The mishandling of the Omoyele Sowore case has become clearly an albatross for the Nigerian government, an embarrassment for the incumbent Federal Government and a public relations disaster for both the Department of State Services and Nigeria as a whole. All of that was patently avoidable. Inadvertently, the Federal Government has turned Omoyele Sowore into a “hero”, a symbol for resilience against official impunity in Nigeria, and a poster figure for courage and boldness. In using the law to paint him as “an enemy of the state”, they have ended up painting the Nigerian state as an “enemy of the rule of law, due process and judicial independence.” This was a station Nigeria supposedly left with the return to civilian rule in 1999. What is happening in the Sowore case is akin to a turning back of the hands of the clock. Whatever happens, the Nigerian government with the psycho/melodrama, last week at a Federal High Court in Abuja now finds itself in a Catch-22 situation. 

Whatever may be the weight and proof of evidence at the disposal of the prosecutors, the mismanagement of the optics and the process, has turned Sowore into a hero. If he is convicted in the long run, he will be considered a prisoner of conscience. Even if the Federal Government enters a nolle prosequi, and the case dies judicially, Sowore could run as far as he can on the global stage with the national honour that the Nigerian Government would have mistakenly bestowed upon him. He and his followers have shown a greater and better understanding of the dialectics of power, history and protest than the Nigerian Government. A basic rule in this dynamics is to know the enemy, and adopt a “counter-revolutionary” strategy. In this instance, the Nigerian Government has so far played Sowore’s game and I dare say they have played into his hands. Even if they win in the court of law, or succeed in further violating the orders of the courts, I do not see the government winning in the courts of local and international public opinion. For President Muhammadu Buhari who by now should worry more about his legacy, as the clock ticks and time passes, this should be a matter of great concern beyond the incredulous statements issued by Nigeria’s secret police and the unhelpful, chest-beating declarations on his behalf by Presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu. It is sad that the Buhari administration is repeating the mistake of 1984, most unnecessarily. 

Sowore is the owner of the game so far and that is not by happenstance. He may not qualify as a man of ideology to the extent that he is not popularizing either scientific socialism or its alternative, caught as he is at the intersection of neo-liberalism complexity and a revolutionary conviction that is couched in shades of populism and opportunism. But his mastery of the psychology of protest is unimpeachable. He is definitely not new to activism and its tactics. A graduate of Geography and Regional Planning of the University of Lagos, Nigeria (1989 – 1995), and holder of a Master’s degree in Public Administration, Columbia University, United States, Sowore’s life has been one of consistent involvement in protest. He was, between 1992 and 1994, President of the Student’s Union Government at the University of Lagos. This was at a time corruption and cultism were reportedly rife at that university. Sowore turned the SUG into a machinery for exposing cultists and corrupt elements. The University expelled him twice. It took him six years to complete a four-year programme. In 1992, he led an army of 5, 100 students against the Ibrahim Babangida military government. Many activists were killed. Sowore survived. He was also a June Twelver: the pro-democracy coalition that rejected the annulment of the 1993 Presidential election that was won by Chief M.K.O Abiola. He stood with other men of conscience at the barricades. Many were killed and maimed. The Abacha military hauled hundreds of persons into jail.  Sowore would eventually find his way to a life in exile in the United States where he created an online platform, Sahara Reporters, through which he launched another campaign against excesses in Nigeria. 

I know Sowore. Let me rephrase that: I know his type, that is his persona. There are people like him who are psychologically wired to find something to fight, or protest against.  It is the adrenalin that drives them. They are motivated by the urge to change either the world or their immediate environment, and they take on that task as a mission. Whoever tries to offer them a contrary advice does so in vain; they believe that it is in a life of struggle that the meaning of life inheres. This may place their lives and the lives of others at risk but they often do not care. Their vision of reality is to identify a fault line in the immediate environment and seek to change it. The more you try to persuade them otherwise, the more they insist. When they are bored with a particular mode of intervention, they invent new ones. They often come across as selfish, stubborn and ambitious, but the curious thing is that the Establishment in seeking to protect the status quo, helps the cause of such persons by going after them with the coercive instruments of state and power. For many years, Sowore was known as a students’ union activist, anti-corruption crusader, blogger and social critic. In 2018, he decided to join partisan politics. He founded and registered a political party, the African Action Congress (AAC) and was chosen as the Presidential Candidate of the party. His main message was that Nigeria had been captured by unconscionable, incompetent and corrupt  elements to the people’s disadvantage and that the country needed to be taken back to the people. He ran a spirited campaign, falling back on his old constituency – the youth of Nigeria and students’ groups across the country. He spoke the language of the streets, and relied on street credibility. He didn’t dress like the other politicians. He didn’t speak their language. He had unusual ideas - such as proposing to legitimize the cultivation, consumption and export of marijuana as a way of diversifying the Nigerian economy and expanding the country’s revenue base. He was a maverick, and an outsider, seeking power. As is the case with his likes, he made significant impact. His party, the AAC became an issue in the Gubernatorial politics of Rivers State, even if not in a manner he approved of. In the Presidential election, Sowore came tenth with 33, 953 votes (0.12%). This should not be seen in terms of the numbers recorded, but the impact that he made in an election that was marred by irregularities and reports of manipulation. He had no money, but it was clear he had a voice and a base, beyond the actual numbers. 

Sowore had three options thereafter: he could have gone back to the United States and focus on his teaching and blogging engagements, or count his losses and hold his tails between his legs, or perhaps go to court to challenge the outcome of the 2019 Nigerian Presidential election. Instead, he condemned the outcome, and launched in due course a #RevolutionNow movement through which he announced a plan to mobilise Nigerians generally to “take the government back”. It was a bold move. It was a courageous response. It was an act of affront against the government. But unpacked, it was obvious that the strongest weapon in Sowore’s arsenal was rhetoric, free speech, orange berets and placards. He had just a handful of people around him, wearing orange berets, emblazoned with the emblem of his political party, the AAC, and non-party members who also screamed that they wanted a “revolution”. As they defined it, they wanted change and improvement in the lives of Nigerians. I was convinced that given the sociology of protests in Nigeria, the #RevolutionNow campaign was at best academic, especially given the balance of forces in the country, with all the coercive instruments of state power firmly deposited in the hands of the Buhari administration. Existential considerations in Nigeria are also so tragically circumstanced. It would take more than the wearing of berets and the chanting of slogans to move the needle. Sowore’s activism adopts the exact tactics of campus journalism, students’ unionism and civil society protest. He does not come across as a man of violence to warrant the panic response and over-reaction of the state.    

But the state, represented by the Department of Sate Services, Nigeria’s secret police, over-reacted. On August 3, 2019 they stormed Sowore’s residence in Lagos and Gestapo-style, abducted him in the middle of the night, breaking down doors and windows. Members of the #RevolutionNow protest later went ahead with the protest scheduled for August 5. Hundreds of them were arrested across Nigeria, notably in Southern Nigeria where the protest was basically concentrated. Today, the public only hears of two names in DSS custody: Omoyele Sowore and Olawale Bakare (aka Mandate). It is not impossible that there are some unnamed and overlooked #RevolutionNow protesters languishing in some Awaiting Trial prisons in parts of the country. Five months after Nigeria’s general elections in 2019, it suddenly became a crime to use the word “revolution” or make any reference to “change”. Sowore and his allies dared the state and Nigeria found itself confronted with a most problematic post-election situation. My argument is: it could all have been handled differently and far more intelligently.  

By over-reacting, the Federal Government has turned Omoyele Sowore into “the Bobi Wine of Nigeria.”  Nigeria’s Department of State Services has only managed to increase Sowore’s political capital. 

He was granted bail on September 24, 2019. The secret police ignored the court’s order.  The Court varied the original terms, upon request by Sowore’s counsel and granted another bail order on October 4.  Nigeria’s secret police again disobeyed the court. It constituted itself into a Court of Appeal, and gave conditions not contained in the Order of Court. The agency further indulged itself with rationalisation that simply looked stupid in the eyes of right-thinking members of society: (1) “Sowore and other detained persons prefer to stay in DSS detention because the agency has five-star facilities” (does that sound intelligent?) and (2): “Sowore is better off in the custody of the state secret police so he doesn’t get killed by a hit and run vehicle” (auto-suggestion?), and (3) “The DSS could not release Sowore and Bakare because nobody had shown up to receive them (how about the counsel – Femi Falana, SAN,  who retorted that he had made every effort to receive the detained persons, now legitimately granted bail, but not even the Director General of DSS, who is well known to him,  would grant him audience?) and (4) “For Sowore and Bakare to be released, their sureties must report to the DSS and go through proper documentation” (was that part of the bail conditions declared by the Court – No?). 

In the face of public outrage, the DSS bared its fangs. When a group of Concerned Nigerians tried to visit the DSS Headquarters in Abuja to demand the release of Swore and Bakare in compliance with Court Orders, they were tear-gassed, brutalized, shot at and dispersed. On December 4, the court of Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu gave the DSS a 24-hour ultimatum to release Swore and pay him a sum of N100, 000 as damages or face the wrath of the law.  Clearly in response to the outrage and the vitriolic comments that the government’s brazen disregard for the rule of law had generated, and the threat by the Court to charge the DSS boss for contempt, the agency promptly complied. Sowore and Bakare were released. On December 5, both parties were back in Court and the judge fixed the commencement of trial on the 4-count charge against Sowore -  treason, money laundering, insulting the President and cyberstalking -  for February 11, 2020. The Judge even praised the DSS for respecting her ruling of December 4. But then hell broke loose as the DSS re-arrested Sowore within court premises without an arrest warrant and an order of detention and without recourse to the court of law. In 24 hours, the DSS reversed itself and in doing so, embarrassed the Nigerian government and exposed it to ridicule.

