To say that the next set of Nigerian legislators may also fail implies that their predecessors had earlier failed. But considering that since 1999 when democracy was restored in the country, our lawmakers have become Nigeria’s wealthiest class, is it not contradictory to describe them as failures? But when the steady decline of Nigeria is considered against the backdrop of the failure to use lawmaking as a tool for the attainment of good governance, it becomes obvious that our successive lawmakers have consistently failed the people whose interest they were expected to represent.

On June 04, 2015, the 7th National Assembly(NASS) while marking the end of its tenure, passed 46 Bills in 10minutes. The Bills were first passed by the House of Representatives before they were forwarded to the Senate which simply skipped all the necessary law-making procedures and passed them, thereby technically entering the Guinness Book of records.  

As for relationship with the executive arm of government, successive Assemblies adopted different approaches. The 8th NASS especially the Senate, preferred the adversarial approach with a body language which suggested that the main goal was to serve as an effective check on the excesses of the executive.  To some analysts, the combative approach did not yield ample fruits. It was perhaps for this reason that the ruling APC ensured that leaders of the Senate who were their members were well disposed to collaborating with the executive.

Rather than seeing signs of a better nation as a result of the supposed collaboration, the most discernible observation was that the NASS was essentially a timid entity whose members were merely hiding under collaborative federalism to achieve self-enrichment. At the end of the day, both the combative and so-called cooperative legislators were all accused of budget padding which happens to be the greatest source of wealth for many legislators

In truth, the priority of the average legislator has always hovered around constituency projects, unapproved allowances and exploitative oversight functions. Other things such as improved living standards of the people never matter. The legislator sees himself or herself as a special breed different from other citizens hence while better-trained professionals earn less than the wardrobe allowance of legislators, the type of law that our legislators relish is that which further tightens the nook around the necks of ordinary citizens while their own influence is not perturbed.

There is no better way of understanding the proposed law that seeks to detain medical doctors in poorly remunerated public services. The outgoing NASS argues that it wants to curb brain drain by legally disallowing doctors from leaving the country to search for better employment opportunities for at least the first 5 years after graduation. However simple logic would show that if doctors are allowed to earn salaries close to the take-home pay of legislators, the much-deprecated brain drain would virtually disappear.

Whereas our politicians would love that we all appreciate their willingness to participate in nation building, their huge remuneration clearly conveys the impression that the real interest is to attract material gains to themselves. The old saying ‘ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country’ does not seem to impress on our politicians that to serve society carries along with it some sacrifices.

Why can’t our legislators serve society ‘pro bono’ or earn same salaries as another set of nation builders – the National Youth Service Corps NYSC. In fact, although NYSC members are ‘bonafide’ graduates, many politicians seeking to serve society in luxury have doubtful academic attainments. It is indeed frustrating that political office-holders in Nigeria have become a de-schooling phenomenon; many of them are not only uneducated but parade fake documents making it seem that it is better not to go to school.

Interestingly, our legislators are not about to showcase any evidence that their arm of government is capable of living an independent existence. With less than a month to the inauguration of the 10th NASS, its proposed members rather than arranging to pick their own leaders are waiting for the return of the president-elect who is not one of their members to make the choice for them? 

Is this not an indication that the incoming NASS is not likely to be better than its rubber stamp predecessor? If the executive can choose its own team without waiting to be dictated to, why can’t legislators quietly pick men and women of integrity to lead them?Why does the NASS need to turn their own internal matter into a public event?

For the purposes of selecting leaders among themselves, some legislators have since the election spent huge funds on differentorgans of mass communication to reach out to far and widejust to campaign for offices within the NASS instead of just interacting among themselves. The way the campaigns have been handled gives an erroneous impression that the electorate has a mandatory role to play in the determination of who can be senate president or speaker of the House of Representatives or other leadership positions.

Why can’t legislators make their choices without over-heating the entire nation? Why is it necessary for anyone to spend huge sums to convince colleagues to allow him or herto hold an office? How do those spending such money intend to recover them if selected for the job other than by sharp practices? Put differently, what gains would accrue to the aspirants to cover their expenses?

The current campaigns for the selection of leaders for the legislature points directly to why politics has been sustained as the most lucrative venture in the country- a trend which encourages politicians to kill, maim and destroy others just to get into office. Societal institutions such as the media ought not to continue to encourage legislators to spend heavily on adverts to convince all Nigerians of their suitability for an office when we have no voting power on the subject. 

Certainly, the subject calls for personal interactions between office seekers and their fellow legislators. The most annoying aspect of the bogus public campaigns on internal matters is that the individual office-seeker does not dwell on his or her personal capacity or the strong traits of character which can convince anyone that they are fit to occupy the office in question. Instead the aspirants and their supporters are more interested in canvassing for the zoning of positions. Will the office be held by a zone or by individuals or are there zonal offices in the National Assembly? 

What has been said so far suggests that neither the NASS as a body nor its members have enough faith in their own capacity. This fear is aptly demonstrated by the unending lack of courage to invite the President to address the legislature when it is necessary for him to account for specific policies and their implementation.

How can such legislators exercise their power to impeach an offending president when despite the power given to them by the constitution to summon ANY person to answer relevant questions they show so much fear in calling out a president where it is expedient to do so? The few occasions they hinted at it melted away in the twinkle of an eye. It is therefore necessary to inform members of the incoming NASS that we have seen enough of feeble legislators.

Any sharp analyst must have anticipated the failure of the 2023 elections in the area of electronic transmission of results. The APC never wanted it as 50 of their senators voted against it but merely allowed it to go to avert public anger. There is no way the transmission of results which if followed can stop rigging would not have had problems during implementation. 

We can only appeal to the incoming legislators to make a difference. While they should not stand in the way of the executive to attain good governance for Nigeria, they should also not toe the hapless line of supporting controversial policies such as incessant loans that can complicate the nation’s fragile economic health. If they fail, it will not be a great surprise because nothing has really changed.

In divorce proceedings, the two most focal bones of contention amongst the couples are the custody /maintenance of children and the issue of division and settlement of properties, especially jointly owned properties. Who gets what is always one of the major issues tabled before the court during divorces, especially among rich and celebrity couples.

The general rule in the division and separation of properties amongst couples during divorce is that every property acquired by each of the couples is to be added together and they are to be splitted amongst them equally. It does not matter if one of the spouses was the sole breadwinner in the marriage whilst the other spouse is a sit-at-home mom or dad; whatever property purchased whilst the marriage subsist is presumed to be jointly purchased and jointly owned by the couples hence why the properties are to be collated and share amongst them equally. 

Every property acquired during the marriage including real estate, money at hand or in the bank accounts or stocks/bonds or chattels like clothes, shoes, Jewelries, house decorations, bags, (even up to) toothbrushes are presumed to be marital properties; jointly owned and are to be collected/collated together and shared equally amongst the couples in the event of divorce. 

It is important to note that in some jurisdictions, marital properties are properties acquired from the day the marriage was entered up till the day the divorce pronouncement was made by the court; ie properties acquired even while you are already separated from the spouse but yet to be officially divorced are still presumed to be marital properties and jointly owned but in some other jurisdictions, marital properties ends when you have separated although haven’t divorced yet. 

You should know that the trick to put an asset or a bank account where you deposit your earnings during your marriage in your name alone will not disqualify such asset from being considered marital property but there are some instances where a spouse or the court can let one spouse keep a property and not to be splitted even though the property was gotten during the marriage; this property may include a property that is of sentimental value to one spouse. 

The legal strategy where a couple in the event of divorce can keep some of the properties or assets he/she acquired during the marriage separate and personal is through a prenuptial or post-nuptial contract. This kind of agreement to keep some properties separate is to be entered in writing for it to be valid and enforceable in law.

Other forms of properties that may be kept separate although maybe gotten or acquired during the marriage include; 

1. gifts or inheritances that one spouse received, either before or during the marriage
2. the portion of certain personal injury awards meant to compensate for the injured spouse’s pain and suffering. 

All property that a spouse pre-owned before entering into the marriage is presumed to be personal and separate property belonging to just that one spouse unless the couples agreed that every personal property that a spouse acquired before the marriage is to become a joint property once they have entered into the marriage. Another way a separate property can become or turn into a spousal joint property is if a separate property gets mixed up or comingled into the joint property; for instance, if the money in a spouse’s separate joint account is transferred into the couples’ joint account, every money in the couples’ joint account is then presumed to be jointly owned. 

