The Imperative of State Police

Evidence of the near complete breakdown of law and order accumulates all over Nigeria-over forty students are killed, mostly by slitting their throats, probably by fundamentalist religious groups in Mubi, Adamawa State; four undergraduates are lynched by a community mob in Aluu, near Port Harcourt; in Kaduna more than twenty citizens are murdered early in the morning allegedly by armed bandits for having the effrontery to challenge their activities; in Jos killings of indigenous villagers by so-called Fulani herdsmen resumed with twenty killed last week-all these in the last two weeks only! The notion that a single national police force will successfully police all 910,770 square kilometres of this nation, more than four times the size of the United Kingdom, covering the activities of our 165 million people, double the population of Germany and Egypt is doomed to failure! It is the same way the concept of PHCN or NITEL failed simply because it is an inefficient way of organising delivery of service! Beyond its inevitable ineffectiveness, a federation in which you have state and federal legislatures, laws, courts and governments which has only a federal police is a major constitutional aberration! Even unitary Britain does not have a single unitary policing system!!! It devolves policing to the community level. Why do we think we can defy common sense and produce positive outcomes? The essence of the state’s law making power is the ability to enforce compliance with the law. A government which has constitutional power to make laws, but lacks a police force to enforce those laws is a constitutional toothless bulldog! The governors in the twelve Northern “Sharia” states understood this logic, which is why when they passed Sharia laws early in this republic, they created Sharia State Police (called Hisbah) to enforce it! It is one of the supreme ironies of Nigerian political sophistry that having created religious state police, the same Northern governors are the main opponents of other states establishing their own state policing systems!!! Globally, federal states have federal police (such as the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)) as well as state, town, city, university and even borough police forces. As I mentioned earlier, even an otherwise unitary state like the United Kingdom recognised the need for an exception in terms of the devolved structure of policing simply because the alternative of a centralised UK police would neither be effective or efficient. Policing is a community-based activity-the police officers should have a thorough knowledge of the communities they police, its customs, neighbourhoods, roads and alleys etc. sending a stranger to police a community is simply a colonial approach to policing (which may have been tolerable from the colonialist’s point of view since he was more interested in intimidating the natives and suppressing dissent) which could never succeed in a modern democratic system. One of the silliest arguments being proffered against state police is that the state governors will abuse it! Is the federal government not abusing federal police? Has it not been used to rig elections? Do our federal police not engage in routine extra-judicial killings? Does it not often act as a service provider offering escort and protection services to anyone rich enough to afford it? As far as I can see, the propensity for a state police composed mostly of indigenes and long term residents of an area to abuse its own citizens is far less than that of a colonial, imported police alien to the culture and beliefs of its host community! And that is our daily, practical experience!!! In any event, I believe that state governors already have considerable scope to abuse their powers against opponents or non-indigenes if they were so inclined. They have powers over land, state judiciary, civil service, building and planning approvals, state universities, radio and TV stations, taxation etc. To their credit, I have not seen any significant incidences of systematic abuse of these powers by most state governors. More importantly we have the courts to check abuses of citizen’s rights by any government, state or federal. Fortunately the court charged with enforcement of fundamental human rights under our constitution is the federal high court!!! The other argument offered often is that states cannot afford to run a police force of their own! This of course flies in the face of the reality that across the country, any state that seeks minimal improvements in policing effectiveness has by-and-large taken over funding of their state police commands from the federal government! We know of the Lagos State Security Trust Fund (Ogun, Oyo and other South-West states have followed suit) and the significant spending by Rivers and other Niger-Delta states on the federal police. But then the substantive issue of devolving more powers and revenue to the states and local governments to better empower these tiers which are most relevant to our people’s lives remain a necessity. I also believe using the example of Lagos State that any serious state will include non-indigene, resident groups in the manning of any state police, simply from the standpoint of effectiveness. Lagos state has non-indigene teachers, civil servants, judges, commissioners and other political appointees. Why won’t they employ non-indigenes in their state police? There is a peculiarly Nigerian absurdity in which current and retired police officers are shouting loudest against state police. Given the non-effectiveness of the model they have presided over, why should we listen to them?

