2015: Moving Kaduna State Forward
Salihu Moh. Lukman
Issues In Nigerian Politics: The Gen. Buhari Challenge
Salihu Moh. Lukman
Background: The Democratic Context and Contest
Recently, His Excellency, Amb. (Rtd.) Ignatius C. Olisemeka, former Nigerian Ambassador to the United States, made the point "a leader must have a strong, solid, moral and disciplined background, the inspirational ability to galvanize his people to higher, lofty and common purpose." This was contained in one of the rarely expected testimonials endorsing Gen. Buhari's leadership and why he should be the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. For Amb. Olisemeka, Nigeria badly needed "a leadership that will turn the country around; and rescue us from the depth of chronic indiscipline, disorder and decadence we have, over the years, gradually descended and slided into."
That Nigeria badly needed a leadership that can rescue the country "from the depth of chronic indiscipline, disorder and decadence" cannot be contested. Amb. Olisemeka simply spoke the minds of millions of Nigerians. What is sharply being contested is whether Gen. Buhari can provide that leadership. Our electoral option is President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan. Of course, in between, there are other less prominent candidates. The challenge before Nigerians, as far as the 2015 elections are concerned, is making a choice between President Jonathan and Gen. Buhari.
With a voting population estimated at about 60%, our young people are certainly the dominant players. Being the victims of almost a failed nation as evidenced by the increasing rates of unemployment (23%), poverty (70%), crimes, etc. one expects that they could make rational decisions. This is however a function of their knowledge base in terms of what the two candidates represent especially with respect to capacity to rescue the nation.
Parts of the questions that should dominate the minds of many young Nigerians include: what will be the new initiatives of government to address in particular the problems of poverty and unemployment in the country post May 2015? How can these initiatives, for instance, respond to the crisis in our education sector? The big elephant in the room is the insecurity challenge; what will government do to defeat the menace of Boko Haram in the country? Against the background of our two choices, whose leadership will respond to these challenges effectively and faster? President Jonathan or Gen. Buhari?
In summary, these are both the context and the issues for contest in the 2015 elections. Providing answers require comparative assessment of the two candidates. In a functional society, propaganda will take bearing from the facts. Our curriculum of education would have unbiasedly tutored our youth about what the facts are. Both contemporary and comparative assessments of performances of current and previous governments should have guided the decisions of our young people. It is possible that this is the case. In which case the campaign messages of both President Jonathan and Gen. Buhari would not in anyway attempt to take our young people for granted. To that extent therefore messages would not distort history.
President Jonathan Vs. Gen. Buhari
Unfolding events, especially coming from President Jonathan’s campaign, contradicts and distorts the facts. Given that our youths are active witnesses of current situation (2010 – 2015), the major challenge is how they are able to interpret our national developments under President Jonathan. Questions such as, why the current high state of insecurity? Why is Nigeria under President Jonathan losing its territory to rag-tag Boko Haram insurgents? Are they superior to Nigerian army? If so, what could have accounted for that superiority? If not, why has it taken the Nigerian army so long to be able to assert its superiority to defeat Boko Haram? Could the speculated conspiracy theory whereby Northern leaders, including Gen. Buhari, are using Boko Haram to disgrace President Jonathan out of power, really be true? What benefit does such conspiracy theory portend to the Northern leaders and why has President Jonathan’s administration been unable to assert its hegemony and bring to end activities of Boko Haram? Could the conspiracy by the Northern leaders be informed by a Machiavellian logic of the end justifies the means?
Other questions starring the face of President Jonathan and his team include: why is the government unable to provide enough jobs, reduce poverty, etc.? Or put differently, is it true that government has transformed the economy? Is it true that government through SURE-P, etc. has provided millions of jobs? Have these really taken care of the national needs? What could government have done differently?
Answers to these questions could have naturally lead our youths to objectively assess the Jonathan administration. The big dilemma of the President Jonathan campaign could perhaps be its inability to provide convincing empirical answers to these questions – undisputed answers that mirror the lives of our young Nigerians. For instance, answers such as creating millions of jobs under SURE-P have not explained why the jobs have not resulted in reduced poverty in the country. The other predicament of the regime is why the provision of those millions of jobs did not translate into protection for our youths. Lack of protection could have explained why thousands, if not millions, of our youths become vulnerable to administrative extortions by top functionaries of the regime through job recruitment scams such as the prisons, immigration, customs, police, etc. recruitment exercises that required qualified young Nigerians to pay for job applications resulting in the unfortunate stampede of March 15, 2014 in Abuja Stadium causing the unfortunate deaths of at least 15 young Nigerians.
Claims such as with the rebasing of the Nigerian economy, we are now the biggest economy in Africa needs closer interrogation. In concrete terms, what does this mean? Of what use is it to have the biggest economy with levels of poverty and unemployment?
Inability to provide convincing empirical answers to these questions has pushed the Jonathan campaign to present a propaganda version of historical interpretation of what Gen. Buhari represents. Records of Gen. Buhari’s leadership between 1984 and 1985 are being presented through adverts in prints and electronic media. Following the emergence of President Jonathan and Gen. Buhari as the candidates of the two leading parties – Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and All Progressives Congress (APC) – the President Jonathan’s campaign attempted to hoodwink families of some refutable Nigerians that were victims of alleged Buhari’s dictatorship to reject the candidature of Gen. Buhari based on the propaganda version of his 1984 government. Notably, Fela Anikulapo Kuti’s and Alh. Shehu Shagari’s names were flaunted. Representatives of both families publicly dissociated the families from those propaganda claims.
By far, the most resounding masterstroke against the anti Buhari propaganda came from Mr. Tunde Thompson, Mallam Adamu Ciroma, Ms. Lola Shoneyin and Mr. Ismail Lawal. These are people that were direct victims of the so-called authoritarian highhandedness of the 1984/85 era of Gen. Buhari’s government. Mr. Tunde Thompson was jailed under decree 4 in 1984. Mallam Adamu Ciroma, being a Minister under the regime of Alh. Shehu Shagari was together with many political office holders of the 2nd Republic unfairly detained for months. The father of Ms. Shoneyin, like Mallam Ciroma, spent months in jail. Mr. Ojuolapo Lawal, father of Mr. Ismail Lawal, was one of the three men executed for drug trafficking in 1985 by Gen. Buhari’s administration. That Mr. Ismail Lawal would announce that execution of his father “doesn’t matter” on account of which declared that he “would vote for Gen. Buhari” is by far the one singular most important endorsement Gen. Buhari has secured in the contest for 2015 elections. Like Mr. Lawal, Ms. Shoneyin, Mallam Ciroma and Mr. Thompson all endorsed Gen. Buhari.
History, Politics and Leadership
Politics is practically about capacity to express our choices. Under democratic system of government the choices should be expressed in the results of periodic elections based on which leaders will emerge. Most times, our choices don’t have to be rational, logical or even informed by the facts before us. Clearly, with the levels of decay in the country, our choices seem to be dictated by the perception of the dangers facing us as a people. The views being expressed by people such as Mr. Tunde Thompson, Mallam Adamu Ciroma, Ms. Lola Shoneyin, Mr. Ismail Lawal, etc. basically reflects the estimation of the national danger facing us as a country.
Perhaps, the increasing momentum of the Gen. Buhari campaign is an indicator to this reality. Somehow, President Jonathan’s campaign is able to correctly read this national estimation. It is however unable to respond appropriately and persuasively to be able to win the hearts of Nigerians and to that extent therefore hopefully win the votes in the 2015 elections. In the circumstance, President Jonathan’s campaign is becoming more and more desperate and in the process present messages that only distort history and in many instances present fabricated stories, all aimed at proving how Gen. Buhari is such a bad leader that represent threat to the nation.
As a result, there is the calculated design to confuse our young people about what defines the danger. Is it the inability of the current government to guarantee protection of life and property, which is the primary function of government, or the potential of a Gen. Buhari presidency, which may reincarnate the 1984 experiences by throwing many innocent Nigerians into jail, executing drug pushers, etc.? Is it possible for Gen. Buhari presidency (or anyone for that matter) to re-enact the 1984 scenario of enacting retroactive decrees, arbitrarily arrest innocent Nigerians?
The desperation to make the case that Gen. Buhari represent the danger made the President Jonathan’s campaign to produce messages such as the one purporting that after Gen. Buhari lost the 2011 elections, he wept and declared never to contest again. The truth is that Gen. Buhari saddened by the national reality, wept while addressing a world press conference at the International Conference Centre on April 13, 2011, as it closes its presidential campaign just before the 2011 presidential election. The 2011 presidential election held April 16, 2011. Such messages denigrate the person of President Goodluck Jonathan, insult our sense of historical recollection and reduced President Jonathan’s campaign managers to bunch of liars.
In all these, it is therefore important that we remind ourselves as Nigerians that in democratic political systems, some of the defining attributes of leadership are lost or muted based on how we desire to interpret our history. Should we rely more on distorted historical accounts; we are more likely to end up producing dishonest leaders.
This may perhaps be one of the many justifications why we can have a President of the Federal Republic that can attempt to prove that stealing is not corruption. This may also account for why billions and trillions of naira will be missing, misappropriated, disappeared from public treasury, etc. and no probe can lead to any judicial action.
With a campaign that clearly threw away virtues of honesty, it was very easy to use issues of age and military background. Reason, Gen. Buhari is 72 years old and a former military dictator. With such allegations, one would expect President Jonathan’s campaign to be radically different. Unfortunately, the reality is that, if age is anything to go by the PDP Presidential ticket is equally old with an average age of 59. Expanding the analysis to include leaders of the campaign organizations, PDP present a far older team with the DG of the campaign, Col. (Rtd.) Ahmadu Ali being 79, Chief Tony Anenih at 82 (10 years older than Gen. Buhari), Chief Bode George, among others, leading the PDP team.
Col. Ali, Chief Anenih and Chief George were retired military, police and naval officers respectively. Why then the noise about Gen. Buhari’s military background? Is it because the PDP leaders such as Col. (Rtd.) Ali, Chief Anenih and Chief George were not privileged to rise to the position of Heads of State? What were their records as military, police and naval officers? How were those records different from those of Gen. Buhari? Perhaps, the narrative of 1978 Ali Must Go embodies the radical differences between these men, on the one hand, and Gen. Buhari, on the other.