There have been conflicting versions of what exactly transpired, but whatever that was, it is Omoyele Sowore and his counsel who are controlling the narrative. Nobody believes the DSS! An intelligence agency should never lose the trust and confidence of the people. It must not become partisan. In 2018, a team of DSS officers attacked the National Assembly. In 2019, the same DSS took over the premises of a Federal High Court and abducted a man standing trial. Nigerians are convinced that the DSS is pursuing a political agenda. No amount of press statements can correct that impression at this point. The Presidency’s statement “in support of the DSS” is also absurd because it puts President Buhari on the spot. No state official should ever use the President as “a scapegoat.”  Others should take the bullets for him. The public has every right to accuse the President because he is the Head of Government and Head of Sate but to tell the public that an agency of the Executive arm of government can do as it wishes because it has a constitutional mandate and that the President should not be blamed is an endorsement of fascism. 

The Presidency is urged to take notice of the local and international reactions to the Sowore saga and retrace its steps. Release Sowore and Bakare, investigate and sanction rogue elements in the DSS, and design a strategy to change the narrative. Many revolutionaries often fail by overstretching their luck and by over-estimating their own preparedness. Sowore in the course of his present travails should also watch his back. His wife, mother and children want him back alive, and they have the backing of the United States and the Nigerian civil society.  He too should learn to live and fight another day: (because) “… he who is in battle slain can never rise to fight again” (Oliver Goldsmith). 

Members of the Nigerian National Assembly, and by extension lawmakers across the country, have been under scrutiny lately with regard to their engagements with citizen-voters whose interest they are expected to represent in parliament. Two issues: constituency projects and constituency offices. President Muhammadu Buhari brought the issue of constituency projects to public attention when at an event organized by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), in November, he lamented that there is very little evidence or benefit to the grassroots of the One Trillion Naira that had been earmarked for constituency projects in the last 10 years. This is the main finding of a tracking report on Constituency Projects conducted by the ICPC, the anti-corruption agency which has further announced that the North East is the most affected region where constituency projects were not carried out, or abandoned either due to Boko Haram insurgency or the negligence of the lawmakers from the area. ICPC is launching a probe. The second issue is that of constituency offices. In its lead story of Monday, December 2, 2019, The Punch newspaperfocused at length on the issue of constituency offices: “Five months after inauguration: Senators yet to set up constituency offices – Lawmakers shun constituents. People seek assistance for social events – Senators,” the paper declares. I intend to deal with this latter issue first and subsequently return  to the matter of constituency projects.

Lawmakers are expected to have constituency offices in the same manner in which they open campaign offices during the election season. A constituency office is a contact address for keeping in touch with the public, a place where the lawmaker can be contacted by his constituents to engage and relate with him, submit petitions for his attention and action, obtain feedback from him about his work in the legislature and draw his attention to community priorities or basically seek help from him or her. Every state in Nigeria has a state of Assembly with members representing local governments. There are 109 members in the Senate, located in the Federal Capital Territory and 360 seats in the House of Representatives. Every lawmaker represents a constituency, they link national and state politics to the grassroots, reinforcing the notion that politics is essentially local and people-centred. In most jurisdictions, constituency offices are funded by parliament or the executive, and the lawmaker gets a constituency allowance to maintain a properly staffed office. Usually, the legislative calendar is also structured in such a way that lawmakers are given enough time within a year to enable them return to base to interact with the people they represent.  

The investigative story in The Punch, earlier referenced, reveals what many Nigerians have always observed since the return to civilian rule in 1999: that is the alienation between parliamentarians and the people, and the urgent need for parliamentary strengthening within the context of citizen relations and wider local, political and sociological forces. The Punch reveals that most law makers in the Senate, five months after the 2019 general elections, do not have any office in their constituencies. The same can be said for other lawmakers. Those who probably have offices are in the minority. This is the Nigerian way. Politicians tend to remember the people only during election seasons.  In order to get the people’s votes, in those places where the people are still allowed to make their own choice unfettered, the political office seeker needs to be seen to be popular with the people, he or she must have followers and supporters.  A politician seeking a position cannot close the doors to either his office or home: he must maintain an open door policy. Many of the visitors to his home or campaign office may even be members of the opposition parties. He is obliged to welcome them and find ways to encourage them to switch their loyalty to him and his party. In the home of a Nigerian politician, food and drinks during the campaign season must not be in short supply. People will eat and drink and collect transport fare, even if they live within the neighborhood. The politician needs them. They too need him. They serve one purpose in particular: apart from keeping the campaign machinery going; they also help to keep hope alive. They will never tell the politician that he would lose the election or that he is unpopular. They will oxygenate him with so much hope, he would begin to see visions of overwhelming victory. Of what use is a Nigerian politician if nobody visits?

But this relationship often changes shape and colour immediately after the elections have been won and lost. The politician who loses election shuts his doors and withdraws into his shell to go count his losses in the privacy of his space. The supporters also instinctively withdraw, leaving behind only a core group of close associates. The crowd would eventually thin out: the same supporters who predicted victory would quietly move on to support the winner of the election. Politicians are pragmatists: even if they are die-hard party members, you can legitimately expect some of them to jump ship. But the major point in The Punch lead story is how politicians having secured victory at the polls tend to abandon the people. They become inaccessible. They lock their gates, now manned by fierce-looking security guards or able-bodied men or both. The same man who used to buy roasted corn by the road side and personally serve the political crowd food, suddenly hides inside bullet proof vehicles, and siren-blaring convoy. He is now “Your Excellency.”  If he is a Governor, he moves into Government House which is a no-go-area for ordinary people. If he is a Member of the House of Assembly, he becomes “Honourable” and he leaves the neighborhood for Legislative Quarters, in a secluded part of the state capital. Don’t expect to see him coming around to play football with his age mates as he used to before he rode on the people’s back to the Assembly. If he is elected as a member of the National Assembly, he would rather hide in Abuja. He may open a constituency office, but you’d never find him there. The poor boy or girl who occasionally keeps the place open to create an impression, has a ready answer: “Honourable is in Abuja!” “Senator is not around.” 

Thus, the objective of representation/accountability, citizen engagement and feedback, is defeated. The Punch in its story interviewed a number of Senators. While one or two affirm that they run constituency offices, the overall impression is that this is not the case generally. And why? We are told that some lawmakers stay away from their constituencies for security reasons. Lawmakers from the North West and the North East run away from their constituencies either because of Boko Haram insurgency or the fear of being attacked. One Northern lawmaker was once stripped naked and given the beating of his life by his constituents. Lawmakers from the East are afraid of kidnappers… But generally, lawmakers complain about the pressure they face whenever they have any encounter with their constituents or other members of society. It is as if nobody is interested in their main assignment of defending the people’s interests and making laws for good governance while also acting as a check on the Executive arm of government. The people are just interested in financial help: they want the lawmaker to help pay hospital bills, feed their families, get jobs for their children, sponsor a wedding, attend a funeral and make a generous contribution towards every expense. Community groups, religious bodies, market women associations, the council of church elders, the association of herbalists and spiritual masters…they all seek financial help from the elected representative. Many are unable to bear the pressure. They simply run away, or go into hiding. They hide in Abuja or the state capital. Nigerian politics, before or after the election, is so money-driven, a weak politician may be tempted to resort to armed robbery in order to live up to expectations. The crisis is complicated by the lack of opportunities for the people, and the widespread epidemic of poverty in the land. The country lacks a social security system. Politicians and their political parties have no poverty reduction strategies. Nonetheless, no politician should run away from the people because they seek help from him or her. Constituency work is part of the lawmaker’s mandate. To build a positive reputation, he must connect with citizens and other politicians. 

What often happens in this regard, is that as another election cycle approaches and the politician needs the people again to achieve his ambition, he suddenly rediscovers them.  He goes back home bearing cash and other gifts. Each politician has his or her style: they could distribute cash, clothing materials, phone sets, grinding machines, generators, motorcycles and tricycles, bags of rice, kegs of ground oil. Food is prepared. A musician is invited to entertain the people. But the politician makes sure the photographs of the items to be distributed are carefully taken and the event itself is video-taped. Journalists are invited to cover the event of course. The politician grants interviews professing his love for “my people.” Usually, the money that is spent on publicity and self-promotion is more than the actual amount spent on the people. It is also common these days to have anyone in power set up a Foundation. One lawmaker bought two electric poles and dug a borehole for his community. Another one built a latrine. Both men advertised the events in newspapers and on national television! 

These politicians would later turn around to boast that they have provided constituency projects in their communities.  They are rewarded with chieftaincy titles, the Knighthood of Forgotten Saints, or some other decorations. But what is a constituency project? Do National Assembly members fund constituency projects from their own pockets? If they do, so why would the allocation for Constituency Projects be a matter of contention between the Executive and the Legislature during every budget preparation and consideration process? If constituency projects are budgeted for in Nigeria, is the Fund handed over to each lawmaker as is the case in some other African countries? Since President Buhari and the ICPC brought up the matter of constituency projects in the last month, members of the National Assembly have been having a meltdown trying to defend themselves. Femi Gbajabiamila, Speaker of the House of Representatives in response to the allegation that Constituency Projects have swallowed over a Trillion Naira, responded that only N500 billion was released. So, who and who got the N500 billion? Where are the projects?  Who are the contractors? Other lawmakers have told us that their only connection with constituency projects is to help identify priority and useful projects in their constituencies. They insist that the projects are implemented by the Executive through Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and if anybody is to be held accountable it should be these MDAs. This same position was repeated by Senator Ali Ndume, (Borno South –APC), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Army, in response to the ICPC claim that the worst abuse of constituency projects is in the North East where Ndume hails from. My gut feeling is that we certainly do not know enough about these constituency projects. There is something we need to know that nobody is telling us.  At least not yet. For example, are there members of the National Assembly who also double as contractors to the MDAs for the execution of constituency projects?  