Diversity and Shared Vision

I am writing this from Prague, Czech Republic, the nation rescued from totalitarian rule by the poet Vaclav Havel and his colleagues in the “Velvet Revolution” of 1989. It is a landlocked country in Central Europe bordered by Poland, Germany, Austria, and its former “other half” in the old Czechoslovakia, Slovakia. This is a historic town and place of culture, though I haven’t had time to do my tourism. I will, though, once I’m done with my primary purpose of coming here. I intend to see the Old Town, River Vlatara, Jewish Ghetto, Lesser Quarter, the Iconic Prague Castle, Charles Bridge, and ride on the classic tram. I intend to also see the legacies of communism and the Cold War – the former communist police headquarters, a real nuclear bunker, and the biggest statue of Lenin. After the Velvet Revolution, the old Czechoslovakia was peacefully dissolved on January 1, 1993 into independent Czech and Slovak Republics. The Czech have benefitted from democracy, enterprise and independence – Czech is the first former COMECON (the pro-Soviet Council for Economic Assistance grouping of Socialist and Eastern bloc countries) nation to become a developed country with the highest human development in Central and Eastern Europe and ranked as the third most peaceful country in Europe. But back to my reason for being in Prague! I am attending the 32nd Annual Conference of the Strategic Management Society (SMS). I arrived in Prague Saturday morning and the conference commenced with a welcome cocktail that evening. Sessions commenced 8am on Sunday (!) and I’m taking time out midway into Monday to write this, but what has most caught my attention was not any of the academic presentations but the speech given this afternoon by Carlos Ghosn, the winner of the SMS Lifetime Achievement Award at this year’s conference. Ghosn is the chairman and chief executive of Nissan Motor Co. Ltd, chairman and chief executive officer of Renault, and head of the Renault-Nissan Alliance, an unprecedented case of a single individual heading two separate companies with combined annual global sales of 7.2 million vehicles. I was fascinated not just by Carlos Ghosn’s business profile and achievements, but by his background – Ghosn by his own words was an embodiment of global diversity. He was born in Brazil of Lebanese origin; studied in France and is essentially a French citizen; and he again unusually became CEO of a Japanese company, Nissan! I will leave out the very important business and strategy issues Ghosn raised in his speech, but let me talk about the part of his speech which relates to this article. In commencing his speech, Ghosn reminded us of his multi-national background, his birth in Brazil and return to Lebanon, and contrasted Brazil in which he learnt about harmony in diversity and Lebanon where he noticed that diversity involved significant risk and conflict. In spite of this potential for risk and conflict, Ghosn celebrated diversity (race, ethnic, gender, age) and endorsed it particularly in the context of the firm, but also in the national and global contexts. At the end of his really powerful and thought-provoking speech, I asked Carlos Ghosn a question that perhaps would naturally occur to a Nigerian worried about the problems of ethnicity, religion and perpetual conflict in Nigeria, and remembering that I was visiting a country that had found peace and development only after shrinking into its ethnic and cultural authenticity – “What factors, in your view, accounted for the harmonious diversity in Brazil contrasted with Lebanon in which diversity was a source of war and crisis? And what lessons can we learn from this contrast in the corporate and national contexts?” The award winner’s response drew on his experience in the Nissan-Renault Alliance, an alliance, we must remember, of culturally, ethnically and nationally divergent Japanese and French/European businesses. He noted that at the inception of the relationship when a vision and project was yet to be defined, the collaboration looked sub-optimal as both partners focused on each others’ negatives. The French managers complained about Japanese attitudes and vice versa. However, once the leadership created a compelling vision and inaugurated a tough project, both sides focused on the goal, and indeed leveraged each other’s strengths and unique perspectives. The Japanese took planning, strategy, systematic thinking from the Europeans; the French took execution and commitment from the Japanese; and both sides benefitted from each other, creating synergistic outcomes. He warned – “Don’t ever promote diversity where there is no vision and project!” That is the problem with Nigeria. We have assembled very diverse ethnicities and religions into a country but we have not defined a shared vision of what the essence is, where we are going and how we would live together. There is no shared vision; and there is no shared project. The outcome is a dysfunctional state in which each individual takes care of himself and his family; each ethnic group distrusts the other; communities war against their neighbours; and people kill others in the name of religion. If we refuse to agree to a common purpose and project, this situation will get worse, not better!