Often, it is convenient to pass judgements as not everyone is cut out for the rigorous auditions associated with political leadership under whatever circumstance. Yet, because political leadership produced under democratic dispensation is one of the most important innovations of civilization and remains the best means of legitimizing leadership by ensuring that leadership and power are arrived at through majority decisions as reflected in periodic elections. Nigeria is today at a critical crossroads – one where the quality of leadership – more than anything else is one that will determine the destiny of over 170 million people for the next generation.
Why is the issue of leadership so critical, especially for Nigerian youth who have not have the opportunity to experience genuine and quality leadership, nor realize that a choice as simple as the choice of who to elect has more far-reaching consequences than they can possibly imagine? Is there anyone out there that will set aside partisan considerations and set the records straight so that we can at least learn from history and not repeat the mistakes of history?
The Pre-Gen. Buhari Narrative
Clearly, the biggest debt older generation of Nigerians owe our younger ones is to reconstruct political leadership in the mould of sound values set in the plaster of logic and the common good and as exemplified by force of personal example, courage, conscience, charisma, humility, fairness, ability to listen, penchant for team work and capacity to make difficult but expedient decisions.
The attempt to reduce the factors determining the choice we are going to make in the coming elections in propaganda terms need to therefore be resisted. We must proceed based on the capacity to recall true accounts of our history. In doing so, some facts should be established, especially around the factors that led to the December 31, 1983 military coup, which produced Gen. Buhari as Head of State. For instance, why was the Alh. Shagari government overthrown? Did it just happened because Gen. Buhari and his colleagues in the armed forces were opposed to democratic rule?
Any objective presentation would highlight the following:
1. With the coming of Alh. Shehu Shagari’s government on October 1, 1979, prices of crude oil shot up to $29.27 per barrel from $14.33 in December 1979. By July 1980, the price had risen to $37.00 per barrel and went up to $40.00 per barrel in January 1981. Between April and December 1980, Nigeria earned N10.366 billion as oil revenue, which almost doubled what the country earned in 1979. By mid 1981, there was oil glut in the international market and prices of crude oil began to tumble and by mid 1981 it has collapsed to about $18.00.
2. High oil revenue at the beginning of the Shagari administration led to high public expenditure resulting in high pay for public officials – President N50,000, Vice President 30,000, Federal lawmakers N15,000, etc. Note that at that time the naira was stronger than US $. This led to agitations for increased workers minimum wage in the country, which used to be N80. After two day national strike led by Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) on May 11 – 12, 1981, N125 minimum wage was achieved.
3. Declining oil revenue in 1982 resulted in President Shehu Shagari proposing the Economic Stabilization Act to the National Assembly, which was expeditiously passed. This Act contained a number of austerity measures designed to check the sliding trend of the national economy. The stabilization measures as contained under the Act include exchange control – Basic Travel Allowance (BTA) was reduced to N500 from N800, Business Travel Allowance similarly reduced to N2,500 from N3,000, among other measure.
4. Some of the resultant impact of the 1982 economic stabilization measures includes retrenchment of public sector workers and by December 1983, it was estimated that about 20,000 public sector workers lost their jobs. Declining revenue and reduced public expenditure also resulted in non-payment of salaries especially teachers’ salaries running into months. This led to increased incidences of public sector strikes.
5. Import restriction measures led to phenomenal shortages of what was then categorized as essential commodities from Nigerian markets. Milk, sugar, bread, etc. falls under this category. By December 1983, government resorts to distributing some of these products through the public sector.
6. Rising problems of budgetary deficits led to considerations by the Shagari government to apply for $2.8 billion IMF loan with the conditions of Naira devaluation, withdrawal of subsidy on petroleum products, rationalizing public sector workers (in other words mass retrenchment) and trade liberalization measures.
7. The challenge of responding to problems of declining revenue by the Shagari administration couple with the need to pacify international financial institutions pushed the regime to adopt unpopular policies such as reduced public expenditure on sectors such as health and education leading to increases in the costs of feeding and accommodation in Nigerian universities and introduction of fees in public hospitals across the country.
8. Politically, the Shagari regime was a ghost of itself by December 1983. Long before then, problems such as the deaths of 50 Nigerians in Lagos in a Black Maria in March 1980, the massacre of innocent protesting Bakalori peasants by the Nigerian Police in April 1980, allegations of corruption against leading public officials of the Shagari administration, etc. contributed substantially in eroding the legitimacy of the 2nd Republic.
The Buhari Narrative
While it is important to avoid approaching the debate with the goal of rationalizing why the 2nd Republic under Alh. Shehu Shagari collapsed the way it did, it is important however to point out that by the time of the collapse, Nigerians were yearning for justice. Somehow, the rumor of military overthrow of the government was almost everywhere, especially following the landslide rigging of the 1983 elections. This largely accounted for the popularity of the coup that ushered Gen. Buhari in December 1983.
In many respects, it needs to be stated that the arrest of the 2nd Republic political office holder’s by the Buhari regime was very popular. The anti-IMF stance of the 1984 Buhari administration was also very popular. The major problems Nigerians had was the fact that the regime continued with economic austerity measures of reduced public sector expenditure resulting in retrenchment of another 10,000 workers.
A major achievement of the administration was that phenomena of corruption in the public sector were drastically reduced. Arrests and trials of the 2nd Republic political office holders endeared the regime. Recovery of some public funds e.g. N300,000 from late Sabo Bakinzuwo, former Governor of old Kano State raised expectations. Attempts by the regime to bring late Alh. Umaru Dikko to trial, including the dramatic attempt to kidnap him from London on July 5, 1984 and bring him back to Nigeria soared the popularity ratings of the regime at home as one that is determined to bring all corrupt Nigerians to face justice.
The anti-corruption stance of the Gen. Buhari administration naturally led to strong regulation of distribution of essential commodities. War Against Indiscipline (WAI) launched by the administration promoted values of discipline in the country.
If anything, one of the public accounts of why Gen. Buhari was overthrown by Gen. Babangida, include the retirement of some senior military officers, including Gen. Aliyu Gusau from the Nigerian army and the plan to retire Gen. Babangida on alleged charges bordering on profligacy. Once the Gen. Buhari regime was overthrown, some of the first actions of the Gen. Babagida government was to reverse the retirement of Gen. Gusau and with Gen. Babangida as military President therefore halt his retirement. Some of these revelations by Newswatch under late Dele Giwa were said to have made intelligence arm of the Babangida regime to be uncomfortable. And with the effrontery of the late Dele Giwa Newswatch to doggedly continue to investigate the where about of Miss Glory Okon who was being detained on charges of drug trafficking, the public suspicion, rightly or wrongly, was that the death of Dele Giwa on October 19, 1986 through a parcel bomb was the handwork of the Babangida administration.
Assessment of the Gen. Buhari’s administration therefore will be incomplete without looking at the context that produced it. The most important point that cannot be missed was that just like our contemporary reality, Nigeria was confronted with crisis of economic downturn occasioned by sharp decline in oil revenue, corruption took over our public life, there was complete collapse of values and problems of drug trafficking was beginning to rear its ugly head by December 1983.
In evaluating both the Shagari and Buhari regimes, it is important to emphasize that they both came at a time of national nostalgia following the short reign of Gen. Murtala Mohammed when the country experienced six months of exemplary leadership. This was the period when our Head of State move without siren with just his driver and ADC. It was also the period when all government employees had to be exemplary.
A major contrast with the Murtala administration was that for the six months of the regime, no Nigerian was arrested. Not even when Dr. Obarogie Ohunbamu accused Gen. Murtala of owning fleets of trailers and rows of houses. Instead of arresting Dr. Ohunbamu, Gen. Murtala went to Igbosere magistrate court and sued him. Following that court action by the Head of State, the Federal Director of Public Prosecution on behalf of the Attorney General of the federation promised that Dr. Ohunbamu would be given “every reasonable opportunity to prove or justify his assertion” including freedom to enable him search for and obtain evidences. The matter was scheduled to come up for hearing on March 17, 1976 and Gen. Murtala was assassinated on February 13, 1976.
2015 and What to Make of the Gen. Buhari Narrative
The emergence of Gen. Buhari in the early hours of January 1, 1984 with the identity claim of being an offshoot of Murtala/Obasanjo administration rekindled hope in the nation. There was no way it could have in anyway match that claim with an agenda of fighting corruption without fighting 2nd Republic politicians. Other levels of political enquiry, at the time, justifies the December 31, 1983 coup based on issues of class preservation with the threat of the possibility of a J. J. Rawlings type of coup.
For very ordinary Nigerians, given the perceived sense of loss and declining welfare of citizens, a J. J. Rawling coup in 1983 would have been very popular. Somehow, there are still public commentaries that suggested that we are where we are today as a nation, held hostages by corrupt politicians, because of the absence of the J. J. Rawlings type of coup. With Ghanaians basically now restoring their national pride with public institutions especially in relations to health and education comparatively doing very well, sympathy for our dominantly perceived corrupt public officials is low and dangerously clamor for the J. J. Rawlings treatment.
The popularity of Gen. Buhari, especially in the North where increased poverty is the dominant attribute since the mid 2000s as revealed by Dr. Charles Soludo as Governor of Central Bank, owe its origin to this reality. Presenting negative interpretation will not change this reality.
In some ways, it needs to be acknowledged that Gen. Buhari of 2015 is radically different from Gen. Buhari of 2011 or even 1984. In 2011, Gen. Buhari’s popularity is limited to the Northern parts, his party, Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) was poorly organized and therefore his campaign was less impactful. In 2015, he had a national party, All Progressives Congress (APC) with a campaign organization that matched that of the PDP in everyway.
Moving Beyond Static Analysis of Threats to Agenda Setting
Thanks to the 2013 merger of our legacy parties – ACN, ANPP, CPC, Okorocha’s APGA and New PDP – our country is blessed with an opposition party that is able to develop the needed strengths to present a formidable electoral contest for the 2015 elections. It is however important that we are able to go beyond static analysis of threats of 1984 and move into the realm of agenda setting.
From all indications, PDP is not favorably disposed to any discussion of agenda setting especially if that would take bearing from the poor records of the last sixteen years. Distorting our history would only amount to resistance to do the needful. The challenge of moving Nigeria forward is not about producing a saint but one that involve a strong recognition of the need to throw up competent, courageous, selfless and inspirational leaders. Therefore in engaging the debate, our past experiences should serve both as reminders and as compass.