Therefore, ownership of the spouses’ personal/ separate property after the divorce will depend on whether the assets are considered one spouse’s separate property or the couples’ marital property.

In the division of marital or joint properties during divorce, there  are basically two different methods applied by the family courts and they are; 

1. equitable distribution
2. community property distribution.

In Equitable distribution, the judge will divide all of the couple’s marital property (and allocate their marital debts) based on the judge’s decision as to what is fair, equitable and just to both spouses. The division of the marital properties is based solely on the judge’s discretion as to what is equitable and fair and not on what the couples want. In forming this discretion, the judge considers who shoulders higher responsibilities like keeping custody and maintenance of the children. A parent that keeps the custody and maintenance of the children is definitely going to be giving the lion’s share of the marital property; that according to the judge will be equitable, fair and just to both couples. Whereas, in the community distribution method as has been adopted by some jurisdictions, marital properties are to be divided equally amongst the couples equally i.e. on a 50-50 basis. An equal division of a couple’s community property (and debts) when they divorced.

In conclusion, marriage is a contract and should therefore be treated as such especially in Nigeria so as to avoid some unforeseen bickering and ripping off.  The legal way to protect your separate properties before marriage or even other properties acquired during the marriage is through a legal contract known as a prenuptial agreement but if you skipped getting a prenuptial agreement, a postnuptial agreement may come to your legal rescue. 

I have always been fascinated by the worldview and insights of old people— fellow mortals who have trodden these ever changing paths for so long that the story of their lives is the story of an era. I am doubly enthralled when such old people have impacted their societies and LIVED FOR SOMETHING. 

In a world where expediency is fast becoming the norm, where men and women of principle are fast going the way of the dodo, I have nothing but adulation for those who have stood by their commitment to what they perceive as the common good.

It was that fascination with veterans of popular struggles that propelled me, in 2018, to attempt speaking to President Mugabe after he was deposed. I still had fond memories of the liberation struggle days when, as university students in Nigeria, we fought on the side of our oppressed brethren in southern Africa. A chat with 94-year-old Mugabe would have been a fitting climax to my visit to Harare. But the interview never happened because elements within the new government advised against it. 

This year, I felt the same kind of hunger for the wisdom of the aged when veteran politician and leader of Afenifere, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, clocked 95. This time around, there were no impediments. I came away with an understanding of the reason why Pa Adebanjo, one of the last surviving direct disciples of the sage, Obafemi Awolowo, is still figuratively in the trenches. The elder statesman is as constant as the northern star.

Afenifere is the mainstream sociocultural organisation established by Yoruba people. Notably, the agenda of Afenifere was adopted as the official manifesto of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) political party in 1998, Most Yorubas view the pressure group as a legitimate body for the protection of their interests, maintenance of political equilibrium and preservation of the Yoruba people’s ethnic identity.

At 95, Chief Adebanjo should be celebrating, especially considering the fact that life expectancy in Nigeria is put at 53 years. But he isn’t. Rather than roll out the drums in festive celebration, he opted for a thanksgiving to thank God for mercies big and small. Thanks to Prof. Akin Onigbinde, I managed to sneak into his crowded schedule as he solemnly marked his 95th year. I can think of no better way to take advantage of still having the durable chief with us than to drink from his fount of wisdom with the hope that the younger generation will be inspired by a life dedicated to the service of others. Enjoy:

NIGERIA’S FUTURE

The British colonised the various nationalities that make up today’s Nigeria: Yoruba nation, Igbo nation, northern emirates , etc. There was no Nigeria. That was why our Independence Constitution took cognisance of our various differences and gave each region autonomy in running its affairs while we all related under one national flag. The military changed all that and installed a unitary system which unduly favoured the North against the rest of the country. Now, even the North is not at peace. You can’t have peace with such a fraudulent arrangement. A country of heterogeneous peoples cannot be run as a unitary entity.

VIOLENCE AGAINST IGBOS

During the 2023 elections rigging and violence were done with impunity; stealing of ballot boxes while security and INEC staff looked the other way. Look at the violence against Igbos in Lagos. The same Tinubu who brought Igbos into the cabinet when it suited him was now unleashing violence against them and calling them evil people because he suspected that they would not vote for him. Can anyone defend that?

TURN BY TURN

Of course, I am convinced that if we want an enduring democracy, it is the turn of the South east to produce the president. When the Igbos wanted to secede, Nigeria said no. Now, they have stayed in the country and you still want to deny them their rights. I say, No. It was in this same country that the military head of state bent the rules to accommodate the Yoruba political organisation, Alliance for Democracy, in 1998.

 If the rules were to be followed strictly, we wouldn’t have qualified for registration. And Gen Abubakar saw the danger in keeping the core Yoruba party out of the democratic exercise. So, there is nothing extraordinary in making room for every part of the country to have its turn. 

Look at the way the PDP threw away its zoning policy enshrined in its constitution to make room for Atiku who called himself a unifier. Who are you unifying when you’re denying the Southeast zone the chance of producing the president? Are they not Nigerians?

NOTHING PERSONAL AGAINST TINUBU

What is right is right. All those who say they are championing Tinubu’s cause now don’t really know him. They are in it for what they can get. I have nothing personal against Bola Tinubu. I should be proud that somebody I made the governor is now president-elect. He has always been respectful to me, very liberal. There’s no Christmas he wouldn’t send me presents — even during the COVID pandemic. But that is not the issue. When he returned from overseas medical treatment, I went to greet him. He calls me Uncle. My children call him uncle. I did everything in my power to make him governor without collecting one kobo from him. That is my record.

AFENIFERE

It is impossible to divide Afenifere. Impossible! There have been attempts to divide us, but they have all failed. There is no crisis in Afenifere. Regarding the unfortunate incident before the elections, I felt sorry for Pa Fasoranti that those who were originally opposed to his emergence as Afenifere leader now turned around to try to use his name to divide the group. Since when did Tinubu become a friend of Fasoranti? Were they friends three years ago? 

BOKO HARAM SPONSORS

Where is the list of 200 Boko Haram sponsors received by our government from our foreign friends? The attorney-general announced that the government was investigating the list, but has anybody heard anything about it again? Is it right to cover up crime, especially sponsorship of terrorism?

PARTISAN MEDIA

At times I marvel at the partisanship of a section of the media. For example, one newspaper refused to publish the story of the world press conference addressed by Afenifere but found it expedient to publish reactions to our position. Why publish reactions when you ignored the original story? Very unethical. Carry the message; forget the messenger.

NO FUTURE IN PDP OR APC

To the younger generation, I will say: Continue to insist on doing what is right. I am not a member of the Labour Party. But I support the Obi/Datti ticket. I am telling the youths that there is no light for them in either the PDP or APC. Nigerian youths must remain steadfast. They are making their voices heard in spite of all odds. As at now, the Labour Party has lost the battle, not the war. Until the Supreme Court delivers its judgement on the last election, there is still a long way to go. Youths should not be afraid or hesitant, or anxious; they should stay the course.

LOYALTY TO PRINCIPLES

I can’t be bothered if anyone considers me rigid because I loyally follow my principles. As a Yoruba man, I live by a set of values. To subvert your principles in order to be accepted as not rigid is unwise and fraudulent. Those who have no principles are always quick to label others as rigid because they will do anything to get what they want. For me, the rightness of a cause is critically important. I don’t owe anybody an apology for staying true to the principles established by our leader, Papa Awolowo.

Throughout his life, Pa Ayo Adebanjo has been an outspoken critic of numerous policies and actions of the state both under military rule and during the democratic dispensation– a member of a vanishing breed of men and women who choose the straight and narrow path of rectitude in public life and who are not afraid to stand alone if necessary in the pursuit of the greatest good for the greatest number. Happy birthday, Pa Adebanjo.

ETUKWU ONAH, SAN (RIP)

News of the untimely demise of Barrister Etukwu Onah, SAN, makes one wonder how unkind fate can be. Just when a man has successfully ascended the ladder of professional recognition and is deservedly looking forward to more fulfilling times, bang comes the grim reaper. May God rest his soul and comfort his family.