Senator Ali Ndume says he is proposing a bill for the establishment of a Commission to track constituency projects. I disagree. Monitoring and evaluation of constituency projects is important, but Nigeria does not need a whole Commission to do that. The first step would be for the National Assembly to have a proper data base on constituency projects: which project is being done and where? Who is the lawmaker behind it and which constituency, MDA or contractor is involved? The relevant Committees of the National Assembly should also monitor the projects and the disbursements, and every detail should be made public, particularly for the benefit of the constituents who are the direct beneficiaries. Perhaps when the constituents are properly informed about these projects, they will have every reason to ask questions. For now, politicians throw money at their constituents whenever they can, while accountability is shoved aside. The political parties also have no structure or means for monitoring the performance or the commitment of their members in public positions. That too, must change. Every politician in public office must open a constituency office and make himself or herself available to the people.  A new typology of role playing for Nigerian politicians and a strategic pattern of behavior aligning district behavior with national responsibilities in general is what we need.         

 Governor of Osun State, Adegboyega Oyetola

Tomorrow, November 27, 2019, it would be exactly one year since the Governor of Osun State, Adegboyega Oyetola was sworn in as Governor of Osun State. The circumstances of his emergence as Governor were quite controversial at the time, especially as the Osun Gubernatorial election was analyzed in the context of the then forthcoming general elections in February/March 2019. The election in Osun, and the one that came earlier in July 2018 in Ekiti state were both seen as dress rehearsals, and indeed a test for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the security agencies and all the institutions and stakeholders involved in the election management process. The Osun Gubernatorial election was held on September 22, 2018. The Electoral Commission declared the election inconclusive in seven polling units across four council areas in the state, and a re-run in those areas was scheduled for September 27, 2018: one polling unit in Oyere in Ife-North, one polling unit in Olode in Ife-South, one polling unit in Osi, Ife South, three polling units in Orolu, Kajola LGA, and one polling unit in Osogbo.

After the re-run, Oyetola was declared winner with a total number of 255, 505 votes while Senator Ademola Adeleke of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) got 255, 023 votes. There were protests. The Peoples Democratic Party kicked. The Coalition of Political Parties (CUPP) cried blue murder. Local and international observers reported that there had been a foul play. This was for a reason: in the original election of September 22, 2018, Ademola Adeleke of the PDP had won the election with 353 votes:  254, 698 votes against Oyetola’s 254, 345 votes. The total vote in the seven polling units that decided the final outcome in the re-run was a mere 2, 637 votes. 

The PDP therefore insisted that its candidate had been robbed, and that the election had been manipulated to favour the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Many observers focused on the role of Senator Iyiola Omisore, former chieftain of the PDP who became gubernatorial candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP).  He came third in the September 22 election. He was accused of selling out to the All Progressives Congress (APC) whose chieftains visited him and reportedly cut a deal with him ahead of the September 27 re-run. For record purposes, PDP leaders led by Senator Bukola Saraki also visited Omisore.  Three of the contested polling units were in Omisore’s constituency: Ife North and Ife South.  Omisore became the beautiful bride of the re-run, and with him leaning t6owards the APC, the calculations favoured the APC. The PDP lost out. In the end, the PDP dismissed the Osun election and its outcome as “a black day” for Nigeria. The party went to the Election Petition Tribunal. Its candidate also insisted before the Tribunal that he was the rightful winner of the Gubernatorial election in Osun State. He dismissed the result announced by INEC as a “419 result” that should not be allowed to stand. The APC through its spokespersons enjoined the people of Osun State to ignore the ranting of losers. 

The dispute went from the Tribunal, to the Appeal Court, all the way to the Supreme Court. At the level of the Election Petitions Tribunal, Ademola Adeleke of the PDP was declared winner. The three-man panel voted 2-1, to dismiss the September 27, 2018 re-run, supplementary, election as illegal. The Tribunal ruled that Adeleke won the election at the first ballot on September 22, 2018, and hence, the declaration of Oyetola as winner was “null and void.” Oyetola and the APC naturally appealed the Tribunal’s judgement. What followed was tha  the Appeal Court ruled in their favour resolving 10 out of the 12 issues raised on appeal, in favour of Oyetola. The five-man panel voted 4-1 with Justice George Ita Mbaba dissenting.

The legal contestation did not end here. It continued at the Supreme Court. On Friday, July 5, 2019, the Supreme Court ruled in a split decision of 5-2 that the proceedings and the majority judgment of the Osun State Election Petition Tribunal could not stand. Thus, five Justices of the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Appeal Court in the matter and nullified the decision of the Tribunal. Oyetola’s election was thus validated. Aggrieved PDP politicians argued that Gboyega Oyetola was helped by the power of  APC incumbency at both state and Federal levels, and that the Osun election had been manipulated from the polls to the courts. There were also two other theories: one, that Oyetola was chosen as Rauf Aregbesola’s successor based on an internal arrangement between him and APC leader, Bola Tinubu and two, that Oyetola is Tinubu’s relation who was installed to sustain and re-affirm Tinubu’s influence in his “alleged original homestead”. In politics, there is never a shortage of conspiracy theories. But in an unusual show of magnanimity, Senator Ademola Adeleke, the PDP Gubernatorial candidate, promptly congratulated Governor Gboyega Oyetola on his victory at the Supreme Court.  He said he accepted the ruling of the Supreme Court, “no matter his misgivings” because for him, the election was “never a do-or-die affair”. Good point. 

While the litigation lasted, Governor Gboyega Oyetola ran what could at best be described as an “interim government.”  He was Governor of Osun state for 10 months with just a handful of supervisors – seven actually- and a few aides. It was only on September 24, 2019, two months after the validation of his mandate by the Supreme Court that he sent a list of commissioner-designates and special advisers to the Osun State House of Assembly as Governor.  My preliminary comment is that there are many lessons to be learnt from the debacle of the Osun State Gubernatorial election of 2018 and the emergence of Governor Oyetola as de facto and de jure Governor of the State. 

Osun State was meant to be the dress and technical rehearsal for the 2019 general elections in Nigeria, but ironically, it is from this same Osun State that we have seen the most notable demonstration of civility, common sense and maturity in the management of electoral crisis. The leadership of the two major political parties in the state - APC and PDP, against local and external promptings, refused the temptation to escalate the political differences in the state. Adeleke displayed maturity. Oyetola of the APC has been calm and level headed through the storm. They have both shown us that whereas elections may lead to a storm, it is the survival of the state and the people’s welfare that is supreme. Other elections have been held since the Osun election of 2018 and we have all seen on graphic display, the greed and madness of the political elite. Osun despite all negative predictions, remains stable and peaceful. 

As Gboyega Oyetola celebrates his one year in office tomorrow, and his survival of the travails of his emergence, it seems to me that he deserves a round of applause. Let me state that I don’t have a dog in Osun politics, what the people of Osun state do to themselves cannot in any way affect the price of a cup of garri (cassava flakes) in my own state of origin. I am a completely neutral observer, taking us back to the roots of the 2019 electoral process and what became of our expectations in the case of Osun under review, for us to look back, remember, reflect and ask the question: how far? When political gladiators fight, it is the people that suffer. Whatever happened in Osun state in 2018, is not even anything close to what we have witnessed in the Gubernatorial elections in Rivers, Zamfara, Kano, Kogi and Bayelsa states and it is the people who are waiting to suffer. What I see in Osun is the attempt by the Governor to make up for the delay and the crisis that attended the process of his emergence. From functioning as an interim, cautious leader, he has since the Supreme Court verdict crawled out of his shell. The appointment of Commissioners and Special advisers is one indication of his determination to set sail. 

But perhaps the biggest and loudest demonstration of his vision, ambition and focus is the Osun Economic and Investment Summit, 2019, which held in Osogbo, the state capital, November 19 -21, 2019, that is last week, and just a week ahead of Oyetola’s one year in office. The event was originally scheduled for June 25 to 27, 2019 to be declared open by the Vice President of Nigeria, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, but it was then postponed, I guess understandably. At the originally scheduled time, Oyetola had unresolved matters before the court, challenging his status. As at July 5 2019, his position as de jure Governor had already been confirmed. His decision to hold the Osun Economic Investment Summit, November 19 – 21, was in a sense an affirmation of his confidence in his status.  If anyone was in any doubt about Oyetola’s mission, he has now made it very clear what that mission is. The Osun Economic Investment Summit is meant “to promote investment in identified sectors to guarantee continuous growth of the state’s economy: youth employment, food security, agricultural development, tourism, and the state’s mining prospects.” The theme of the summit is “pathway to economic growth for the state of Osun 2019.” It was a well attended Summit and by all accounts, it was successful.

But note this: Osun state is one of the poorest states in Nigeria. Its close to five million people are mired in poverty because over the years, let’s say since 1999, successive administrations have taken advantage of the people. They reduced Osun state to a civil servant state, relying on hand-outs from the Federation Account. Oyetola is the fourth civilian Governor of the state since 1999.  Before him, Chief Bisi Akande ran the state with moral authority.  Olagunsoye Oyinlola had the right connections and influence. Comrade Rauf Aregbesola brought into play a socialist philosophy but he ended up being the most anti-worker Governor in Osun State since inception. Oyetola served as Aregbesola’s Chief of Staff. With his Economic and Investment Summit and road map, he asserts his independent economic philosophy. Nonetheless, he has to manage it carefully. 

Osun is one of the most resourced states in the South West. It is an agro-based economy turned into a civil servant state. It is also the foremost cultural hub in the South West region of Nigeria. Osun State is the home of the cultural majesty of the Ooni of Ife, the Alaafin of Oyo and some of the foremost Obas in Yorubaland. A substantial heritage of the Yoruba Empire sits in Osun State. It is the cradle of the Yorubas. Osun State is also the home of the University of Ife, later named after the Yoruba icon, legend and spirit, Chief Obafemi Awolowo. Most Yoruba communities, local and diaspora, also trace their ancestry and roots to Osun State. The most significant tourism sites in the South West are situated in Osun State. Osun state alone boasts of 78 annual festivals and 65 tourism sites. Osun is better resourced culturally and tourism-wise than Dubai, Hong Kong and Seychelles. It has a population of close to five million. But unlike Dubai, Osun State till date has not explored its potentials. Everyone knows about the Osun Oshogbo festival and the cultural strength of Osun State. But Osun state’s tourism potential has so far been organized as events, not as economic opportunities. In fact, some of the leading artistes in Nigeria are from Osun State: Nike, Duro Ladipo, and Wale Ogunyemi of blessed memory, Muraina Oyelami, and a long list of actors and artistes. Osun state is the cultural epicenter of Yorubaland.  Ironically, it is also the crossroads of tradition and modernity: Osun State has the largest collection of pastors, prophets and prophetesses in Nigeria.  