It is therefore with this in mind that we should engage all actors including our youths based on a strategy of using the current national struggle for the soul of the nation, to provide the needed critical support to our leaders by drawing attention to take the right initiative. Leaders that distort history in order to project themselves must be avoided as they can only compound our national problems.
With President Jonathan and Gen. Buhari being our choices for the 2015 elections, clearly, the nation is left with only Gen. Buhari as our only hope. Being the only hope doesn’t mean Nigerians may not have issues, disagreements or even grievances arising from the leadership styles of Gen. Buhari. Our preoccupation should be how to ensure the provision of institutional and organizational mechanism to address such issues, disagreements and grievances as integral components of the new government and the consolidation as well as guaranteeing the growth of the APC post 2015 elections. Accordingly therefore the following proposals could be considered:
1. Avoiding the PDP Pitfalls: Gen. Buhari and our APC leaders need to take urgent steps to avoid the PDP pitfalls. Under no circumstance should victory in the 2015 elections take our attention away from the need to continue with the project of building our party, APC. Just as we prepare for the March 28 elections, our party needs to adopt a double strand leadership setup. One strand will be the team to drive government. The second strand will be the team to drive the party. While the governmental team will have the task of giving life to the vision of the party as encapsulated in our manifesto, the second, will have the task of consolidating and growing the party.
In approaching this responsibility, we need to be reminded that our party is young and the task of consolidating and growing it will call for sacrifices. A major aspect that needed immediate attention is that of developing the administrative capacity of the party, which would require professionalizing functions of the party. This is important given that almost every leader will want to serve in government. Being a party that is borne out of sacrifice, some leaders need to make the needed sacrifice in order to consolidate and grow the party.
Consolidating and growing the party will require that we are able to continue with the strategic goal of combining with new political partners, which was what made the 2013 merger successful. Given current challenge of fighting against the attempt of the President Jonathan administration to subvert our democracy, our party has found new allies such as Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM), Kowa Party, National Conscience Party (NCP), etc. As we approached the 2015 elections and after, Gen. Buhari and our leaders need to win the confidence of leaders of these parties to agree to combine both on short, medium and long term strategic political agendas.
Inability to address this challenge is what has since 1999 destroyed the core values that produced the PDP and reduced the party to a Frankenstein monster.
2. Political Leadership Development: There is the urgent need to free the process of political leadership development in the country. Situation where money exclusively determines the emergence of leadership is unhealthy. In fact, should that be exclusively the case during the December 10, 2014 APC Convention in Lagos, it is debatable if Gen. Buhari would have emerged as the APC Presidential candidate for the 2015 elections.
What this requires is that Gen. Buhari’s leadership should encourage democratic emergence of leaders at all levels. Accordingly, processes of nominating leaders should promote consensus building and elections. It should also require that public functionaries must respect citizens and where it is established that public functionaries contemptuously disrespect Nigerian citizens, appropriate sanctions should be applied. This may require APC to develop some byelaws to regulate conduct of public officials. Being a ruling party, as custodians of the nations constitution, APC must be governed by its internal rules. That way, Gen. Buhari Presidency will be able to guarantee unfettered constitutional development of the country.
3. Meeting Public Expectations: Amb. Olisemeka has argued that “it will soon be clear that those of his (Gen. Buhari) followers of questionable and dubious pedigree who think they can latch on to the reputation of this rare Nigerian would be the first to be highly disappointed.” This is an important precondition in ensuring mistakes such as Kano 2003 – 2011 and Bauchi in 2007 are not repeated.
Related to this is the issue of who is qualified to be part of Gen. Buhari’s team in government. During the town halls meetings in both Lagos and Kano, Gen. Buhari has assured Nigerians that his government will assemble qualified and competent Nigerians. In far more profound ways, on February 26, 2015 at Chatham House, London, Gen. Buhari announced that corrupt Nigerians would not be appointed into his government. And while responding to questions from both Aljazeera and CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, Gen. Buhari emphasized that his government will operate based on 1999 constitution.
These declarations have further served to rekindle the hope of Nigerians around the notion that a federal government led by Gen. Buhari will be a radical departure from what we had in the last sixteen years under PDP. It will above all also be a democratic government as opposed to the 1984 military government. We need to develop the needed capacities both within APC and as a people to be able to push Gen. Buhari as President of the Federal Republic to give practical expressions to these declarations.
4. Promoting National Reconciliation: Ethno-religious conflicts over the years have engendered high tension and frequent violence in the country resulting in unfortunate loss of lives and property. Mutual suspicions saturate the polity. Gen. Buhari Presidency needs to emerge with a strong national agenda to promote national reconciliation.
5. Agenda for the Youths: Gen. Buhari’s presidency need to prepare to rollout radical policies that will address the crisis in our educational sector in very fundamental ways. A situation where parents receive better education than their children is unacceptable. Again, a situation where virtually everyone with means send their children outside Nigeria for education, including ridiculously primary education must be halted by all democratic means possible.
The good thing is that the APC Manifesto has very far-reaching progressive proposals. What is urgently needed is some complementary demand framework driven by our young people. Given the urgent need to develop our young people, Gen. Buhari’s Presidency need to consider developing a mentoring agenda whereby all appointees should appoint at least one young person, persons under the age of 35, as Personal Assistants, Special Assistants or Special Advisers.
In addition to mentoring, we need to have a strategic plan as a nation to develop sporting activities as integral components of our educational sectors with the goal of discovery the talents of our youth at the same time promoting sport as economic activity.
Conclusion
The 2015 elections, from all indications, is not just about making a choice between President Goodluck Jonathan and Gen. Muhammadu Buhari; it is not about choosing between PDP and APC; it is not about our interpretation of, or capacity to distort, history; it is not a contest to showcase how rascally we can be.
Democracy as expression of civility should not denigrate or antagonize age. The Gen. Buhari challenge given present Nigerian reality is about lifting Nigeria out of crisis of monumental proportions. Reducing the issues to age, military background or educational qualification of Gen. Buhari may only serve to distract and confuse young Nigerians who may only rely on secondary sources for the accounts of the Gen. Buhari era of 1984.
There is no doubt that the scale of Nigeria’s problems calls for the development of good competent and courageous team of leaders to drive the business of governance. We need to approach this challenge as citizens and offer our contributions in our different roles wherever we find ourselves. Finally, we must be ready to tenaciously seek to develop the capacity to engage all our leaders to consider and negotiate all proposals. That way, our democracy will have a meaning and the provisions of Section 14(2)(a) of the 1999 constitution, which declared that “sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority” shall be true.
Salihu Moh. Lukman
State of the Nigerian Nation: Familiar Journey to Political Crisis
Salihu Moh. Lukman
High Uncertain Declining Economy
Official accounts as contained in annual budgets presented to National Assembly reported that the Federal Government of Nigeria earned N3,890 and N3,731 billion respectively in 2013 and 2014. Aggregate expenditure wasrespectively N4,987 and N4,725 billion. In 2015, FGN revenue is projected at N3,602 billion and expenditure estimated at N4,358 billion, implying projected deficit of N756 billion.
Between 2011 and 2014, the Federal Government earned N14,608 billion. Corresponding aggregate expenditure was N19,073 billion, producing cumulative deficit of about N4,465 billion. Partly on account of rising budget deficit, the nation’s foreign reserve was drawn to $34.51 billion in January 2015 from $44.6 billion in January 2013. With oil prices in the international market currently on the decline, Nigeria’s 2015 revenue and expenditure projections as presented to the National Assembly are no longer tenable. The fact that the 2015 budget was based on $65 per barrel oil benchmark, with daily production of 2.28 million barrels is the confirmation. Currently, OPEC price of Nigerian crude is $55.77 per barrel. The House of Representatives, while debating the 2015 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) on March 3, 2015 adopted $54 per barrel.
Assuming the price of $54 per barrel is upheld and stabilized in the international market throughout 2015, what does this mean for the nation’s 2015 budget? First, it translates to about 16.9% reduction in projected oil price for 2015. Assuming for instance, net impact of the emerging reality is 10% reduction in federal government revenue, this may mean projected revenue drops to about N3,242 billion. If Nigeria is to retain proposed expenditure of N4,358 billion, it may also mean potential increase in budget deficit of over N1,000 billion.
How can the federal government fund this potentially high deficit? Choices to be considered include; loan facility, reduced public expenditure and drawing down the nation’s foreign reserve. What is the potential for a loan and at what cost? In other words, what will be the terms for the loan and how much will the federal government be borrowing to sustain projected expenditure levels? Already, the Debt Management Office (DMO) estimates the nation’s debt (exclusive of states domestic debt) at $56.76 billion as at December 2014. What is the implication of higher debt profile given high rising revenue uncertainty?
If rationality and objectivity is to guide decisions of the Nigerian federal public authorities, the second option of reduced public expenditure may be a natural course of action. This will conform to the logic of living within the nation’s means. In other words, ensuring that we don’t live above our earnings. What will that mean in practical terms? Is a likelihood of reduced public expenditure going to affect capital or recurrent components of the 2015 federal government budget or both? What will be the distribution of reduced public expenditure across the different sectors and agencies of government?
Necessities and Possibilities: Political Exigencies
Perhaps, it needs to be acknowledged that it is possible for the federal government to earn the same level of revenue as proposed in the2015 budget against the background of declining oil revenue. This will mean substantial increase in non-oil revenue. With the oil sector contributing over 60% of federal government revenue, what is the possibility of expecting substantially increased non-oil revenue to offset declining oil revenue? Are existing conditions in the country favorable?
For the purpose of analysis, let us assume this is possible and conditions in the country are favorable, what does this mean? It simplymeans increased taxation, which presupposes increased incomes in the country. With poverty levels of about 70% and unemployment rate of 23.9%, can we really assume increased incomes to support correspondingly increased taxation?
Whichever way one looks at it, the federal government is confronted with hard choices in 2015. For many optimists, it can be argued that necessity is the mother of invention, based on which we can postulate wonderful economic models, matrices and equilibriums that produce wonderful public accounts consistent with the notion of the biggest economy in Africa. It doesn’t matter even if such models, matrices and equilibriums produce negative economic indices of high inflation, unemployment, and poverty rates so long as the outcomes generate the desired revenue gap.