Nigeria is currently plagued by a myriad of debilitating problems – insecurity, hunger and poverty, rights of minorities, economic mismanagement and exploitation, corruption, myopic leadership, and a weak governance structure. Some of these directly threaten the corporate existence of Nigeria.

There are too many unsettled issues about the conditions for mutual coexistence of the different ethnic groups in the country. There is a perception that the basis for national unity has not been negotiated and accepted. A master-servant relationship between a parasitic majority and the minorities is troubling the new generation of Nigerians.

So, the nation is in a flux. And some people love to have it so. This may be the reason parts of the federation suffer insurgent attacks. Religious supremacy has also been dangerously thrown into the mix. The fear is that a further attack on basic national values will lead to a collapse of the nation. The states do not have confidence in the federal government. Federal institutions have been hijacked by a cabal which claims to represent northern interests. But as we know, they represent their ilk and are indeed interested in the depth of their pockets! We have pushed our luck too far as a nation, especially through acts of brazen injustice. We may not be lucky if another civil war breaks out!

Ethnic profiling and its consequences threaten the existence of our republic. It is a game of deafness, deliberate deafness of one to the concerns and anxieties of the other. Difference has become a survival problem. The narrative says that one person is unwelcome because their ethnic origins are different. It doesn’t matter that some of these persons are multiethnic. Once profiling takes place, reason takes flight. Often the mob, that group so despised by Shakespeare, drives the infantile madness. They have nothing to cling to. They are poor. Despised. Neglected by the centre. They are not empowered. They misdirect their venom on other persons in their class. Often, they are the direct casualties when violence erupts. Their lives are lost in the sea of statistics. Yet, they carry the physical weapons of physical destruction.

The irony is that ignorance is at the core of our current experience of ethnic profiling. Persons who had hitherto lived in harmony suddenly become enemies and their very existence threatened. The economic denominator which unites all such persons in poverty is ignored. It is true that political gladiators help to promote difference when it pays off. They stand in the background. The enlightened ones often pretend and mouth politically correct statements in public. A few misguided extremists supposedly in the rulership class let out tirades that goad their supporters into extreme reactions and behaviour. In any state where the rule of law takes preeminence such unruly behaviour ought to be punished. What we have experienced however is that some of these vermin are above the law. How else must we understand the arrogant message which an ethnic group has published on the latest killings in Benue State?

The ethnic profiling in Lagos is dangerous. In 2015, a traditional ruler made pejorative and inflammatory remarks about Igbo in Lagos. In the last elections, non-Yoruba citizens were physically prevented from voting in some parts of Lagos. I have not read any statements from prominent or leading politicians in the southwest condemn the brigandage that took place during the governorship elections. The subtext is that they gave tacit approval to voter suppression in the state. Which is unfortunate. I expect political leaders to work with groups in the state that have huge voting capacity. Not to threaten them. The incendiary write ups on social media are a threat to national unity. There must be a voice of caution from credible opinion leaders.

Ethnicism like racism is superficial. Yet historically it has led to wars and mass hysterical destructions. It does not matter that the ethnic groups sometimes have a common ancestry, traced back to less than a generation. It doesn’t matter that they sometimes share contiguous geographical space. Once that emotion of difference seizes their minds, the madness of foolishness takes over. The hysteria over Igbo voting in Lagos is a tragedy. In other jurisdictions, groups like the Igbo and Hausa in Lagos would be courted. They would be seen as representing special interests and ensure that their votes are won. The intimidation tactics of APC thugs in Lagos has further fractured the supposed interethnic harmony in the country.

If the nation succumbs to an interethnic conflagration, the rulers and their associates are likely to seek refuge in the big cities of the world, far away from the mess which they have created. We must not allow things to get to that stage.

There is need for atonement in Lagos State. There is need for healing. The governorship election was like a war and because Lagos is the proverbial city on a hill, activities cannot be hidden. Crimes committed atop a hill cannot escape the eyes of the world. The government’s reaction to ENDSARS and the Lekki toll gate incident is highly instructive. The federal government must stop the carnage in Benue State. At some point, self help will become the order of the day. Once this starts, there will be no end to it. Ethnic profiling destroys the essence of competence and personal drive. Those at the benefiting end of ethnicism are privileged. So, they are comfortable. But the overall effect on the nation is retrogressive.

There should be deliberate steps to downplay ethnicism. The first national anthem, which captured the beauty of diversity points the way. ‘Though tribe and tongue may differ/In brotherhood we stand’, and ‘Help us to build a nation where no man is oppressed’ were deliberate exhortations on national unity. Where did we get it wrong?

Of all the cards that I carry around with me, none is a political party membership card. I have never and do not belong to any political party in Nigeria. Nor have I ever belonged to one or aspired to belong to any. My attitude to political party membership is pretty much the same as that towards organized religion. I am a Christian of the Anglican variety by birth and baptism. I however respect and admire those who go to either mosque or church every week. My liberal attitude to organized everything has nothing to do with either my estimation of those who join and lead political parties or subscribe to organized religion.

My option is more a product of education and general humanistic orientation. I was trained to think freely and roam the forest of global culture and history for ideas and currents that can enhance my humanity and help me contribute to the society in which I live. By instinct therefore, I have come to respect the choices that different people make for themselves in the context of a free society. My friends and associates around the world therefore range from devout Moslems to committed Christians, Hindus, atheists and Himalayan Budhist monks. From each of the belief systems of those I interact with, I find something of benefit through a compulsively liberal attitude and mindset.

In the current Nigerian post election climate, something unfortunate has happened. A group of citizens are being branded, vilified, spat upon by all manner of tyrannical political spokespersons. They have been joined by public opinion autocrats and disguised entrepreneurs. Suddenly, it is now fashionable to abuse, condemn and generally vitiate the Obidients. All it has taken to initiate this shift in attitude is for INEC to announce the result of the last presidential elections in favour of Mr. Tinubu of the All Progressive Congress. Both APC official jackals and those who want to ingratiate themselves with the winning squad have since been falling over each other to win the trophy of ‘Obidient bashers or killers’.

Tragically, even otherwise respectable citizens with previous records of sanity and respectability have joined the fray of frying the Obidients. Someone has described them as the most despicable group ever to come to earth. Another has described them as a mob of miscreants. Yet more desperate people have quickly said that the Obidients are the political arm of IPOB while Mr. Peter Obi is a patron of and sponsor rolled into one.

An informed source told me that one of the more conspicuous latter day Obidient bashers had actually written two different congratulatory messages while waiting for the outcome of the presidential elections of 25th February.  One letter profusely congratulated Peter Obi for upturn in the long standing  political behemoth of old Nigeria and ushering in a new world led by the youth. The other letter was a subdued congratulation to Bola Tinubu, his tribesman, for a victory much deserved and a pledge to do whatever is necessary to ensure that his imminent reign was successful and free from distractions.

Rewind to the just ended campaign season. Literally out of the political blues, Mr. Peter Obi emerged onto the political scene. In the campaign season that followed, he laid out his vision for a new Nigeria free from the familiar blights of what has come to be accepted as normal Nigerian politics. His message, largely addressed to the youth and all those left behind and locked out by the old order, caught on like wild fire. Obi’s adherents voluntarily and informally assumed the broad name of “Obidients”. Trust the creativity of Nigerians in all such situations.

The name caught on in the public imagination. It tallied with the broad perspective of Mr. Obi as the carrier of an unusual third force message in an ossified bipartisan political architecture. The name became the mantra of a movement that grew first in the social media and became a reflection of the lived experience and conviction of many. At first, Obi’s growing mass followership was dismissed as a creation of the social media. Someone in the APC insisted that the viral following g of the Obidients was merely the work of less than six social media hands locked up in some basement and spreading the news on all available social media platforms.

Undeterred, Mr. Obi and the Obidient movement surged ahead. In city after city where Obi went with his message, throngs of followers and believers in the new message followed through street matches and spontaneous gatherings. Spontaneity was the secret of the new movement. Advocates grew into armies of adherents. Believers grew into a mass movement. A lone man in black attire with a different message delivered in a hoarse shy voice became a pop star figure in every public space. Mass gatherings became a political force. It latched onto the political platform of a minority Labour Party. The rest is history as they say.

