The Problem with Nigerian Football
Last week I asked the question, ‘Can Nigeria win the cup?’ For those who could read carefully between the lines, my implicit, and occasionally even explicit answer to that question was, ‘No’. Some may have perhaps deemed that unpatriotic so we were careful in making this point but the sum total of the article were the following assertions-many of the players in our team are average, or at best slightly above average; Kanu Nwankwo who used to be a real star is now well past his prime; John Mikel Obi is the only authentic world class star in our team; weighed against teams like Cote D’Ivoire and Ghana, the Nigerian team is a second rate team, and looked at objectively the Nigerian team stands little chance of victory in Ghana.
Well by the time you are reading this, Nigeria will probably have crashed out of the African Nations Cup in the first round, a true national embarrassment if ever there was one! Even though I’m writing this piece on Sunday afternoon, it is safe to project that the Ivorienes and Malians would do the safe and sensible thing-play a draw-and guarantee their entry into the next round, making nonsense of any Nigerian victory over Benin Republic. And so the biggest sporting disgrace to afflict Nigeria in a long while will befall us and our compatriots. The only surprise is that Nigerians are surprised. Our team is very weak relative to the competition, the coach is very deficient strategically and tactically, and the team sprit, discipline and organisation are nothing to write home about.
But those are only symptoms. The problems of football in Nigeria are more fundamental and unless we address them headlong, Nigeria will sooner than later become a second rate team in Africa. Of course it all boils down to organisation. Last week I wrote that “The long term imperative for African sports is for entrepreneurially-minded managers to take control of the management of sports, and to evolve a sustainable model of sports funding, marketing and organisation. The leagues in Africa will not develop until the clubs are privately-owned institutions, with wide shareholder participation, a commercial model dependent on gate takings, broadcast revenues, marketing of memorabilia and an enthusiastic fan base. The reluctance of sports administrators to allow such a model in favour of their present rent-facilitating system, will only prolong the drain of African talent to leagues in England, Spain, Italy, France and other countries organised in a commercially viable and sustainable manner.” You may substitute ‘Nigeria’ every where you have ‘Africa’ in that quote!
Football is business and until our administrators treat it as such we will continue to fumble and sub-optimize. I read with sadness a recent interview where Dr Amos Adamu, Director-General of the Nigerian Sports Commission arrogantly argued in favour of continued government control of sports, according to him because the private sector cannot fund sports. If his peculiar logic and reasoning is correct, that must be something unique to Nigeria because the private sector happens to fund sports in all the countries where we have money spinning football leagues-England, Italy, Spain, France, Holland etc Of course he will then argue that Nigeria is different from those countries and that such private capital is not available in Nigeria. We will of course laugh at such suggestion, because we remember they told us the government must continue to fund telecommunications in Nigeria, because the private sector did not have resources to fund it. Of course we now know better. The private sector which funds telecommunications, banking, oil and gas, aviation, breweries and beverages, broadcasting etc will of course fund sports (and power) if only the bureaucrats will allow them to, and will create a sustainable structure and appropriate laws and policies in that direction. Just like NITEL and Nigerian Airways proved to be worse than the private sector possibilities we later discovered, we will also find that sports in Nigeria will grow phenomenally when government assumes it proper role of facilitator and infrastructure provider rather than administrator.
The age group competitions have also become a major problem with Nigerian football. FIFA created age group contests to help discover youth talent and institutionalize youth football. They were a means to an end, not an end in themselves. Nigeria has in a typical short-sighted manner turned the under-17 contest into an end in itself. So we cheat and celebrate that we have conquered the world at under-17 level, when every Nigerian knows that we send men with average ages of 25 years or slightly lower to those competitions. We all carry on the collective self-deception and no one asks why after winning the under-17 world cup three times we have not managed to win African Nations Cup more than twice, and we have never reached the quarter-finals of the World Cup.
I found it interesting that after our recent ‘conquest’ of the world at under-17 level, we invited the ‘Yahoozee’ musician right into the hallowed precincts of Aso Rock to entertain our President with his song which glorifies cheating and ‘yahoo yahoo’ just as we had cheated the world. It says something about our degraded national morality that one of our most popular hit songs celebrates doing nothing except searching for a ‘yahoo yahoo’ hit Monday to Friday until you hit a million dollars, buy a hummer jeep, fly on holiday all over the world and ends by deriding those who came to the world to work while hailing those who came to the world to enjoy. Those are the actual lyrics of the song! And I do not recall reading or hearing much complaining about the song or the immorality behind it.
The under-17 tournament damages our football development because we send those who should be playing for the senior national team to the teenage contest and trade-off our future for the present, like Esau did with Jacob. Even after we win those teenage contests using fully matured players, we then amazingly pretend that they are actually teenagers and promote them two or three years later to the under-21 team. The result is that with only few exceptions (such as Osazee Odemwingie), our national team is peopled by footballers who are aged between 32 and 38 years old. Why are we are surprised when energetic youths like Salomon Kalou dribble four of them and score as happened in the Nigeria-Cote D’Ivoire match. Of course competitive football is best played by men between 21 and 28 years old and God will not bend the laws of nature no matter how much Nigerians deceive themselves!
If we stop cheating and send real under-17 boys to those contests, we will have a rich pool of talent who can play at the highest level for the next 10-15 years until they are 28-32 years. If we send real under-21 boys to under-21 contests, they will play for the next 10 years or so in the best teams in the world; ditto if we sent under-23 boys to the Olympics. Instead we deceive ourselves and win meaningless titles while the rest of the world wonders why we win so empathically at junior level but struggle in the real thing. Our bureaucrats must know that they will not be civil servants for ever. Will they think about Nigeria for once, and stop regarding our sports as a private fiefdom?
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Can Nigeria win the Cup?
The African Nations Cup got underway in Ghana on Sunday, 20th January 2008. This is certainly the most hyped contest since the Cup of Nations became one the world could no longer ignore. I was in Accra just over a week before the commencement of the competition, and I could see that football high fever was already in town. Every where you went the games colours and those of its major sponsors MTN were splashed all over the city. One fortuitous side effect of this year’s fiesta is that it will take our attention off the unfortunate goings-on in the “House of Obasanjo”. Hopefully in that interval the actors and actresses will take the opportunity to reflect and draw back from the precipice of self-destruction that they have embarked upon. And perhaps seek spiritual counselling and redemption.