Unfortunately, 2015 is also election year, which meanscertain levels of public expenditure must remain high. As a result, government will be weak in reducing public expenditure. Besides, increased taxation may also produce high negative public ratings of the government and with the current President seeking re-election; the choice of increased taxation may not be attractive. At another level, if reduced public expenditure is to affectrecurrent budget resulting in possible retrenchment of public sector work force, in an election year, it may mean high political risk for the ruling party.
With oil prices hovering at $55.77 per barrel and a possible benchmark of not more than $54 per barrel, sustaining current public expenditure become very challenging. Existing high public expenditure engender a flamboyant public account with expenditure consistently more than revenue. With budgetary oil price benchmark much lower than actual prices, since the mid 2000s, it helped nourish the nation’s Excess Crude Account with all the legal and political contestation around it, at the same time providing a huge financial buffer to the federal government.
With foreign reserve of $34.51 billion, all things considered therefore, the possibility of convenient political option of heavily drawing down the nation’s foreign reserve is very likely. The question will be by what magnitude? Considering that between 2013 and 2014, the nation’s foreign reserve was drawn by at least $10 billion, with the level of current decline in international oil price, to sustain current expenditure levels as proposed in the 2015 federal government budget proposal, our nation’s foreign reserve risks being drawn by more than $15 billion by the end of 2015.
High Public Expenditure Embed Corruption
National reality of financial recklessness fuelled more by the federal government defines the Nigerian economy. Allegations of mismanagement and corruption against public functionaries have become frequent and reduced to public noise without any consequence. For instance, in 2012,following the January national protest against increases in the prices of petroleum products, there were allegations of oil subsidy fraud, with the House of Representative eventually setting up the Hon. Farouk Lawal Ad-hoc Committee to verify 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 ofN2.587 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 billionpaid 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 by NNPC with the strong charge that “NNPC feasted on the Federation Account to bloat the subsidy payable, some of themarketers 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 installments ofN999 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 enmeshed himself in $3 million bribe scandal reportedly demanded from Mr. Femi Otedola, a major oil marketer, to clear him from allegations of subsidy fraud.
Since the House of Representatives subsidy investigation, the nation has continued to witness claims and counter claims of missing oil revenue. 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 Minister of Finance, Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala reported $10.8 billion. On February 20, 2014, President Goodluck Jonathan suspended Mallam Sanusi fromoffice on charges of financial misconduct.
With the suspension of Mallam Sanusi, allegations of missing oil revenue from NNPC accounts took backseat. So also were issues of subsidy fraud. However, public flashes of allegations of corruption against public officers continue. In 2012, there was the case of Police Pension Task Forceresulting in Senate investigation. Some of the revelations include withdrawal of N24 billion for payment of pension that required about N3.5 billion. TheChairman of the Pension Review Task Team, Alh. Abdulrasheed Maina, informed the Senate Committee of two accounts in Lagos where police pension funds was 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. Total sum of N273.9 billion was reported by the Senate Committee to have been looted in 6 years.
Other flashes of corruption charges against public officials include the recurring case of $180 million Halliburton; $1.1 billion MalabuOil; Princess Stella Oduak N255 million Aviation Ministry bulletproof cars; N10 billion jet scam involving the Petroleum Minister, Mrs. Dizieni Alison Madueke; House of Representatives Capital Market probe; N360 billion service wide scam; and the recent Soludo’s allegation of missing N30 trillion.
What these suggest is that substantial component of public expenditure services shady activities of public officers and their collaborators. Unfortunately, inconclusive investigations both cover the size of the proportion of public expenditure that is lost to corruption and as well as encourages and entrenches the incidence of corruption in our national life.
Politics – Corruption Drive High Public Expenditure
On Saturday, December 20, 2014, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) organized fund raising dinner ostensibly for President Goodluck Jonathan 2015 re-elections. The dinner, which held at the Old Banquet Hall, Presidential Villa, Abuja, was reported to raise N21 billion. Players in the nation’s Oil and Gas sector donated N5 billion; Friends and Associates of Prof. Jerry Gana in the Power Sector, N5 billion; Real Estate and Building, N4 billion; Transport and Aviation, N1 billion; Food and Agriculture, N500 million; Power, N500 million; Construction, N310 million; Road Construction, N250 million; National Association, N450 million; and Shelter Development Association, N250 million. Flagging off the donations, Mr. Tunde Ayeni, Chairman of Skye Bankdonated N2 billion.
Although owing to public criticisms, and of course legal implications, the PDP subsequently argued that the fund raising dinner was not to support President Jonathan re-election campaign, the question needs to be asked; why this generous support coming from virtually all the leading sectors of the Nigerian economy? Do altruistically ideological or business investment considerations or both inform these contributions? If the consideration is altruistically ideological, what does that mean? If business investment decision, what are the expected returns?
Underpinning this extravagant donations is certainly the expectations to access business opportunities by way of contracts and consultancies to the magnitude of these contributions. Ethical and legal considerations are hardly regarded and this may have accounted for situations where federal government makes subsidy payments for fuel products that are never supplied. It also account for why N24 billion payment will be made for pension that required just about N3.5 billion and daily withdrawals of N200 to N300 million can be made from pension accounts without any internal audit system reporting it. Total payments of N127.872 billion in equal installments of N999 Million for 128 times can be audaciously made without any query. And with Accountant-General, NNPC, CBN and Ministry of Finance having differentpublic account returns, everything goes!
If all these have happened, how can anyone then dismiss the recent APC Presidential Campaign allegation of President Jonathan awarding contract of N24 billion to a car wash company surreptitiously for railway rehabilitation? With probes only producing archival materials in the names of reports, the beneficiaries are brazen and therefore could publicly announce donations for election campaigns of billions even when the law clearly limits it to N1 million per individual.
Entrenched Interests and the 2015 Elections
Certainly, high political investments produce entrenched interests. With PDP being the ruling party since 1999 and elections merely rituals of producing so-called results of votes, it is “rational” to be over-confident and therefore proceed to mobilize N21 billion for the re-election of President Jonathan.
Perhaps, again for the purpose of analysis, it can be assumed that many of the actors really don’t have options. If not for anything, with many possible allegations and in some cases indicting investigation reports, to protect themselves from the law, they have to support PresidentJonathan. Supporting Gen. Muhammadu Buhari whose agenda is to fight corruption will be suicidal. Not even the pledge of not looking at issues before May 29, 2015 can assuage them. Because in real terms, what does this mean? Will it allowthem to get paid for products and services not rendered? Will it permit huge withdrawals from public accounts on daily basis for clandestine pension payments that required minimum of monthly withdrawals?
With Gen. Buhari as the potential winner of the 2015 elections, other bigger questions may include what will really happen to all the pending probe reports? Will they, in the spirit of looking at issues from May 30, 2015, be left to the archives? Or given that they are pending, and with the pledge not to interfere with the work of the judiciary, are these probereports going to be given judicial life?
These questions can be endless and any answer other than victory for PDP and President Jonathan will mobilize those benefiting from all the high incidences of corruption against the 2015 elections. What is it that is possible in the circumstance? Are we going to just watch how the PDP, President Jonathan and the formidable interests around them subvert our democratic rights, return by all means President Jonathan in whatever guise to continue to rule Nigeria post May 29, 2015 and unguardedly deplete our national resources and assets without let or hindrance? Or, can Nigerians rise up to the challenge of depending our democratic rights to support the defeat of PDP and President Jonathan?
Mobilizing for the Defeat of PDP and President Jonathan
For most Nigerians, especially outside PDP, what will the defeat of PDP and President Jonathan translate to, both with respect to national governance and citizens’ welfare? Issues of national economic management are at the heart of the campaigns for the 2015 elections. From the narrative, so far, it is clear why and where the source of support for the PDP and President Jonathan originates. The source of support for APC and Gen. Buhari would appear to be organic but yet to crystalize into support from the nations’ organized groups. What are these groups? Do they exist? Do they have the capacity needed to mobilize for the defeat of PDP and President Jonathan? Assuming they do, under what conditions will they want to support the defeat of PDP and President Jonathan? Specifically, are these organized groups insulated from the pervasive corruption that characterizes our national life?
Many would readily cite organizations such as the trade unions, students movement, professional bodies, civil society organizations, notably women, youths and human rights organization, faith based groups, etc. Specifically, Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and its affiliates, Trade UnionCongress (TUC) and its affiliates, National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS), etc. will readily come to mind. Records of pro-democracy struggles against military dictatorship in the 1990s and more recently against Yar’Adua cabal could be cited.
Some reality check would however be necessary so that we don’t chase shadows and end up defeated. The hard truth is that most of our organizations are either weak, compromised or both. They are weak to the extent that they are mostly alienated from their membership with very little services, if any. They hardly convene meetings of structures of these organizations and when meetings are convened, leaders hardly submit themselves to members’ scrutiny. As a result most of our organized groups reflect our corrupt national realities.
By far, the source of major concern is that public officials clandestinely heavily fund most leaders of these non-governmental organizations, probably on account of lack of sources of independent funding. In fact, many were sponsored by government officials to emerge leaders of their organizations. Having therefore been sponsored by federal government, some are embarrassingly and openly campaigning for PDP and President Jonathan even when for instance they claim to be “not for profit and not political”. A good example is the case of the President of TUC, Mr. Bobboi Kaigama who openly campaigned for President Jonathan during the opening session of the February 8, disrupted NLC Delegates’ Conference. Even the NLC is riddled with many allegations of underhand deals with some contestants for many NLC offices being funded by the federal government.
Going by reports in the media, there are daily allegations indicting some of our civil society leaders too. With all these, what is the prospect of mobilizing these organizations to work for the defeat of PDP and President Jonathan? Given that many are already compromised, will the defeat of President Jonathan enable them to at the minimum sustain current privileges? In other words, what will facilitate the relationship between political forcesopposed to PDP and President Jonathan?
Historical Experiences
Spontaneity would appear to be the savior and often come to the rescue of societies and nations in period of great national challenges.This is largely because our formal leaders are hardly prepared to lead at periods of adversities, which required great sacrifices. Some of our formalnon-governmental leaders, are far more entrenched and compromised and in the circumstance get themselves deeply entangled with the leaders of government in power.