Osun state is also agro-based. Its people are primarily farmers and they are hard-working and productive. But the obsession with petro-dollar by the 70s made every Nigerian lazy.  By the late 70s, the people of Osun State, like others in the Western region who used to survive and progress on the basis of the wealth and sweat of their own region in the 60s, began to depend on the extractive products of the Niger Delta region. They stopped farming. They abandoned their comparative advantage. Oyetola wants to change that. He wants to turn around the economy of Osun State.  Osun State has gold deposits and an overlooked mining economy. The Odutola Brothers of Ijebu Ode started their business empire as gold miners in Ilesa which is part of the present Osun state. As the biographer of one (opportunity provided by Baba Obasanjo) and “son/friend of the other”, I am in a positon to say that Osun state had been a viable state long before Oyetola was born. His attempt to revive the state’ s potential through economy and investment deserves support and encouragement. His focus on tourism and agriculture is brilliant. 

As he celebrates his one year in office tomorrow, he should move beyond the politics of his emergence, and focus on making life better for the people of Osun State. So far, he has put his hands on a good thing. He must realize however that there are other issues of urgent consideration. He must work with the Federal Government to ensure the right enabling environment. The road to Osun state, from every direction, is in very bad shape. Whoever wants to invest in Osun State should have stress-free access. The roads, in and out, must be motorable. The security of lives must also be guaranteed. Late-coming to events in Osun State must be abolished as state policy. He is allowed to dance and wine tomorrow, but the morning after, let him remember his many promises to the people who earnestly hope that he would do better than those who came before him.  The Osun Economic Investment Summit should not be a jamboree or another event: it should be a new beginning for Osun state in all the identified sectors: from mining to agriculture to ICT and tourism, and if I may add- governance!  

 Tunde Fowler

When, in October, President Muhammadu Buhari presented to the National Assembly the Appropriation Bill for 2020, he submitted along with the budget proposal as it is known, a Fiscal Strategy or Finance Bill, 2019. The Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning has since then spoken about the importance of the Finance Bill, to the growth of the Nigerian economy. The stated objective is to promote fiscal equity, address problems with the prevailing taxation order, and reform existing taxation laws in line with global best practices. The Bill contains changes to the Companies and Income Tax Act, Value Added Tax Act (which has been quite controversial), Personal Income Tax Act, Capital Gains Tax Act (CGTA), Customs and Excise Tariff (Consolidation) Act, Stamp Duties Act and Petroleum Profits Tax Act (PPTA). Overall, the Bill seeks to expand the government’s revenue base, strengthen the extant regulatory framework (??) and also provide incentives for small and medium scale enterprises as engines of economic growth and development.  The Minister is pleased that the Bill has already passed the second reading stage in the National Assembly. No one should be surprised about that. The present National Assembly will pass anything presented to it by the Executive with unprecedented enthusiasm.  

It should be noted, however, that despite all efforts that have been made to reform taxation in Nigeria and turn taxation into a strong vehicle for effective governance, Nigeria’s tax receipts have remained relatively low. The country’s tax-to GDP ratio is one of the lowest in the world. It is far below the average in sub-Saharan Africa. The Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP) targets a tax-to-GDP ratio of 15% by 2020.  Current efforts by the Nigerian government to focus on tax reform is in part a response to arguments by both home-based and foreign analysts that Nigeria needs to diversify its revenue base, and expand government revenue if it hopes to meet its targets of double-digit economic growth, wealth creation and sustainable development through foreign direct investment and local entrepreneurship, and of course a tax-to-GDP ratio of 15% by 2020, which is certainly, ambitious because the real problem is productivity and earnings. 

There are specific challenges that stand in the way of these targets: (a) Nigeria’s over-dependence on extractives, particular crude oil, which accounts for 80% of the country’s forex receipts, and a casual attitude to revenue collection and taxation – for 20 years, for example,  nobody deemed it necessary to protect Nigeria’s interest under Section 16 of the Production Sharing Contracts Agreements Act with international oil companies – resulting in a calculated loss of between $28 - $62 billion dollars for the country; (b) the weakness of tax laws, institutions and policies in the country, the effect of which is a low quality tax system; (c) the negative attitude of the Nigerian tax payer towards taxation. The average Nigerian tax payer does not trust the tax authorities and (d) there are also issues of transparency, accountability – (that is lack of accountability for collected revenues) and good governance which accounts for the poor administration of the country’s tax system. 

It must be admitted nonetheless that there is some merit to the cumulative efforts that have been made over the years, to transform the tax regime in the country, or to be more specific, to encourage non-oil revenues, and mobilise non-compliant taxpayers to see the need for tax payment as a civic responsibility. After independence, an Income Tax Management Act (ITMA) was enacted in 1961. There was also the Companies Income Tax Act No 22 of 1961 (CITA) which placed corporate taxation under the control of the Federal Board of Inland Revenue (FBIR). In 1979, CITA, 1961 was replaced with the CITA Decree No. 28 of 1979. The FBIR was responsible for the operationalization of the Act. In 1991, the Federal Government set up a study group on Nigeria’s tax system, whose recommendation led to the Finance Decree of 1993 and the establishment of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), State Boards of Internal Revenue and Local Government Revenue Committees.  There were other efforts at tax reform in 1992 (led by Dr. Sylvester Ugoh), in 2002 (led by Professor Dotun Phillips), in 2004 (led by Seyi Bickersteth) and in 2012 (led by Mckinsey and Co). The turning point at the Federal level was in 2004. 

At the state level, Lagos State took the lead in this regard as far back as 1999 and by 2007, the state was already directly reminding Lagos residents of how tax payer’s money was working for them thus linking taxation to good governance and accountability.  Many Nigerians are not motivated to pay tax though, because they do not trust the political elite or tax administrators and they hardly ever see why they should pay tax when everyone else is enjoying oil money. Tax evasion is therefore common and this is even facilitated by tax officials who take a cut of the reviewed rates and help to doctor the papers. In truth, tax payers do not also see why they should pay any tax when paid taxes are likely to be mismanaged to fund the wasteful official and private lives of elected or appointed officials. Given new realities however, that is: the volatility of oil prices, the pro-climate change, anti-hydrocarbon lobby, increase in the production of Shale oil, increased inventories in non-OPEC countries, high budget deficit, mounting debt, a weak national currency, shifts in geo-politics beyond local control, slow domestic economic growth, Nigeria has every need to adopt new, workable and sustainable strategies. Institutionalizing a strong tax governance regime is only one of many options, but beyond all the problems already identified, the biggest challenge is the needless politicization of tax administration in Nigeria.  

This is precisely what the Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning and the President should worry about if Nigeria must achieve its stated objectives and targets with regard to revenue mobilisation and an efficient tax system. How can we insulate Nigeria’s tax system from politics and the greed of politicians? How do we ensure that an engine of growth and development does not become a play-field for political conflicts? I raise this point because this is what has been happening in the FIRS, and even at the state levels in recent times. Politicians want to get hold of the tax office. It is the favorite posting for anybody that a Godfather wants to help. Every jobless man wants his first job to be in the tax office or Customs or any department of government that is considered “juicy”. The juiciness or non-juiciness of an appointment must be a uniquely African and Nigerian invention. The way it works out is that whoever is appointed to a position that is considered “juicy” or influential is considered a target for attack and blackmail. Everybody wants the position. And the detractors would go to any length to pull the person occupying the attractive office down. We have seen traces of that in every administration and also in this administration.  Public service is an arena where you cannot trust anybody. You have to constantly look behind your shoulders. There are civil servants who tell you: “Yes sir, Yes sir” every other minute but they are busy compiling evidence against you to be used the day the Devil seizes control of their souls. There are politicians who believe that the office you occupy belongs to them because their kinsman is the President. 

Nigeria wants to diversify its revenue base and strengthen its revenue collection system. How do we do this without the threat of primitive politics? With regard to revenue collection, two departments of government at the Federal level are of primary importance: the Federal Inland Revenue Service and the Department of Customs and Excise. If President Buhari’s advisers would tell him the truth, he should know that both departments are in the eye of the storm. Some people and stakeholders want the leaders of both departments of government changed. In fact, with immediate effect if possible. I have nothing against Col. Hameed Ali. He can be there indeed for as long as the President needs his services in line with the Enabling Act but he needs to tone down his military-style tactics. The Customs under his watch has been more military than para-military. Locking down people’s shops, harassing car dealers and seizing cellophane bags of rice, turning the Customs into a military unit create the wrong impression, but no one can doubt the fact, however, that Hammed Ali loves his job and that he means well for Nigeria. With a little change of style and tactics, he is probably the Customs Manager that Nigeria needs. Those who are insisting that he should not be re-appointed should check his records of performance and state in clear terms their objections to his methods. 

Like Hameed Ali, Babatunde Fowler who heads the Federal Inland Revenue Service, the operational department for internal revenue is similarly embattled. There have been complaints and petitions against him purportedly signed by faceless and nameless staff who accuse him of all kinds of infractions including the engagement of consultants and using FIRS money to attend parties every weekend. Fowler denied all the allegations. His cowardly detractors have not provided any concrete evidence. When the blackmail failed, one Mr. Okwara, an Abuja-based lawyer went to court in Kano to ask Babatunde Fowler to vacate his office, on the grounds that his tenure expired in August 2019, having been appointed on August 20, 2015. The plaintiff alleged that Fowler’s continued stay in office is illegal unless he is re-appointed by President Muhammadu Buhari. Counsel for Fowler raised issues of locus standi and jurisdiction. The Court eventually threw out the case noting that whereas Fowler was appointed in acting capacity in August 2015, the effective date of his appointment was December 15, 2015, the very day the Senate conveyed its approval of his appointment. 

