The Illegality of PMB’s Honour at Kaduna State University By Dr. Mohammed Jibo Imran

By: Dr. Mohammed Jibo Imran

O

n Saturday, December 12, 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari shocked the Nigeria’s academic community when he went to Kaduna State University, KASU and received an honorary doctorate degree (Honoris Causa) barely seven months after his inauguration. On the surface of it, one would be tempted to ask: is the president being honoured for his records of yesteryears or is he being honoured for his performance in the last seven month? If it is for his past records, the natural question is why now and why by KASU? That university existed for over a decade, why didn’t they honour Muhammadu Buhari last year or five years ago? If the honour is as a result of his present assignment, what has he done this far to earn him a honoris causa? Isn’t it a case of moral corruption for a serving president, who has a lot of favours to dish out, accept to receive an undeserved honorary doctorate degree from a state university whose vice chancellor was, in the last six months, queried by the Visitor to the University about three times?

Is it the case that, after the KASU formula, that the president will not attend the convocation ceremony of any university unless that university include the president as one its recipients of honorary doctorate degree. How not, since over a dozen universities have held their convocation ceremonies since the coming of PMB to office and he attended none, it is therefore safe to assume that his failure to attend was because they have not honoured him with a degree. These include the University of Ibadan, University of Benin, Obafemi Awolowo University, Federal University Owerri, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, etc. And none of them received the respect of the presence of the president. Now that KASU has shown the way, any university that wants the president to attend its convocation should simply include the president in the list of the recipients of its honoris causa. They are sure to have the president coming in person to be decorated.

The question is where is the shock? The president action is shocking for three reasons. First, his receiving an honorary doctorate degree, from any Nigerian University, while holding and elected public office is immoral, illegal and a crass violation of the existing regulation guiding the award of honoris causa in Nigeria’s University System. Section 2.0 subsection (a) of the famous Keffi Declaration which was enacted on the 24th September, 2012 by the Association of Vice Chancellors of Nigerian Universities (AVCNU) stated that: “AVCNU member-universities hereby make it a policy not to honour with honorary degree anybody holding political office (elected or appointed) while such officers are still in service.” President Buhari violated this rule and the president is an honourable man, apology to Shakespeare in his histo-drama book, Julius Caeser. 

In 2012, worried by the spate of irregularities and the erosion of academic culture and university tradition especially in the indiscriminate award of honorary degrees in the university system, the vice chancellors of Nigeria’s federal, state and private universities met at the Nasarawa State University, Keffi and resolved, collectively, that the age-long best practices of university culture be restored and maintained. It was the case that politicians, public office holders and all manner of money-bags and favour-flaunters will be conniving with governing councils, vice chancellors or visitors to state universities all in the bid to cajole or hoodwink the university into awarding an undeserving honorary degree. It was so rampant that the credibility of any honoris causa by any Nigerian university was suspect. The Nigeria’s academic community was relieved when the Keffi Declaration on “Sustaining Academic Tradition in Nigerian Universities, Including Guidelines for the Award of Honorary Degrees” was made. It was even more refreshing seeing that all the federal universities, all the state universities and all the private universities at that time have signed the declaration. 

But the action of President Buhari of accepting honoris causa, in complete violation of the Keffi Declaration, has done one of the greatest damages to the university system since the enactment of the declaration in 2012. The president has just killed the Keffi Declaration and therefore open the floodgate of irregularities and moral corruption in the award of honorary degrees. Will the president refuse to accept another honoris causas from other universities? No. All the remaining 140 universities will now line up with their ceremonial academic robes ready to decorate the president with honorary degrees. It will be a moral dilemma for the president to refuse to accept after receiving one from a sister-university. And not only that, the president cannot stop his cabinet members, other public officer holders, and including civil servants from haggling-and-bargaining to ‘buy’ honorary degrees and even stand on the same podium with the president to be decorated. The era of immoral impunity in the award of honoris causa has effectively returned. And it was declared open by the action of Mr President.
Second, and even more disturbing is the fact that Kaduna State University is not competent to award honorary doctorate degree to anybody. Information available on the National Universities Commission website indicates that there are only 22 out of 40 state universities with approval to run masters and PhD programs. KASU is not one them. How can you have an honorary doctorate graduands when you don’t have the regular program with regular students pursuing doctorate studies? More so, the Keffi Declaration, section 2.0 subsection (e) stated explicitly that: “A university shall not award honorary degrees if it has not graduated any PhD or has no postgraduate school or program”. Because the president is an honourable man, I dare say that his idea of change is about changing the rule, it will be safe to say that he received a 419 degree that is not recognised by the NUC, a government institution under his watch. 

The question is how many people graduated with PhDs at the 12th December convocation when President Buhari was decorated by KASU? Have KASU ever graduate a PhD since its establishment? When did they get the approval from the NUC to commence the PhD program? How could KASU award what it does not have? Why should NUC keep mute at this illegality and gross abuse of regulation?

If the information they published in their website is correct, why should they allow KASU to award illegal honorary degree even to the resident of the Federation? It is amazing how politicians are always at the forefront of rubbishing our academic traditions and values.