But back to the exciting African fiesta that has now taken off in Ghana. The first time I took note of the competition as a young boy must have been the 1974 contest in Egypt and particularly the 1976 edition where Nigeria took third place and our players Kunle Awesu and Baba Otu Muhammed (?) were the best wingers on the left and right, but of course Nigeria had its first real honours in 1980 when we both hosted and won. That glorious 1980 team of Segun Odegbami, Muda Lawal, Captain Christian Chukwu, Adokiye Amaesimeka and others simply overwhelmed all opposition and crushed Algeria 3-0 at the National Stadium in Lagos to claim gold for the very first time. Since then we have won it only one other time-in 1994-even though playing in so many finals in between, and thereafter.
For most of its history the competition was dominated by players who were more or less amateurs playing in the local leagues in the participating countries. It attracted little or no attention from the international community except for the few scouts from fringe European leagues such as Belgium, Israel or Portugal. Domestic interest within African countries was limited, and broadcast and commercial interest was insignificant. The Nations Cup has come a long way, and has changed in many ways. It is no longer a second rate contest of unknown quantities. Many of the teams would fare well against European and South American opposition, and the players play in all the best leagues in England, Spain, Italy and France with only a minority in most of the top national teams being home-based players.
This is both good news and bad. The inward wealth transfer that our footballers and other sportsmen are generating into African economies is a significant inflow that has helped to reduce poverty on the continent. Every time I think about an Obafemi Martins, who might have at best ended up wasting his talents as an ‘area boy’ in central Lagos, or a Kanu Nwankwo who may have best been a textiles trader at Aba or Onitsha market, I think that football has been a source of positive societal transformation. These stars are also becoming beacons of hope and role models in an African society which is so lacking of positive role models. But the fact of exportation of young African foot balling talent also reflects how Africa is losing out in the globalisation era. It reflects the lack of development in the African continent while the rest of the world surges ahead.
The long term imperative for African sports is for entrepreneurially-minded managers to take control of the management of sports, and to evolve a sustainable model of sports funding, marketing and organisation. The leagues in Africa will not develop until the clubs are privately-owned institutions, with wide shareholder participation, a commercial model dependent on gate takings, broadcast revenues, marketing of memorabilia and an enthusiastic fan base. The reluctance of sports administrators to allow such a model in favour of their present rent-facilitating system, will only prolong the drain of African talent to leagues in England, Spain, Italy, France and other countries organised in a commercially viable and sustainable manner.
Any way while we wait for our system to change, we will continue to depend on the Diaspora players to constitute almost one hundred percent of our team. As usual Nigeria has qualified and will be participating in Ghana 2008, but the question is do we stand a chance of victory this time around? The problem is that Nigerians (your columnist included) are incurable optimists, and perhaps patriots. Six months ago when I was a bit more objective about our chances, my honest view was that Nigeria did not have one of the better teams and was therefore unlikely to do well in Ghana. Many of the players in our team will not get a shirt in the Cote d’ivoire, Ghana or Cameroun teams. Just look at the team paraded by Didier Drogba (of Chelsea) and his team mates in Cote d’Ivoire-Kolo Toure and Emmanuel Eboue of Arsenal, Salomon Kalou also of Chelsea, Aruna Dindane, Aruna Kone and a generally first class team.
The Ghanaian team also has Michael Essien also of Chelsea, Sulley Muntari and Laryea Kingston, while Cameroun still has Samuel Etoo of Barcelona who has enough skills, speed and dexterity to almost single-handedly win the cup for his country. Nigeria in my view has an at best slightly above team. Kanu who is the only truly outstanding player in the team is well past his peak. John Mikel Obi is the only other of real star quality and the only Nigerian player who plays in the top global teams. Others feature in middle or bottom league teams such as Portsmouth, Newcastle and Sunderland and even second division teams like Watford or inferior leagues like those in Israel and South Africa. But we must admit that the organisation of this year’s pre-tournament build-up including selection, call-ups, friendly matches and camp arrivals and training have been better organised than on previous occasions.
At the end of the day, the most important lesson managers can learn from football is that it is good teams that win matches, not good individuals. So Cote D’ivoire or Ghana will not necessarily win because they have stronger individuals than other teams. They will only win if in addition, they are a cohesive, united and purposeful team. That is why Real Madrid in the ‘galactico’ era did not win trophies in spite of having the best assembly of individual skill anywhere in the world. In fact, one good illustration of the triumph of teams over individuals in football was the Champions League clashes between Real Madrid and Olympique Lyon of France, in which Lyon trounced Madrid two years ago. In my view, the only hope for Nigeria is if we could leverage the power of team work to overcome the superior skills in the Ivorien team.
My bet, like that of most informed observers is that the winner of this contest will come from Nigeria, Cameroun, Ghana and Cote D’Ivoire. My emotional favourite is of course Nigeria. But I very much like the Cote D’Ivoire team, probably a residue of my Chelsea affiliation and Didier Drogba’s presence in the team, along with the impressive Arsenal contingent. Unfortunately I can’t delay writing this column until I have the result of the Nigeria/Cote D’Ivoire match, but I suspect that whoever wins that game may be on course to win the cup.
The African Nations Cup got underway in Ghana on Sunday, 20th January 2008. This is certainly the most hyped contest since the Cup of Nations became one the world could no longer ignore. I was in Accra just over a week before the commencement of the competition, and I could see that football high fever was already in town. Every where you went the games colours and those of its major sponsors MTN were splashed all over the city. One fortuitous side effect of this year’s fiesta is that it will take our attention off the unfortunate goings-on in the “House of Obasanjo”. Hopefully in that interval the actors and actresses will take the opportunity to reflect and draw back from the precipice of self-destruction that they have embarked upon. And perhaps seek spiritual counselling and redemption.
But back to the exciting African fiesta that has now taken off in Ghana. The first time I took note of the competition as a young boy must have been the 1974 contest in Egypt and particularly the 1976 edition where Nigeria took third place and our players Kunle Awesu and Baba Otu Muhammed (?) were the best wingers on the left and right, but of course Nigeria had its first real honours in 1980 when we both hosted and won. That glorious 1980 team of Segun Odegbami, Muda Lawal, Captain Christian Chukwu, Adokiye Amaesimeka and others simply overwhelmed all opposition and crushed Algeria 3-0 at the National Stadium in Lagos to claim gold for the very first time. Since then we have won it only one other time-in 1994-even though playing in so many finals in between, and thereafter.