Madam Aviation and the President's Friends

Last week Thursday Arik Air, Nigeria’s de facto “national carrier”, was in limbo, with all its domestic flights grounded. I was a victim, stuck in Port Harcourt “International” Airport for many hours, until good fortune intervened in the form of an Aero Contractors plane diverted from Owerri late in the day (night actually), which evacuated many of us stranded Lagos-bound passengers. Arik’s domestic operations had been disrupted by the aviation unions, but there was no doubt in anyone’s mind who had ministered the instigation! At the time of Arik’s grounding, the airline was responsible for perhaps seventy percent or more of domestic flights with the exit of DANA Airlines, Air Nigeria, First Nation Airways and Chanchangi Airlines. The only alternatives to Arik – Aero and IRS – accounted for less than thirty percent of domestic passenger traffic. And once Arik was grounded, aviation services effectively came to a halt within Nigeria! Only an irresponsible manager could have conspired to foist such a situation on Nigerians. The cost in economic and social terms to the Nigerian nation was incalculable! The political goodwill lost by President Jonathan was not quantifiable! As I sat along with hundreds other frustrated Nigerians AND EXPATRIATES in shabby and uncomfortable airport terminals, I wondered how Nigeria got this way. The apparent offence of Arik was that it owed aviation agencies some amount which was itself a subject of disagreement between the airline and the aviation authorities. How come the sector unions woke up one day and proceeded to disrupt airline operations? Is that one of the functions of trade unions? Was there any connection between the action taken against Arik and the request by a National Assembly committee that Arik be designated the nation’s official national carrier? I recall that the current minister of aviation, Stella Oduah (Ogiemwonyi), has a pet project of creating a national carrier for the country? I also recall Air Nigeria’s proprietor, Jimoh Ibrahim, declaring in the wake of the airline’s troubles that he would not be blackmailed into being part of any national carrier project? Is there any truth to these blackmail allegations? We have since heard rumours of demands by someone for five percent of Arik’s shareholding. Is there any truth in these allegations? Who made such demands? We have also heard rumours that the purported demands were expressed to have been on behalf of a higher authority? Is this true? These are allegations that require immediate investigation by law enforcement agencies – the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) and the police – so that the confidence of Nigerians and the international community in our government and aviation sector will not be irreparably damaged! Now we have numerous controversies in the sector, including the forceful ejection of MAEVIS Limited, FAAN’s erstwhile revenue concessionaire, from the Murtala Mohammed International Airport, Lagos; the ministry’s troubles with Bi-Courtney, the concessionaire who built the MM2 domestic terminal; the banning and unbanning of DANA Airlines in the aftermath its air crash; the grounding and exit from the industry of Air Nigeria; and now the current problems of Arik Air. Are the officers in charge promoting or destroying the fortunes of the sector? Given reports that the minister is very close to President Jonathan, I have a suspicion that the presidency may sooner than later suffer grave embarrassment on account of the activities of this ministry! “Madam Aviation” is not the only friend of the president that may cause him serious headache. The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has recently released a list of AMCON debtors whom it has restrained Deposit Money Banks from extending further credit to. At the very top of the list is a notable friend of Mr President and member of the regime’s National Economic Management Team (NEMT), Femi Otedola. According to the CBN, Otedola’s company owes AMCON N192.4bn. Other major debtors who may be considered proximate to the presidency include Patrick Ifeanyi Uba’s Capital Oil and Gas (N48bn); Arumemi-Ikhide’s (also owner of Arik!) Rockson Engineering which owes N60.4bn; recently resigned power minister, Barth Nnaji, whose Geometric Engineering owes N19.7bn; Wale Babalakin whose three companies – Bi-Courtney Limited, Roygate Properties, and Resort International are indebted to the combined total of N54.2bn; former