendal politics as the main orientation of democracy in Nigeria.

 

This is further complicated by the fact that, it would appear, prebendal politics has become more entrenched even under the APC, both during the eight-year tenure of former President Muhammadu Buhari and currently under President Asiwaju Tinubu. The whole allegations of corruption surrounding the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs since its formation in 2019 demonstrate how under the APC problems of corruption were allowed to continue. This is heart breaking because one of the campaign promises of the APC in 2015 is war against corruption for which Nigerians invested their trust on the party and former President Buhari. In fact, part of the reasons for the mass support of Nigerians from the Northern part of the country for former President Buhari was the expectation that he will be ruthless in fighting corruption in the country. Largely based of his antecedent as a former military Head of State between January 1984 and August 1985, who overthrew the Second Republic, arrested, tried, and sentenced many politicians to prison terms, many supporters of former President Buhari expected that he will handle the fight against corruption in the same way he did when he was military Head of State.

 

As it turned out, those expectations were not met. Although, there were flashes of attempts to fight corruption during the tenure of former President Buhari, however, it was not able to change the orientation of politics away from being prebendal. If anything, prebendal politics took over the APC and many public officials produced by the APC also became guilty of converting public resources to private use. Recall how the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was reported to have seized N19.3 billion salary bail out given to Kogi State by the Federal Government, which was deposited in an unlawful bank account domiciled with Sterling Bank Plc in November 2021. This is a State controlled by the APC. There are other similarly damaging allegations of how some APC controlled states were unable to pay salaries of workers.

 

All these confirms Prof. Richard Joseph seminal description of prebendal politics in Nigeria as a system, which ‘enables divergent groups and constituencies to seek to accommodate their interests. At the level of the individual, it is a pattern of social behavior that is quickly learned and accepted. It would be more comforting to say that it works because it is efficient, and that it is a rational and productive method of minimizing social costs and maximizing benefits. Unfortunately, such claims cannot be made: the system permits although it seldom satisfies such criteria. It is often wasteful, unproductive, and contributes to the increasing affluence of a relative few, paltry gains for a larger number, and misery for the great majority of the people.’

 

Debate about social costs and benefits regarding public policy choices of APC governments, for whatever it is worth can go on. However, so long as indices of poverty, cost of living and welfare conditions of citizens remain below acceptable thresholds, public expenditure would be heavily suggestive of waste, low productivity, increasing affluence of public officials, ‘paltry gains’ for citizens and ‘misery for the greater majority’ of Nigerians. It is painful to admit that the APC has ‘quickly learned and accepted’ prebendal politics and ‘it would be more comforting to say that it’ is working efficiently for some APC leaders in government. Part of the evidence of working efficiently produces the outcome whereby ‘some …appointees’ of President Asiwaju Tinubu ‘decided to hit the ground running by spending public funds with impunity and audacity – and gleefully spitting on due process’ as highlighted by Mr. Kolawole.

 

The big consolation is that President Asiwaju Tinubu has decisively intervened, first with the suspension of the Minister, Dr. Betta Edu, then followed by suspending implementation of all social investment programmes and full-scale investigation of activities of the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs. Will these produce a new beginning in the fight against corruption in the country? Or will it be another moonlighting providing escape routes for all those accused of corruption with another inconclusive outcome? Above all, will President Asiwaju Tinubu use the opportunity of this investigation to introduce deeper political reform in the country such that the orientation of APC begins to shift away from prebendal politics? Will such shift take APC back to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party based on which the party and all its organs are strengthened to not only become functional but also develop the capacity to regulate the conduct of public officials it produces?

 

Inability to regulate the conduct of public officials by political parties is at the root of the problem facing democracy in Nigeria, which strengthen prebendal politics. As loyal members of APC, the disposition will be to confidently engage both President Asiwaju Tinubu and all leaders of the party so that new chapter in the fight against corruption is opened, such that APC and all its organs are activated to be functional and strengthened to regulate the conducts of all public officials. However, it is important to moderate our expectations with the reality that once President Asiwaju Tinubu’s initiatives do not include developing corresponding relationships with organised groups in the country, based on which engagements and negotiations on policy measures and their outcomes are made possible, inclination towards prebendal politics will remain high in the country. Unfortunately, also given that President Asiwaju Tinubu is more disposed to be accessed by politicians whose mission is limited to being prebendal, discourages any strong expectation for deeper political reform in the country under President Asiwaju Tinubu.

 

Given such discouraging prospect, what is the future of democracy in Nigeria? Even with such ugly prospect, APC leaders must rise to the occasion and remain resolute in engaging President Asiwaju Tinubu and all APC leaders to return APC to its founding vision of being a functionally progressive party, based on which it is able to develop the needed capacity to regulate the conducts of public officials it produces. To be able to achieve that would require a change in the way party leaders relate with President Asiwaju Tinubu. A situation whereby disposition of party leaders towards the President is limited to issues of accessing opportunities in government would only strengthen prebendal politics and weaken initiatives towards returning the APC to its founding vision of becoming a progressive party.