Look at our experiences under military with the challenges thrown up by the annulment of June 12, 1993 elections. Our recent experience of fighting the Yar’Adua cabal between 2009 and 2010 bear the same attributes. And looking at unfolding political events, we are almost replaying 1993 scenario, scene after scene. The only different is that in the case of 1993, the election held before Gen. Babangida came up with those infamous allegations of voters being coerced, huge array of electoral malpractices, lack of decorum and fairness on the part of electoral umpire (Prof. Humphrey Nwosu’s National Electoral Commission), charges of money and other forms of inducement, conflict in the process of authentication and clearing of credentials of the presidential candidate, contradictory decisions and conflict of interest between government and candidates, etc.
The reasons cited by Gen. Babangida for cancelling the June 12, 1993 elections bear strong resemblance with reasons being advanced today for postponing the 2015 elections. The only one element that may have been new is the factor of insurgency. And just like in 1993, long before the elections and its annulment, there were calls for stopping the elections, including legal cases, so also is the case of postponing the elections today. There are allsorts of media campaigns and protests calling for the postponement of the 2015 elections just as there are uncountable court cases.
It is clear that given the entrenched interests aroundPresident Jonathan, the struggle for 2015 elections will continue even after the elections. Depending on how the APC and Gen. Buhari are able to use theperiod of transition (between now and May 29, 2015) to develop relationships with sympathetic leaders of organized interests, the risk of emerging as a government that is highly polluted by the same interests that have benefitted immensely from PDP’s inglorious corrupt era are very high.
June 12, 1993 Experience
What is it that can therefore be done? Again, learning from history of June 12 struggles, APC and Gen. Buhari need not to be bothered too much about perfect situations. The key strategy should be to open up to be able access all groups on regular basis. Process of relationship building between APC and Gen. Buhari, on the one hand, and the nation’s organized groups, on other, should be mapped out such that daily and weekly engagements and consultations hold.
Most of the times, we dismiss these suggestions but once we reach levels of emergency thresholds, we return to them. Typical example, in 1993, the attention of SDP and Chief MKO Abiola was more on organizations like Nigeria Union of Teachers because of their roles during elections. Attention on trade unions was limited to the top leadership of NLC under Comrade Pascal Bafyau. By the time of the annulment, with the NLC President very reluctant on account of being connected to the regime of Gen. Babangida and also not picked as the running mate to MKO, capacity to mobilize national resistance against the annulment was hardly predictable.
The only saving grace was that in 1993, the nation still had some remnants of vibrant organizations with some individual leaders such asChief Alao Aka Bashorun, Dr. Beko Ransome Kuti and Chief Gani Fawehinmi. These leaders, long before the annulment of June 12 started the process of campaign for an end to military rule in the country under Campaign for Democracy (CD). The effort to form CD started around July 1990 with the attempt by Chief Alao Bashorun to lead the convocation of a Sovereign National Conference, which was blocked by the Babangida administration. Eventually, it was the CD, under Dr. Beko’s leadership, that spearhead the campaign against the annulment of June 12 elections.
The Save Nigeria Group (SNG) Experience
Unlike the 1993 June 12 annulment, no one expected the2009/2010 Yar’Adua experience to lead to threaten our democracy. Largely because the Yar’Adua government was a product of democracy, it was inconceivable that functionaries of the Yar’Adua administration will seek to subvert the constitution in order to hang on to power. Perhaps, like today’s formidable interests, interests around the Yar’Adua administration wanted to hang onto power in order to continue to access public resources.
By the time Yar’Adua was taken out of the country for medical treatment in Saudi Arabia in December 2009, concerned Nigerians (about 54) came together to issue a statement. This gave rise to some media campaigns, advocacy, consultation meetings that produced the Pastor Tunde Bakare-led SNG and eventually started organizing rallies in Abuja and Lagos calling for respect for constitutionalism and upholding provisions of section 145 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution that require handing over the mantle of the nation’s leadership to Dr. Goodluck Jonathan as Acting President. Struggles of SNG, in no small measure help to mobilize Nigerians leading to the “doctrine of necessity”, which led to the swearing in of Dr. Jonathan as Acting President. Instructively, throughout the struggles of SNG, leaders of trade unions and some of the renowned civil society took backseat.
Contemporary Reality
The truth is that the state of our organizations today are far worse that the reality in 2010. Today the nation is in short supply of patriotic Nigerians such as Chief Alao Aka Bashorun, Chief Gani Fawehinmi and Dr. Beko Ransome Kuti. Of course, we still have the Pastor Tunde Bakares, Mr. Femi Falanas and their likes. Unfortunately, we can hardly talk about CD and SNG largely because somehow we have failed in so many respects to build these organizations.
The CD collapsed as far back as 1994 and organizations like NADECO sustained the struggle for June 12 more as a regional campaign. In the case of SNG, inability to open up and allow members to take control of the post Yar’Adua emerging reality contributed substantially in extinguishing organizational life out of the young SNG.
With CD and SNG practically non-existent, is it possible to produce similar organizational frameworks, especially in the event that theformidable interests around President Jonathan today succeeds in creating constitutional crisis in the country? Must we have such interventions to beable to resolve constitutional crisis?
Necessities of Peoples Movement to Resolve Potential Constitutional Crisis
There is in existence strong possibility that in the coming days and weeks, the nation may be confronted with constitutional crisis. The simple reason being high probability that PDP and President Jonathan will be defeated in the Presidential elections. The stronger public rankings suggest that President Jonathan will be defeated in the 2015 elections, the more desperate will be the PDP, President Jonathan and the interests that mobilized N21 billion (and more) to seek to undermine the 1999 Constitution.
What is needed at this point is some constant reminders of J. Stiglitz message in his 2002 book Globalization and its Discontent that democracy “is more than just periodic elections; it entails ensuring that voices are heard, and that there is a deliberate process.” Given our national reality, it is not enough to assume that opposition to the naked looting of public resources are loud enough and they will translate into electoral votes. We need far stronger national processes to continue to amplify the voices and consolidate them into national processesthat destroy our economy through looting.
The good thing is that there is strong currency of independent actions aimed at mobilizing Nigerians to support Gen. Buhari and the APC. What is needed at this point is to consolidate all these independent processes to stronger relationship both with the party, APC, and the candidate, Gen. Buhari. The relationship needs to be founded around the goal, for instance, of policy advocacy, including interfacing with individual leaders of non-governmental organizations.
Small as this would appear, it would help to lay foundation for a stronger national campaign both in the event of a likely constitutional crisis and smooth transition to a Gen. Buhari Presidency following a victory at the March 28,2015 elections.
Conclusion: Setting Agenda for a Peoples Driven Governance and Economic Management
It needs to be emphasised that the option of building a peoples movement is almost inevitable especially if, as a nation and opposition, we want to actualize the defeat of President Jonathan. All nations that are able to achieve democratic consolidation resulting in transfer of power to opposition leaders following electoral defeats have to of necessity develop peoples movements.
Closer home, the case of Cote de Voire in December 2010 with Mr. Alassane Quattarra defeating incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo readily comes to mind. And like ourPresident Jonathan, former President Gbagbo almost aborted the December 2010 Ivoirean elections but the Alassane Quattarra-led opposition party with the support of international community was able to force Gbagbo to respect the result of the elections.
The story was similar in the case of Senegalese elections of March 2012. Former President Abdoulaye Wade almost created constitutional crisis with the amendment of the Senegalese constitution to accommodate his attempted third term re-election. However, a strong alliance of the opposition with civil society organizations facilitates the defeat of President Wade and the election of Mr. Macky Sall.
Both Gen. Buhari and leaders of APC need to always remember the experiences of these and many others as a source of inspiration. But more importantly, they also need to remember the many revelations of allegations of corruption, to use the words of President Jonathan, public theft of national resources running into billions and trillions. This should call for humility and moderation and the need to ensure that relationship with Nigerians at levels are strengthened. The words of leadership scholar, Warren Bennis advocating for the emergence of ‘leaders of leaders’ who “will decentralise power and democratize strategy by involving a rich mixture of different people from inside and outside the organization in the process of inventing the future” should be a constant guide.
Gen. Buhari and our APC leaders and candidate need to be emphatically called upon to transform all the swelling Buhari Support Group, Organizations, Volunteers, etc. into a national political networks, united and linked to the APC structures in all the 36 states. This way, APC can be transformed into a party that is committed to creating a new Nigeria, and in line with that vision engage all our governmental and non-governmental actors with the goal of rebuilding institutions founded on stronger values of productivity, service, equity and mutual respect.
Salihu Moh. Lukman
Emma Ezeazu: Tribute to a True Nigerian Across Borders
Salihu Moh. Lukman
Emma Ezeazu, former President, National Association ofNigerian Students (CLO) - 1986 – 1988, former National Secretary, Civil Liberties Organization (CLO) – 1990 – 1992, former Executive Director, Community Action for Popular Participation (CAPP) – 1992 – 2000 and until the early evening of Monday, May 18, 2015, Executive Director, Alliance for Credible Elections (ACE) died after long protracted illness. He died at the age of 52 after clearly more than four years of health challenges. Everyone that may have encountered Emma in the last few months would have certainly noticed that he was going through very trying times but one thing that is also veryclear was that he remained his determined self. Partly on account of that, conversations with him never focus on his personal health. Rather, it remained as usual around politics and national issues.
I first met Emma sometime in 1985 while attending the meeting of Patriotic Youth Movement of Nigeria (PYMN), which was the coordinating body of all Marxist movements in higher institutions across the country. Through the PYMN, Marxist movements were able to control the leadership of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS). Centraltherefore to the deliberations of the 1985 meeting was the issue of NANS convention, which was scheduled for early 1986 and Zone D covering campusessuch as UNN, UniPort, UniCal, UniBen, etc were by NANS constitution to produce the Secretariat – President and General Secretary. Emma Ezeazu and Jonas Awodi were introduced to the meeting as leading cadres of the UNN-based Marxist Youth Movement (MYM) and proposed NANS’ candidates respectively for the positions of President and General Secretary from UNN.
I was introduced to the meeting by the then NANS President, Hilkiya Bubajoda and the General Secretary of the ABU based Movement for a Progressive Nigeria (MPN), Ado Yahuza. I was introduced as a representative of Students’ Liberation Movement from College of Advanced Studies, Zaria.
That 1985 meeting had representation from many Marxistmovements from Nigerian universities, notably, UniJos, ABU, BUK, UNN, UniBen, UniCal, Ife, Kwara Tech, etc. Attending the PYMN meeting for the first time was to say the least very intimidating. The debates were very antagonistic and highly academic. They reflected sharp Marxist tendencies that at least challenged every delegate to study Marxism deeper especially if one hope toparticipate in debates at the meetings of the PYMN.