minister of interior, Emmanuel Iheanacho, whose Integrated Oil and Gas owes N6.7bn; and Gitto Construzioni whose debt stands at N11.83bn. I recall warning on these pages about the dangers of crony capitalism, a path we now seem to be treading. This style will only get our president into trouble, in office or afterwards! Talking about the NEMT and the president’s friends, I was amused to notice the president deploying three “billionaire” members of the team (Atedo Peterside; Femi Otedola; and Aig-Imoukhuede) to persuade Nigerians about the merits of Sanusi Lamido’s N5,000 note. Did the presidency think these very rich men could persuade poor and angry Nigerians to support the policy? Anyway, while Otedola and Imoukhuede were a bit circumspect, Peterside blasted: “If I was the one, I would have printed N10,000!” or words to same effect. How does he feel now that the policy has been “suspended”? Someone should please beg our respected Atedo Peterside to stay out of public advocacy – it is evidently not his calling!

Obama's Failed Appeasement Strategy

President Obama’s foreign policy has centred on improving relations with Arab and Muslim nations. He appears to proceed from an assumed guilt complex and seems apologetic for America’s (or Republican?) exercise of global power. He went to Cairo to “speak” with the Arab/Islamic world; he bowed waist-level before the Saudi King, a curious gesture that still requires interpretation given his off-handed, almost superior posture with Western dignitaries (e.g. The Queen of England); he tolerated the notion of a Mosque at the World Trade Centre bombing site against majority US opinion; and has consistently shown irritation with Israel. Indeed Obama’s body language suggests willingness to sacrifice the US-Israeli relationship for a US-Arab/Islamic one! As Iran marches determinedly towards nuclear weapons, it seems in spite of his words and reluctant sanctions, that Obama is willing to countenance Iranian nuclear arms. While the Israelis, for good reason given Ahmedinejad’s genocidal rhetoric, are paranoid about the Iranian nuclear threat, Obama seems unperturbed and if one focuses on actions rather than words, one would think that Obama really does not mind Iran getting the bomb! As the Arab “Spring” developed, Obama quickly sacrificed US allies in Egypt (Hosni Mubarak) and elsewhere. While this columnist sympathised with America’s decision to side with Tunisians, Egyptians and Libyans against their erstwhile dictators, I wondered at the complete loss of US initiative as events unfolded! America was being led down a path it did not define; could not influence or control; and yet its power and resources were deployed in support of the protesters, activists and rebels, including a diverse crowd of Islamists, former terrorists, far right Salafists, Al Qaeda extremists, and other dangerous groups with barely-disguised hatred of America. As the Arab uprisings progressed, the US did not insist on projecting its values-would the emerging states make an irrevocable commitment to democracy? (In Egypt some former protesters later carried banners saying, “We don’t want democracy, only Islam!!!”); would they protect religious minorities? (Such as Egypt’s Coptic Christians who have subsequently been victims of religiously-inspired violence); would they protect women? would they adopt secular constitutions? In short US policy makers, often led by their noses by people like Fareed Zakaria and Christiane Amanpour, did not define their objectives based on US values and interests! It is a sign of the shocking naiveté of US policy that the new Muslim Brotherhood leader in Egypt, has since visited Saudi Arabia, Iran and China! Meanwhile Hillary Clinton was heckled and booed as she visited Cairo, presumably to remind Morsi of America’s role in his emergence! Remember also that in spite of America’s help, the transition government arrested and prosecuted US NGOs for spying against Egypt! It is the same helplessness and confusion that defines US policy in Pakistan! This is the nation that harboured Osama Bin Ladin and much of the leadership of the Taliban, Al Qaeda and the Haqqani Network, all undisguised American enemies. Like Egypt which collects well over a billion dollars in US military and non-military aid annually, Pakistan is a major recipient of US aid, yet at best ambivalent about its US relationship. Reports suggest that Osama Bin Ladin regularly evaded the US trail whenever it shared intelligence with the