In August 2019, Fowler further received a query from the office of the Chief of Staff on the failure of the FIRS to meet revenue projections. He was required to explain “significant variances between the budgeted collections and actual collections for the period 2015 to 2018.”  Mischief-makers seized upon this to allege that they had been been vindicated.  Fowler responded to the query, and the Presidency issued a statement to say that t the FIRS boss was not being probed by the Presidency. Given the fact that the FIRS and Customs and other revenue collection agencies of government are given set targets, and the history of abuse of the processing of revenues, it should not come as a surprise if the Presidency demands explanations. 

But what is clear is that whenever a person’s tenure in government is about to end, especially if the person is imagined, thought, or considered, to be occupying a “juicy” position, and such a person is eligible for re-appointment, other persons who are interested in that position would embark on a campaign of blackmail and calumny. Their goal is to influence the appointing authority to get their quarry out of office in as vicious a manner as possible.  With regard to Nigeria’s fiscal strategy going forward, the Nigerian government must separate politics from policy if it hopes to make any difference. To avoid taking any rash decision, beyond policy, the administration must ask critical questions and conduct a proper audit of the revenue collection agencies, and their leadership.  Is Hameed Ali, a soldier in Customs, terrorizing everybody as alleged? Even if he brings in high revenue? The people who accuse Fowler in FIRS, do they mean well for Nigeria or they are just resisting change? What is their motive? Do they just want Fowler out because they think he is close to persons who may be interested in the Presidential politics of 2023?

I understand Hameed Ali has nothing to fear. But Fowler? Appointed in August 2015 in an acting capacity, and subsequently as Chairman of the FIRS in December 2015, Babatunde Fowler’s first tenure appointment expires on December 15, 2019. He can only remain in that position if he is re-appointed by the President. Fowler, a former banker, was the pioneer Chair of the Lagos State Inland Revenue Service (LIRS). When he assumed office at the Federal level in 2015, FIRS revenue stood at N3.2 trillion. The figure at the end of 2018 was N5.3 trillion, this increase came at a time the economy suffered recession and oil prices crashed. Fowler’s FIRS recorded non-oil tax revenue of N2.85 trillion in 2018 alone, representing more than half of the total revenue for the year. He encouraged innovation and automation.  In 2016, he was elected President/Chairman of the African tax body, the African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF). In October 2018, he was re-elected for another term of two years in that position.  His term expires in October 2020 as head of the African Tax Forum. In 2017, the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres further appointed Babatunde Fowler as a member of the International Experts Committee on Tax Matters. 

As I write, Fowler is in Kampala Uganda, as Nigeria’s ambassador, providing leadership as Africa’s Tax Chief. The African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF) is by the way, 10 years old today. The 4^th Conference of African Tax Administrators, international organizations, civil society groups, academics and policy makers is also being held today in Kampala, Uganda, the same city where the inaugural meeting of the Forum was held in 2009. The Forum’s theme for this year is “Innovation: Digitalization and Harnessing Technology ICT to improve tax systems”. Nigeria’s Babatunde Fowler is leading that entire process. Back home, he is being derided by some faceless characters. Those who should be proud of him are trying to pull him down. We must not reduce tax administration in Nigeria to petty politics. In the long run, tax management must be linked to per capita income and productivity within the economy, merit and achievement, not personalities.  

Our educated concern is to draw President Buhari and the public’s attention to these issues and the need to be fully apprised of the growing politicization of revenue collection agencies beyond whatever obvious limitations that may exist. Mr. President is hereby invited to consider the foregoing submissions and act with utmost discretion pursuant to Sections 5(1), 130, 147, 171 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.  

“God has been so kind, the only way I can show my gratitude to Him is to use my resources to support those who are underprivileged. This I intend to do for the rest of my life. In a world full of conflicts, diseases, calamities and inequality, we all need to show the milk of human kindness, to reach out and comfort the sick and give a helping hand to the weak.”  With those touching words about the collective humanity that we all share and the purpose of life, Femi Otedola, Nigerian multi-billionaire and entrepreneur issued a cheque of N5 billion in support of Save the Children, a 100-year old UK-based charity. Otedola’s donation is for the rehabilitation of displaced and underprivileged children who are victims of the insurgency in the North Eastern part of Nigeria. The cheque was presented by Tolani Otedola, the billionaire’s eldest daughter, at a gala event in Abuja, Sunday, organised by another daughter, Florence Otedola, who is popularly known as DJ Cuppy.

The latter is an Ambassador for Save the Children and a member of the organisation’s Africa Advisory Board. Femi Otedola’s friend, Aliko Dangote, also a billionaire and a philanthropist of note, added his own donation of N100 million bringing the total donation to N5.1 billion. I do not know how rich Otedola is, but any man that would give away N5 billion (about US $14 million) to support children or anyone in distress certainly has the milk of human kindness flowing through his veins. Otedola deserves special recognition and a word of gratitude for his generosity. By this singular act, and similar gestures in the past, he seems to be changing the narrative about the art of giving and the need for a sense of community and philanthropy in Nigeria. It is not enough to give, but to give consistently and generously, without any expectation of reward or gain.

Of all his efforts as an entrepreneur, Otedola would probably be most remembered for his acts of philanthropy in the long run, that is his social entrepreneurship, the readiness with which he offers a helping hand. In the last year or so, he has been on record for picking up the medical bills of Christian Chukwu, former Captain and coach of the Super Eagles or the Green Eagles as the team was earlier known. Chukwu (now 68) was a commanding presence on the football field. He led his local team, the Enugu Rangers to many victories, and as a member of the Green Eagles, he was a play maker and motivator of the team’s last line of defence. Both his fans and teammates called him “Chairman.” That was not for nothing. And yet the same man could not pay hospital bills. Femi Otedola stepped in and helped out. He did the same for Peter Fregene (now 72), Nigeria’s former international goalkeeper (1968- 1971). And for Majek Fashek, the gifted Reggae musician who at the height of his glory was dubbed “the rainmaker”, in attestation of the force and mythical quality of one of his famous tracks: “Send Down The Rain.” Many fans of his would insist even today, that whenever Majek Fashek performed that song, rain actually fell! But the magic has since left the stage, the myth has been compromised. The same Majek Fashek could also not pay hospital bills.  Femi Otedola bailed him out. He also did the same for two famous Nigerian actors: Sadiq Daba and Victor Olaotan. There are probably many others whose cases are not reported in the media. 

Nigeria is a very strange place where the future is as uncertain as the present. The gap between the rich and the poor is wider than the entire Sahara Desert. The average Nigerian lives on less than a dollar per day. Social infrastructure is in a state of decay. There is no social security scheme. The public health system collapsed long ago. Private hospitals detain the sick who are unable to pay for treatment. One woman gave birth in a hospital; she and her baby were detained. The country once tried to introduce a National Health Insurance Scheme. It has never worked, because it is used as an instrument of political and ethnic patronage. Ours is a country where even the rich are not sure of tomorrow. Talented people, distinguished professionals in various fields of endeavor end up becoming beggars, or destitute, not necessarily because they did not plan for their future or for unforeseeable accidents of life, but they suffer because Nigeria often leaves its citizens stranded. The state routinely disappoints the people. It is unfair. It can be cruel. People are treated as if they do not matter. 

This is why every act of kindness is significant. It is not the amount that matters, but the very thought itself, that gesture that reminds us occasionally that in this pressure cooker of a society in which we live, you can still find a rich man who gives out a dollar or two, a concerned citizen who helps an accident victim, a cab driver who finds a document or some money forgotten by a passenger and returns it, or a security agent who does his work with the fear of God. Such persons are quite rare in these parts, and it is why we need a constant reminder that beyond the state or government, Nigeria is a country where we must continue to search for the meaning of Being-ness, and the reasons for being human. An Otedola helping the sick and the weak reminds us of the big difference that we all can make, not in dollars but each man in his own station according to his strength through simple and possible gestures of kindness. 

As for Otedola, I do not imagine that he goes about with an ambulance-load of cash looking for other people’s medical bills to pay. Far from it. He supports other causes as well, particularly poor students whose school fees he pays, educational institutions to which he has donated buildings and religious bodies and groups that he has assisted. By involving his children in his most recent donation, he also signposts a strong narrative about parenting and sustainability. His N5 billion donation is routed through the Cuppy Foundation. The cheque was delivered by his eldest daughter. What else does a man need to say to his daughters or the suitors who want to marry a billionaire’s daughters? He tells them clearly that life goes beyond music, fashion, dancing, boo-ing, bae-ing, vacationing and Gelato-ing. 

It is not surprising that his donation of N5 billion drew enthusiastic applause. The Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo said it is “the single largest donation to philanthropy in the country.” He may well be right. But perhaps the most notable reaction has been that of Reno Omokri, who describes himself these days as “a table-shaker.” And did Reno Omokri try to shake the table? In this particular matter, he didn’t actually shake the table; he broke the legs. Said he: “Femi Otedola has just put the billionaires of the North East to shame. Where are the Indimis, the Mai Deribe family and other oil billionaires from the North East? Google their names and some of the first pictures you will see are of their children in private jets marrying President’s children and displaying obscene wealth while surrounded by extreme poverty. It took a Good Samaritan stranger to do what the natives of the North East failed to do! Shame on them and God bless the talakawa that they have refused to look after.” This harsh and pain-inflicting comment has stretched the narrative a bit further - with the daughters of the two families that Omokri calls out directly defending family integrity on social media. The emerging controversy about how the rich Nigerian one per cent engages the rest of society and gives back or not is useful. But while Omokri may be accused of trying to politicize or ethnicize the Otedola gesture, we need to place his comment in proper context. 