For most of its history the competition was dominated by players who were more or less amateurs playing in the local leagues in the participating countries. It attracted little or no attention from the international community except for the few scouts from fringe European leagues such as Belgium, Israel or Portugal. Domestic interest within African countries was limited, and broadcast and commercial interest was insignificant. The Nations Cup has come a long way, and has changed in many ways. It is no longer a second rate contest of unknown quantities. Many of the teams would fare well against European and South American opposition, and the players play in all the best leagues in England, Spain, Italy and France with only a minority in most of the top national teams being home-based players.
This is both good news and bad. The inward wealth transfer that our footballers and other sportsmen are generating into African economies is a significant inflow that has helped to reduce poverty on the continent. Every time I think about an Obafemi Martins, who might have at best ended up wasting his talents as an ‘area boy’ in central Lagos, or a Kanu Nwankwo who may have best been a textiles trader at Aba or Onitsha market, I think that football has been a source of positive societal transformation. These stars are also becoming beacons of hope and role models in an African society which is so lacking of positive role models. But the fact of exportation of young African foot balling talent also reflects how Africa is losing out in the globalisation era. It reflects the lack of development in the African continent while the rest of the world surges ahead.
The long term imperative for African sports is for entrepreneurially-minded managers to take control of the management of sports, and to evolve a sustainable model of sports funding, marketing and organisation. The leagues in Africa will not develop until the clubs are privately-owned institutions, with wide shareholder participation, a commercial model dependent on gate takings, broadcast revenues, marketing of memorabilia and an enthusiastic fan base. The reluctance of sports administrators to allow such a model in favour of their present rent-facilitating system, will only prolong the drain of African talent to leagues in England, Spain, Italy, France and other countries organised in a commercially viable and sustainable manner.
Any way while we wait for our system to change, we will continue to depend on the Diaspora players to constitute almost one hundred percent of our team. As usual Nigeria has qualified and will be participating in Ghana 2008, but the question is do we stand a chance of victory this time around? The problem is that Nigerians (your columnist included) are incurable optimists, and perhaps patriots. Six months ago when I was a bit more objective about our chances, my honest view was that Nigeria did not have one of the better teams and was therefore unlikely to do well in Ghana. Many of the players in our team will not get a shirt in the Cote d’ivoire, Ghana or Cameroun teams. Just look at the team paraded by Didier Drogba (of Chelsea) and his team mates in Cote d’Ivoire-Kolo Toure and Emmanuel Eboue of Arsenal, Salomon Kalou also of Chelsea, Aruna Dindane, Aruna Kone and a generally first class team.
The Ghanaian team also has Michael Essien also of Chelsea, Sulley Muntari and Laryea Kingston, while Cameroun still has Samuel Etoo of Barcelona who has enough skills, speed and dexterity to almost single-handedly win the cup for his country. Nigeria in my view has an at best slightly above team. Kanu who is the only truly outstanding player in the team is well past his peak. John Mikel Obi is the only other of real star quality and the only Nigerian player who plays in the top global teams. Others feature in middle or bottom league teams such as Portsmouth, Newcastle and Sunderland and even second division teams like Watford or inferior leagues like those in Israel and South Africa. But we must admit that the organisation of this year’s pre-tournament build-up including selection, call-ups, friendly matches and camp arrivals and training have been better organised than on previous occasions.
At the end of the day, the most important lesson managers can learn from football is that it is good teams that win matches, not good individuals. So Cote D’ivoire or Ghana will not necessarily win because they have stronger individuals than other teams. They will only win if in addition, they are a cohesive, united and purposeful team. That is why Real Madrid in the ‘galactico’ era did not win trophies in spite of having the best assembly of individual skill anywhere in the world. In fact, one good illustration of the triumph of teams over individuals in football was the Champions League clashes between Real Madrid and Olympique Lyon of France, in which Lyon trounced Madrid two years ago. In my view, the only hope for Nigeria is if we could leverage the power of team work to overcome the superior skills in the Ivorien team.
My bet, like that of most informed observers is that the winner of this contest will come from Nigeria, Cameroun, Ghana and Cote D’Ivoire. My emotional favourite is of course Nigeria. But I very much like the Cote D’Ivoire team, probably a residue of my Chelsea affiliation and Didier Drogba’s presence in the team, along with the impressive Arsenal contingent. Unfortunately I can’t delay writing this column until I have the result of the Nigeria/Cote D’Ivoire match, but I suspect that whoever wins that game may be on course to win the cup.
Yar’adua: Status Report
President Umaru Yar’adua has been in office for over seven months now. Initially the intention of this column was to present an assessment of the government after three months-that would have necessitated a report card by the end of August 2007-but for a variety of reasons, we deferred that till year end. We now feel impelled to assess the government’s initial actions and directions given that the regime has already spent approximately 15 percent of the forty-eight months it has to shape Nigeria’s destiny. At the end of former President Obasanjo’s eight-year tenure, I evaluated him based on five dimensions of a ‘balanced scorecard’- political, economic, international relations, impact on people and corruption and transparency.
When the Yar’adua regime was about to be inaugurated, I presented some series of ‘Memos to Yar’adua’ which attempted to set an agenda for the then incoming president. Those memos suggested three broad categories of priorities-governance (electoral reform/entrenching democracy; anti-corruption; rule of law and constitutionalism), policy (Niger-Delta; power sector; and social sector reforms and investments-education, health, rural development, urban mass transportation, access to credit, housing development and unemployment). In terms of economic priorities, I suggested that the government focus on transparent privatisations, land reform, strengthening regulatory capacity, competition and anti-trust policy, and improving capital markets, accounting standards and corporate governance.
President Yar’adua himself put forward a ‘7-Point Agenda’ as his contract with the Nigerian voters and citizens encompassing real sector development; physical infrastructure (power, energy and transportation); agricultural development; human capital development (education and health); security, law and order; zero tolerance for corruption; and Niger-Delta. I have also recently seen a report which includes electoral reform, regional development and some cross-cutting issues as part of the seven-point agenda. Clearly we have enough objective and subjective criteria including self-imposed ones on which we can evaluate the government of President Yar’adua so far.