 

Once prebendal politics remain strong and initiatives towards making the APC becoming a progressive party are weak, the fight against corruption in the country will be weak. APC leaders must rise to this challenge and provide the required support to ensure that Nigerian democracy overcome its prebendal orientation to become both responsive and representative of the wider interests of Nigerians. As a party, APC must turn a new leaf in Nigerian democracy by doing everything necessary to ensure that the government of President Asiwaju Tinubu succeed. Nigerian politics must be about meeting the expectations of citizens based on which elected leaders make every sacrifice to justify the votes of Nigerians!

 

May Allah (SWT) guide President Asiwaju Tinubu and APC leaders to initiate deeper political reforms in the country to end prebendal politics, which promote corruption and converts public resources to private use by political leaders and public officials. Amen!!!

 

[Salihu Lukman]

Challenges of Democratising Political Parties

 

Salihu Moh. Lukman

Kaduna

 

The question of whether it is possible to have free and fair elections when political parties don’t allow internal competition to produce candidates is a recurring debate. As Nigerians, this is a question that is as old as the Fourth Republic. If anything, it is a challenge that has produced a cancerous reality whereby inability of political leaders to subordinate themselves to competitive practices internally within the structures of their own parties, create the current ugly reality of higher disposition to manipulate electoral results, which invariably nullified the votes electorates. This was the reality that weakened the support base of the PDP between 2003 and 2015. In fact, it was a reality that made many leaders of former opposition parties, who are today’s ruling politicians to agitate for ‘one man, one vote’, largely because of the frustration with high incidences of rigging of elections in the country by PDP.

 

Sadly, the same people who aggressively and successfully mobilised Nigerians against the PDP based on ‘one man, one vote’ campaign are also behaving exactly the way PDP leaders behaved between 2003 and 2015. Painfully, in the process, a party that emerged with so much promise, APC, winning the support of Nigerians is almost destroyed and on daily basis creating conditions for its own electoral funeral. As loyal members of the APC, we must remind our leaders that parties become more prone to electoral defeat when they resist or block internal pressures for leadership change.

 

APC’s electoral victory in 2015, for instance, could be partly explained based on the refusal of PDP leadership to recognise and respect the yearnings of party members and leaders. It was the inability to respect internal yearnings for change that produced the splinter group of New PDP, which eventually joined the merger that produced APC in 2013. Combined with other factors outside PDP, especially the ability of leaders of the opposition parties under the defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples’ Party (ANPP) and Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) to negotiate a successful political merger, which bolstered public confidence, APC’s electoral victory of 2015 was resoundingly accomplished.

 

Since 2015, having won the elections at national level, emerged as the ruling party in the country, the structures of the APC have increasingly become narrow. Meetings of organs are not taking place, access to leaders have become very difficult, if not impossible. Unfortunately, most demands for access are reduced to question of access for opportunities for political appointments and other privileges largely because that is also the prevailing reality. In the process, opportunity to manage governance differently by producing policies that are representative and responsive to interest of Nigerians is lost. Consequently, we end up constantly reproducing old realities whereby the business of political parties, including the APC is limited to producing candidates for elections.

 

Should we allow that to continue? Being members of the APC, what are our options in terms of engaging our leaders to open the party and allow internal competition to take place, especially on the question of producing candidates for election? Without attempting to directly respond to some of the criticism by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole about engaging issues publicly, it is important to draw attention to the fact that the issues we are dealing with border on the survival of our democracy and ensuring that our democracy is responsive and representative. These issues test the strength of our loyalties as citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Should our loyalty to the party be stronger, or should our loyalty to our country be stronger? The danger of loyalty to our party becoming stronger will reduce us to the status of being members of secret cult. No member of any political party has signed any oath of allegiance that subordinate him or her and therefore make them to operate as members of a cult.

 

Expectedly, Nigerian political parties are required to be open through meetings of their structures, as provided by their constitutions. The big draw back is that when structures of political parties don’t meet there are no penalties. With meetings not taking place, individual leaders take decisions, which directly affect members with grave consequences on the electoral prospects of the party. To mitigate these consequences, party leaders then pushed themselves to the overdrive electoral mode of rigging elections. Once that is the case, politics is no longer about developing strong relation with citizens. This is completely unacceptable. To take Comrade Oshiomhole back to his analogy of the family, it must be recognised that this is like the hurtful incidences of force marriages, which existed in our families. As members of our respective families, we had to come out publicly to fight such menace with all our convictions, even if it means losing all the privileges, which being family members may guarantee.