One, he probably generalizes when he refers to “Oil billionaires from the North East” in a manner that may be unfair to some other persons from that part of the country. The North East, one of Nigeria’s six geo-political zones consists of the following states: Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Taraba, and Yobe. I don’t know whether Alhaji Atiku Abubakar is an “oil billionaire” or not, but I know he is from Adamawa state. One of the reasons for his popularity among his people is his generosity and common touch. General TY Danjuma is from Taraba state. He easily belongs to Omokri’s “Oil billionaire” category, but it is a fact that through his TY Danjuma Foundation, the General has done a lot for his own people in Taraba State and across the North East and Nigeria. There is also a Muhammadu Indimi Foundation which prioritises the North East. We can praise Otedola without hurting the feelings of others. Two, while stating this, I am mindful of the bigger point in Omokri’s comment which is the felt, seen, and often commented upon abdication of responsibility by the Nigerian Northern elite. 

The Nigerian elite is generally callous, selfish and irresponsible but the most alienated, the worst set can be found in the Northern part of Nigeria, an indolent elite that has occupied the higher rungs of privilege and power before and after independence and yet has not been able to translate its access to power into advantages for its people. Northern Nigeria has the largest number of out-of-school children. It has the largest number of girl-child brides, and other children under difficult circumstances.  It has the largest number of persons living below the poverty line. It has the smallest number of educated Nigerians, and the highest number of Nigeria’s “lazy youths.” Reno Omokri throws up the questions: why don’t we have the Northern rich, as many of them as possible, helping their own people? Why must it be a Yoruba man from Epe donating N5 billion to assist displaced children in the North East? Our response to Reno Omokri is that philanthropy needs not wear an ethnic or partisan garb. It is about the collective humanity we share. Isn’t Reno Omokri himself running a #Free LeahSharibu campaign?  Leah Sharibu is neither a member of his church nor is she of the Itsekiri stock. Bill and Melinda Gates, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg have supported worthy causes around the world.          

What we may legitimately say is that the example of Femi Otedola and others like him necessarily generates a conversation about the purpose of wealth and the place of the privileged in a dispossessed society. Aliko Dangote who made his own donation to the Save the Children charity is probably the leading philanthropist in Nigeria today, in terms of spread and scope, through the Dangote Foundation, which is run by his daughter, Halima Dangote. Dangote appeared on stage recently in New York, with Mo Ibrahim and Bill Gates and he said he is inspired by their examples. Mo Ibrahim, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are among the most generous givers in modern history. It is an ethic that should be encouraged. Closer home in Nigeria, there are other examples: Tony Elumelu, of the Union Bank of Africa (UBA) is the founder of the Tony Elumelu Foundation which promotes Africapitalism and provides opportunities for young entrepreneurs in more than 40 African countries. What TOE, as he is otherwise called, has done with that Foundation is impressive and reliable. Jim Ovia is the founder of Zenith Bank. He has invested heavily in education, not for profit, but to provide opportunities for young persons. He is the founder of James Hope College, a world-class, private school in Agbor, Delta State where he tries to provide a strong, educational foundation for the youth of tomorrow. Recently, he launched a branch of the school in Lagos with an offer of full scholarship to 40% of students. Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede, of Access Bank and Coronation Capital, has a scheme called Africa Initiative for Governance (AIG). Every year, AIG sends five students from Nigeria and Ghana to the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford, to take post-graduate degrees in Public Policy. He believes that when they return and they are injected into the public sector, over time a crop of well-trained experts would have been created to act as agents for public sector transformation in Africa. The scholarships are fully funded. There are other philanthropists of course who intervene in their own way – like Professor Pat Utomi who supports widows, Florence Ita-Giwa who provides for the poor in Bakassi, Sir Emeka Offor, Mr. Oba Otudeko, Folorunsho Alakija, Otunba Subomi Balogun…  We can have more people in this country willing to give back and help. Reno Omokri may have been direct in his finger-pointing but there is certainly a large community of rich Nigerians out there who do not know what it means to be public-spirited. They are happy to go about in private jets: it costs about US $4 million per annum to maintain a private jet in Nigeria (Otedola’s N5 billion donation is the cost of maintaining a private jet for about 4 years) and yet most of the nouveaux riche are much happier going about in those jets with girls with long legs, fake skin, fake eye lashes, Brazilian butt-lifts, fake accent, and small brains, rather than help the poor. Their type can be found across Nigeria. 

But it is not enough to make donations or set up a Foundation. There must be transparency and accountability in the management of funds and processes. Sustainability is important. Too many Foundations rise and fall. We hope Femi Otedola and his daughters will find every reason to sustain their new-found passion.  

Last week, The Supreme Court of Nigeria announced its verdict in the matter between Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and President Muhammadu Buhari, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC and the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC). After the February 23 Presidential election and the declaration by INEC, of incumbent President Muhammadu Buhari as winner of that election, the PDP and its Presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar went straight to the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal to challenge the result. INEC not only declared Buhari winner of that election. The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal further upheld the declaration in September 2019, delivering a marathon judgment that kept the entire nation glued to television for close to nine hours. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and his party, the PDP, felt that they had been denied justice. So, they took their case all the way to the Supreme Court. But if Atiku and his supporters had hoped that they will secure victory at the Supreme Court, they were grossly disappointed.  In just a sentence, the Supreme Court dismissed their appeal on October 30. The Chairman of the panel, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Tanko Ibrahim Mohammed simply said: “We have examined all the briefs of argument and the exhibits for over two weeks and we have all agreed that there is no merit in this appeal.” Their Lordships promised to provide their reasons later. The entire appeal didn’t last for too long. It was a brisk, hasty procedure. 

And this is where the problem lies. In the absence of a reasoned, written down and properly articulated judgment, it is difficult to take on their Lordships on the merit of their own submissions. When their reasons are finally available, it would be time to do a proper, extensive, judicial review. But what can be legitimately said at this point, is that the Supreme Court has created in this case, a problem of perception. Does the ordinary Nigerian think that justice has been done? For, it is a trite principle that justice must not only be done, it must be seen to have been done. Does the ordinary, reasonable man believe that given the approach adopted by the Supreme Court, there is fairness in the handling of the matter at the apex court? Professor Ben Nwabueze, SAN, in a widely circulated response has argued that the Supreme Court’s treatment of the Atiku case raises issues of fairness and fair hearing. He insists that the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal is “inconsistent with Section 36 of the Constitution (and) it is, by the self-executing declaration in Section 1(3), null and void.” Section 1 (3) of the 1999 Constitution talks about the supremacy of the Constitution as basic law.  Section 36 is on the inviolability of fair hearing as a pillar of the justice administration process. Nwabueze’s contention is that the apex court erred in the eyes of the law by holding an examination of the appeal before it, “in secret”, as declared and admitted, without regard to Section 36 (3) of the Nigerian Constitution. 

He asks further: “… to whom does the word “We” in the CJN’s statement refer? Can the “We” be a reference to the Supreme Court? Can the Supreme Court function, as regards the hearing of the appeal, before the seven-man panel to hear the appeal was appointed, and the names of the members announced to the public? When exactly was the appointment of members made?” Nwabueze is a prodigious and productive analyst of the Nigerian legal system and perhaps one of the most percipient and most durable. His sympathy for the Atiku camp notwithstanding, he has raised fine points of jurisprudence which I hope the Supreme Court will address when it eventually provides the reasons for both its approach and decision in the Atiku Presidential Election Petition 2019.  When their Lordships provide those reasons, how they frame their ratio decidendi or obiter dicta, in relation to the naked facts of the case or to use the CJN’s words, briefs and exhibits, and the issues for determination, will be of great interest. When they say the Atiku case lacks merit, for example, do they mean that it is incurably bad and if so, on what grounds?  

And why did they have to sit “in secret”, more than two weeks earlier only to come out in the open to deliver judgment? Without any effort to listen at length to counsel on both sides, not to re-open arguments of course, a case before the Supreme Court not being the inception of a new action, but to defend their claims, the Justices rested their decision on the fact that they had examined the briefs and exhibits. The conduct of their one-day process was also so brisk, if not anti-climactic and peremptory, as if the matter before them had already been pre-determined. The Supreme Court, being a policy court and a court of last resort has a duty to worry about its brand and image. The treatment of the Atiku case, that is the 2019 Presidential Election Petition wrongly or rightly has fuelled all the suspicions that the ordinary Nigerian has expressed about the independence of the judiciary.  It is hence not surprising that many Nigerians have expressed the view that they were not disappointed because they did not expect a different outcome, even without having any knowledge of briefs of argument or exhibits, but supremely confident all the same about their knowledge of the history of power and Presidential election petitions in Nigeria.  

Why was the Supreme Court in such unusual haste? In the past, there was usually so much anxiety, drama and argumentation each time a Presidential election petition made it to the Supreme Court. The most dramatic incident in recent memory being the 1979 Presidential election which turned virtually every Nigerian into a mathematician, struggling to determine the meaning and exact calculation of two-thirds of 19 states.  In 2019, the moving spirits of the Nigerian Supreme Court treated the Presidential election matter as if it was an irritating piece of distraction. I have tried to attempt two explanations. The first is that their Lordships felt that given the pressure of time, they were duty bound to determine the matter within the time frame provided by law. Section 285 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 134 of the Electoral Act provide strict time limits for the hearing of election petitions and this has been severally upheld by the Supreme Court (re: Ikpeazu v. Otti & ors., Felix Amadi and Anor. vs. INEC & Ors.; and ANPP vs Goni). In the Atiku case, the Supreme Court was definitely not out of time in the light of Section 285 (7) of the 1999 Constitution and the fact that Atiku and PDP appealed the decision of the Election Tribunal by September 23. Questions have therefore been legitimately raised about approach and procedure. 