It is very clear that the Visitor to KASU who is the Governor of Kaduna State is at the forefront of this manipulative scheme to rubbish the university system and smear the good name of the president of the country. Or why did he dissolve the governing council of the university simply because they allegedly drew his attention to the illegality and immorality of awarding honoris causa to a serving elected public officer? And the VC who was appointed by Governor Yakowa was rattled to his nerves with an array of queries to get him to accept political interference in the running of the university. How else, given the fact that section 2.0 subsection (c) of the Keffi Declaration states, in parts, that: “…the award of honorary degree shall not be tied to wealth consideration or political alignment…” Who will doubt that after sacking the governing council and sufficiently intimidating the vice chancellor of the university, the APC governor as the visitor to the university, is not bullying his way into forcing the university to award illegal degrees to an APC President and a business mogul exclusively for political and material reasons?
My third reason is even more scary. Is the Minister of Education so incompetent as not to draw the attention of the President to all these violations? Why wouldn’t the minister of education draw the attention of the president to the Keffi Declaration? And to the NUC guidelines on approved universities with graduate courses? Or better still shouldn’t the honourable minister make the moral common sense argument of not accepting a gift from an institution under ones superintendence? Or is it the case that the president, who ruled the country for over three months without ministers, is still living with that hang-over and is taking decisions without consulting the relevant ministers? If the minister of education is kept in the dark on the KASU honoris causa brouhaha, then our country is in trouble. It means the president will be relying on informal and unofficial (most of the time, misleading) suggestions to run the country. If the minister is in the picture and his opinion sought by the president and he misled the president into going to accept and illegal honorary degree, then some punitive action must be meted on the minister. If on the other hand, the minister was consulted and he advised the president against accepting the illegal degree and his advice was jettisoned by the president, then something is fundamental wrong – it means there is a crisis of confidence between the president and his ministers. And the earlier that crisis is resolved the better for our country.

It is important to note that PDP, in spite of its numerous ills had adhered to the Keffi Declaration. Former president Goodluck Jonathan, to his credit – (oh God, remembering PDP and Jonathan again) withstood all the pressures and declined many of such offers.

For me, President Muhammadu Buhari can still save the Keffi Declaration, save himself from further embarrassment and save the university system in this regard by doing two things: one, cause his handlers to issue a public statement returning the illegal and undeserved honorary degree back to the awarding university and stating his commitment to respect and protect the Keffi declaration; two, investigate and punish any persons that have hands in misleading him into this embarrassing misstep. Fighting corruption is not just about stolen wealth. It is about respect for regulations. It is about staying on the moral high-grounds. Over to you “Sai Mai Gaskiya.”

Culled from: Daily Trust

Shia-Military Clashes and the Road to Anarchy By Ahmed Musa Hussaini

13^th December, 2015

By: Ahmed Musa Hussaini

F

or the past 24 hours, I have been keenly following the tragic turn of events in Zaria and the numerous commentaries that follow. It is difficult to exonerate both sides from blame. But what is happening is both avoidable and inevitable: avoidable if we were proactive in preempting emerging conflict scenarios, and inevitable because it was very obvious that Shia activities along the busy Sokoto road are a recipe for clashes.

I have lived in Zaria and had warned about the potential for conflict between the Shia sect and other rival Muslim sects and non-Muslim groups. Two things are very clear in the ongoing conflict: initial Shia provocation and contempt for constituted authority and the Nigerian military's overreaction and high-handedness.

We have to understand the history between the two to arrive at the causes and likely consequences of the ongoing conflict.

But, What Actually Happened?

Shia activities blocked traffic along the ever busy Sokoto road, the COAS convoy was caught in the unfortunate mix and the COAS was personally negotiating his passage when a projectile was hurled at his direction and all hell broke loose. The soldiers guarding the COAS responded with live fire. The Nigerian military called it an assassination attempt on its head because the projectile was metallic and fired from a device. The Shia movement called it an unprovoked atttack on their defenseless members.

But it was not yet over. Military reinforcement later came in as a show of force and in order 'to teach the Shia a lesson.' The rest is now tragedy recorded in a rapidly rising casualty toll.

It is obvious that the ongoing conflict is built on a foundation of decades of distrust between the sect and the Nigerian state and its instruments of power, a distrust that is at the heart of Shia ideology. Events of last year are still fresh in the memories of both the sect and the military, and both sides reacted to the ongoing situation with the cumulative fury of past grievances.

The response of the military at the Husainiyyah area was at best, understandable, and can be somewhat justified on the argument of defending the COAS with all options, but the military's subsequent mobilization to Gyallesu, the destruction of Zakzaky's residence and murder of his family members and followers leave much to be desired. It was disproportionate, indefensible and extrajudicial.

There is no doubt that our laws, both Islamic and secular, do not confer or transfer burden of culpability on/to an individual by virtue of kinship to an alleged perpetrator of a crime, much less the power to destroy his house or kill his family or relatives.

The argument that no Nigerian religious group has the right to block traffic (whether civilian or military) is non-debatable, so also is the argument that our Armed Forces should deploy proportionate force in quelling internal conventional uprising. I believe, after securing the COAS passage, arresting Zakzaky becomes an internal security affair that is better conducted by the police and can be effected via simple invitation as both groups were expected to work towards de-escalating the situation.

That did not happen.

It is also true that Zakzaky is to blame for the conduct of his members, for indoctrinating them on a steady ideological diet that secular governments are evil and must be disrespected and held in utmost contempt. He leads a parallel quasi-political movement side by side a spiritual one that is akin to a state within a state with the ultimate aim (in theory) of dethroning the existing order and replacing it with an Iran-style theocracy. This type of teaching is a recipe for conflict and no serious state would tolerate that in the long run.

Superficially, there is no problem in pursuing any ideology one feels strongly about, the right of religion is fundamental and non-derogable. But while Zakzaky understands the difference between his ideological rhetoric and strategic pragmatism of the Nigerian state and its agents, most of his followers don't, and will seek ways to translate their revolutionary rhetoric into actions. That is what was probably in the mind of that lone Shiite that hurled a projectile at the COAS direction. He never realized the true gravity of his action and its symbolic and real implications on the capability and image of the Nigerian army.