Pakistanis. Eventually the US learnt to keep its plans to itself and killed him at a location proximate to a major Pakistani military facility! The Pakistanis have subsequently put the medical doctor who assisted the US CIA on trial for treason! US appeasement and political correctness is also evident in Nigeria! Recall that Ambassador Johnnie Carson, Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton and other members of the sentimental, liberal crowd in the State Department have urged a strategy of appeasement on the Nigerian government in response to “Boko Haram”. They have agonised and dithered over designating our local terrorists as a “foreign terrorist organisation” despite its bombing the UN building in Abuja, killing thousands of civilians, bombing countless Churches across Northern Nigeria and attacking newspaper houses. The State Department’s overriding consideration has been that designating “Boko Haram” as a terrorist organisation would portray the US as against Nigeria’s Northern Muslims! The US Congress has had to take the initiative in that regard. This past week, Obama and Clinton’s appeasement strategy has fully come home to roost!!! There are fierce anti-American demonstrations in twenty states across the Middle-East and North Africa; the US Ambassador to Libya who helped the rebels take power (and performed sentimental gestures such as eating in his Arab-Muslim driver’s home with his wife to show America’s love for the romanticised “new Libya”) and three of his officers have been killed; the Egyptians nearly allowed a similar occurrence as US Cairo embassy was attacked; Sudan and Yemen would not even allow US marines in to protect US lives and assets; President Morsi would not issue an unequivocal condemnation of the Cairo attack! While Egyptian officials expressed sympathy in English tweets, their Arabic version justified the US embassy attacks! Obama now reminds of Jimmy Carter during the Iranian hostage crisis in 1980! Anyone who thinks this was a spontaneous reaction to a stupid film is irredeemably naïve!!! In his eagerness to build friendly relations with Arab and Middle-East nations, Obama ended up projecting weakness and simple-mindedness. Hopefully he (and Clinton) will snap out of romantic delusions and begin to define US foreign policy based on substance, geo-politics, interests, shared values and pursuit of global peace.

The Lagos Road Traffic Law

I alluded to the new Lagos State Road Traffic Law in my article “A law and order state” a few weeks back. In a recent interaction with the Lagos State attorney-general, Ade Ipaye, he asserted that “the law fundamentally goes beyond road traffic to issues of how we use our roads and the unacceptable road culture in Lagos; impact of road traffic behaviour on economic productivity; impact of road traffic culture on social relations and society as a whole” or words to the same effect. I agree with the honourable attorney-general and more! My personal view has always been that the way we manage traffic in Lagos affects our livelihoods, mobility, quality of life, economic productivity, mental and physical health, safety, environment and life expectancy, tourism prospects and security. Indeed, it fundamentally defines us as a people – the type of culture and civilisation we are trying to bequeath to our children, and whether we seek to build a society based on law and order. As Ade Ipaye argued, let’s examine where we are coming from and what unfortunately we have come to accept – a society in which the average citizen wakes up at 4am every working day and goes to bed around 11 o’clock every night essentially due to traffic constraints! That Citizen Ade, Olu or Ola leaves his or her home by 4.30-5am to escape excruciating traffic, yet spends the next two hours in traffic, arriving the office drained and exhausted. Those who leave their homes later than 6am will usually spend hours sitting in slow moving (or no moving) traffic and essentially go to the office to rest from their daily ordeal while dreading their inevitable return journey home. The impact on economic productivity is severe, and there is no doubt that traffic and road usage are significant contributing factors to low national productivity. There are many obstacles on the way – commercial motorcycles in their thousands (some statistics say millions, in Lagos State alone!) ridden by untrained, illiterate, often under-age riders weave in and out of traffic causing accidents and daily deaths and injury; bus