My second explanation is that the law is a social modulator, and may be that is what we have here. The judex are human beings and members of society.  Sometimes, the judex gauge the mood of society and try to provide the necessary balance, especially in the face of potential threat.  When the apex court goes that route though, it is travelling on the path of politics and social science rather than law. It is not impossible that the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the Atiku case took a firm decision to protect the country from any outbreak of violence or hostilities. Buba Galadima, a Buhari ally turned adversary, has said that Buhari’s declaration as winner did not result in any jubilation on the streets. He did not raise the flip question: would the declaration of Atiku as winner or anything close to that have resulted in the jubilation he seeks? Maybe not either. Galadima is obviously biased. But the plain truth is that the Nigerian voter is so alienated, cynical and so disconnected, he or she is right now largely indifferent and that is part of the problem with Nigerian democracy. The Nigerian electorate must rediscover their voice. Still, the judex must not descend into the arena of politics. The law must be applied in its purest form. The ruling of the Supreme Court when it eventually becomes available should address all the jurisprudential issues that have been raised on all sides for our collective education. 

Nonetheless, whatever concerns anyone may have in this matter, the case is now closed. The Supreme Court is the apex court. There is no further appeal beyond it, especially in election matters, which are by the way sui generis. The principal petitioner, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has already issued a statement dismissing the ruling of the Court. Both his statement and the eventual reasons of the Court would form useful historical documents. For now, we have Atiku’s statement before us. I think it drips with too much bitterness, innuendoes and cynicism. Atiku writes that: “Today, the nail has been put on the coffin and the gains we collectively made since 1999 are evaporating, and a requiem is at hand… In a democracy, you need a strong judiciary, a free press, and an impartial electoral umpire. Nigeria has none of those three elements as at today…” But even more telling is the opening paragraph of his statement and here it is: “It is said that the Supreme Court is not final because it is infallible, but that it is infallible because it is final.”  

This statement is a direct paraphrase of Justice Robert H. Jackson’s declaration in Brown v. Allen, 344 US 443 (1953).  Jackson (1892 – 1954) was an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and a former United States Attorney-General. He said: “We are not final because we are infallible but we are infallible only because we are final.” Chukwudifu Oputa, JSC (as he then was), famously known as the Socrates of the Nigerian Supreme Court of his time, improved on this when he tried to address the question of whether there had been a conflict between the Supreme Court decisions in two cases: Skenconsult v. Ukey and Ezomo v. Oyakhire as follows: “My simple answer”, he said, “is that it is not part of the jurisdiction or duties of this Court to go on looking for imaginary conflicts. We are final not because we are infallible rather we are infallible because we are final. Justices of this Court are human beings, capable of erring. It will certainly be short-sighted arrogance not to accept this obvious truth.  It is also true that this Court can do inestimable good through its wise decisions.  Similarly, the Court can do incalculable damage through its mistakes.” (per Oputa, JSC, Adegoke Motors Ltd. v. Dr Babatunde Adesanya & Anor). Where the catch lies is that even when the Supreme Court arrives at a decision per incuriam, it is the only Court that has the power to overrule itself. But will Atiku’s counsel ask the Supreme Court to overrule itself? I don’t see that happening, especially as the party, the PDP has handed over the case to God, and with Atiku himself declaring that the matter “has come to a conclusion.”  

Nonetheless, Atiku’s lawyers have called for a reform of Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence. They have a point in that regard. There are too many knotty, controversial and unresolved issues to be dealt with, including access to vital materials by election petitioners, time limits for election petitions, administrative bottle-necks, and the use of technology. Atiku is obviously not convinced that he lost the 2019 Presidential election. This is the overall indication of his statement. He has also pointedly refused to congratulate the APC candidate and incumbent President, Muhammadu Buhari. Every student of Nigerian politics should be interested in what this means, and the implications for Nigeria’s future politics. Whatever that is, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has two options before him: to start preparing for the 2023 Presidential election if his party’s zoning formula favours him or to retire to the position of a statesman and help defend Nigeria’s democracy. However, beyond elections, the biggest challenge facing Nigeria is that of sustainable development and economic growth. It is the task that all stakeholders must now address, going forward, in order to correct the many anomalies that hold the country down and behind. It is commendable that all parties involved in the Presidential Election Petition case, before and after, have resisted the temptation to resort to self-help. 

Since Nigeria’s return to civilian rule in 1999, Deputy Governors have always tended to have issues with their bosses, that is the Governors, and the Governors in turn have often had problems with their Godfathers. Whatever shape the conflict takes, it has been more of a blight on our democratic process and the health of the polity.  Mini-dictators converting a democratic dispensation into an opportunity for self-aggrandizement and childish power games end up hurting us all. 

As Governor of Anambra state in 2003, Chris Ngige, now Minister of Labour and Productivity, had problems with a certain Godfather known as Chris Uba. In those days, Uba had the ears and eyes of the Nigerian Presidency. Ngige’s offence was his refusal to do the bidding of the Godfather and the Godfather of the mini-Godfather in his state. In July 2003, a letter of resignation from office was circulated on Ngige’s behalf.  He was also abducted by a faction of the Nigeria Police (the then Inspector General of police would later disown that “faction”). Ngige  insisted that he had not resigned. Subsequently, he was shown half-naked purportedly swearing to an oath of allegiance at what was then known as the notorious Okija shrine. He was named. He was shamed. The spectacle of a sitting Governor in shamanic garb looked really ugly.  Ngige’s detractors finally got him out of office in 2006. They made him. They unmade him. 

In Oyo State in 2006, Rashidi Ladoja, now the Osi of Olubadan, meaning a potential Olubadan of Ibadanland was pushed out of office because he refused to share the state’s security vote with Chief Lamidi Adedibu, the famous originator and promoter of alimentary politics in the politics of Ibadan and the South-West. Alimentary politics is known locally as “amala politics.” It was re-defined in Ekiti State by Governor Ayo Fayose as “stomach infrastructure.” Real meaning: “you-chop -I-chop” politics.  

Fayose himself fell foul of the powers that be when in his first term as Governor of Ekiti State, he made the fatal mistake of saying openly that he would not support a Third Term agenda for the Obasanjo administration. The witches and wizards of Aso Rock went after him. Fayose, who is ordinarily very boisterous, had to escape from the Ekiti State Government House in the trunk of a car. He was chased out of office in an overnight raid by a specially assigned police squad. He took the famous NADECO route and gave Nigeria a wide berth for a while. Again in 2006, Joshua Dariye, serving a second term as Governor of Plateau State, was impeached by eight members of the state’s 24-member House of Assembly.  He protested about the fact that 8 out of 24 members did not amount to a quorum. Nobody listened. His supporters protested. Two of them were gunned down by the police. Dariye was impeached. His offence was his refusal to respect the powers that be. The Supreme Court later returned him and Ladoja of Oyo state to office, but I doubt very much if they have both recovered fully from taking on those secret manipulators of the Nigerian political process. 

But while state Governors often get into trouble with their Godfathers, what we have seen is that the Governors themselves are just as power drunk as their own Godfathers. The target of their fascism is usually the persons they choose or who are appointed to serve as their Deputies. Since 1999, no Governor has made any conscious effort to hand over to his Deputy. In Plateau, and Oyo states, Deputies became Governors by sheer default: Michael Botmang in Plateau (2006 -2007), and Adebayo Alao-Akala in Oyo State (January – December 2006) not because their bosses wanted them as successors. In an exception to the rule in Kano state where Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso was succeeded by his two-time Deputy (1999 -2003; 2011-2015), the Deputy as Governor has shown great contempt and animosity towards his former boss, clearly indicating that there was never any love lost between them while they worked together.  The kind of passion that Abdullahi Ganduje has devoted to rubbishing and undoing his former boss is astonishing. 

But the battle between Governors and their Deputies is not just at the state level; at the level of the Presidency, the story is not much different. During President Olusegun Obasanjo’s second term, Nigeria was saddled with a divided Presidency. I covered the politics of that crisis in a series of columns tilted “The Bolekaja Presidency”. Going further, the story is often told of how under President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, his then Vice President -  Goodluck Jonathan was completely sidelined by a cabal that hijacked Presidential power and authority.  The only job President Yar’Adua’s people wanted Dr. Jonathan to do was to just read newspapers. They made sure his office got a good supply of newspapers and a short supply of state news. They showed their hands when they made it clear that they didn’t want him to succeed his boss who fell ill and had become incapacitated. President Yar’Adua died in office. It was a great ordeal to get Dr. Jonathan to succeed him. Concerned Nigerians had to stand up physically and emotionally, for the letter and spirit of the Constitution to be respected. Even when Jonathan became President, the cabal did not leave him alone. They made every day difficult for him.     

I have gone on this long, retrospective, voyage to draw attention to a few points: One, that Nigerian politics, even with the exit from military rule in 1999 is still based on a principle of clientelism and godfatherism. Some people just assume that Nigeria belongs to them and they must dictate what happens within its borders.  Two, people get into offices not because they are the best persons for the job but because they are the right clients. How many got elected because they swore to an oath in Okija or elsewhere? How many paid fees to get a nomination form? How many of these guys have become big men and women today because they had to trade off? When such persons try to stand up and assert themselves, they are shot down. Three, Nigerian politicians have little regard for the Constitution. 

It is also important to note that in real terms, Deputies in Nigerian politics are at best spare tyres. The Constitution gives them no real roles.  This is why it is possible for Governors and Presidents to treat their Deputies shabbily. In Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu trashed two Deputy Governors between 1999 and 2007. When Mrs Kofo Bucknor Akerele tried to stand up to him; she was shut down. Otunba Femi Pedro, her replacement also thought he could act like a man. He was shown the exit door. He would return later to beg and genuflect. His own assistant, someone he brought to the party is now the Governor of Lagos State, obviously in an attempt to complete his humiliation. I don’t see the current Governor of Lagos State fighting the powers that be. He only needs to look at Bucknor-Akerele, Femi Pedro and Akinwunmi Ambode, the immediate past Governor in the mirror. 