There is also a sense of a siege mentality, a persecution complex among Nigerian Shiites that is reinforced by anti-Shia sentiments and discrimination within the largely sunni Nigerian Muslim community. It is true that the Shiites are targeted for some infractions that would be tolerably condoned if perpetrated by mainstream Muslim groups and even genuine Shia grievances are dismissed as the intra-Muslim affair that they are by non-Muslim groups, or as illegitimate ranting of a heretical group by the mainstream Sunni majority. But it is also true that Zakzaky deliberately sought to build his group on that narrative of sectarian victimhood that characterized Shia's evolution through centuries of Islamic history.

It is high time the Shia discard that old fashioned narrative and embrace pragmatism. Religious groups should not operate with impunity. They must respect the existing laws of the country. Religious groups are expected to embrace and legitimize a national master narrative and inculcate the virtues of law and order into their adherents and not promote impunity and contempt for the rule of law and right of others.

Behind this veneer of perennial conflicts between the Shia sect and the Nigerian security agencies is a latent Iran-Saudi and Iran-Israel rivalry at play, and this must be thoroughly investigated if we are looking for lasting solutions. There are many internal and external dimensions or what I call externally instigated internal dimensions to the ongoing conflict which are beyond the scope of public discourse, and which if not handled carefully may snowball into another national security challenge. We must do everything to prevent Nigeria from becoming another battleground for Middle-East geopolitics.

But fundamentally, we have to reexamine the role of religious groups, the military and other security agencies in a truly democratic Nigerian setting. Because if we allow religious groups to operate with impunity, and our security agencies confront impunity with more impunity, then we ask for more Boko Haram, and more Boko Haram we shall get, and we will never cease to wonder why our problems continue to defy solutions.

May God heal our wounds!

Social Media Bill: Between Free Speech and Abusive Speech

11^th December, 2015

 By: Amir Abdulazeez

T

hree apparently co-incidental events happened in quick succession in the past few weeks. The first was the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed’s meeting with Nigerian bloggers and social media influencers in Lagos where he stressed the Federal Government’s resolve to protect free speech, but tasked social media users on self-regulation. The second was the emergence of a mocked photo of an ‘improperly’ dressed Senator Bala Ibn Na’Allah which went viral on social media. The authenticity and source of that picture cannot be verified but several netizens kept mocking the Deputy Senate Leader on the basis that he could not properly utilize his wardrobe allowance. The third is the presentation of a draft bill titled “Prohibit Frivolous Petitions and other matters connected therewith,” proposed by no other person but by the same Senator Bala Ibn Na’Allah (APC, Kebbi South), and it has passed second reading in the senate.

Outrage and condemnation broke out particularly on social media shortly after the bill-popularly but ignorantly referred to as ‘The Anti-Social Media Bill’-passed second reading. The bill according to competent media sources makes it illegal to start any type of petition without swearing to an affidavit that the content is true in a court of law. It also proposes up to two years in prison, or a fine of N2 million, or both, for anyone posting an “abusive statement” via text message, Twitter, WhatsApp, or any other form of social media.

The bill reads in part “Where any person through text message, tweets, WhatsApp or through any social media post any abusive statement knowing same to be false with intent to set the public against any person and or group of persons, an institution of government or such other bodies established by law shall be guilty of an offence and upon conviction shall be liable to an imprisonment for two years or a fine of N2 million or both”.

Actually, apart from the massive public misconception and suspicion, there is no problem with the content of this bill, but there are four vital issues we should understand and reflect from this emergence of this bill. Firstly, there is massive mistrust between the governors and the governed in Nigeria. This mistrust is getting worse by the day and this is caused by several obvious factors. For instance, the generality of Nigerians tend to by default disagree with the National Assembly on almost everything because they see them as people not serving their interest. As such, we always have a preconceived negative disposition towards many things emanating from our leaders. Despite assurances by the lawmakers that the law is meant to protect Nigerians, the public insists that the draft bill would muzzle free speech and are bent on giving it not the slightest of chances. Secondly, the emergence of this bill once again stresses the fact that we are only interested in making laws and having law officers but not actually committed to enforcing these laws and ensure their strict adherence. For instance, with or without the so called bill, spread of falsehood, abuse and hate campaigns against individuals, groups and institutions on social media or anywhere else are unlawful and anybody caught should be arrested and charged to court by the police; we don’t need any new bill to take care of this. It is that simple. Thirdly, Nigerians are once again demonstrating their gullibility to go with the bandwagon effect. Assumably, more than 75% of Nigerians opposing this bill are virtually ignorant of its content or are basing their arguments on misinformed notions and they apparently don’t care to find out. Most of them are not looking forward to any public hearing on the bill to have the opportunity of constructively ventilating their grievances either on the whole bill or some parts of it. Presently, many Nigerians are calling for the removal of fuel subsidy after they vehemently opposed it four years ago. If we had objectively studied the fuel subsidy issues irrespective of our mistrust for the Jonathan Government at the time, we would have gave it at least, the benefit of the doubt and the subsidy would have been removed long ago, the rest would now have become history.

The impact of the social media on global political development cannot be overemphasized. Through the social media, a revolution happened in Tunisia and Egypt and subsequently led to the popular Arab Spring. Countries like Turkey and Bangladesh had partly tampered with access to social media platforms like Twitter and Whatsapp in fear of the replication of what happened in other countries.

The Social Media is probably the best thing that has happened to Nigeria’s Democracy in the last 16 years. It has helped raised political awareness, increased participation, encouraged debates, promoted accountability and established synergy between the leaders and the led.  President Obasanjo was just lucky that the social media wasn’t as it is today during his time, he would probably have been given a good run for his money. Contrary to views that the social media was deployed against President Jonathan, the truth is that political participation in it reached its peak during his time and no other president would’ve survived its heat. President Buhari is currently in the social media oven and his handlers can best describe how the heat is hard to contend with. However, the level of social media abuse by users in the name of politics is fast undermining the aforementioned gains recorded. The integrity and credibility of the Social Media is becoming a subject of debate. It is fast losing credibility and integrity not for want of good people but for the actions of some people who use it as a medium for all sorts of vices. For this reason, many people have either refused to join Social Media or have chosen to join but remain inactive.