The Jos 1985 PYMN meeting, which held at the Secretariat of the then Civil Service Technical Workers Union on No. 3 Tafawa Balewa Way started around 9 am on a Saturday and ended in the early hours of the following morning of Sunday around 5 am. Attending the Jos PYMN meeting convinced me that revolutionaries are knowledgeable people and student activists as revolutionaries in the making are very hungry for knowledge. I still recallsome of the intimate personal discussions we had with Bubajoda and Ado Yahuza on our way to and from the meeting. Ado Yahuza was very emphatic that activists must aspire to make 1st Class. This was in some ways much later corroborated by Chris Abashi of blessed memory and Labaran Maku.
Femi Ahmed, popularly then called Sandinista was the one that introduced Emma and Jonas Awodi to the Jos PYMN meeting as General Secretary of MYM. I remember very well that my only contribution at that meeting was presenting the report of the state of the movement in our campus, CAS Zaria. Emma certainly, although attending the PYMN meeting for the first time, made more contributions largely because he was far more advanced bothacademically and ideologically. He was already a postgraduate student in UNN.
I must confess that I left the PYMN meeting very confused because some contributions around the debate on the state of the nation was too advanced and there were often lengthy references to Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin. I remember asking Ado Yahuza and Bubajoda that does it mean that to be able to contribute to debates on the PYMN floor, one has to be able to quote at length Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin? Both Ado and Bubajoda unanimously made the point that some of the references were just empty and often out of context. They cautioned that I must not go about studying Marxism with the objective of memorizing Marx, Lenin or any other person, but instead seek to understand the central message and logic of analysis.
Some weeks after the meeting, there was a follow up meetings of the PYMN. I wasn’t able to attend some of the meetings but was privileged to be briefed by our ABU comrades – Ado Yahuza and Bubajoda. I was made to understand that the issue of NANS secretariat moving to UNN was settled with Emma and Jonas Awodi as respectively candidates for President and General Secretary. The debate shifted to the issue of which campus will produce thePRO. The contest was between UniJos and UniLorin. This came to be part of the deliberations of the Zaria PYMN meeting. Interestingly, Movement for Advancement of African Society (MAAS) Jos came to the Zaria meeting with two camps. One led by John Odah, who was the PYMN General Secretary and second led by Victor Olisah who was NANS Vice President (National Affairs). While JohnOdah argued that the MAAS candidate for NANS PRO was Labaran Maku, Victor Olisah argued that MAAS candidate was a different person. However, Adoga Ibrahim of UniLorin was also a contender for the NANS PRO. Eventually, the decision of who will be the PYMN sponsored NANS candidate for PRO was shifted to the pre-convention PYMN meeting to hold in Kano.
This development and internal contestations within the PYMN set the tune for the Kano NANS Convention. Of course, faced with bigger contestation against the Nigerian state with clear state sponsored candidates, PYMN was able to reconcile its cadres and produced the Emma Ezeazu leadership. Labaran Maku eventually emerged as PRO.
Emma was to serve as NANS President under very trying times. Shortly after the Kano NANS Convention, authorities of ABU Zaria expelled Mathias Yohanna and Bala Hamid, student union leaders and on May 22, 1986 ABU students began a protest demanding the removal of Prof. Ango Abdullahi as Vice Chancellor. Police were invited and on May 23 four ABU students were killedincluding a female student, Farida Mustapha. The Emma Ezeazu’s NANS leadership immediately called for national protest.
Government responded with a ban on NANS and appointed Emmanuel Abisoye Panel of enquiry on the remote and immediate causes of the ABU Students’ crisis. In addition to banning NANS, the Federal Government also banned activities of students unions in all tertiary institutions. Emma Ezeazu’s leadership responded appropriately by refusing to accept the ban and continue to operate. In addition to the Abisoye Panel, the Federal Government also setup the Justice Akanbi Panel to among other things determine the role of teachers in the crisis. Akanbi Panel came up the notorious report that some teachers are not teaching what they are paid to teach leading to very aggressive state intervention in the content of university education in the country. The deportation of radical ABU sociology lecturer, Dr. Patrick Wilmot in 1987 by the Babangida administration was direct fallout of the Akanbi Panel report.
Armed with Abisoye and Akanbi Panels’ Reports, the Babangida government opened direct attacks on structures of students’ unionism in the country. Without barely any union leadership in Nigerian institutions, Emma was able to run NANS, often spending more time in SSS detention centres. In February 1987, he was arrested and was to face military tribunal with the potential danger of death sentence hanging on him. Students across the country were to rise in his defense and the Babangida regime was left with no option but to release him.
To say, Emma was a committed student union leader will be an understatement. I believe there must have been a genetic factor in the constitution of Emma. His parents no doubt must have been very selfless to be able to accommodate his choice of activism and the periods of tribulation that he has gone through. There were periods between 1987 and 1988 that Emma, on the floors of PYMN cried out loud for the need to have a NANS convention. The realities on ground made it impossible for NANS Convention to be organized until mid 1988.
In March 1988, there was an attempt to hold the Convention in Jos and SSS virtually took over the whole of Jos, especially areas around Tafawa Balewa Way. As a result the Convention was aborted. But in June 1988, we successfully had the Convention in Ilorin. Interestingly, two issues that were very clear to us were that the government had a different strategy. Instead of stopping the Convention, the government wanted to take over the leadership of NANS. Candidates that had no prior knowledge of NANS came to Ilorin to contest for NANS leadership. One of such was the President of Bendel (now Edo) State University, Ekpoma who came to contest for President. He had no prior knowledge that NANS President is a joint ticket with the candidate for Secretary General. He was flamboyantly dressed with a walking stick.
The second issue was that the NANS Secretariat could not make it to the Ilorin Convention as Emma and other student leaders of UNN were arrested on the eve of the Ilorin Convention. In the circumstance, Labaran Maku was the only member of Emma Ezeazu’s NANS leadership that was present at the Convention. Part of the reason responsible for this was also that most of the Comrades have graduated and have moved on. Shortly before the Convention Bamidele Aturu (also of blessed memory), who was NANS Vice President National Affairs, has graduated, served in Niger and was recognized as one of the best NYSC member but rejected his award. He graduated with 2/1 from Adeyemi College of Education, Ife. Having rejected the award, the government claimed that it was his NYSC discharge certificate that he rejected. Bamidele responded by going to University of Ife to enroll in a law degree programme. Until his death about a year ago, Bamidele was one of the successful lawyers produced from the ranks of student activists.
The address of Labaran Maku to the June 1988 Ilorin Convention scared the government candidates. Once Labaran announced that Emma could not attend the Convention because he was arrested and that everyone aspiring to be part of NANS leadership should be ready to go to jail, my only challenger from Ekpoma, when called upon to respond to his nomination voluntarily stepped down. Eventually, all positions were contested unopposed. In the end, out of about 18-member team, only about four of us ran the activities of NANS. I lost my Secretary, Yiluk Isa Almasihu, immediately after the election as his father who was a Deputy Commissioner of Police forced him to resign.
As student activists, our vision has always been political. Between the late 1980s and 1990s, human rights and trade union organisations became our destination. Emma Ezeazu went to Civil Liberties Organization (CLO) as National Secretary and he opened the space for people like Chima Ubani, Lanre Ehonwa, Ogaga Ifowodu, Abdul Mahmud, Emma Edigheji and many others. Those that went to the trade unions include Yahaya Hashim, Salisu N. Muhammed, John Odah, Chom Bagu, Issa Aremu, Chris Uyot and Didi Adodo.
Our relationship with these organisations opened the space for us to contribute to the struggle against military dictatorship in the 1990s. Having left the CLO in 1992, Emma moved to Abuja and took up the responsibility of establishing CAPP. CAPP was certainly not as successful comparative to CLO and ACE. For Emma, however, one can say without any fear, he was very unhappy that we have failed politically. Between 2011 and the time of his death, we have had a lot of reflection and we are in agreement that we made big time blunder in 1998 when we decided not to participate in the Abdulsalam transition program. We both came to the conclusion that we must retrace oursteps and engage politically.
In 2011, we held series of consultations and agreed that our mission in politics should be long term and must not be reduced to aspiration for a particular position. But one area we debated but had to accept to disagree was the ambition of Emma to contest for Senate in Abuja and not Onitsha. I felt Emma would have made more successful impact in Onitsha. Emma disagreed on the grounds that he is only known in Abuja and he is not ready to go back to Onitsha and start negotiating to appropriate the profiles of hisparents. With such strong positions, Emma engaged the process of APC formation in Abuja, aspired for House of Representatives but lost the primaries very marginally.
Unlike many of us, Emma engaged politics on his own terms. He refused to allow the dominant perception of playing politics based on how much you accumulate and therefore eventually simply buy the ticket. More than anything, for many of us Emma represents the future Nigerian politician. In the coming days, months and perhaps, the next four years, our APC leaders, standard bearers will face the challenge of producing new generation of politicians.Otherwise, electoral storm similar to the one that produced the defeat of PDP will confront us again.
It will be incomplete to talk of the politics of Emma without bringing out the fact his nationalism being unpretentious and without any border. At a time when everyone is returning back to his ethnic group, Emma chose to integrate himself with the Gwaris. He worked hard and selflessly for the Gwaris. There is no contest; the Gwaris as their own. One can say confidently, Emma was born an Igbo man and died both an Igbo man and a Gwari. In our generation, Emma is about the only Marxist that practically lived based on Lenin’s dictum of recognizing your own nationality but never campaigning for the hegemony of your own nationality over others.
The legacy of Emma is Alliance for Credible Election (ACE). It is one of the success stories of organisations established by generation of activists. While I am confident that members of the Board of ACE must have been working round the clock to address the challenges facing the organization with the unfortunate demise of Emma, it is also important that other patriotic Nigerians demonstrate commitment to strengthening ACE. Not just because Emma is associated with ACE but because the future of our country and nation depends on credible elections. Emma’s life and politics provides the nexus for both intellectual and organizational actions for credible elections.
Salihu Moh. Lukman
Nigerian Public Service: Labour Challenges Facing APC Governments
Salihu Moh. Lukman
2015 Elections and Campaign Promises
During the 2015 electioneering campaigns, the All Progressives Congress (APC) pledged to “create 3 million new jobs a year through public works programmes and shifting the economy towards value-added production” as the primary economic targets of governments produced by the party. The APC is today victorious having won the presidency and 22 states. No doubt, the challenge facing the party is how it will deliver on all campaign promises, which include the creation of 3 million jobs annually.