 

We must appeal to our leaders, including Comrade Oshiomhole not to be carried away by the aura of being todays rulers and conduct themselves in the same mode previous rulers of Nigeria conducted themselves. As party members, we are left with hardly any option but to engage our leaders publicly, given that the structures of our party, APC, are closed, and we don’t have the kind of access that would enabled us to influence the decisions of our leaders. It also should be empassised that as much as possible in engaging issues publicly, many party members do so with respect, but sadly, response of leaders is hardly the case. Because of disagreement with decisions of leaders, many of us are condemned and most times called abusive names.

 

Perhaps, it is important to remind our leaders where we are coming from. Nigerians fought against the military, campaigned for democracy, and eventually won to have the current Fourth Republic in 1999. Between 1999 and 2015, we had PDP as a ruling party, which took Nigerians for granted by blocking internal democracy within PDP on account of which Godfathers took over the PDP and impose candidates for elections across board. Led by the APC, in 2015, Nigerians rose to defeat the PDP. Having emerged as a ruling party since 2015, APC leaders have become just like the PDP, blocking all avenue of internal party contests. With every election, the situation is getting worse.

 

Internal contests within the APC are reduced to whether the party should abandon its founding vision and collapse into the conventional way of organising political contests in the country. The founding vision of the party is about having all party members to participate in the process of producing candidates for elections through direct primary. In fact, the debate around direct or indirect primary has been a constant issue in APC since 2014. Part of the experience is that aspiring politicians and by extension godfathers continue to impose their preferences, with the direct consequences of undermining initiatives within the party to develop new organisational frameworks that can allow for broader participation of members. This reflects Antonio Gramsci’s thesis about ‘the old is dying and the new cannot be born.’

 

Most of the public debate about internal democracy within Nigerian political parties hardly addresses the fundamental issues of membership management, party funding and administration. So long as political parties in Nigeria are not challenged to alter the current framework, which reduces party members to being free riders with no financial responsibility, and party leaders at all levels becoming surrogates to aspiring politicians, effectiveness of legal provisions will remain weak. With all its problems, in its short period, more than any party in the history Nigeria, at least in this Fourth Republic, APC has some empirical evidence to prove that a law compelling political parties to use the direct method involving all members of the party to select candidates for elections can exist but will not stop politicians from undermining the process.

 

Recall that ahead of the 2019 elections, the decision in APC was that stakeholders in each state will decide on the mode of primary to select the APC Governorship candidates for 2019 elections. In the case of Presidential primary, former President Buhari opted for the direct primary. In many of the states, the votes returned for former President Buhari were quite higher than the votes during the general election. For instance, Lagos State returned 1.9 million votes during the internal party primary but only got 580,825 votes during the general elections. In fact, the total voter turnout during the general election was just around one million. Similarly, Kano State returned 2,931,235 votes for the President during the party primary. But during the general election he got only1,464,768. Like the case of Lagos, the total voter turnout for Kano State during the general election was less than two million.

 

Instances of clear manipulations using direct primary are also evident at state levels. For instance, in 2019, through direct primary, Lagos State APC declared Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu winner of the election with 970, 851 votes. Then incumbent Governor, Mr. Akinwunmi Ambode was reported to have scored 72,901. During the 2019 Governorship election, Mr. Sanwo-Olu polled 739,445 votes to defeat Jimi Agbaje of the PDP, who polled 206,141 votes. Why did more than 200,000 APC members voters Mr. Sanwo-Olu during the direct primary failed to come out to vote for him during the general elections.

 

The vulnerability of direct primary to manipulative intrigues of political leaders was further confirmed during the Anambra 2021 Governorship election. The APC candidate in the election, Sen. Andy Ubah, during the APC primary election was said to have emerged with 230,201 votes but only got 43,285 votes during the election. Some measure of honesty is required from all leaders to address problems of internal democracy within political parties in Nigeria. No doubt, Nigerian democracy needs to be deepened to broaden the participation of party members in the process of selecting party candidates. But given the way some APC leaders are desperately and aggressively campaigning for direct primary, with all the current ambiguities, makes it suspect.

 

APC emerged in 2013 with the commitment to bring about political change in the country. One of the changes envisioned by the founding leaders of the party was the adoption of the direct method, which is to broaden the participation of members, not just few delegates, in the process of electing party candidates at all levels. Between 2013 and 2015, there were internal debates in the APC to develop the necessary infrastructural platforms that should allow all members of the party to elect both leaders and candidates. Under Chief Bisi Akande’s Interim Management leadership, substantial investment was undertaken towards establishing computerised membership Data Centre for the whole country, located at No. 10 Bola Ajibola Street, off Allen Avenue, Ikeja, Lagos. Sadly, PDP government under former President Jonathan Goodluck vandalised the Data Centre on November 22, 2014 based on the claims that the Department of State Services, (DSS), which carried out the attack, acted on a petition which alleged that the Data Centre was being set up to ‘clone INEC Permanent Voters Card with the intention of hacking into INEC database, corrupting it and replacing them with their own data.’ (Premium Times, November 23, 2014).