Many average Nigerians cannot simply discuss political issues on social media without insulting each other. This makes the sociability of the social media questionable in the Nigerian context. If we use the so-called ‘social’ media to rain abuses upon each other and others mostly in reaction to falsehood and half-truths, then how social is that social media? In essence, we collectively contribute a lot in making the social media unsocial for Nigerians. The main victims of the vices coming from social media are the youths-most of whose faculties of learning and intuition are still under construction-who find it easy to believe and assimilate what they are being fed with. This portends the intellectual future of our youths in bad light and in serious danger along with potential unpatriotism.

The major problem we are facing is the attempt of many of us to completely divorce online life from physical life. Hence, the assumption that a vice online is not a vice offline. It is most unfortunate that the Social Media Bill issue is coming up at this time, but it is an anticlimax of long term usage of Social media for the spread of abuses and hate campaigns.

While we may oppose this bill for the fear of its disguised use or future abuse in the long-run by authorities to clampdown on free speech, we must self-regulate. We must be concerned about the overall integrity of the platform which offers us the cheapest but most efficient opportunity to express ourselves. The cyber unit of the police must also stand up to its responsibilities. It should be able to professionally police activities online just as they normally police our streets and anyone found wanting should be prosecuted. Any crime online is a crime offline.

Personally, I am vehemently against any legislative provision to ‘checkmate’ activities on Social Media for many reasons, but I think Lai Mohammed’s call for self-regulation should be taken very seriously.

Will Tinubu Contest for President?

20^th November, 2015

By: AmirAbdulazeez

T

o many keen political observers, the question is no longer about what Tinubu wants; probably the question is whether Tinubu will get what he wants. That the Buhari’s government has exhausted all major appointments available without Tinubu featuring in any of them is a clear indication that Asiwaju might be aiming for something different and more prestigious.

Bola Tinubu’s quest to become Nigeria’s Vice President over the last nine years is something that almost every political onlooker is quite aware of. An adventure that has brought him mixed fortunes, but notably propelled him to greater national prominence. It was speculated that, Tinubu’s attempt to become former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar’s running mate under the defunct Action Congress (AC) in the 2007 Presdiential Elections was what created misunderstandings between the two men which culminated into the latter’s exit and return to the PDP in 2008-a decision that have kept haunting him to date and which some believe even to some extent cost him the 2015 APC ticket. Atiku was reported to have argued that, it was unfair to offer the Vice Presidency to a Yoruba or South-West man at a time when another Yoruba in President Obasanjo is just completing 8 years of his presidency. Atiku therefore opted for the less prominent Senator Ben Obi from the South-East against Tinubu who offered the Turaki of Adamawa the AC platform on a platter of gold, after PDP had forsaken him.

It has been further reported that Buhari’s refusal to drop Pastor Tunde Bakare and pick Tinubu was what led to the collapse of the proposed alliance to confront Jonathan and PDP, between the defunct CPC, ANPP and ACN in 2011. Buhari later made amends through ‘offering’ Tinubu in 2015 what he couldn’t in 2011, but the Jagaban Borgu was wary of the Muslim-Muslim hype this time around and was mindful of the threat it poses to the chances of the APC to clinch the presidency. Tinubu unexpectedly opted for his former commissioner in Professor Yemi Osinbajo whom many people feel is directly or indirectly holding the position of behalf of the APC National Leader.

Why does Tinubu attempted so desperately to become Vice President? Hardly is there anyone who has coveted the Vice Presidency as much as Tinubu in Nigeria’s democratic history. The answer is not far-fetched; it is all about political strategy, he might be eyeing the presidency through the easier route of the Vice Presidency. Tinubu had the opportunity to make himself ACN presidential candidate in 2011, but didn’t possibly because he knew it won’t work and was unlike many elites unwilling to just be on the presidential ballot for the sake of it. Unsurprisingly, he made no attempt to be Ribadu’s running mate either, who was the party’s presidential flag bearer.

Everybody, including Tinubu knows it will be very difficult for any South-West man to directly emerge president in the near future after Obasanjo had spent 8 out of the available 16 years on behalf of the region. Asiwaju seems to have sacrificed the Vice Presidency in 2015 to ensure APC’s victory, but it appears he may finally go for the presidency in 2019. If Buhari decides not to go for a second term, the coast might just be clear for him to emerge as APC standard bearer in 2019.

If Tinubu gets the presidency, it would be the reward of a long term systematic and strategic, planning politicking, manoeuvring, patience, investment and sacrifice. The roots of the former Lagos state governor’s strong and ruthlessly expanding political dynasty and influence sprang from his emergence as the only non-PDP governor in the South-West in particular and the whole of Southern Nigeria after the 2003 elections and his consistent struggles to rout PDP out of the zone and beyond and consistently champion the cause of opposition politics.

Some view Tinubu’s ‘refusal’ to so far accept any direct responsibility in Buhari’s government as a minus; others see it as a plus. Those who see it as a minus argue that many individuals in Buhari’s government are likely to use their portfolios to perform, gain influence and impress the president into considering them as worthy successors who would carry on with the policies of his government, thereby leaving Tinubu on the sidelines. On the other hand, those who consider it as a plus argue that Tinubu will remain focussed, fresh and influential by being devoid of any direct government problems or scandals. The indebtedness of APC to him personally continues and his position as a kingmaker can also be cemented by refusing to accept any post.