drivers high on “paraga”, “ogogoro”, and, I heard a new one recently, “seven-seven”, drive recklessly and irresponsibly like mad men causing obstructions and scratching cars as they go; some guy in a hurry suddenly opts to drive against traffic, and as he gets away with it, hundreds other motorists follow his example leading to predictable gridlock, and everyone coming thereafter is condemned to spend one hour at the spot before the confusion tapers off! Meanwhile, as they wait, armed robbers on “okada” take advantage, robbing people as they are stuck immobile in traffic. During the day these robbers operate; at night, they have a field day! In a modern society, we accept all these and worse – we accept that motor parks should be places where alcohol and drugs are sold; indeed, we laugh and joke at the notion that virtually all bus drivers and their conductors are high on intoxicating substances, and yet we proceed to enter those same buses; we see people die and maimed every day from “okada” accidents, yet we act like it’s an unavoidable state of affairs; we see these “okadas”, despite the high accident rate, carry pregnant women and children or people carrying heavy luggage, yet we think society can or should be organised in this manner; street traders add hours to our travel time and we don’t complain – indeed, some of us buy meat, pepper, electronics, textiles and virtually all our household provisions in traffic! We struggle for right of way with “omolanke” and refuse cart pushers who inevitably scratch our cars and buses, but I guess we say “that’s life”! Some big man gets fed up with all the bedlam and seeks to insulate himself by equipping his car with a siren and patrol vehicle, with which he drives all of us off the road, and we say “that’s life”! Trailers park on one lane of a two-lane road, and that’s life? Windscreen wipers, often under-age children who should be in school, intimidate and blackmail us on the road, and that’s life! We hear that most robberies are now conducted on “okada”; we hear that the overwhelming proportion of injuries and fatalities reported at outpatient wards of general hospitals are caused by “okadas” and “that’s life”? What type of people are we? What type of society and culture are we trying to create? What civilisation is this that we are willing to live in? And then people focus on the punishments! I have a friend who has lived in Canada until recently and yet complains about the punishment for one-way driving. Have you ever seen someone drive against traffic in Canada, United Kingdom, USA, Ghana, or South Africa? If someone does, he would clearly be presumed to be insane. What is inevitable about such behaviour that all we complain about is the punishment? Why should we condone drunk and or reckless driving in spite of the high price that society pays in economic and social costs? Why should we accept road behaviour that would be inconceivable in other parts of the world? Why should we keep talking about the good things in other societies when we are unwilling to pay the price they paid, and still pay?

As The Spirit Leads!

The phrase and context of this column’s title belongs to Remi Babalola, former Minister of State for Finance who was reported to have wondered in bewilderment, whether there was a holistic, coherent and well thought-out strategy behind Lamido Sanusi’s unfolding banking sector reforms or whether the “reforms” were proceeding “as the Spirit leads”!!! Several incidents appear to offer corroboration for the perception that the latter possibility is supportable-CBN introducing clearly unconstitutional Islamic banking guidelines in January, and then replacing with less blatantly unconstitutional ones in June 2011; and ordering banks to remove all Automated Teller Machines (ATMs) installed in public places; then months later introducing a “cashless” policy under which it encouraged banks to rapidly restore them, being prominent examples! And true, no one has seen any document articulating an integrated philosophy, plan and programme for the CBN’s overall financial sector agenda. The frequency of new policy announcements and amendments is so perplexing that one worries whether banks themselves are successfully keeping track!!! The recent CBN announcement that it would introduce a N5,000 note in 2013 unfortunately reinforces the impression that it acts tactically rather than based on a comprehensive strategy! I do not support the proposal which also includes converting currency N20 