On the positive side, the President has lived up to his promise of a state based on the rule of law and constitutionalism. He has indeed elevated the notion of the rule of law to a cardinal principle of state policy that can override any other consideration. This in itself is good. However we have made the point previously that the concept of the rule of law is not an end in itself, but a means to an end-the end being defined based on the ideology, values and principles which the state seeks to uphold. As we have recently seen, the rule of law can be used to fight corruption, or to truncate the fight against corruption. President Yar’adua will yet have to define the ideology and principles which his conception of the rule of law is meant to protect and advance.
But the President’s focus on rule of law is helping institutions to develop. The House of Representatives for instance, benefited from Yar’adua’s refusal to interfere in the ‘Etteh Affair’. The Legislature in general-the Senate and the House-at the federal level has been allowed to strengthen their institutional capacity and to carry out their constitutional responsibilities without pressure from an overbearing President. The President has also somehow defused political tension with his low-keyed approach to politics which has allowed some level of improvement in inter-party relations. The participation of the ANPP and PPA in the so-called ‘Government of National Unity’ has also been a significant factor in this regard. I must add however that I am one of those who feel that politics should be driven more by ideas in which different groups freely contend, rather than a notion of patronage-driven consensus that eliminates opposition parties and the critical element of an alternative viewpoint which they offer. The President’s promise of electoral reform and the constitution of a high-powered electoral reform committee is also to be commended.
But the negatives are many also. The regime has shown ambivalence in many areas and Nigerians are increasingly wondering what exactly the regime stands for. Is the government committed to its ‘zero tolerance against corruption’ or will the demands of real politik override anti-corruption where necessary? Is the government committed to electoral reform or will the government look the other way while its state governments rig local government elections and then issue a statement after the fact? Is the government’s commitment to rule of law total, or will it waive that when it comes to implementing FIRS autonomy, National Procurement Commission Act or the Fiscal Responsibility Act or indeed any other cases it is unhappy with?
Much has been written about the government’s penchant for reversals of policies and actions undertaken by the former regime. The list of reversals is getting longer and longer, with a list of threatened reversals also lengthening. The government has reversed sales of refineries, tax increases, monetisation of ministers and special advisers transportation, Federal Unity Schools PPP policy, Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) decentralisation, suspended funding for National Integrated Power Projects, Railway Projects, primary health centres and there are hints that people are unhappy with FIRS autonomy, NITEL privatisation, (as well as Ajaokuta and Delta Steel) and probably other privatisations as well. The problem really is not the policy reversals, as it is a cardinal principle of constitutional law that no government or parliament can be bound by its predecessor. The real problem is the refusal to suggest an alternative policy framework.
This illustrates the fundamental problem with the regime-the policy vacuum in which it operates. Before the regime, there was NEEDS and NEEDS 2. The regime seems to have disavowed these policy frameworks and sought to replace them with its own seven point agenda and perhaps a VISION 2020 which seeks to make Nigeria one of the top 20 economies in the world by 2020. The problem is that neither of these has been articulated in terms of specific policies, strategies, plans, objectives and milestones and remain at the level of a broad agenda or vision. Some even detect a nostalgia for the 1970s type state-owned enterprises led economy as been the government’s unspoken preference contrary to the policies of liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation that it inherited from the Obasanjo regime and that its international partners in the World Bank, IMF and bilateral partners expect the regime to implement under its Policy Support Instrument (PSI) with the IMF.
Even in terms of specific commitments which the government outlined in its own seven-point agenda such as the power emergency, there is no strategic action beyond some committees to re-examine and recreate policy. This is in spite of the existence of a law-the Electric Power Sector Reform Act of 2005 which in my view presents a comprehensive reform agenda for the power sector. By the way doesn’t adherence to the rule of law compel execution of this law? The regime will have to quickly present its economic strategy to Nigerians and move rapidly to implement it.
President Umaru Yar’adua has been in office for over seven months now. Initially the intention of this column was to present an assessment of the government after three months-that would have necessitated a report card by the end of August 2007-but for a variety of reasons, we deferred that till year end. We now feel impelled to assess the government’s initial actions and directions given that the regime has already spent approximately 15 percent of the forty-eight months it has to shape Nigeria’s destiny. At the end of former President Obasanjo’s eight-year tenure, I evaluated him based on five dimensions of a ‘balanced scorecard’- political, economic, international relations, impact on people and corruption and transparency.
When the Yar’adua regime was about to be inaugurated, I presented some series of ‘Memos to Yar’adua’ which attempted to set an agenda for the then incoming president. Those memos suggested three broad categories of priorities-governance (electoral reform/entrenching democracy; anti-corruption; rule of law and constitutionalism), policy (Niger-Delta; power sector; and social sector reforms and investments-education, health, rural development, urban mass transportation, access to credit, housing development and unemployment). In terms of economic priorities, I suggested that the government focus on transparent privatisations, land reform, strengthening regulatory capacity, competition and anti-trust policy, and improving capital markets, accounting standards and corporate governance.
President Yar’adua himself put forward a ‘7-Point Agenda’ as his contract with the Nigerian voters and citizens encompassing real sector development; physical infrastructure (power, energy and transportation); agricultural development; human capital development (education and health); security, law and order; zero tolerance for corruption; and Niger-Delta. I have also recently seen a report which includes electoral reform, regional development and some cross-cutting issues as part of the seven-point agenda. Clearly we have enough objective and subjective criteria including self-imposed ones on which we can evaluate the government of President Yar’adua so far.
On the positive side, the President has lived up to his promise of a state based on the rule of law and constitutionalism. He has indeed elevated the notion of the rule of law to a cardinal principle of state policy that can override any other consideration. This in itself is good. However we have made the point previously that the concept of the rule of law is not an end in itself, but a means to an end-the end being defined based on the ideology, values and principles which the state seeks to uphold. As we have recently seen, the rule of law can be used to fight corruption, or to truncate the fight against corruption. President Yar’adua will yet have to define the ideology and principles which his conception of the rule of law is meant to protect and advance.
But the President’s focus on rule of law is helping institutions to develop. The House of Representatives for instance, benefited from Yar’adua’s refusal to interfere in the ‘Etteh Affair’. The Legislature in general-the Senate and the House-at the federal level has been allowed to strengthen their institutional capacity and to carry out their constitutional responsibilities without pressure from an overbearing President. The President has also somehow defused political tension with his low-keyed approach to politics which has allowed some level of improvement in inter-party relations. The participation of the ANPP and PPA in the so-called ‘Government of National Unity’ has also been a significant factor in this regard. I must add however that I am one of those who feel that politics should be driven more by ideas in which different groups freely contend, rather than a notion of patronage-driven consensus that eliminates opposition parties and the critical element of an alternative viewpoint which they offer. The President’s promise of electoral reform and the constitution of a high-powered electoral reform committee is also to be commended.