The strengths and weaknesses of the Obidient movement can only be understood by those who understand the difference between a movement and a party. A party has a prescribe structure. A movement is amorphous, held together by the beliefs around which people gather spontaneously. It is an invisible meeting of minds, at once spontaneous and organic. It develops its own code of conduct from its loose understanding of the emission of its inspiration figure. A movement is in a hurry to capture power and overturn the status quo which as locked so many people out of the power nexus. Therefore, those who were expecting the Labour Party and Obidients to come forward with a structure as in conventional parties were disappointed. It is therefore unfair for any sensible commentator after the even to expect that Peter Obi as the inspiration of the Obidient movement could have also been a head master figure, handing down a code of behaviour for a movement of spontaneous citizen followership.

The throngs of Obidients out there defied order in the conventional sense. They were incensed with the idea of ‘taking back our country’. They saw themselves as the alternative government and Peter Obi as the next president. They would settle for nothing less. No one could blame them. They only needed the electorate to prove them right or wrong. Even after the elections, the conviction has lingered among them that their party won but was edged out by the gangster state and its stranglehold on all agencies of state including INEC. It now remains for the judiciary to prove them either right or wrong. Even at that, their deep suspicion of the state extends to the judiciary.

The present and triumphalist critics of the Obidient movement need to go to school on the dynamics of recent popular uprisings and mass movements either in support of popular causes or the conservative backlash. They are driven by the social media. They are largely uncontrollable. They obey only their major drivers and inspiration figures. These movements take on a life of their own. Those who have tried to quell them by force have either failed or been thrown out of power or remained there tenuously with neither legitimacy nor credibility except by sheer force of arms. The confrontation between popular movements and unpopular states has mostly bred instability or authoritarianism and endless instability. The most that the authoritarian state has achieved in recent times has been to usurp the spirit of the popular movement and convert it to their own to foster further autocracy. Examples: Jaiye Bolsanario in Brazil, Recep Erdogan in Turkey, Vladimir Putin in Russia, Victor Orban in Hungary, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, Jaroslaw Kazynzki in Poland.

In the places where autocrats have failed to usurp the power of the mass movement, they have triumphed and brought down autocratic regimes. The Arab Spring led to a serial collapse of Middle East dictatorships including those of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

In the post election climate in Nigeria, a president-elect duly returned by INEC and so declared is still locked in a credibility war with a man and a movement that came a distant third in the contest. This raises so many questions. There is an instant puzzle. How come the Obidients suddenly became a Fascist force after the election and Tinubu’s declaration? 

Yet questions abound for those who understand the geo-architecture of the Nigerian power conspiracy. How come Mr. Atiku and his PDP who scored second position in INEC’s ranking have suddenly become so docile and quiet? How come Obi suddenly became part of IPOB and a sponsor of ESN only after a successful election outing?

The truth is that the emergence of Obi and the Obidients is the first credible threat to the power base of Nigeria’s long standing decrepit gangster state and its support cast of open and disguised defenders and trumpeters. If the threat were Obi alone, it would be easy for the gangster state to isolate and eliminate him.

But in the massive crowd of the Obidients movement, many Peter Obis have germinated. They are the unemployed youth, the teenagers leaving school with no hope or prospects but armed only with their PVCs. They are the artisans long without a voice, the many Nigerians in the diaspora hungry for a country they will be proud to call home. It used to be easy for the state to wipe off and eliminate individual threats and adversaries. Not any more. The adversaries are our own citizens in multitudes with an awakened consciousness. They wrote their prologue in the #ENDSARS protests and now have shown their power in the 2023 elections.

Peter Obi merely activated this latent force. They have seen themselves as the owners of a new Nigeria. In their quest for hope, they met a simple man in black speaking a new political language free from tribe, religion and elite arrogance. They saw a genuine window of opportunity to take back their country. They saw the prospect of a new kind of leadership shorn of the pompous ceremony of state, freed of the massive corruption of the deep state and entitlement syndrome of power hegemonists. These are the real threats of the Obidients. The outcome of the 2023 elections ignited a fright in the system. Power was going to slip from the bloody claws of the criminal network of politicians, moguls and their noisy apologists. That is the real threat that is powering the present climate of harassment of Peter Obi and the Obidients.

The election revealed the vulnerability of the criminal state. They had thought the OBIdients were a mere social media hoax. But they ended up winning real votes, real legislative seats and real states. They did not just win real votes in strategic places,  they penetrated the fortresses of gangster chieftains, smashed the myths of tribe, faith, geography and violent thuggery. Twelve states for each of the INEC winner candidates, 12 states for the Obidients and their Labour Party! A real seat at the table of power. That is the real threat of the moment.

For the advocates of Fascism and other name calling schemes, a few home questions: what name do we give to the criminal gangs of Lagos? What should we call those who have used touts and dangerous thugs to convert our democracy into ‘Agberocracy’? What name do we give to the entrepreneurs of organized political crime who used ethnic blackmail to suppress votes in Lagos during the governorship elections? What do we call those who have industrialized ethnic bigotry and now seek to reduce the cosmopolitan beauty of our Lagos to the autocracy of tribal hamlets and their chieftains?

Once so threatened, the gangster state will try to find a way to neutralize the adversary: bribe, cajole, incorporate or destroy. That is the present stage of the battle for the political soul of Nigeria. All the name calling, blackmail, fake arrests in London, campaigns of revisionist lies etc, are all part of the same recalcitrant and crude retaliatory assault. It may intensify after the 29th May swearing in and the formal handover of power to Mr. Tinubu.

The road against the Obidients as the only credible opposition for the future will lead in one of two either directions. It could be time after the inauguration to begin genuine national reconciliation through populist programmes. At the other extreme, the new administration could begin a clampdown on Obi and the Obidients thereby inaugurating a season of authoritarianism by an elected government.

There are endless peculiarities, I must here admit, about the 2023 presidential election, the least not being the outing of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). With the post-election brouhaha and hullaballoo, a cursory observer would be forgiven for thinking the February 25 poll was a two-way contest between Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and Mr Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP). Atiku came second with 6,984,520 votes. Therefore, whether it is Tinubu that won, as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), or Obi, as proclaimed by his supporters, Atiku is still ranked as second best.

I am certainly aware that Atiku also claimed to have won — and that he has filed an election petition to that effect. And this is part of the mystery: why is his claim to victory not gaining as much traction as Obi’s? In Nigerian politics, Atiku is definitely not a small man. This year marks the 30th anniversary of his presidential quest. He first aspired in 1993, along with Bashorun MKO Abiola and Ambassador Babagana Kingibe. In 1999, he was elected vice-president and re-elected in 2003. He was a presidential candidate in 2007 and 2019 and a presidential aspirant in 2011 and 2015. He was elected governor of Adamawa in 1999 but gave it up to become PDP’s vice-presidential candidate.

Atiku’s political résumé is nothing but intimidating. In 2019, Atiku gave President Muhammadu Buhari a good run. He got 11.26 million votes — or 41.2 percent — and won in 17 states, including the entire south-east and south-south, as well as the FCT. For comparison, Buhari got 15.19 million votes and won in 19 states. The cold calculations this time around were that Atiku would sweep northern votes and get just about enough in the south to win the race. Although there were shouts for power rotation by southerners who made a strong claim that it was the turn of the south after eight years of Buhari/north, Atiku clearly did not see the clamour as an overwhelming obstacle.

I must allow myself to speculate herein that there was much confidence in Atiku’s camp ahead of the election. It all looked like the presidency was his for the taking. Some of the optimism could be justified. Afterall, he had the name recognition, a national reach, a political structure with vast experience in the ground game, and, if I may say this again, an intimidating résumé. What’s more: 2023 was an open race, with no incumbent to contend with. He was also clearly the strongest northerner in the race. This was probably his best-ever opening. But things still did not turn out in his favour, contrary to his calculations. There now has to be an inquest as to why he failed yet again.