Tinubu’s potential presidential ambition is not likely to go unchallenged. Some national figures from his native South-West like Babatunde Fashola, Kayode Fayemi or even Yemi Osinbajo may develop some interest in the presidency. Notable APC figures from the South-East like Chris Ngige, Ogbonnaya Onu and Rochas Okorocha may argue that if the presidency is returning to the south, then it should be the turn of the Igbos and not South-West. Despite the South-East’s popularized political miscalculation in 2015, they may still view Tinubu as the man who denied them the Vice Presidency and may therefore do all they can to stop him from re-denying them not only the Vice presidency but probably the Presidency in 2019. Another stumbling block for Tinubu is the North which may insist that Buhari should complete 8 years and if for any reason he’s unable to do so, another northerner should take over for at least 4 years. People like Atiku Abubakar, Bukola Saraki, Rabi’u Kwankwaso, Nasir El-Rufa’i and some two-term northern APC governors may want to try their luck if this scenario plays out.

Tinubu’s political grip on APC may be of immense advantage to him, but may also work against him. He has stepped on many toes within the party in trying to maintain his influence everywhere. The amount of people he fixed in the APC leadership and the presidency is unprecedented and from the look of things, he can count on Buhari’s support. However, his overbearing nature and his attempt to have an influence in virtually everything can prove costly. Already, reports have started going round that many notable people in the APC are re-considering their membership of the party because of Tinubu’s grip on the party and its organs. His invincibility was recently broken when he attempted to impose the leaderships of the National Assembly and unless he trades carefully, different groups within the APC can shed their differences and gang up against him ahead of 2019.

As PDP Continues to Mock Reality

15^th November, 2015

 By: AmirAbdulazeez

A

ny proponent of competitive democracy and any advocate against one-party state would like to see the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) remain strong and vibrant enough to keep the ruling All Progressives’ Congress on its toes. Probably, only a fanatical APC sympathizer would like to see PDP become extinct in the current situation. The role of a strong opposition in a democracy cannot be overemphasized and without opposition, democracy becomes autocracy.

Many neutrals have recently began to have sympathy for the PDP neither because the party deserves such nor because it is showing signs of deserving such any soon, but because it is the only party that is in a strong position to keep APC on its toes-something the governing party itself needs to checkmate complacency. However, the question is: does the PDP have as much sympathy for itself? Apparently it doesn’t, because many of the party’s actions tend to de-market the party rather than promoting it.

No matter how well outsiders wish to see things go for PDP, it won’t be possible if the major stakeholders within the party are not willing to put their acts together. If there were other viable opposition options apart from PDP, majority of Nigerians would most likely go for them and back any among them to become the major opposition party in the country. Alas! There is none and considering what it takes to build a formidable national political party or to transform a dormant one in Nigeria, we can say, there would be none at least for the time being, except if an unforeseen miracle-like situation happens.

After the 2015 General Elections, the question on the lips of Nigerians was: how would PDP manage defeat? Others asked whether PDP would bounce back and if yes, how and when? The problem we are facing in Nigerian politics is that political parties are almost solely judged based on electoral performance. Therefore, in the eyes of many, PDP would only be considered to have bounced back if it takes over from APC at the next polls. From the look of things, PDP itself also narrowly look at things that way. The truth is, if PDP can still remain in existence, strengthen its organs, engage in massive grassroots membership drive and followership, give the nation a rebranded and innovative opposition, retain its states and win some elusive states like Lagos and have a decent presidential election outing in 2019, that would be enough success even if they don’t win back the presidency in the next 8 years. The PDP should not be exclusively looking forward to winning elections, it should think of ways it can set the standards and become the epitome of internal democracy, de-commercialization and de-monetization of politics, inspiring political consciousness and awareness as well as ideology-based politicking.

Is PDP ready to bounce back? It depends on what we take ‘bounce back’ to mean. However, we take it, the answer is, the party has the potential to bounce back, but it is not yet ready. Virtually, all of the actions and inactions of the PDP stakeholders since after April 2015 suggests that they are not ready to bounce back even in the next 16 years. When you find yourself in the midst of a self-inflicted mess, the least that is required of you to get out of that mess is to even believe that you are in a mess, sincerely acknowledge the role you played in putting yourself in that mess followed by genuine repentance.

Time and again, the PDP through many of its notable chieftains still boasts that it is the largest party in Nigeria and it is still the only party that has presence everywhere including the remotest parts of the country. Even a small kid knows this is not true, but such is PDP’s arrogance even as an opposition party. When they were in power, they declared themselves the largest party in Africa without depending on any scientific yardstick. The PDP is presently a regional party confined mainly to the South-South and the South-East and the truth is that if free and fair elections had held in those regions, APGA, LP and to some extent APC would have occupied most of the seats, ‘elected’ PDP members are now occupying. One needs not to wonder why 70% of total annulled 2015 elections by the tribunals across the country so far are coming from the South-South and South-East.

The PDP has been the biggest loser in all the decided cases by the election petition tribunals so far. Instead of the party to tell itself some home truths, galvanize and see how they can salvage the situation to enhance their chances of winning the re-run elections, they are busy accusing the APC and the presidency of influencing tribunal judgements. Would PDP ever accept half of what transpired in Rivers and Akwa-Ibom states as elections if they were not the beneficiaries? PDP is accusing the Presidency of judicial interference probably because that’s what they use to do when they were in power and hence they expect others to be doing the same. It looks like PDP’s game plan is to continue with this propaganda to blackmail the tribunals into succumbing to their pressure and prevent them from doing their jobs adequately. If the party is not careful, some of the victories it recorded in some tribunals might be upturned after the cases might have been carefully reviewed in the appeal and supreme courts.

The way PDP has been lamenting its defeat in the 2015 elections is very funny. How many times have PDP actually won elections? If free and fair elections had been taking place, the party would have since become history, probably since 2003 or 2007. PDP should cherish the fact they still exist with some relevance. They have spent the last 6 months lamenting and advancing reasons why they lost, whereas they knew deep in their hearts that the party seldom wins any election post 1999.   