But the negatives are many also. The regime has shown ambivalence in many areas and Nigerians are increasingly wondering what exactly the regime stands for. Is the government committed to its ‘zero tolerance against corruption’ or will the demands of real politik override anti-corruption where necessary? Is the government committed to electoral reform or will the government look the other way while its state governments rig local government elections and then issue a statement after the fact? Is the government’s commitment to rule of law total, or will it waive that when it comes to implementing FIRS autonomy, National Procurement Commission Act or the Fiscal Responsibility Act or indeed any other cases it is unhappy with?
Much has been written about the government’s penchant for reversals of policies and actions undertaken by the former regime. The list of reversals is getting longer and longer, with a list of threatened reversals also lengthening. The government has reversed sales of refineries, tax increases, monetisation of ministers and special advisers transportation, Federal Unity Schools PPP policy, Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) decentralisation, suspended funding for National Integrated Power Projects, Railway Projects, primary health centres and there are hints that people are unhappy with FIRS autonomy, NITEL privatisation, (as well as Ajaokuta and Delta Steel) and probably other privatisations as well. The problem really is not the policy reversals, as it is a cardinal principle of constitutional law that no government or parliament can be bound by its predecessor. The real problem is the refusal to suggest an alternative policy framework.
This illustrates the fundamental problem with the regime-the policy vacuum in which it operates. Before the regime, there was NEEDS and NEEDS 2. The regime seems to have disavowed these policy frameworks and sought to replace them with its own seven point agenda and perhaps a VISION 2020 which seeks to make Nigeria one of the top 20 economies in the world by 2020. The problem is that neither of these has been articulated in terms of specific policies, strategies, plans, objectives and milestones and remain at the level of a broad agenda or vision. Some even detect a nostalgia for the 1970s type state-owned enterprises led economy as been the government’s unspoken preference contrary to the policies of liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation that it inherited from the Obasanjo regime and that its international partners in the World Bank, IMF and bilateral partners expect the regime to implement under its Policy Support Instrument (PSI) with the IMF.
Even in terms of specific commitments which the government outlined in its own seven-point agenda such as the power emergency, there is no strategic action beyond some committees to re-examine and recreate policy. This is in spite of the existence of a law-the Electric Power Sector Reform Act of 2005 which in my view presents a comprehensive reform agenda for the power sector. By the way doesn’t adherence to the rule of law compel execution of this law? The regime will have to quickly present its economic strategy to Nigerians and move rapidly to implement it.
Person of the Year
Part 2
So back to those who made the most significant positive contributions to the progress and development of the Nigerian nation in 2007. My ten nominees, we recall are Peter Obi, Archbishop Peter Akinola, General Muhammadu Buhari, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and the Supreme Court. What is the basis of these nominations and who will be our eventual choice of Person of the Year?
Peter Obi was the choice of Anambra people as Governor in 2003. The PDP in Anambra State then under the physical leadership of Chris Uba, and spiritual mentorship of Andy Uba rigged Dr Chris Ngige into office. Of course relations between the Ubas and Ngige broke down shortly thereafter and all the things which were done in secret places were revealed in public, notably Aso Rock! The whole weight of Obasanjo’s government was deployed against Ngige and for a long period, Anambra was basically an anarchic society. Meanwhile Peter Obi put his faith in the electoral tribunals, plodding on in spite of significant odds, until three years later in 2006 he assumed his rightful place as governor by the auspices of the judiciary.
The PDP-controlled legislature then illegally impeached Obi and he returned to the courts which again re-instated him. Obi then returned to court asking their Lordships to declare that his term of office did not expire in May 2007. By then the PDP, Obi’s own party (APGA), his party leadership and his deputy had all conspired by various subterfuges to keep him off the 2007 gubernatorial contest. Incredibly the Supreme Court eventually ruled that Obi’s tenure started counting from 2006 when he was sworn in and will run for four years till 2010. Obi deserves recognition for his faith in democracy and the rule of law rather than might, and his tenacity and commitment.
Archbishop Akinola stood for his principles and faith in the face of powerful homosexual constituencies who will rather re-interpret the Bible to suit their orientation. He faced up to a Western Anglican establishment that elevates a notion of sexual freedom above the explicit stipulations of the faith. He demonstrated great leadership and made black and African Christians proud. I found it somewhat curious (and ironical) that while Akinola was excelling on the global stage, his colleagues in the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) were replacing him as President. General Buhari also showed principle and commitment to his chosen course especially within the murky waters of politics in Nigeria. Of course he has paid a high price in betrayal by his ANPP colleagues for his principles, but his example is worthy of recognition.
Atiku Abubakar did a lot to advance the course of democracy in Nigeria in the last few years, and history may yet be kind to him. He, along with Asiwaju Bola Tinubu created a viable opposition party-the Action Congress (AC) against great odds. He fought doggedly against the whole might of the Obasanjo regime, overcoming obstacle after obstacle and even though he did not win the 2007 elections, it was a major victory for him even participating in that elections. In the process, he helped to advance our constitutional law, and firmly established the principle that no regime can arbitrarily exclude candidates from contesting elections except as prescribed by the Nigerian Constitution, and the Courts.
President Obasanjo should have been the undisputed man of the year, but he blew his chance, and almost subverted his own legacy with his own hands. But in spite of himself, many of Obasanjo’s efforts will endure-a debt-free nation, a new pension system, a revitalized banking sector, a telecommunications boom, the EFCC and ICPC, the Niger-Delta Development Commission (NDDC), an incipient solid minerals sector, many private universities, a resurgence of foreign investment and indigenous entrepreneurship etc. His failures in infrastructure especially transport and power, the duplicity over corruption and the mistakes of his last two years in office (third term, electoral sham and reduced fiscal transparency in particular) threaten his legacy, but may not have completely undermined it.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has always been a particular favourite of this column, but for very good reasons. She presided over a transparent finance ministry, institutionalised prudent fiscal arrangements that ensured Nigeria now has in excess of $50billion in reserves, obtained the Paris Club debt write-off, and when people needed money for third-term, elections and personal pensions, she gladly stepped down rather than beg to remain a Minister like many would have done. Today the world has vindicated her, with her elevation as a Managing Director at the World Bank, proving that you cannot keep a good woman down. Governor Fashola has started very well in Lagos-awarding many road and infrastructure contracts, training teachers, revitalizing sports development, investing in education, health, environment and security, and doubling the state’s budget etc. If as they say, morning shows the day, then Lagosians support for Fashola may not have been misplaced.