Before the election, many people sought my prediction. Since some people cannot distinguish between preferences and predictions — because of their emotions — I often struggle to answer such questions. But I made three basic predictions. One, I said Obi’s candidature would hurt Atiku and help Tinubu. In fact, I often said if Tinubu won the election, it would be with an “assist” from Obi. Two, I said the battle up north would be principally between APC and PDP rather than between a northerner (represented by Atiku) and a southerner (Tinubu). That meant Tinubu would get plenty votes there. Three, I said Atiku’s major backers were not strong enough to help him win the race.

While it is true that Obi’s candidature hurt Atiku, I must now regret that I underestimated its impact, particularly in the south-east, south-south and Christian north, plus Lagos. I must also regret that I underestimated the damage Dr Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, the candidate of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), could do. By the official results, the gap between Tinubu and Atiku was 1.8 million votes. Most of the 1.96 million votes Obi got in the south-east would have gone to Atiku on a good day. Kwankwaso’s 997,000 in Kano looked like PDP’s votes in disguise. Most of Obi’s 582,000 votes in Lagos would have gone to Atiku — given the pattern of voting in recent presidential elections.

As things turned out, the assists Tinubu got were not from Obi alone. Kwankwaso might not be a Kevin de Bruyne, but he was not far from being a Leandro Trossard (pardon me if you don’t follow the English premier league). Every vote for Obi in Lagos was a vote for Tinubu, as it were, because Atiku would most likely have been the beneficiary. Every vote for Kwankwaso in Kano was also a vote for Tinubu because it could have been Atiku’s. Tinubu got 517,000 votes in Kano — more than double the 225,000 home-advantage margin Atiku enjoyed in Adamawa. Although Tinubu lost Lagos, his 572,000 votes there still completely wiped off all of Atiku’s gains in Bauchi, Gombe, Taraba and Yobe.

When Atiku is reviewing his performance (except the results are legally overturned), he has to answer some questions. How could he not keep hold of the south-east, which had been voting PDP since 1999? How did he allow himself to be held hostage by lightweight politicians, mostly from the north, who did not have the leverage to swing things his way? How did he allow choosing a running mate become so messy that it blew up in his face? Why did he refuse to make the necessary concessions to the G5 governors so that he could unite his party and face the APC as a united force in the February 25 poll? Finally, why is he lagging miles behind Obi in the post-election media blitz?

As to why he could not hold down the south-east, I will be satisfied admitting that nobody saw Hurricane Obi coming. It was not until Obi pulled out of the PDP in May 2022 and joined the LP that his electoral value went through the roof. He became a phenomenon. The best Atiku could have offered him was the VP slot and he was not even inclined to do that, from what I heard, because their pairing in 2019 did not really go well. I would, therefore, not blame Atiku for losing the south-east. The loss was inevitable with Hurricane Obi. In Obi, the south-east had a candidate with a realistic chance of being elected president and their support for him was incredibly spectacular.

Atiku could still have done better but for the PDP crisis. His face-off with the five PDP governors, called G5, was a fatal error. With a united front, he could have performed far better in Oyo, Rivers and Benue states governed by three G5 members. I used to rate Atiku as a master strategist but I was amazed that he would prefer to keep Dr Iyorchia Ayu as PDP chairman rather than make peace with the G5, led by Chief Nyesom Wike whom he had defeated in the presidential primary. Atiku was part of the rebellion in the PDP that led to the ouster of President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015. He experienced the role of governors in a presidential election. Yet, he did not quench the G5 fire.

Wike played a major role in demarketing Atiku. It appears his major grouse was the northern gang-up against him at the PDP presidential primary, where Rt Hon Aminu Tambuwal, governor of Sokoto state, withdrew for Atiku. Wike had heavily backed Tambuwal against Atiku in the 2019 presidential primary. He obviously felt betrayed. Also, Ayu was caught on video embracing Tambuwal and describing him as the “hero of the convention” after Atiku won the PDP ticket in May 2022. That was below the belt. And then, Wike claimed that Atiku, on his own, promised to make him running mate only to go ahead to denigrate him after opting for Dr Ifeanyi Okowa, the governor of Delta state.

Why did Atiku not heal those wounds? I propose three possibilities. One, he maybe did his math and believed he could win without the G5. His primary target, I suppose, was northern votes. I further suppose that he believed Obi would be in his corner in the event of a run-off between him and Tinubu. Two, Atiku possibly believed encouraging Ayu to resign was not going to resolve the crisis — maybe it would only open him up to more demands. Three, he probably wanted to yield to the G5 demand but some hardliners in his circle prevailed on him to ignore them. These hardliners were mostly northerners and at some point began to play the regional and religious cards against the G5.

It might as well have been a combination of these three probabilities, but Atiku clearly misjudged the strength of Tinubu in the north. His underground “naka sai naka” campaign, roughly translated as “your own is your own”, might have won him millions of northern votes but they did not eclipse the “two Muslims are better than one” counter-campaign by Tinubu’s supporters — leveraging on the Muslim-Muslim ticket. Unfortunately for Atiku, too, Obi’s candidature deprived him of many northern Christian votes which used to go to the PDP. Obi actually got more votes than Atiku in most Christian-dominated areas. Obi’s battle cry of “Christians, take back your country” looked effective.

Atiku was surrounded by northern politicians such as Mallam Sule Lamido, former governor of Jigawa, Dr Babangida Aliyu, former governor of Niger, Alhaji Adamu Maina Waziri, PDP chieftain in Yobe, Alhaji Adamu Aliero, former governor of Kebbi, Gen Aliyu Gusau, former national security adviser from Zamfara, and Rt Hon Aminu Tambuwal, governor of Sokoto state. These PDP heavyweights could not deliver the north in large numbers. Nonetheless, Atiku deserves some credit for winning nine of the 19 states in the north, despite the PDP controlling only four of them before the general election. Ultimately, Atiku’s slim victory margins in the northern states let him down.

If indeed Atiku was strategising on the north making him president, it was a miscalculation. The PDP heavyweights could not overwhelm Tinubu, despite the harsh effects of the naira recolouring policy which many APC sympathisers insisted were targeted at him. In fact, Tinubu got 5.3 million votes in the north compared to Atiku’s 4.8 million, according to the official data. Except the courts eventually upturn Tinubu’s victory and declare Atiku as president-elect, I am left with no other choice than to conclude that his presidential quest has effectively ended. In moments of introspection, he must necessarily admit that he punched blow his weight this time around, mostly of his own fault.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

TRICKS AND POLITICS

There has been intense jostling for leadership positions in the next national assembly, which I think is normal. What I find alarming is the notion that some people are considering making a Muslim the next senate president. Will this not be the height of insensitivity? Having Muslims as No 1 and No 2 has already inflamed passions amidst unending claims and speculations about an Islamisation agenda. We may want to continue to deceive ourselves that these things don’t matter and blindly refuse to link certain crises in the land to ethnic and religious sentiments, but I want to believe that reason will prevail in the end. National interest must trump personal ambitions. Commonsensical.

SUBSIDY SONG

I think most of us have finally agreed that we cannot continue to pump trillions of naira into subsidising the consumption of a single petroleum product, but there is always a problem of strategic communication by the government with the supposed ultimate beneficiaries — the poor. Since I have been hearing about “removal of petrol subsidy” in the days of Gen Ibrahim Babangida, the messaging has always been the same: the poor people would benefit. Only Gen Sani Abacha effectively communicated with the people. He did not say much. He simply transferred the benefits to Nigerians via road construction, provision of drugs and renovation of schools. Effective.

ON OBI’S DETENTION

The social media was aflame last week with the reported “detention” and “harassment” of Mr Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party, at the Heathrow Airport, London, on Good Friday. The details are still as provided by the media unit of his campaign team. Neither the UK government nor Obi himself has provided us with more information. The politics of it aside, it is not unusual for the UK Border Force to stop visitors who have been flagged on the system. To be able to legally keep them waiting, an official must serve a detention order and ask them to sit in a waiting area. The official then goes to clear with a supervisor. If there is no issue, the visitor is stamped in. Procedural.