Almost two years after, the PDP has continued to call the people that left the party as betrayers, traitors and ingrates. Uptill today, they have failed to move forward on this. The party has refused to accept responsibility, not to talk of addressing the issues that led to the exit of such people. The PDP has forgotten that it has been the biggest beneficiary of defections since 1999. Arguably more than 90% of all defections from 2001 to 2010 have been in favour of the party and none of the then opposition parties refused to move forward and plan ahead because of this.

Another disgusting habit of the PDP is boasting and crediting itself with Nigeria’s 16 years of uninterrupted democratic rule. This is childish and akin to a scenario where the military begins to boast and ask Nigerians to thank it for not carrying out a single coup since 1999. PDP are fond of making vague statements; nothing could have happened to Nigeria’s democracy with or without PDP. In fact the PDP-led Federal Government should be blamed of threatening democracy by supervising some of the worst elections in Nigeria’s history. If we may ask, how willing was the PDP government to allow the 2015 elections hold? How can a party known for one of the worst records on internal democracy entrench any democracy elsewhere?

Some PDP chieftains who have not completely lost touch with reality like their colleagues have admitted that the party has done so many political wrongs even if they refuse to agree that the party had failed to bring any meaningful development to the country. In short, the believe PDP has done very well in terms of governance. The question we should ask them is, between infrastructure, power, health, employment, Security, Agriculture and poverty, what single sector can the PDP point out to have achieved 75% success to justify the money it spent in 16 years? Where then is the development? PDP’s mistake is that, they keep judging themselves on inputs instead of results.

One other issue is PDP’s over celebration of the emergence of Ike Ekweremadu as Deputy Senate President in an APC controlled government and citing it as ‘first in Africa’ and an indication of good things to come. First and foremost, what would have been the chances of Ekweremadu in that election if all 109 senators were around in the Senate Chambers when the election for the post of Deputy Senate President took place? Would he have contested? Hardly. Therefore, PDP cowardly took advantage of a situation courtesy of APC’s blundering and misjudgement. Morally, PDP should not have allowed any of its members to contest for any principal office in the National Assembly because in its 16 years rule, it gave no one any chance. It seems, PDP wants to become a ruling and an opposition party at the same time. This is evident as, it also wanted the Deputy Speakership of the House. One thing PDP doesn’t understand is that it is shooting itself in the foot. With the party holding the Deputy Senate Presidency, it is officially part of the Federal Government and must therefore partly bear the burdens of its wrongs.

It is a welcome development that the PDP organized a National Reform Conference that is aimed at rebranding and reshaping the party for future challenges. The problem however is that the aim of the conference seems to have been defeated already. Instead of PDP to concentrate on using the conference for self-assessment and rebranding strategies, speakers took turns and wasted useful time and energy in using it as an opportunity for bashing the APC and the President. There would be many upcoming tangible things to criticize Buhari’s government on and there would be ample time to do so, but PDP seem to be in a desperate hurry as if that is what will help it reclaim past glory.

The APC is the least of PDP’s worries currently. APC has many shortcomings and it will gather many more baggage as the journey continues, but no matter how bad the APC becomes, Nigerians may likely stick with it in 2019 if PDP refuses to truly reform itself and move away from its past. PDP should deal with itself and Nigerians would do the rest by dealing with APC. The PDP must be ready to present itself as an alternative which Nigerians can trust in the event of an APC failure. The PDP should look inwards and try to reform, re-shape and rebrand itself from a party with the image of impunity and cheating to that of justice and fairness and thereafter re-present itself to Nigerians. This would be better than mocking reality and the continuation to live in denial.

Nigerians and the Misconception of Unity

28^th October, 2015

By: Amir Abdulazeez

J

ust recently, Nigeria celebrated its 55^th independence anniversary amidst a mixed atmosphere of renewed political hope and optimism on the one hand and the fear of an uncertain economic future on the other. The general belief is that the country has made some progress democratically and it is well positioned to begin the journey of attaining the long elusive greatness. However, many others are of the opinion that there is not much to celebrate as our independence still remains ironical. They claim that with our mono-economy heavily dependent on one single commodity which price is directly or indirectly determined by the western giants, we are nothing but dependent.

At home, we are still battling with debates about how the ownership and control status of that single commodity the country depends on should be. While some think it should solely belong to the Federal Republic of Nigeria, others think it should be partly so. Some even think it should completely belong to the areas where the oil is being extracted from. Meanwhile, the more serious minds among us are asking us to shelve this debate on oil resource control and focus on how to diversify the economy.

The story of Nigeria over the last 55 years has been that of an independent but fragile and disunited nation. The Nigerian unity doesn’t go beyond the word ‘Nigeria’, besides almost everybody sees his fellow tribesman as his only true brother. The question is no longer when this will stop; the question is for how long would this continue? If after 55 years, citizens of a country do not see themselves as one national family bonded by nationhood, trust and understanding, then how many more years do we require to truly become citizens of one nation? This is the primary reason why some genuinely believe that the solution to all these is disintegration. The question is into how many parts do you need to divide Nigeria into in order to do justice to the multi-ethnic nature of its societies?

There is an argument as to whether achieving national unity is something natural or artificial, deliberate or coincident, divine or man-made. For instance, many think there is no way a Muslim would achieve any meaningful and lasting understanding with a Christian or an Igbo man achieving true unity and brotherhood with a Yoruba man and so on and so forth. This is simply because; there are some shape-thinking forces of nature that are beyond the control of both parties. Proponents of this argument often say that countries that have achieved unity are bounded by something natural like religion or tribe which they built upon. For example, more than 90% of Britons are Christians and are mostly English, then what is there to disagree about?   