The EFCC and Mallam Nuhu Ribadu gave us hope especially in the later part of 2007 that Nigeria does not have to live with corruption, their only stain being their role in the unconstitutional impeachments and disqualifications. But Ribadu has done the unthinkable, hurling ex-governors Orji Kalu, Saminu Turaki, Jolly Nyame, Alamieyesegha, Chimaroke Nnamani, Ayo Fayose and James Ibori before the courts to answer allegations of money laundering and corrupt practices while in office. Many others are reportedly in line for similar treatment. Not surprisingly the anti-Ribadu vanguard is up in arms. The Attorney-General, Kaase Aondoakaa has been the arrowhead of the campaign to curb Ribadu’s powers, but the group is getting wider, with IG Mike Okiro now involved and many respected lawyers providing intellectual support. Not surprisingly, the political class is united against Nuhu Ribadu, across party lines. President Yarádua’s capitulation to this admittedly formidable coalition casts a big shadow over his government’s credibility and his commitment to the anti-corruption war!
The Supreme Court has acted as the last bastion of democracy when all else have failed. It is by virtue of its resilience that the unconstitutional impeachments of various ex-governors-Joshua Dariye, Rasheed Ladoja and Peter Obi were reversed. But for those reversals, the manner of impeachments supervised by Obasanjo’s government would have destroyed Nigerian democracy. It is by the grace of the Court that Atiku Abubakar contested the presidential elections and Ifeanyi Araurume the Imo governorship, effectively proving that INEC and any sitting regime cannot determine capriciously who contests elections and who does not. It is the Supreme Court that has restored Peter Obi to office in Anambra, ensuring that victims of election rigging are not denied a remedy. Of course Rotimi Amaechi is Governor in Rivers because the Court stood against arbitrary and illegal actions of political parties. The Supreme Court is our Institution of the Year 2007.
Part 2
So back to those who made the most significant positive contributions to the progress and development of the Nigerian nation in 2007. My ten nominees, we recall are Peter Obi, Archbishop Peter Akinola, General Muhammadu Buhari, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and the Supreme Court. What is the basis of these nominations and who will be our eventual choice of Person of the Year?
Peter Obi was the choice of Anambra people as Governor in 2003. The PDP in Anambra State then under the physical leadership of Chris Uba, and spiritual mentorship of Andy Uba rigged Dr Chris Ngige into office. Of course relations between the Ubas and Ngige broke down shortly thereafter and all the things which were done in secret places were revealed in public, notably Aso Rock! The whole weight of Obasanjo’s government was deployed against Ngige and for a long period, Anambra was basically an anarchic society. Meanwhile Peter Obi put his faith in the electoral tribunals, plodding on in spite of significant odds, until three years later in 2006 he assumed his rightful place as governor by the auspices of the judiciary.
The PDP-controlled legislature then illegally impeached Obi and he returned to the courts which again re-instated him. Obi then returned to court asking their Lordships to declare that his term of office did not expire in May 2007. By then the PDP, Obi’s own party (APGA), his party leadership and his deputy had all conspired by various subterfuges to keep him off the 2007 gubernatorial contest. Incredibly the Supreme Court eventually ruled that Obi’s tenure started counting from 2006 when he was sworn in and will run for four years till 2010. Obi deserves recognition for his faith in democracy and the rule of law rather than might, and his tenacity and commitment.
Archbishop Akinola stood for his principles and faith in the face of powerful homosexual constituencies who will rather re-interpret the Bible to suit their orientation. He faced up to a Western Anglican establishment that elevates a notion of sexual freedom above the explicit stipulations of the faith. He demonstrated great leadership and made black and African Christians proud. I found it somewhat curious (and ironical) that while Akinola was excelling on the global stage, his colleagues in the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) were replacing him as President. General Buhari also showed principle and commitment to his chosen course especially within the murky waters of politics in Nigeria. Of course he has paid a high price in betrayal by his ANPP colleagues for his principles, but his example is worthy of recognition.
Atiku Abubakar did a lot to advance the course of democracy in Nigeria in the last few years, and history may yet be kind to him. He, along with Asiwaju Bola Tinubu created a viable opposition party-the Action Congress (AC) against great odds. He fought doggedly against the whole might of the Obasanjo regime, overcoming obstacle after obstacle and even though he did not win the 2007 elections, it was a major victory for him even participating in that elections. In the process, he helped to advance our constitutional law, and firmly established the principle that no regime can arbitrarily exclude candidates from contesting elections except as prescribed by the Nigerian Constitution, and the Courts.
President Obasanjo should have been the undisputed man of the year, but he blew his chance, and almost subverted his own legacy with his own hands. But in spite of himself, many of Obasanjo’s efforts will endure-a debt-free nation, a new pension system, a revitalized banking sector, a telecommunications boom, the EFCC and ICPC, the Niger-Delta Development Commission (NDDC), an incipient solid minerals sector, many private universities, a resurgence of foreign investment and indigenous entrepreneurship etc. His failures in infrastructure especially transport and power, the duplicity over corruption and the mistakes of his last two years in office (third term, electoral sham and reduced fiscal transparency in particular) threaten his legacy, but may not have completely undermined it.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has always been a particular favourite of this column, but for very good reasons. She presided over a transparent finance ministry, institutionalised prudent fiscal arrangements that ensured Nigeria now has in excess of $50billion in reserves, obtained the Paris Club debt write-off, and when people needed money for third-term, elections and personal pensions, she gladly stepped down rather than beg to remain a Minister like many would have done. Today the world has vindicated her, with her elevation as a Managing Director at the World Bank, proving that you cannot keep a good woman down. Governor Fashola has started very well in Lagos-awarding many road and infrastructure contracts, training teachers, revitalizing sports development, investing in education, health, environment and security, and doubling the state’s budget etc. If as they say, morning shows the day, then Lagosians support for Fashola may not have been misplaced.