RIP EBIEDE

Recently, I saw the picture of a sickly Emmanuel Ebiede, former youth international, on social media. He looked old and distressed. It was unbelievable that a footballer who had plied his trade outside the country and probably made a fortune could be in that state. Ebiede, 45, died on Friday night at the Rivers State University Teaching Hospital (RSUTH) from an enlarged liver. Ebiede was in the 1995 set of Flying Eagles managed by Fanny Amun. Some of his teammates, as I recall, were Karibe Ojigwe, Blessing Anyanwu, Olumide Harris and Duke Udi. I used to visit them at their Ibadan camp and one lasting memory was the lively Ebiede always cracking jokes. May God comfort his family. Adieu.

I grew up in the village in the sixties - my then rustic but very beautiful village of Iviukwe, near Agenebode, Edo State. With forests, game and nature as our only inseparable partners, I sat down and listened to my unread, but very intelligent and wise parents; and the greying elders, as they piloted the affairs of our community with commendable efficiency and proficiency. They used sundry endearing proverbs and parables to unknot difficult puzzles. Proverbs were always the palm oil with which words were eaten, as Chinua Achebe most admirably put it in his epic, “Things Fall Apart”).

So, permit me today to employ some proverbs and parables in this discourse, to express myself on a very sore national issue that has caused much ruckus and brouhaha – Interim Government (IG).

Now the questions: Et tu Interim Government? Quo vadis Interim Government? IG has become the tsetse fly that delicately perches on one’s scrotum. It must skillfully be killed, lest one ends up breaking his own scrotum. The reason to be wary about IG is simple: when a millipede crawls out of its hole, you may never tell if it will return as a millipede or as a snake. I have therefore decided to discuss this vexed issue today because an elder does not sit idly by and watch a goat deliver on its tether. I owe this duty to Nigerians.

INTERIM GOVERNMENT OR INTERIM NONSENSE?

In the latest manifestation of our seemingly endless fascination with things that are apparently bizarre and absurd, Nigerians have almost, overnight, become animated, besotted and infatuated with the fanciful idea of an IG. Afterall, when the moon shines at night, even the lame becomes hungry for a walk. They see it as a panacea and successor to the incumbent colourless and uneventful administration of President Muhammadu Buhari. That suggestion, first patriotically mooted last year by no less a personage than the iconic legal sage, Aare Afe Babalola, SAN, had recently gained traction. Many Nigerians did not then grasp his deep jurisprudential thoughts and genuine concerns about the calamitous destination Nigeria was headed.  He saw it as a journey to no destination. I had shared his opinion. (See https: //www. Youtube .com/ watch?v = wmw9OuXxAM0).

THE YUSUF DATTI BABA-AHMED INTERVIEW AS A CATALYST

However, arguably the greatest catalyst for thrusting the debate into the front-burner of current national discourse was the interview granted to Channels Television by the running-mate to Peter Obi, the Labour Party presidential candidate in the last presidential election, Senator Yusuf Datti Baba-Ahmed. In the interview, he seemed to raise the spectre of the presumed winner of the election, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, not being sworn in or inaugurated on the 29th day of May, 2023, as constitutionally mandated by section 140 of the 1999 Constitution, upon Buhari completing his second term of 4 years. This suggestion generated such a storm of controversy particularly among the Tinubu handlers who quickly called for the sanction of Channels TV that aired the interview. As expected, they were seamlessly obliged. Channels TV was fined #5m by NBC. This is Nigeria. I can almost always predict events including the questions and answers.  Is this not a country where leaders force the led to first show them the limbs of a snake before the led can enjoy the dividends of democracy?

The brick-bats have since then continued unabated, with the proponents of the “No-Inauguration” agitation seemingly coalescing around the mantra of an 'Interim Government', to which President Buhari will hand over as a provisional or stop-gap measure. The Buhari government demurs. It is this IG which will presumably organize yet another Presidential (or, indeed general) election that will ultimately produce a ‘permanent government’. Nigerians have so experienced many oddities that they now appear unshockable. Afterall, when a sparrow gets beaten by a raging storm too many times, a mere drizzle no longer frightens it. But our leaders must realise that when the cripple dances in the village square in the presence of agile youths, the elders become ashamed of themselves. Have we lost our individual and collective sense of shame?

To probably pull out a burning palm kernel from the blazing furnace of fire, Aare Babalola stepped in, and propounded his thesis in April, 2022. It was based on the sound premise then that without such intervention of an IG, the just concluded elections (which were then imminent) will produce, in his words, ‘recycled leaders.’ His proposal was that the last general elections ought not to have been held at all. Rather, he suggested that they should have been suspended, while an IG should first be put in office for six months, which will then develop “a new-look people's Constitution.” That Constitution, according to the sage, “should provide for part-time legislators and a non-executive President.” In terms of its composition, he suggested, most attractively, that members of the IG should be selected from previous Presidents and Vice-Presidents, Ministers and Governors, as well as members of professional associations. (See 2023: Afe Babalola Proposes Interim Government, Says Nigeria Needs New Constitution: https://thecable.ng;published). The Aare’s worries have since been vindicated afterall by the farce and national embarrassment which the last discredited presidential election symbolises. Has this great educationist and legal prodigy not been vindicated by subsequent events? I think so. Or, do you not?

ARE INTERIM GOVERNMENTS COUPS IN DISGUISE?

Interim Governments, some have argued, suffer from a serious fundamental defect in the sense that they are wholly unconstitutional and tantamount, in effect, to a coup d’etat. Proponents of this school of thought liken an interim government to the load the hunch-back man must carry on his back, whether he lies facing down, or sleeps facing up. After all, he who brings a maggot-infested piece of firewood into his home should not complain of visitation by a colony of lizards.

Some questions naturally agitate the mind here, on the question of an interim government in Nigeria:

Was the idea a mere mooted plan, or was the DSS merely flying a kite so as to test the waters and the mood of the Nation?

Why should Nigeria’s elite Secret Service cause such national hoopla and frightening alarm without quietly arresting such proponents and charging them to court, if there really were any?

Datti Baba-Ahmed’s televised statement that Ahmed Tinubu should not be sworn in 29th May, 2023, was a mere advocacy that did not in any way infract sections 37, 50 and 51 of the Criminal Code, CAP C38, LFN, 2004; nor amount to an attempted coup. In 2015, Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo outrightly called for a “parallel government” if his APC (then in opposition), were denied victory. (See https://youtu.be/NgX_SngwBvY, interview dated January 4, 2015; and https://youtu.be/9oar9H6n1_Q, 2014 interview in Washington DC, USA). APC, through its then Chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, had also threatened to set up a parallel government (see https://thenationonlineng.net/apc-vows-to-set-up-parallel-govt-if-2015-poll-is-rigged/). Rotimi Amaechi, a chieftain of the APC, followed suit in threatening to form a parallel government (see https://www.thecable.ng/rewind-apc-threatened-to-form-parallel-government-if-2015-presidential-poll-was-rigged). The very Minister of Information, Mr. Lai Mohammed, who held press conferences in the US, urging the US to sanction Peter Obi and Datti Baba-Ahmed for alleged treasonable felony did not only threaten Nigeria in 2015, but actually vowed that the APC would form a parallel government (see https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/171627-apc-vows-form-parallel-government-2015-elections-rigged .html ?tztc=1) if they were rigged out of the 2015 elections. All these threats were made at a time when elections had not even taken place. Yet, heavens did not fall. No one called for their arrests and prosecution. President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan who believed his “second term ambition was not worth the blood of any Nigerian”, simply smiled and walked away in the face of opposition stringently threatening his legitimate government. Yet, these party chieftains are now threatening fire and brimstone for such mere suggestions even when they are aware of the historic electoral malfeasance that took place. By the way, did the DSS need to announce a coup publicly without arresting the alleged coup plotters? Aside apparently flying a kite and testing the waters, did the DSS need to publicly pledge its loyalty to a president-elect that has not yet been sworn in, and whose election is still being hotly challenged by his two major co-contestants? Was the whole scenario merely simulated as an artifice and design to give Tinubu an upper hand, and thus hint the petitioners and the Presidential Elections Tribunal not to waste their time in litigating their petition?

What will be the fate of the winners at the various levels of the last elections were an Interim government to be set up? Are they expected to simply accept their fate and wring their hands in despair on the altar of hopelessness and helplessness?

How exactly will such Interim government come into being or function? Will it simply materialize out of thin air? Does it require a legal instrument to birth it? Who will author that legal instrument? NASS? President? In what capacity and on what basis?