and below into coins; and re-designing all others for several reasons-it is unnecessary and diversionary, and does not amount to a substantial policy action; it will cost us significant resources (which in the light of its doubtful value or purpose means such expenditure is wasteful and profligate); it contradicts the “cashless” direction the CBN has embarked on at great cost to the industry and customers; it suggests an arbitrary and weak policy analysis process at the CBN; and it is unclear what motives, logic and economic imperatives have necessitated the policy. The best one can say on the matter is that it is inconsequential and of no effect on the economy or financial sector, and that is only if one ignores the costs and disruptions that would result there from. Please note that I do not subscribe to the popular, but misplaced argument that the policy would cause inflation! To the best of my knowledge, there is no scientific and/or economic evidence that mere introduction of higher currency denominations while retaining lower ones, without more will cause inflation. Inflation is a monetary (and not currency) phenomenon, usually caused by money supply dynamics and would not result simply because of introduction of a higher value currency note. Inflation may be caused by excess demand, high costs, or excessive increase in money supply. If the CBN combined this policy with too much money in circulation; Naira depreciation; or very low interest rates for instance, we may observe higher inflation, but that may be due more to those other variables, than the new note. That said, the basic underpinning of the “cashless” policy was to make financial and payments systems more efficient and less costly, the argument being that cash handling costs are excessive in our cash heavy economy and that migrating to cashless platforms would help reduce transaction costs and introduce better payments efficiency. Other benefits of the cashless system (which I personally supported in various media) included reducing corruption and money laundering, both of which are better facilitated through cash transactions! Significantly, the cashless policy is more relevant and impactful precisely in relation to higher value payments! To introduce N5,000 note just months into the cashless regime undercuts and contradicts the CBN’s logic! Admittedly processing N5,000 is cheaper for banks relative to lower denominations, but it still costs MUCH more than an electronic transfer, card or Point of Sale (PoS) payment! And will be big boon to corrupt officials and money launderers!!! In any event, the CBN had two policy alternatives in seeking to deal with cash processing costs-“cashless” banking or higher denominations! It couldn’t logically choose both!!! Beyond these, it is unclear what economic benefits are sought by the policy! Yes higher currency denominations don’t cause inflation; but they don’t reduce or mitigate inflation either! They do not retard economic growth; but they don’t spur it either!! They don’t necessarily increase money in circulation; but they don’t necessarily constrain it either!!! Instead they facilitate corruption and money laundering!!!!!!! The highest currency denomination in the British currency system is the fifty pound note! In the US, even though they have $1,000 notes, no one (except the mafia and other criminals!) sees it!!! The highest denomination regularly encountered in America is the $100 note!!! And this change costs money! Lots of money!!! Considering immediate past CBN Governor, Soludo implemented a comprehensive currency change which included converting some notes to polymer, introducing a N1,000 note etc between 2005 and 2007, it is difficult to justify a change at this time especially as the last one actually spurred controversy over its procurement and cost!!! The best that can be said for this change is that it is unnecessary and cosmetic. It adds no value and is not supported by any apparent economic rationale. The substantive economic policy imperatives facing Nigeria are clear-sustaining and increasing economic growth; diversifying the economy; improving infrastructure; improving fiscal and macroeconomic management; reducing inflation and interest rates; combating corruption; redressing poverty, unemployment and social exclusion; improving Human Development Indices; and improving investment climate and business competitiveness. Tinkering with currency does not help in advancing any of these and may actually hurt some!