The EFCC and Mallam Nuhu Ribadu gave us hope especially in the later part of 2007 that Nigeria does not have to live with corruption, their only stain being their role in the unconstitutional impeachments and disqualifications. But Ribadu has done the unthinkable, hurling ex-governors Orji Kalu, Saminu Turaki, Jolly Nyame, Alamieyesegha, Chimaroke Nnamani, Ayo Fayose and James Ibori before the courts to answer allegations of money laundering and corrupt practices while in office. Many others are reportedly in line for similar treatment. Not surprisingly the anti-Ribadu vanguard is up in arms. The Attorney-General, Kaase Aondoakaa has been the arrowhead of the campaign to curb Ribadu’s powers, but the group is getting wider, with IG Mike Okiro now involved and many respected lawyers providing intellectual support. Not surprisingly, the political class is united against Nuhu Ribadu, across party lines. President Yarádua’s capitulation to this admittedly formidable coalition casts a big shadow over his government’s credibility and his commitment to the anti-corruption war!
The Supreme Court has acted as the last bastion of democracy when all else have failed. It is by virtue of its resilience that the unconstitutional impeachments of various ex-governors-Joshua Dariye, Rasheed Ladoja and Peter Obi were reversed. But for those reversals, the manner of impeachments supervised by Obasanjo’s government would have destroyed Nigerian democracy. It is by the grace of the Court that Atiku Abubakar contested the presidential elections and Ifeanyi Araurume the Imo governorship, effectively proving that INEC and any sitting regime cannot determine capriciously who contests elections and who does not. It is the Supreme Court that has restored Peter Obi to office in Anambra, ensuring that victims of election rigging are not denied a remedy. Of course Rotimi Amaechi is Governor in Rivers because the Court stood against arbitrary and illegal actions of political parties. The Supreme Court is our Institution of the Year 2007.
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Person of the Year (1)
Your columnist has selected a person of the year since 2003. In December 2003, just over six months after the inception of former President Obasanjo’s second term, I proclaimed his reform-minded economic team my ‘team of the year’. The next year, the reform team had consolidated and was firmly on the way to changing Nigeria for good. I had no hesitation in December 2004 in concluding that they were ‘still, team of the year’. The 2003 and 2004 nominations were published on the op-ed pages of the Guardian.
At the end of 2005, my person of the year was extracted from the same team-indeed its then leader, Dr Mrs Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. She was in many ways a model-her intellect, comportment, values and leadership, and her work for Nigeria had borne clear fruit-fiscal transparency, growing reserves, sectoral reform, resumption of foreign investment and debt relief. In 2006, I nominated ‘the Judiciary’ as my Institution of the year’. The nominations for 2005 and 2006 were of course published on these pages.
This tradition will continue this year. Who in the opinion of this columnist made the greatest positive impact on the Nigerian nation in 2007? Which individual, group of individuals, entity or institution helped Nigeria along the way of development and sustainable progress in 2007? Our ten nominees for this year in no particular order are Mr Peter Obi, Archbishop Peter Akinola, General Muhammadu Buhari, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (again), Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and the Supreme Court.
But before examining these nominees, we have decided on an alternative list as well. While we honour those who in our view have made the most significant positive contribution, shouldn’t we recognize for the records those who in our view may have also advertently or otherwise made a not too positive contribution? Should we not also note those who may have been the most important stumbling blocks in our forward march as a nation? I think we should. Accordingly we also suggest ten nominees for our alternative list as follows-armed robbers, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Obasanjo, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Ahmadu Ali, the Nigerian political class, the ex-Governors of the 1999-2007 class, Corruption, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Professor Maurice Iwu.
Armed robbers made life terrible for many Nigeria (not least your columnist) in 2007. They raided homes, snatched cars, attacked people in traffic, robbed banks, petrol stations, supermarkets, drugstores, any where there was a possibility of some cash. Insecurity increased in the land as armed robbers made a big come back into the national psyche. There were several victims-many dispossessed, some injured, many dead from their gunshots, or knife attacks. Often all they sought to collect from their hapless victims was a mobile phone, a laptop computer, handbag or just some petty cash. Many of the victims did not even have a chance to say yes or no before they were shot. In 2008, insecurity and crime must be a major focus of the federal and state governments.
Alhaji Atiku is on my hero’s list, as noted above. But along with his ex-boss, he is also on the not so heroic list! His name came up in all manner of corruption allegations-PTDF, Congressman Jefferson/ I-Gate, Wilbros etc. Whether he likes it or not, he has contributed to the notion of the Nigerian as corrupt and dishonest. Happily however, he is always ready to defend himself against all allegations. President Obasanjo also has both positive (as we shall see later) and negative contributions. The obnoxious third term plot, emerging corruption allegations involving his friends and family members, infractions of due process and transparency and capricious decisions characterized the last two years (particularly) of his tenure. But his most enduring damage was the shameful conduct of the 2007 elections.
The PDP had an opportunity to transform Nigeria since 1999, but instead it has presided over the erosion of democratic practice in Nigeria. Far from the touted vision of its founders as a vehicle to institutionalise democratic norms and values in Nigeria, the PDP ended up institutionalizing election rigging, shameful party primaries, violence, bribery, intimidation and every thing but democracy in Nigeria. There is yet no indication that the party has turned a new leaf going by the local government elections its state governors conducted recently. This is in spite of the odium the April general elections brought upon the whole country. Of course the party seems to have nothing against corruption, with more and more of its ex-governors ending up before the law courts on staggering allegations of gubernatorial stealing.
Alhaji Ahmadu Ali was a particularly obnoxious symbol and spokesman of the degenerate face of the PDP. He propounded a notion of politics as a military garrison, counselling ex-governor Rasheed Ladoja of Oyo State to submit to Lamidi Adedibu, because Adedibu was the reigning garrison commander. Under him, the PDP did not in any way resemble a democratic community. Rather he made the party look like it was a distasteful and unprincipled assemblage of persons united seemingly only by a common aversion for principles and honourable behaviour. But of course we know there is another more acceptable face of that party which history has given a great responsibility as Nigeria’s ruling party.