There are people who argue that the above position is weak and to some extent baseless and that it’s only those who don’t understand the complexities of life that would hold such views. Their claim is that unity is quite different from uniformity and what is required of the citizens of a nation is unity of purpose and not necessarily unity by nature. For instance, more than 90% of the Middle-east people are Arabs and Muslims, but there is no region with many inter-political and intra-ideological conflicts as the region. The Arab world does not show any sign of unity. Another argument is that, there is no way a people can be uniform. If we happen to all be Muslims, some would be practicing Muslims and others, Muslim by identity; some may be white others black and some may be Sunni, Shi’ite or even extremists, etc. We may all happen to be Hausa, but some may be purely Hausa while others are Hausa/Fulani, Christians or Muslims. rich or poor, educated or ignorant, etc.

The problem facing Nigeria is that most of its citizens neither understand nationhood and the aspirations of a nation nor the interpretation of our history and the history of others. It is true that the British did a great injustice by not considering a lot of logical factors while demarcating the area they called Nigeria, but nations are not perfect and even if they are perfect, they didn’t start perfectly but with determination that imperfection can be overcome over time. However there is no absolute guarantee, even if there are prospects that the various original societies and kingdoms that were merged to form Nigeria would be any better in terms of unity and progress if they were left as they were. This is debatable.

What is unity? An average Nigerian may think of unity as a scenario where everyone is of the same religion or tribe or atleast something similar or close to that situation. This explains the agitation for disintegration in many quarters. The belief is that once we have entities of Igbos only, Yorubas only, Muslims only or Christians only, then there would be unity. On the other hand, an average Nigerian elite may think of unity as a scenario where the presidency rotates periodically from North-east to South-south, from North-central to South-east or a scenario where federal character is strictly adhered to with all states or ethnic groups getting equal appointments and number of civil servants.

All of these are not unity. Unity is when we all unanimously agree to pursue a common cause, that is to make our country great for our own benefit and that of the unborn generation. Unity is when we all understand from where we came from, where are we now and where we are heading to together. Unity is when we understand our differences, acknowledge them and work inspite of them to build a civilized society of law, order, justice, equality and prosperity; a society which everyone feels an integral part of.

It appears, we are actually confused as to what we really want, probably that’s why we haven’t make the progress we should make. So, now, over the last 55 years, what have we being pursuing, unity or uniformity?

Mallam Amir is on Twitter: @AmirAbdulazeez

Africa’s Longest-Serving Leaders

Here is a list of Africa's longest-serving leaders:

Currently Serving;

- 36 years: Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, Equatorial Guinea. Came to power in a coup on August 3, 1979. He was officially named president on October 12, 1982.

- 36 years: Jose Eduardo dos Santos, Angola. Leader of the party which won independence from Portugal in 1975, Dos Santos has been in power since September 20, 1979.

- 35 years: Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe. The only living African leader to have been continuously in power since his country's independence, Mugabe became prime minister in April 1980 and president in 1987.

- 32 years: Paul Biya, Cameroon. Came to power on November 6, 1982.

- 31 Years: Sassou Nguesso. Congo. He took power in 1979 and has been in office ever since, except for a five-year period. The country now votes to amend the constitution Sunday in a referendum allowing President Denis Sassou Nguesso to extend a grip on power that began three decades ago.

- 29 years: Yoweri Museveni, Uganda. Took office in January 1986 after winning the war which ousted the brutal regime of Idi Amin Dada, with help from neighbouring Tanzania.

- 29 years: King Mswati III, Swaziland. Acceded to the throne of the tiny southern African kingdom in April 1986, four years after the death of his father.

- 26 years: Omar al-Bashir, Sudan. Has ruled since he seized power in a coup in June 1989.

- 25 years: Idriss Deby, Chad. Emerged as the leader of the arid north-central African state in December 1990, after the war which ousted the regime of Hissein Habre.

All-time record holders;

The longest-serving leaders of post-colonial African countries have been:

- Emperor King Haile Selassie, who was ousted from power in Ethiopia in 1974 after 44 years.

- Moamer Kadhafi of Libya, who ruled his north-African state for almost 42 years after a coup in 1969. Kadhafi was ousted and then killed in 2011 by a rebel movement backed by western warplanes.

- Omar Bongo Ondimba, who ruled the west African state of Gabon for more than 41 years until his death in October 2011. He was then succeeded by his son.

Source: Agence France Presse (AFP)

Before Everybody Becomes an Election Rigger

20^th October, 2015

By: AmirAbdulazeez

M

any Nigerians were not angry with the reportedly massive irregularities that characterized and dominated the 2003 and 2007 General Elections as much as they were with the verdicts from the various election petition tribunals across the country, notably those judgments from the Supreme Court which affirmed the ‘elections’ of Obasanjo in 2003 and that of ‘Yaradua in 2007. Some researchers I recently discussed with have expressed the fears and reluctance of conducting studies using alleged ‘inflated’ figures from various Nigerian General Elections which unfortunately have already made their way into our National Archives. If you think their fears are unfounded, how on earth can you explain election figures showing almost 100% or more voters’ turnout in certain places or one giving the impression that even dead people voted? How can you swallow the (il)logic of a people continuously and overwhelmingly ‘voting’ for a particular party in certain states in 5 straight elections despite the clear visibility of bad governance everywhere in such states? These are some of the things that many of our courts are directly and indirectly endorsing as correct.