Is the idea of an Interim Government even known to, or acceptable within the confines of the 1999 Constitution? Is it envisaged or provided for therein, whether specifically or by necessary implication?

This last question neatly dovetails into the most fundamental question of all - and the greatest obstacle to the erection of such contraption- that is, the provisions of section 1(2) of the 1999 Constitution which clearly outlaw the unconstitutional takeover of government in any part of Nigeria in the following words: “The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any persons or group of persons take control of the Government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution”.

The implication of this provision is obvious: without a constitutional amendment in accordance with section 9(1)&(2) of the 1999 Constitution, the whole idea of an interim government is itself legally a non sequitur. That process of amending the Constitution is quite cumbersome, tedious and time-consuming, as it requires the buy - in of at least 2/3 majority of the members of the National Assembly as well as a resolution passed by at least 24 (or 2/3) of the 36 State Houses of Assembly. If experience is anything to go by, it will be simply impracticable if its main objective is to create the legal framework for establishing an Interim government. Will those who believe they have won the last election – even if illegally and by brute force – not certainly resist such an amendment? I believe so. Or, do you not?

This leaves the option of a military take-over - GOD FORBID! It is for this reason - and this reason alone -that patriots and lovers of democracy have raised their voices against the suggestion. I hereby humbly add mine. Yes, our experience in democracy since its return 24 years ago has been anything but stellar. I was in the trenches for years to drive the military back to their barracks – CLO, UDD, JACON, etc. I experienced its ugliest side in perspectives too horrific to narrate here. I readily concede that our flawed electoral process, notwithstanding successive legislative interventions in virtually every electoral cycle – has forced the hedgehog out of its burrow. Afterall, a frog does not run in the daytime for nothing. It is either after something or something is after it. The political class has repeatedly failed us. It has refused to get its acts together, notwithstanding that it would be the single biggest loser were democracy to be truncated yet again. However, I firmly believe none of these challenges and shortcomings is enough reason, in my humble opinion, to abandon the Nigerian contraption project, which at any rate, has forever been a work-in-progress.

Any suggestion that the solution to the glaringly evident flaws in the last bastardised “elections” (which are legion and nauseating), is an unconstitutional structure called an 'Interim government', would not only subvert the presumed will of the people, but would also replace an admittedly repulsive and compromised system with a raging amoebic monster, so grotesque that it's precise form, shape and structure are unknown. Such an idea - if it ever sees the light of day - will, in all likelihood, not only make a bad situation infinitely worse; it might end up consuming all of us. It may open a Pandoras Box, whose contents are presently unimaginable. It is like opening a whitened sepulchre. Know it now that the fowl does sweat, but it is its feathers that prevent us from seeing its sweat. Having an interim government to me, is simply akin to a man who pours palm wine in the ground in the name of preserving it, but ends up getting the spirits drunk.

IG AND THE NIGERIAN EXPERIENCE

To put it bluntly, the idea of an Interim government (even if it was historically expedient 30 years ago during the military dictatorship of General Ibrahim Babangida), is simply unworkable under the present political dispensation. The situations are quite dissimilar. It is when the termite decides to fly like a bird that it enters into trouble.  

This is because the circumstances in which the Ernest Shonekan interim government was installed in 1993 was the June 12, 1993 annulment of the Presidential elections won clearly by Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola. The annulment was executed by the Babangida military junta. Such circumstances do not presently exist- unless the proponents of the ING are calling for the replication of the same scenario. Once again, God forbid! At any rate, that IG only lasted for barely 90 days, before it was promptly declared illegal by a Lagos High Court on 10th of November, 1993. According to late Hon. Justice Dalapo Akinsanya, the courageous Judge who declared the Shonekan ING illegal, the erstwhile military ruler, General Babangida, had no legitimate power to sign a Decree post-August 26, 1993, after his exit from power. She held that “the Decree by which the Interim National Government was established was void and of no effect”. The suit had been filed by the acclaimed winner of the June 12, 1993, Presidential election Chief M.K.O Abiola, who was not only prevented from governing Nigeria, but was also killed in hazy circumstances in Aso Villa. (See Ernest Shonekan and Interim National Governance in Nigeria; Oladiti Abiodun Kazeem https://www.slideshare.net.published on October, 03, 2014 < Accessed on 2nd April, 2023>). See the case of Madzimbamuto v. Lardner-Burke (1969) 1 AC 645.

The abhorrence of coup d’etat in Africa has since been formalised. On Monday, the 25th day of April, 2022, the representatives of the African Union (AU) Member States; members of the Peace and Security Council (PSC) of the AU; AU Organs/ institutions and the Regional Economic Communities and Regional Mechanisms for Conflict Prevention, Management, and Resolution (RECs/RMs); as well as the representatives of African Civil Society Organisations (CSOs); academic, professional bodies; youth and women groups; and other stakeholders, strongly condemned all forms of unconstitutional change of government in Africa, coup pepertrators and manipulation of democratic processes to effect constitutional amendments and urged all interested parties to address political concerns through the available national legal mechanisms to find solutions in a constructive, peaceful and constitutionally accepted manner.

To the extent that the circumstances in which interim governments are viable options, such as the India experience in the build-up to her independence in 1948) do not exist in Nigeria, to that extent must we remind ourselves of the dangers and bitter lessons of history in our previous unpalatable experience with that idea. If an unelected military junta could not sustain that Shonekan experiment, it is hard to see how a civilian government, which has just concluded a most shambolic general election can accomplish it. This government will never agree to hoist an interim government. Doing so will be self-immolatory. It will be tantamount to the story of a beetle - whether it rolls its dung forward or backward - it ends up rolling it into its burrow. An interim government, though called a government, is never a legitimate government. Surely, the alligator is not a crocodile, even though they look alike. The alligator is a mere infantry officer, while the crocodile is a Naval Admiral. It is only the tortoise that knows how best to carry its hard shell.

WHAT IS AN INTERIM GOVERNMENT?

Let us now explore the world of IGs to show us why they are detestable. It is important at this juncture, to define exactly what an IG means. According to the Institute for Integrated Transitions (See htpps://ifit-transitions-9rg; Interim Governments: Lessons and Guidelines, November, 2020<Accessed on 2/4/23), “an Interim government is a formally constituted government holding an extra-ordinary mandate to conduct governmental affairs for an extraordinary term lasting until the election of a new government for an ordinary term with an ordinary mandate.” The Institute adds that this definition excludes the following:

i Unelected governments established for an interim period without the promise of ordinary elections within a reasonable timeframe; and

ii Elected governments that remain provisionally in place as part of the ordinary process and rules for the transfer of power or the temporary filling of a conventional constitutional vacuum.

Also, Wikipedia.org, regarded an IG as “a provisional government, also called an interim government, an emergency government, or a transitional government. It is an emergency governmental authority set up to manage a political transition generally in the cases of a newly formed state or following the collapse of the previous governing administration. Provisional governments are generally appointed, and frequently arise, either during or after civil or foreign wars. Provisional governments maintain power until a new government can be appointed by a regular political process, which is generally an election. They may be involved with defining the legal structure of subsequent regimes, guidelines related to human rights and political freedoms, the structure of the economy, government institutions, and international alignment.” Provisional government (See Wikipedia; https: //en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Provisional _ government).

Again, Simplylaw.com in one of its publications on March 30, 2023, had this to give as the meaning of interim government; “Therefore, an interim government is an emergency governmental authority set up to manage a political transition, sometimes in the case of a newly formed country or following the collapse of a previous administration. It can be an unelected government established for an interim period or an elected government that remains provisionally in place pending the successful conduct of an election. This can be at the state or federal level.” (See Interim Government; What you need to know - Simply Law; https://simplylaw.com.ng/interim-government-what-you-need-to-know/).

We can therefore comfortably surmise that an interim government can only result or manifest in a situation where the norm, convention or legally institutionalized system and/or process fails. Interim governments from the definitions above and from the instances that will be analyzed in this intervention, will and should only be in contemplation where there is an impossibility, or at worst, a near impossibility to continue the norm or the legally provided mode for change of government in a state. Interim government should just be a mechanism to hold the state intact pending the return of a legitimate government.