Of course the PDP can argue (not without some justification) that it is not alone amongst Nigerian political parties and politicians in disdaining values-based politics, internal party democracy and proper electoral conduct. Unfortunately as the ruling party, it is the one Nigerians will hold accountable. Nevertheless the entire Nigerian political class will have to rediscover proper democratic practice or sooner rather than later, the entire political class will lose legitimacy before the people, with terrible consequences. The ex-governors (1999-2007 class) were particularly visionless representatives of the political class. In eight years they stole and squandered exceptional oil revenues and at the end of their tenures, many are ending up in jail. Of course it is not only the politicians and the ex-governors who are guilty of corruption-civil servants, bankers, business persons, contractors, professionals, clerics are all involved. The Nigerian nation will have to deal with that malaise if we will fulfil our destiny as a great nation.
But the 2007 prize for infamy will have to be awarded jointly to INEC and its chairman, Professor Maurice Iwu. The Yorubas say, when you are sent a message fit for slaves, you carry it out like a freeborn. In INEC and Iwu’s case their conduct of the 2007 elections was banal-worse even than slaves would. That election took Nigerian democracy back several decades. It will take a lot to repair the damage.
Your columnist has selected a person of the year since 2003. In December 2003, just over six months after the inception of former President Obasanjo’s second term, I proclaimed his reform-minded economic team my ‘team of the year’. The next year, the reform team had consolidated and was firmly on the way to changing Nigeria for good. I had no hesitation in December 2004 in concluding that they were ‘still, team of the year’. The 2003 and 2004 nominations were published on the op-ed pages of the Guardian.
At the end of 2005, my person of the year was extracted from the same team-indeed its then leader, Dr Mrs Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala. She was in many ways a model-her intellect, comportment, values and leadership, and her work for Nigeria had borne clear fruit-fiscal transparency, growing reserves, sectoral reform, resumption of foreign investment and debt relief. In 2006, I nominated ‘the Judiciary’ as my Institution of the year’. The nominations for 2005 and 2006 were of course published on these pages.
This tradition will continue this year. Who in the opinion of this columnist made the greatest positive impact on the Nigerian nation in 2007? Which individual, group of individuals, entity or institution helped Nigeria along the way of development and sustainable progress in 2007? Our ten nominees for this year in no particular order are Mr Peter Obi, Archbishop Peter Akinola, General Muhammadu Buhari, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (again), Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and the Supreme Court.
But before examining these nominees, we have decided on an alternative list as well. While we honour those who in our view have made the most significant positive contribution, shouldn’t we recognize for the records those who in our view may have also advertently or otherwise made a not too positive contribution? Should we not also note those who may have been the most important stumbling blocks in our forward march as a nation? I think we should. Accordingly we also suggest ten nominees for our alternative list as follows-armed robbers, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, ex-President Obasanjo, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Ahmadu Ali, the Nigerian political class, the ex-Governors of the 1999-2007 class, Corruption, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Professor Maurice Iwu.
Armed robbers made life terrible for many Nigeria (not least your columnist) in 2007. They raided homes, snatched cars, attacked people in traffic, robbed banks, petrol stations, supermarkets, drugstores, any where there was a possibility of some cash. Insecurity increased in the land as armed robbers made a big come back into the national psyche. There were several victims-many dispossessed, some injured, many dead from their gunshots, or knife attacks. Often all they sought to collect from their hapless victims was a mobile phone, a laptop computer, handbag or just some petty cash. Many of the victims did not even have a chance to say yes or no before they were shot. In 2008, insecurity and crime must be a major focus of the federal and state governments.
Alhaji Atiku is on my hero’s list, as noted above. But along with his ex-boss, he is also on the not so heroic list! His name came up in all manner of corruption allegations-PTDF, Congressman Jefferson/ I-Gate, Wilbros etc. Whether he likes it or not, he has contributed to the notion of the Nigerian as corrupt and dishonest. Happily however, he is always ready to defend himself against all allegations. President Obasanjo also has both positive (as we shall see later) and negative contributions. The obnoxious third term plot, emerging corruption allegations involving his friends and family members, infractions of due process and transparency and capricious decisions characterized the last two years (particularly) of his tenure. But his most enduring damage was the shameful conduct of the 2007 elections.
The PDP had an opportunity to transform Nigeria since 1999, but instead it has presided over the erosion of democratic practice in Nigeria. Far from the touted vision of its founders as a vehicle to institutionalise democratic norms and values in Nigeria, the PDP ended up institutionalizing election rigging, shameful party primaries, violence, bribery, intimidation and every thing but democracy in Nigeria. There is yet no indication that the party has turned a new leaf going by the local government elections its state governors conducted recently. This is in spite of the odium the April general elections brought upon the whole country. Of course the party seems to have nothing against corruption, with more and more of its ex-governors ending up before the law courts on staggering allegations of gubernatorial stealing.
Alhaji Ahmadu Ali was a particularly obnoxious symbol and spokesman of the degenerate face of the PDP. He propounded a notion of politics as a military garrison, counselling ex-governor Rasheed Ladoja of Oyo State to submit to Lamidi Adedibu, because Adedibu was the reigning garrison commander. Under him, the PDP did not in any way resemble a democratic community. Rather he made the party look like it was a distasteful and unprincipled assemblage of persons united seemingly only by a common aversion for principles and honourable behaviour. But of course we know there is another more acceptable face of that party which history has given a great responsibility as Nigeria’s ruling party.
Of course the PDP can argue (not without some justification) that it is not alone amongst Nigerian political parties and politicians in disdaining values-based politics, internal party democracy and proper electoral conduct. Unfortunately as the ruling party, it is the one Nigerians will hold accountable. Nevertheless the entire Nigerian political class will have to rediscover proper democratic practice or sooner rather than later, the entire political class will lose legitimacy before the people, with terrible consequences. The ex-governors (1999-2007 class) were particularly visionless representatives of the political class. In eight years they stole and squandered exceptional oil revenues and at the end of their tenures, many are ending up in jail. Of course it is not only the politicians and the ex-governors who are guilty of corruption-civil servants, bankers, business persons, contractors, professionals, clerics are all involved. The Nigerian nation will have to deal with that malaise if we will fulfil our destiny as a great nation.
But the 2007 prize for infamy will have to be awarded jointly to INEC and its chairman, Professor Maurice Iwu. The Yorubas say, when you are sent a message fit for slaves, you carry it out like a freeborn. In INEC and Iwu’s case their conduct of the 2007 elections was banal-worse even than slaves would. That election took Nigerian democracy back several decades. It will take a lot to repair the damage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)