 

Issues of maintaining verifiable membership register is a condition precedent for the conduct of direct primary by any political party. Experiences under APC is that direct primary is being conducted without verifiable membership register, which empowers party leaders to simply write results in favour of aspirants they want to emerge as candidates for elections. Once that is the case, winning elections will hardly be about winning the votes of electorates. The same logic that is applied to produce candidates, which is manipulating results of primary will be used during the elections. Campaigns will be weakly committed to winning the support of the electorates.

 

Related to issues of membership management is the primary question of party funding. So long as political parties in Nigeria are not challenged to alter the current framework, which reduces party members to being free riders with no financial responsibility, and party leaders at all levels become surrogates to aspiring politicians, incidences of manipulation to produce candidates will remain strong and effectiveness of legal provisions, including abiding by extant provisions of party constitution to produce candidates will continue to be violated. Once that is the case, party members will be shortchanged as unpopular candidates will be produced.

 

This is the unfortunate reality, which has greatly weakened capacity of political leaders and institutions, including political parties to be able to facilitate or resolve political challenges in Nigeria. Is it possible to have democracy without political competition? In other words, is it possible to have election without contest? These are old questions, which made the American political scientist, Francis Fukuyama in his controversial book, The End of History and the Last Man to argue that “there is no democracy without democrats.”

 

The absence of competition in Nigerian democracy, especially in our political parties is responsible for so many unpredictable political circumstances and is making political leaders both unsure and insecure. This has basically reduced Nigerian politics to a game of conquest. A major attribute is that political leaders are conquerors, while party members and ordinary citizens are the would-be conquered. Arguably, while in other parties, including PDP, this is a well-established order, in APC, although highly contested, it is also increasingly becoming the norm. The recent decision by the APC National Working Committee (NWC) regarding the 2024 Edo election, whereby the NWC announced that the party’s candidate will emerge through direct primary may be informed by the strong desire of party leaders to manipulate the process. Already, there are media reports alleging that APC Stakeholders in Edo State have decided to limit the number of aspirants for the primary.

 

These are troublesome realities. Troublesome because the decision of the NWC to organise direct primary contradicts provisions of Article 13.4(iv) of the APC constitution, which only empowers the NWC to ‘propose electoral guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of elections to Party offices at all levels, and procedure for selecting Party candidates for elective offices …to the National Executive Committee.’ The decision of the NWC to produce the Governorship candidate of APC for the Edo 2024 election based on direct primary is a clear usurpation of the powers of the National Executive Committee (NEC), which is illegal.

 

Combinations of illegality, clear disposition by APC leaders to manipulate the process of producing candidates could only mean that APC leaders are weakly committed to win the support of electorates. Once that is the case, it makes APC leaders more disposed to acts of rigging and manipulating electoral results with the attendant consequences of producing elected representatives on the platform of the party who are anything but representative or responsive to the interest of citizens. As loyal APC members, we will continue to appeal to our leaders to moderate their conduct and return to the founding vision of APC.

 

The founding vision of APC is for all members of the party to participate in producing the candidates of the party through a process which guarantees the existence of verifiable membership register. As it is, APC has no verifiable membership register anywhere. If it exists, like the case of INEC voters register, it should be displayed publicly long before the conduct of the primary for verification. Many APC leaders, including President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Comrade Oshiomhole were in the frontline of the struggle for democracy in Nigeria. Now that they are the elected leaders of the country, they must justify that by demonstrating that they truly led the struggle for democracy based a conviction to end dictatorship in all its ramification. They must not imagine that because they were in the frontline in the struggle for democracy in 1990s, that gives them the license to permit, or even promote practices that undermine democratic values.

 

Beyond anything, the big test is the question of democratising the APC as a political party. Being the first time in this Forth Republic we are having elected leaders such as President Asiwaju Tinubu and Comrade Oshiomhole who were in the frontline of the struggle for democracy in the 1990s, they should justify that by ensuring that Nigerian political parties are truly democratic. Being leaders of APC, APC must emerge as a distinctly democratic party based on abiding respect for rule of law, which should be well reflected in a strong commitment to manage affairs of the party based on compliance with provisions of the APC. Anything short of this, will diminish the credentials of our leaders, including President Asiwaju Tinubu and Comrade Oshiomhole. May Allah (SWT) touch the heart of our leaders to function as democrats and not dictators, based on which they return APC to its founding vision and refrain from acts of manipulation to produce candidates of the party for all elections. It is only by allowing democratic process to produce candidates that popular candidates can be produced on sustainable basis. Anything, short of that will push leaders to seek to manipulate emergence of candidates, which will become the catalyst for rigging elections!