The Ghanaian Transition

President John Atta-Mills of Ghana died on July 24, 2012 and was succeeded by his Vice-President John Dramani Mahama on the same day. Atta-Mills, who was aged 68, served as President of Ghana from 2009 when he took over from ex-President John Kufuor till his death. He had previously been Vice-President under Jerry Rawlings from 1997-2001 and unsuccessfully contested the presidency in 2000 and 2004 as candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC). He was the first Ghanaian president to die in office. Born on July 21, 1944, Atta-Mills was Fante from Ekumfi Otuan and attended Achimota School and University of Ghana, Legon where he obtained his law degree in 1967. He studied at London School of Economics and the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London obtaining a PhD in law based on a doctoral thesis in taxation and economic development. He lectured at his alma mater in Legon for twenty-five years and served as Visiting Professor at Temple Law School, Philadelphia, USA. He was in charge of Ghana’s Internal Revenue Service from 1986 to 1996 and remarkably won the presidency in 2009 with only 50.23% of the vote against the equally formidable candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), Nana Akufo-Addo. He was married with a son. (Source: Wikipedia) Upon Mills death, his erstwhile Vice-President, John Dramani Mahama was promptly sworn-in as mandated by the Constitution of Ghana. Born in November 29, 1958, Mahama is described by Wikipedia as a communications expert, historian and writer. He was a Member of Parliament from 1997 to 2009 and Minister for Communications from 1998 to 2001. Born in Damongo in Damongo-Daboya Constituency of Ghana, Mahama’s father was also a Member of Parliament. Like Atta-Mills, he attended Achimota and Legon, and obtained a degree in History and post-graduate qualification in communications. He also studied social sciences in the old Soviet Union and worked in Ghana’s diplomatic service and the development sector. He is now the presumptive nominee of the NDC in the next presidential elections and is expected to be confirmed as candidate in a party congress scheduled for September 1, 2012. Nigeria and Ghana share many historical similarities-British colonialism and its legacies of the English language, legal system and civil service amongst others; military interventions early in the country’s post-independence history; return to civil rule after multiple military rulers and coups; and transition from parliamentary to presidential system of governance. Remarkably both countries now share the experience of losing sitting, civilian leaders post-return to democracy-Yar’adua in Nigeria in 2010 and Atta-Mills in Ghana in 2012! But that is where the similarity ends! We can draw several distinctions between the processes of democratic deepening and national cohesion in the two countries as evidenced by the reaction to the demise of these two leaders. In Nigeria, as we all recall, Yar’adua’s illness and subsequent death almost led to the truncation of democracy in Nigeria. There was a long period of denial of his illness; there were several attempts by some to rule by proxy in his stead; there were numerous subterfuges around his illness, medical treatment in Saudi Arabia, re-entry into Nigeria and his eventual death. On the night he was brought back to the country, it was done in the dead of night and all lights were reportedly switched off at the airports during the “operation” conducted by senior military officers without the knowledge of the then Vice-President! Many attempts were made to intimidate then Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan from accepting the position of President and we needed an extraordinary action by the National Assembly to invest Jonathan as Acting President while Yar’adua lay gravely ill in Arabia!!! In the end, it is clear that only the fact that an attempt to prevent Jonathan from taking power as mandated by the Constitution would have resulted in serious danger to our national unity and cohesion prevented such desperation from some cliques! Indeed many would argue that we are still dealing with the consequences of Jonathan then seeking and accepting the nomination of the ruling PDP and winning the subsequent elections in 2011!!! The response in Ghana has been starkly different! Immediately Atta-Mills died, there was no question about what should and would follow-immediate swearing-in of his deputy Mahama in line with the Constitution. No one from Fante quarrelled that there was a presumption that the office was “zoned” to them for eight years! No one threatened fire and brimstone if Mahama goes ahead to contest the forthcoming election. There were no powerful politicians from Atta-Mills region promising to make the country ungovernable if another Fante man was not found to replace him! No one has had the effrontery to demand that the now sitting president, John Mahama must NOT contest the next polls; Atta-Mills wife and entourage did not attempt to hide his death from Ghanaians in a vain hope of grabbing power and national resources for themselves! Insecurity and indeed terrorism has not erupted in Mills’ Fante region to bring Mahama’s government to its knees for having the audacity to declare his intention of contesting!!! The evidence is clear that Ghana’s process of democratic deepening and nation-building is proceeding in a more qualitative manner than in her West African neighbour. Here rather than deepening democracy, we are endangering it and drawing our people further apart than we’ve ever been!!!