Beyond winning the 2015 elections, the APC has, in fundamental ways, responded to the demands by Nigerians for parties and politicians to make clear commitments. Today, there is no doubt that APC unambiguously commit itself to issues that are well outlined in the provisions of the party’s manifesto. In addition to commitments contained in themanifesto, President Mohammadu Buhari further committed himself to issues contained in My Covenant with Nigerians. Today, the details of the specific commitments of APC and President Buhari are not in doubt. One of such commitment is the provision of 3 million jobs to Nigerians annually.
Against the background of high unemployment rate of 23.9%, which translate to over 40 million unemployed Nigerians, creating 3 millionjobs annually will fundamentally address the challenge of unemployment in the country. The question is how can the APC create the 3 million jobs annually? President Muhammadu Buhari and the 22 APC State Governors would have to deliver on this particular campaign promise. Capacity of the APC governments, whether at federal or state levels to deliver will depend on the capability of the public service as aptly articulated by Mal. Nasir El-Rufai, APC Governor of KadunaState at the APC Policy Dialogue of May 20 – 21.
With the incontrovertible message that “No nation develops faster than the capability of its public service” Mal. El-Rufai submitted that Nigerian public service is “perceived as Dysfunctional, Inefficient, Corrupt, lacking Administrative capacity and incapable of attracting the best and brightest”. Some of the highlighted attributes include; too many workers (1 million – federal and between 2 – 3 million – States and Local Governments), aging (with average age of FG civil servant around 43), inadequately educated, expensive, outdated,poor pay and high ghost workers.
Repositioning Public Service – A Recurring Challenge
Certainly the commitment to create 3 million jobs annually is not just about employing public sector workers but more about how to reposition the sector to serve as very effective stimulant that would lead to the creation of economic opportunities in all sectors of the nation’s economy. Looking at the attributes of the Nigerian public sector, it will be almost impossible to formulate any roadmap without considering issues of size and budgetary implications. Interestingly, these are issues that are as old as the sector and for us in Nigeria, attempts to respond to these issues based on the challenges of size and budgets has produced reform commissions and panels appointed almost by every administration since independence.
|
Commission/Panel |
Year |
Outcome |
|
Morgan Commission |
1963 |
Revised salaries and wages of junior workers in FG |
|
Eldwood Commission |
1966 |
Investigated anomalies in grading and other conditions in public service |
|
Adebo Commission |
1971 |
Reviewed wages and salaries at all levels in the public service, statutory corporations state-owned companies. |
|
Udoji Commission |
1972 |
Reviewed and overhaul the entire public service to ensure development and optimum utilization of manpower for efficiency and effectiveness. |
|
Dotun Phillips Commission |
1985 |
Reviewed the structure, composition and methods of operation to cope with demands of government in the 1980s and beyond. |
|
Civil Service Reform Decree No. 43 |
1988 |
Recognized politicization of the upper echelons of civil service, merged ministerial responsibilities and administrative controls, recognized ministers as chief executives and accounting officers, replaced permanent secretaries with director-generals, etc. |
|
Ayida Review Panel |
1994 |
Re-examined 1988 reforms and reversed most of them. |
|
Civil Service Reform |
1999 – 2007 |
Expunged extant rules, procedures and regulations that frustrate effective service delivery based on market driven philosophy. This produced pension reform, monetization policy, restructuring of pilot MDAs, downsizing and payroll reform, and review and update public service rules and financial regulations. |
|
Steven Orosaye |
2010 - 2012 |
Reviewed organizational structure of the service in line with the 1999 – 2007 reform. Specifically recommended reducing 541 MDAs to 163. |
Most of the reforms are accompanied with staff rationalization exercises especially since the 1980s affecting thousands ofpublic sector workers. While the desirability of each reform could not be disputed, the mandates are very similar and recommendations virtually repetitive. The common issues being costs and organizational structure. Today’s public service challenges are virtually the same with those attended to since Dotun Phillips’ Commission of 1985. With minor alterations therefore provisions of previous reports could be adopted to address today’s public service problems. The danger being that few years from now, we will return to the same issues again.
In some ways recurring arguments always produced arising from the works of reform panels and commissions is reduced to size and capacity developments. It resurfaces with almost every economic downturn. To that extend virtually all previous reform panels or commissions have size of the publicservice as part of their terms of reference.
Perhaps, we may wish to check; is there international standard to the size of a nation’s civil service? Could the size of the civil service in US, Germany, France, UK, Brazil and South Africa for instance serve as any reference point? US, with population of 325 million is said to have 2.123 million workers in its federal service. Germany with 82 million has 698 thousand, UK with 63 million has 2.182 million, France with 66 million has 2.441 million, Brazil with 203 million has 883 thousand workers and South Africa with 53 million people has 466 thousand workers. Looking at the public service profiles of these countries, it is difficult to make reference to any standard with respect to size.
What is very clear from the records of these countries is that the size of the civil service is not the issue. What is an issue is the capabilities and effectiveness of the service in meeting national needs. Unlike Nigerian public service that is adjudged “Dysfunctional, Inefficient, Corrupt, lacking Administrative capacity and incapable of attracting the best and brightest”, public service in these countries are “functional, efficient, transparent, with Administrative capacity and capable of attracting the best and brightest”. That may perhaps be the only strong reason why Brazil with over 200 million population could have less than 1 million workers in its federal service, while UK and France with just around 60 million population could have over 2 million federal civil servants. Yet, Germany with 82 million could have much less than 1 million workers. Similarly, South Africa with 53 million people has less than half a million federal workforce.
Failure of Previous Reforms – Ideological Factors
It would appear that we need to focus the challenge ofaddressing problems of our public service more in terms of why implementation of previous reforms have failed rather than simply re-introducing the same old principles that influenced old reforms. In doing so, two issues need to be recognized. The first is that since the 1980s, public service reforms were part of demands by multilateral financial institutions such as the World Bank and IMF. Ideological orientations of those demands led to the demobilization ofpublic organizations such as railways and aviation. In addition, it has led to the privatization or monetization of public service functions such as cleaners, drivers, gardeners, etc. This has created its own problem, one of which is that it may not have achieved the result of reduced public financial burden.
Influenced largely by right-wing ideological postulations of reduced size of government, many services were sub-contracted to so-called private operators, no thanks to the recommendations of public service reform panels and commissions. In so many ways, the results of sub-contracting public service activities escalated incidences of corruption in Nigeria and make it assume the current monstrous proportion. A typical example is the importation of refined petroleum products in the country. On account of allowing private operators in the name of major and independent oil marketers to handle the business of importing refined products, the nation today is confronted with subsidy bills running into trillions of Naira annually. Addressing these issues can hardly produce desired expected result of affordable service delivery with reference to personnel cost.
The second issue is the need for consideration of all perspectives. In therefore attempting to formulate public service roadmap for the President Buhari administration, it is important that President Buhari and our Governors go beyond ideological preferences. The temptation could be high that we go back to old mindsets and end up emphasizing old initiatives. We need to support President Buhari, all our APC Governors and the teams around them to approach these issues beyond mindsets. In any case, some states that are essentially civil service oriented would have very little options if the dominant conclusion is to reduce the size of the public service.
The political risks would be high both in short and long runs. We may even chose to ignore such political risks and damn the consequences and based on claimed patriotic convictions of doing what may be adjudged right given our ideological choices proceed to carry out rationalization measures. Thiswill cause distractions and create avoidable tense industrial relations atmosphere. Again ideological preferences may blindfold our public officials into believing that tense atmosphere will be temporary and therefore not serious factors for consideration.
Be that as it may, it is important to emphasize that initiatives leading to rationalization of public workers will lead to predictable responses of hostility between government and organized labour resulting in strikes and work stoppages. The bigger challenge of ensuring that the country is placed on the path of national development driven by efficient and capable public service will be suspended. The main preoccupation of government will be limited to that of overpowering and subduing public sector workers and their unions.
Often strong ideological convictions could lead us to downplaying the negative consequences of any potentially hostile atmosphere. Given the challenges that the President Buhari administration will be confronting, it is important that the choice of who the government fight and when is made very carefully. This is not however to reduce governments to willy-nilly accommodate labour and just continue business as usual. Especially with the challenge of fighting corruption President Buhari’s government, at this early stage of its life should be very interested in making correct judgements of who the victims of bad governance over the years are. It could be debated but workers would certainly fall among the victims.
In any case, if a service characterized as aging, inadequately educated, expensive, outdated and poorly paid, reducing the size without taking specific actions to address these attributes would only further magnify the problem. Whichever way, there is hardly any easy option. More importantly however, should the current problems of the service persist, APC should just be ready to resoundingly fail in its promise of creating 3 million jobs annually. Our approach therefore should be to marshal support for the President Buhari administration to be able to succeed in all its campaign promises. With respect to the creation of 3 million jobs as a primary requirement for developing the capacity of the nation’s public service to stimulate economic activities and create diverse opportunities to facilitate producing the 3 million jobs should be the overarching goal of public service reform under the President Buhari administration.
Size and Cost Prejudices
It can hardly be disputed that workers in our public service are ageing, inadequately educated, outdated with ghost workers accounting for between 15 – 25%. The argument that it is too large and expensive needs to be verified beyond ideological biases. It doesn’t make sense to simply handover services to private operators in the name of reducing size and personnel costs, which only end up moving cost from personnel to other sub-heads in public accounts. With proper audit, it is likely to be found that this could have actually resulted in increased cost.
With estimated workforce of 1 million in FG and between 2 – 3 in states and local governments, is our public service really large? If it is, what will be the recommended size of our public service given a population of 170 million citizens and 92 million workforce? With a commitment to create 3 million jobs annually, is reducing the size of our public service necessary for APC governments to be able to deliver on all campaign promises? How will reduced size of the public service change the facts of its ageing, inadequately educated, outdated with high ghost workers? Is the size of the public service positively correlated with age of the workers, education, etc.? While it istrue that the size of the service is positively correlated with cost, is personnel cost as reflected in our public accounts really the problem?