It takes one of the most morally bankrupt consciences to rig an election, but it takes even a more morally bankrupt one to legitimize and affirm it. One wonders where the aggrieved person in an election can find justice if he can’t find it in the tribunals. Before and after elections, multiple alarms of foul play are being raised in different quarters and during the course of the elections, many candidates usually complain of rigging, violence, manipulation and oppression, but all INEC could do was to tell them to head to court if they were not satisfied. Does this means INEC itself is satisfied with all elections it presides, no matter how dirty and those dissatisfied should go to court? Is it even a matter of satisfaction or dissatisfaction? With this development, it is therefore the duty of the election tribunals to rescue the people from being governed through illegal mandates in various capacities-a duty which they have so far failed to adequately perform. The Electoral Act itself has badly incapacitated the electoral process to checkmate rigging and punish riggers.

The elections petitions tribunals in 2011 did not fare any significantly better than those of 2003 and 2007. Over the past few weeks, outcomes of various 2015 election tribunals have left many people baffled and dejected. Some of the outcomes are simply bizarre to say the least, even though not all were completely unexpected.

It has gradually become very clear that once you were not declared winner after the polls, you stand virtually no chance of reclaiming your mandate in the courts. First, the tribunals give much emphasis on flimsy technicalities and often dismiss several petitions on such grounds. Secondly, they often summarize all arguments and evidences brought before them as having failed to prove the case ‘beyond reasonable doubt’- an ambiguous phrase now so popularly and notoriously used to dismiss many competent cases.

There are so many problems bedevilling the quest for electoral justice in Nigeria. The first starts with the constitution of the tribunals themselves. Quite often judges and tribunal members are hurriedly constituted from entirely different areas from where the elections took place, leaving them with virtually zero knowledge on what happened in the area or how the area is. Although, every tribunal is expected to only rely on arguments presented before it and not otherwise, we cannot say that knowledge of an area will not help a judge to make better informed decisions on so many things. The time frame for settling electoral cases and the unnecessary delays and adjournments of proceedings within such time frames is also another critical problem. The ‘winners’ are allowed to be sworn in and properly settle in power while petitioners are left to wander and wallow in search of justice. Winners, after being sworn in may use state resources to not only diligently prosecute their defence in the tribunals through competent and experienced lawyers, but also to scuttle any efforts for justice to be done against them. This is apart from the likelihood of using same resources to adequately prepare and gain upper hands in case of a re-run. These are luxuries which the petitioner does not only lack, but also struggles to maintain his tempo after the elections and sustain his zeal enough to prosecute his case. He finds things very difficult and in some cases he has to even pay his witnesses in addition to other things.

Secondly, the tribunals are themselves inadequate. Two tribunals are set up per state; one for the governorship and the other for the national and state assembly elections with very few-often an average of one per geo-political zone- Appeal Courts serving the entire country. The national and state assembly elections are packed with several cases which are expected to be settled within limited time. As such, the tribunals hardly give enough attention to each case. Elections are not perfect, that is why we have election tribunals and their duty is to ensure speedy justice. Justice must not be delayed because it is totally unfair and unacceptable for someone to continue sitting on an illegal or stolen mandate for long just because the tribunals are dragging the case for whatever reason.

Thirdly, INEC is not playing the role of a truly unbiased electoral umpire in the hearings of election petitions. In the cases, INEC’s objectives should not be about defending its actions no matter how wrong during the elections, it should be about defending the truth; it doesn’t matter whether the truth was discovered after the polls. INEC Staff are humans; the commission can’t defend their indefensible actions during the elections just because they are joined as respondents in a petition. They should admit their mistakes, take responsibility for their actions, give explanations for them, expose and punish their officers involved and provide the true facts with which the work of the tribunals would be simplified rather than complicating proceedings.

The fourth is the cost of justice in Nigeria. Prosecuting an average case in a Nigerian court needs huge financial resources and time. Many a time, you can’t get justice when you don’t have good lawyers who are hired at exorbitant costs. In election petitions, one may also need the services of forensic experts, data analysts, huge logistic arrangements and other expenses. This often costs a petitioner with a good case but without money his victory in courts.

The fifth but also the most crucial is corruption. The entire Nigerian justice system comprising the police, judiciary and other bodies are perceived by many to be corrupt. Indeed the elections tribunals are seen as some of the worst. There were reports of allegations in 2003, 2007 and even 2011 that judges jostle and lobby to be appointed to preside over election tribunals because of the lucrative prospects involved. Power-monger politicians would stop at nothing to influence and manipulate the election tribunals and to comprise their officials in order to stay in power.

Currently, most of the rulings coming out of the 2015 elections petitions tribunal are not showing a significantly different pattern from the dismal ones of the past, even though there are some signs of little improvement. Many of the judgments are seemingly unjust and hard to comprehend with. The level of success of the Appeal Courts in correcting these anomalies would determine the future confidence level of people in the judicial-electoral process. All eyes would now be on the Appeal Courts who are expected to thoroughly review most of these cases.

If the Appeal Courts fail to salvage the situation and things continue like this, it will reach a level where everyone would think of rigging his way into power since there is every chance that his victory would not be overturned by the tribunal and even if it does, he has every advantage of winning the re-run, except of course if the tribunal chose the rare case of declaring the petitioner as the outright winner. After the 2007 and 2011 elections, the tribunal nullified the governorship elections of Kogi, Bayelsa, Cross-Rivers, Kebbi, Adamawa, and Sokoto states, but the governors all won their re-run elections against their battered and power-less opponents whose energies have been sapped after several months of pursuing their cases at the tribunals. Candidates who could adequately prove that they won elections should be declared winners instead of wasting government funds by ordering for re-runs.

One of the most popular opinions among Nigerian politicians is that it is better to rig elections and be taken to court than get rigged out and go to court. One of the problems with election rigging is that no matter how hard you try, you cannot completely hide it, although you may get away with it and even get the chance to repeat it. The law says everyone is innocent until proven guilty but in reality some people are guilty until proven innocent.

Mallam Amir is on Twitter: @AmirAbdulazeez