Viewed from this perspective, it will mean that an interim government should not be in contemplation where the legitimate mode for change of government is still in process, and has not failed or been exhausted; and where there is no situation or state of emergency. This will therefore suggest that any calls or clamours for an interim government before the occurrence of any of the following conditions listed below, will have no justification, or be ripe. Such calls may therefore be interpreted to mean a motive to sabotage the lawful and peaceful existence of the state. It may amount to a home rat venturing into the forest to wrestle with a bush rat.

Interim governments must therefore be seen as a mere contingency plan, designed to normalize a bad situation.

FACTORS THAT MAY NECESSITATE INTERIM GOVERNMENTS.

Interim governments do not just spring forth from the blues in normal circumstances. No. The factors and causes would have been there for long – even if dormant and latent. But it is only the ant that hears the whispers of the sand; just as it is only the worm that knows what is buried in the earth. Vigilant Nigerians had seen these signs long ago. Aare Babalola is one of them. I am one of them. My daily write-ups and frequent television appearances wholly attest to this.

The factors which foster the emergence of interim governments include regime collapse, negotiated agreement, special election or international intervention. They may arise at a national or sub national level; and can have a myriad of compositions: national, international or mixed; one party or power-sharing, civilian, military or hybrid. Their mandates range from providing or restoring basic state services, to special tasks such as the preparation of a new Constitution or the introduction of economic reforms. It is in the preparation of a new autochthonous and People-driven Constitution that Babalola’s dissertation is situate.

Examples of such circumstances, as identified by the Institute for Integrated Transitions include an existing regime dealing with crises - such as severe economic problems, a fracture within the ruling elite, or an invigorated opposition which may transform itself into an Interim government to stave off its demise or provide more political space to work towards longer-term recovery or resolution (e.g Spain 1975-1976; Indonesia 1998-1998). Additionally, an international intervention may produce an Interim International Government as a practical means to restart governance after war or dictatorship or a stalled political process (e.g UN Transitional Administration in East Timor 1999-2002). Furthermore, an existing regime and the opposition may reach a peace deal or political settlement, establishing an Interim Government for a specified period (e.g El Salvador 1992-1994; and Nepal 2006-2008).

TYPES OF INTERIM GOVERNMENTS

There is the type of Interim Government where an organized power or force overthrows a sitting government and takes over the leadership of the state. This is different from a coup d’etat strictu sensu, because in this case, the regime taking over is only doing so to manage power temporarily, promising to hand over power, properly and as the law of the land recognizes. Wikipedia.org referred to this kind of interim government as “revolutionary provisional government”. An instance of such interim government would be the case in Chad where when the Head of State died, his son took over government, as against the provisions of the law of the land where the power to lead the state was supposed to devolve on the speaker of the National Assembly. However, Mahamat Idriss Deby in a bid to take over power had to, through the Army, dissolve the government and the National Assembly to ensure that the speaker did not become the Head of State. He however promised to hand over power according to provisions of the law after 18 months, thus making his government an interim/provisional government.

There is the second type of interim government, where there is set up, a new regime of leadership. However, the previous regime still retains the true power. This was the case with Nigeria when General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida, said that he will “step aside”, not even resign. He did appoint an Interim National Government to usher in a proper government in accordance with the Constitution of Nigeria. General Babangida however retained the Secretary of his government to be the Secretary of the Interim government and the actions of the Interim Government were generally seen to be largely dependent on and not against the interest of General Babangida. Wikipedia.org named this type of Interim government, “Incumbent Provisional Government”.

There is the third type of interim government, where obedience and legitimacy in the state are shared between the incumbent interim regime and a regime trying to take over power. This is the case in Syria where the Interim Government is sharing power with external forces from Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Qatar. Wikipedia.org referred to this type of Interim government as “Power Sharing Provisional Government”.

Finally, there is the type of Interim government where the power belongs to and is solely managed by an international body, the international community or an external state. Such was the case with the United States in 1776 during the American Revolutionary War when the Continental Congress, a convention of delegates from 13 British colonies on the east coast of North America served as its interim government until it was replaced in 1789 by the United States Congress. (See https: //en. wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Provisional _ government). Wikipedia.org named this type of interim government as “International Provisional Government”.

HOW WELL HAS INTERIM GOVERNMENTS WORKED IN OTHER CLIMATES?

As at date, South Sudan, Libya, Sudan, Burkina Faso, and Chad in Africa; Afghanistan, Myanmar, Syria, and Yemen in Asia; and  Belarus in Europe, are the countries currently under an interim government regime.

Taking the samples of Afghanistan, Chad and Syria, let us analyse how interim governments have performed.

AFGHANISTAN

Matthew Saul in an article, “International Law and the Legitimacy of Interim Governments”, (see page 14; International Law and the Legitimacy of Interim Governments by Matthew Saul, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2715703) – pointed out the issues with the interim government of Afghanistan. He stated thus, “…certainly, the lack of security in Afghanistan has been a major hindrance in the development of a productive public sphere and the government has been keen to justify some of its constraining activity on the security situation. Consider, for instance, the decree that all news agencies ‘refrain from covering incidents of “terrorist activities or movements” between 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. on election day,’ a ban enforced by National Directorate of Security (NDS) officials. … This suggests that it might have been a measure that has been motivated by the government trying to sustain its own authority, by reducing knowledge of events that bring into question the credibility of the election process.”

Matthew makes the very disturbing insinuation that interim governments are in an unending struggle to assert and justify their legitimacy. Yes, indeed. Afterall, the fall of a dried leaf is a warning to the green one.

CHAD

As published by Al Jazeera on 20th April, 2021. (See https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/4/20/chads-military-announces-new-interim-government-after-deby-death); and on 13th October, 2022; and (https: //www. africanews. Com /2022 /10/13/chad-new-interimprime-minister-vows-freedoms rights/), in Chad, even as it is today, the government which came into force in the guise of an interim regime to hand over to a Republican government after 18 months, counting from April 2021, is still in force till date. Now the question is, who now has the right, authority, and requisite power at this material time to bring this government to book? Should Chadians not regret ever having this interim regime in the first place? Which rat will now bell the cat? That is the question.

SYRIA

Middleeasteye.net.(Seehttps://www.middleeasteye.net/features/syria-interim-government-waiting) has painted a gloomy picture of the state of Syria under an interim government; just as has Al-monitor.com, they both show a country in serious crisis.

Though the situation in Syria (being a warring country and one with different power blocks exercising real power across divided parts of the country), is to be expected, it is still the case that its Interim Government has not only suffered major oppositions that bring to jeopardy its control of the state, but is also in search of its own legitimacy – the very foundation of a government. A cockroach has never been adjudged innocent in the presence of fowls.

CONCLUSION

The above scenarios have shown that IG is no longer in vogue. But, a final warning for those “politricians” messing up our hard-earned democracy: they must now move swiftly, deliberately, to save this pseudo democracy we are operating and turn it into full-blown democracy. This is because, if a snake chooses to crawl sluggishly like a snail, it will only succeed in making itself food for the hawk.

It will however be unrealistic in the present circumstances to expect “politricians” (the greatest beneficiaries of the last farcical polls) to commit collective class suicide by acquiescing to that idea. The IG idea will garner little or no traction among this most critical base of those who will lose out. It is not only the political class that will lose out, but also the electorate. As the ENDSARS riots of 2020 clearly showed, Nigeria's youths have become increasingly restive, enlightened, and audacious in the fight for their rights. Their righteous indignation is palpable. This once-upon-a-time supposed structureless and amorphous segment of the society has become the rejected stone that has ironically formed the cornerstone of our democracy.

The days of taking the youths for granted by corrupt and unpopular governments are clearly over. An IG which they perceive as antithetical to their interests and aspirations might be the needed signal to spark off another round of mass protests, in a way and manner that may dovetail into ponderous chaos and anarchy. Who knows where that might lead us to? The way forward is to overhaul our abused electoral jurisprudence and change the warped mind-set of our desperate “politricians”. The stubborn fly that refuses to hear the voice of its mother usually accompanies the casket into the grave.

The lessons are quite clear to us all. Our elders tell us that if you tell a man a proverb and proceed to interpret it to him, then the dowry paid on his mother’s head becomes a waste.  A word is enough for the wise. A stitch in time saves nine.