Take 2013 for instance, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) annual report for that year, indicated that personnel cost of federal, states and local governments was N3.589 trillion against total public expenditure of the three tiers government of N11.103 trillion. Personnel cost therefore represented 32% of total public expenditures of the three tiers of government. For federal government, personnel cost was reported by the CBN in 2013 to be N1.721 trillion with total federal public expenditure being N5.185 trillionrepresenting 33%.
Personnel cost of slightly above 30% would appear to be healthy although definitely hardly productive especially with reference to endemic lack of capacity. The big issue is that beyond the nominal value ofpublic personnel cost is the high levels of corruption associated with the service, which has produced very high recurrent public expenditures. Often when references are made to the service being expensive, high corruption associated with the service is the issue. The challenge of transforming the service to be productive, efficient and less wasteful is centrally about fighting corruption in the service. Any discussion of reforming the service without successfully fighting corruption will be defeatist.
Could there be any form of correlation between size and corruption? Perhaps yes given the stubborn prevalence of phenomenon of ghost workers. Estimated at between 15 – 25% of workers in the service, fighting corruption should include tight measures to eliminate ghost workers, which in itself would reduce personnel cost. As part of the fight against corruptionunder the young Buhari administration, the issue of ghost workers should begiven high priority.
High Public Expenditure Embed Corruption
National reality of financial recklessness fuelled more by the federal government under the PDP defines the Nigerian economy. Allegations of mismanagement and corruption against public functionaries have become frequent and reduced to public noise without any consequence. For instance, in 2012, following the January national protest against increases in the prices of petroleum products, there were allegations of oil subsidy fraud, with the House of Representative eventually setting up the Hon. Farouk Lawal Ad-hoc Committee to verify 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 ofN2.587 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 billionpaid 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 by NNPC with the strong charge that “NNPC feasted on the Federation Account to bloat the subsidy payable, some of themarketers 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 installments ofN999 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 enmeshed himself in $3 million bribe scandal reportedly demanded from Mr. Femi Otedola, a major oil marketer, to clear him from allegations of subsidy fraud.
Since the House of Representatives subsidy investigation, the nation has continued to witness claims and counter claims of missing oil revenue. 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 on charges of financial misconduct.
Although with the suspension of Mallam Sanusi, allegations of missing oil revenue from NNPC accounts took backseat, the recently released report of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) confirmed about $20 billion as the missing amount. In addition to missing $20 billion, the PwC audit report revealed that NNPC expended $1.5 billion as personnel cost over a period ofabout 15 months. This highlights the fact that any public service reform must address the cost of running our parastatals.
Throughout the tenure of the Jonathan administration (2010 – 2015), public flashes of allegations of corruption against public officers continued. In 2012, there was the case of Police Pension Task Force resulting in Senate investigation. 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 was 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. Total sum of N273.9 billion was reported by the Senate Committee to have been looted in 6 years.
Other flashes of corruption charges against public officials include the recurring case of $180 million Halliburton; $1.1 billion MalabuOil; Princess Stella Oduak N255 million Aviation Ministry bulletproof cars; N10 billion jet scam involving the Petroleum Minister, Mrs. Dizieni Alison Madueke; House of Representatives Capital Market probe; N360 billion service wide scam; and the recent Soludo’s allegation of missing N30 trillion.
What these suggest is that substantial component of public expenditure services shady activities of public officers and their collaborators. Unfortunately, inconclusive investigations both cover the size of the proportion of public expenditure that is lost to corruption and as well as encourages and entrenches the incidence of corruption in our national life.
Politics – Corruption Drive High Public Expenditure
On Saturday, December 20, 2014, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) organized fund raising dinner and generated whooping N21 billion ostensibly for former President Goodluck Jonathan 2015 re-elections. Although owing topublic criticisms, and of course legal implications, the PDP subsequently argued that the fund raising dinner was not to support former President Jonathan’s re-election campaign, the question needs to be asked; why this generous support coming from virtually all the leading sectors of the Nigerian economy? Do altruistically ideological or business investment considerations or both inform these contributions? If the consideration is altruistically ideological, what does that mean? If business investment decision, what are the expected returns? Whatever the objective, good enough, both the PDP and former President Jonathan have lost the elections.
Underpinning this extravagant donations was certainly the expectations to access business opportunities by way of contracts and consultancies to the magnitude of these contributions. Ethical and legal considerations were hardly regarded and this may have accounted for situations where federal government makes subsidy payments for fuel products that are never supplied. It also accounted for why N24 billion payment will be made for pension that required just about N3.5 billion and daily withdrawals of N200 to N300 million can be made from pension accounts without any internal audit system reporting it. Total payments of N127.872 billion in equal installments of N999 Million for 128 times can be audaciously made without any query. And with Accountant-General, NNPC, CBN and Ministry of Finance having differentpublic account returns, everything goes!
If all these have happened, how can anyone then dismiss the APC Presidential Campaign allegation of former President Jonathan awarding contract of N24 billion to a car wash company surreptitiously for railway rehabilitation? With probes only producing archival materials in the names of reports, the beneficiaries have so far been brazen and could publicly announce donations for election campaigns of billions even when the law clearly limits it to N1 million per individual. These beneficiaries would do everything possible to recruit new partners from the ranks of APC appointed public officials, which could well include incoming public officials of the President Buhari administration.
Politics Entrench Corruption in Public Service
Certainly, high political investments produce entrenched interests. With the defeat of PDP and the emergence of APC controlled federal government, it should not be assumed that the culture of pervasive corruption in our public service will have gone with PDP. The truth is that it is verymuch around. Ministers and other political appointees to be appointed by President Buhari will assume office with the hope of enjoying some pecuniary benefits. Members of the National Assembly who have spent extravagantly to be electedwill be assuming office with the hope of recouping their investments. The question is, what will be the new safeguard to protect public funds under the management of these public officials? Put differently, what initiative willPresident Buhari introduce to inject new culture and new orientation among our public service officials?
Perhaps, again for the purpose of analysis, it can be assumed that many of the new emerging public officials will be resuming office with very little options. They will need accommodation and other essentials, which monetization assumed not to be the responsibility of government. The reality is, unless there are proactive safeguards, the process of orientating these public officials will naturally pull them along the old dirty corruptpaths, thereby stunting the capacity of the President Buhari’s administration to bring about the change Nigerians desire.
To therefore approach public service reform based on the old mindset of reducing cost and size through simply staff rationalization measures will be chasing shadows. It is true that workers could be part of the problem but without putting in place a good plan that can respond to the expectations of politicians and make them operate strictly within predictable service limits with projected accountable rational costs, reform will only go through cycles of failures and re-enforce the problem.
New Public Service Orientation as Foundation for Change
Public service reform of the President Buhari’s administration must include new orientation as the foundation for delivering the change Nigerians are yearning for. A holistic approach that goes beyondnumber of workers and payroll will be required. Issues of output will have to be addressed. As it is today, output is marginal and perhaps a derived focus of reform.
The process of transforming service to be output driven will necessarily require attention to education of the workforce and modernization. Its success will be contingent on how strongly the reform is integrated to the revival of our educational system. The truth is that a nations public service is as good as the quality of products from its educational system.
While it will take some years for the reform of our educational system to make good impact on quality of our public service, for reform to produce new service orientation need to commence with the immediate short term targets that includes appointing not just competent institutional drivers such as ministers and heads of MDAs but also persons that are capable of demonstrating transparent and accountable public life. The starting point is for President Buhari to develop additional byelaws and ground rules that further subject appointed public officials to public scrutiny.
This will profoundly serve as the moral driver for deeper public service reform including the issue of eliminating ghost workers and the fight against corruption. Once the reform is broadly informed and not narrowed to the application of biases and mindsets, it will be far more effective toprosecute the fight against ghost workers and corruption and where the challenge required a focus against corrupt unionized workers and union leaders who may attempt to mobilize against government in order to shield culprits will be possible and easily achieved.
Factoring Other Labour Challenges
With or without reform, President Buhari’s administration will be inheriting a lot of outstanding labour inputs and perhaps strikes. Even without initiating reform, the administration is assuming office against the background of very hostile atmosphere. Unfortunately, institutional mechanisms for addressing labour disputes are as dysfunctional and ineffective as the service itself. The capacity of the Ministry of Labour, which under the law has the mandate to promote constructive labour relations and foster productive workplace relationship in Nigeria, is weak. Extant statutory provisions such as provisions under the Trade Disputes Act, to the extent of recurring strikes and work stoppages, highlight sharp capacity challenges.
One of the critical issues that President Buhari need to urgently attend to as part of the short term challenges of public reform programme of the young administration will be to urgently reposition Ministry of Labour with the objective of managing all disputes and apply provisions of the Trade Disputes Act proactively to arrest all potential disputes and ensure that they don’t result in strikes. As part of the immediate response mechanism, President Buhari may wish to consider appointing a Specialist Technical Adviser on Labour Matters to work with relevant staff of Ministry of Labour to undertake quick industrial relations audit of agreements with unions in the public sector and constitute a task team to attend and negotiate all outstanding labour matters with unions.
In order to succeed in this respect, the regime would need to commit itself to developing good relations with unions and other non-state actors. Good relations with union and non-state actors will be important at two levels. The first will be on the issue of fighting corruption, which will require effective whistleblowing capability. Unions and non-state actors can best provide this support to the government’s quest to fight corruption.
The second is with respect to other macro-level engagements especially aimed at broadening the scope of citizens’ participation in governance. Inputs to government policy and facilitating emergence of negotiable frameworks to engender cooperation and collaboration to produce desired outcomes can be initiated. This will be needed against the background of APC’s commitment of creating 3 million jobs annually.
There is also the issue of strengthening regulations and ensuring that service conditions applicable to operations and conducts of private employers conform to all statutory provisions as provided by our nation’s extant rules. Due to weak regulations, private operators function with impunity and in some cases, for instance some foreign players; unskilled jobs, which could have been employed by Nigerians, are imported. A typical example is the case of a local airline employing foreigners as cabin crew. These and other issues related with violation of our laws by private players resulting in the incidences of unfair labour practices in the country could be part of the terms of reference of labour task team under the supervision of a Presidential Technical Adviser.
In the end, President Buhari’s administration needs to approach the issue of public service reform based on strategy of addition, rather than subtraction. The goal should be to humanize the nation’s public service through combined effort to harness the capacity of our public service workers to make them effective and efficient. The intended outcome should be to make Nigerian public service “functional, efficient, transparent, with Administrative capacity and capable of attracting the best and brightest”.