What am I trying to say? I am saying that Nigerian politics is dirty, crazy and incomprehensible. In the last 20 years, it has been overtaken by Godfathers, cabalists and fascists. They do what they like. If you stand in their way, they crush you. In effect, fear rules the land. In an environment dominated by power-mongers who parade themselves as good men and women, you can no longer trust anybody. Nigerian politics has never been so terrible.. In politics as in society, the picture of a mentally ill community looms large. 

But of all the things that I have heard and seen in the last 20 years, permit me to say that the most shocking, the most objectionable, the most fearful happened in Kogi state the other day with the purported removal from office of the Deputy Governor, Simon Achuba. Simon Achuba’s offence is that he is no longer in good terms with his Governor, Yahaya Bello. When a State Governor no longer likes his Deputy, he tells him to jump, if the guy refuses to jump, he pushes him. If the guy refuses to be pushed, the Governor gets the House of Assembly, obviously the largest collection of nitwits since 2019, to help push the Deputy Governor through the vehicle of impeachment. We have seen one or the other strategy adopted in Lagos State with Kofo Bucknor-Akerele and Femi Pedro by Bola Tinubu in Lagos, Rochas Okorochas against his deputies- Jude Agbaso and Eze Madumere in Imo, and Ibikunle Amosun against Segun Adesegun in Ogun State. In the case of Achuba in Kogi state they just threw the Constitution completely out of the window. The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria spells out the procedure for the removal of a Governor or Deputy Governor from office. In Kogi State, the State House of Assembly just decided to do whatever suited it. State Houses of Assembly are appendages of Government House. The Governors in the process become so powerful that once they don’t like anybody’s face they can get rid of him politically or buy him or her. Nigerian politicians can be bought and converted like commodities. Nigerian politics is a market. 

In Kogi state, Deputy Governor Simon Achuba chose to differ with his Governor. He got accused of all kinds of things which a House of Assembly in recess interpreted as “gross misconduct’ and then decided to put him up for impeachment and removal. A cash and carry House of Assembly set to work. The state Chief Judge was asked to set up a panel to impeach the Deputy Governor. A seven-man panel was indeed set up led by Mr. John Baiyeshea, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). The panel returned a verdict of not guilty on all the charges. What the Constitution says in Section 188, is that once the panel thus returns a verdict of not guilty on all counts, there shall be no further proceedings or process. The word “shall” in law is mandatory. It is a command. Still, in their wisdom, the House of Assembly in Kogi State, which is not even sitting, proceeded to sack the Deputy Governor. If anyone is looking for a classical rubber stamp Assembly and the most conscienceless legislature in Nigeria’s democracy since 1999, Kogi State House of Assembly fits the bill.  It has been more than a week since then and Kogi state is just hoping that this comedy of absurdity will disappear. It is a shame on all the people of Kogi state who have chosen to keep silent, and the most worrisome is that the  Federal Government and indeed the National Assembly and the Attorney General of the Federation who is the chief law officer of the Federation by virtue of Section150 of the Constitution have all chosen to be quiet in the face of this brazen abuse of the letter and spirit of the Constitution thus setting a dangerous precedent for the continuous abuse of the Constitution, the very fabric that holds the nation together. 

It is a rape of the Constitution, a slap on the rule of law. Members of the Kogi State House of Assembly should cover their heads in shame for projecting themselves as law breakers and persons who do not have the interest of the nation at heart.  But the biggest scandal is that of the Chief Judge of Kogi State, Nasir Ajanah. The biggest problem with the Nigerian Bar and Bench is the cancerous proliferation of a body of lawyers and judges who believes that justice is a mere slogan, who thinks equity is sheer nonsense and who behaves as if conscience is for the religious and not the legally minded. This is precisely what happened in Kogi State the other day. The panel set up by the Chief Judge in accordance with the 1999 Constitution reported back to the House of Assembly a verdict of not guilty on all counts. There is no way the Chief Judge could have claimed ignorance of this finding. Having been aware of this, the Chief Judge should not have gone ahead to commit an act of illegality by standing the Constitution on its head. It is not enough for him to claim that he is not a Father Christmas to act, suo moto, on a matter that had not been properly placed before him. 

Simon Achuba should go to court. Whether the eventual determination would be academic or not, let him fight for his rights and put the matter on record. His seat is not vacant in the eyes of the law. Edward Onoja has merely usurped the seat of the Deputy Governor of Kogi State, illegally and without conscience.  Political vendetta cannot replace the tenets of the law. The fact that other Governors also behave badly does not justify the reign of idiocy in Kogi state. 

When the Kogi Governor, Yahaya Bello was elected in 2015, he was advertised as a poster boy for the No-Too- Young-To-Run Campaign. He was seen as the young man who would make a difference. He was the youngest Governor in Nigeria. But he has dropped the ball in the same manner in which one Elisha Abbo, youngest Senator in the 9^th National Assembly (Adamawa North, PDP), has also dropped the ball. What’s the latest on Elisha Abbo? Young Nigerians want to be part of the governance process, but unfortunately, the ones who show up in the arena  are the strange, unprepared types who gamble with the opportunities that they have been given. Our belief that young Nigerians in politics will turn out to be change agents is defeated daily. Yahaya Bello, playing dirty games with the removal of his Deputy, does not deserve a second term in office. The people of Kogi state would be stupid to vote for him on November 16.  The absurdity in Kogi state should not be allowed to stand.     

Also read : Gowon at 85 and Fani-Kayode - Reuben Abati

Also read : Buhari’s Fake Social Media Wedding - Reuben Abati 

General Yakubu Gowon, Nigeria’s military Head of State from 1966 -1975, turned 85 on Saturday, October 19, 2019. In a congratulatory message, President Muhammadu Buhari described him as a living legend and a symbol of national unity. The statement from the Presidency gushed with phrases such as “visionary leadership style, wisdom, disciplined outlook…elder statesman, simplicity and humility, good governance... sacrifices, wide respect....”. There were other tributes: The Senate President, Ahmed Lawan praised Gowon for defending and preserving the unity and territorial integrity of Nigeria. Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, described Gowon as a “statesman and national icon who contributed enormously to Nigeria’s unity and development.”  Nigeria, he adds “owes Gowon a debt of gratitude”. Governors of the 36 states of Nigeria also concurred that “General Gowon is a rare gift to the state, Nigeria, and the world”. On Friday, October 18, The Institute for Governance and Leadership Studies in Africa organized a birthday dinner in Gowon’s honour where everyone got a chance to say something about his place and legacy in Nigerian history.  I attended General Gowon’s 80^th birthday church service in 2014 – I still have the gift item- a towel, distributed by his wife’s family as evidence- and I recall that the tributes were effusive then. They are even more so now, indeed, more saccharine. 

But the only man who seems to differ is Femi Fani-Kayode. Femi Fani-Kayode’s father, the historic and inimitable man who was popularly known as Fani-Power was one of the key figures in pre-independence and post-independence Nigerian politics, and significantly a miraculous survivor of the July 1966 imbroglio. In many ways, Femi Fani-Kayode, known also as FFK, has followed in his father’s footsteps.  He doesn’t take hostages. He is bold and assertive. On the question of Gowon’s anniversary at 85, he is the only one who has said publicly, that he does not think Gowon is a hero. He provides an explanation: he says Gowon as Head of State presided over a war situation where over 3 million Igbos were massacred, and that such war crime does not qualify Gowon to be celebrated as a war hero or an icon of national unity. Indeed, during the civil war, one million Igbo children suffered, many died, others ended up in Gabon and Equitorial Guinea, others died of kwashiorkor, many Igbos perished. The world at a point began to sympathize with Biafra because the war began to look like genocide.  Fani-Kayode’s point as I understand it, is that while we celebrate General Yakubu Gowon, we should not forget what he sees as the humanitarian disasters that occurred in this country under his watch. Ironically, Gowon saved his own father’s life! 

I note therefore, that in the past, Fani-Kayode had cause to praise General Gowon. So, I do not want to think that he despises him. But on the occasion of Gowon’s 85^th birthday, Fani-Kayode brings up an issue that may continue to impinge on the Gowon legacy. The lazy, intellectual definition of the problem would be to say that Fani-Kayode is raising the issue of the civil war and Gowon’s role because he wants to suck up to Igbos, and defend his access to privileges in the other room, his wife being Igbo, thus romantically embedded as he is in Igbo matters. I consider such thinking absolutely lazy and mischievous. I argue that with or without Femi Fani-Kayode’s intervention, Gowon’s management of Nigeria’s civil war would always be part of the conversation around and about his place in Nigerian history.

Whatever we know about this subject is available in bits and pieces in the extant bibliography on the Nigerian civil war, and that is quite a large, cross-border, multi-disciplinary and inter-generational bibliography. It is unfortunate that General Gowon himself, has chosen to remain silent. He has not written an autobiography. He has left his place in history at the mercy of the definition of others, the most authoritative book on his tenure in office being Isawa Elaigwu’s Gowon: The Biography of a Soldier Statesman (1986). Other books include Yakubu Gowon: Faith in United Nigeria by John Digby Clarke (1987); General Yakubu Gowon: The Supreme Commander by Olufemi Ogunsanwo (2009) and thousands of commentaries in academic journals and periodicals. Gowon owes us an autobiography. The import of Femi Fani-Kayode’s intervention is how he draws our attention to the fact that long after Gowon would have become an ancestor, his handling of the civil war would still form the epicentre of his legacy. So, why don’t we start the debate right now in the General’s presence, at a time when he can speak up for himself and enjoy the right of reply? Those who do not know Nigerian history can dust up their books and let’s have a conversation. Is Gowon a hero or a villain? Did he preside over a genocide? And is that what defines his place in Nigerian history?  

Let no one be in any doubt about it: the civil war, 1966-1970, will always be a big question at the heart of Nigerian politics and inter-ethnic relations. In many ways, there is indeed clear evidence that the war against Igbos has not ended. Nigeria nurses a huge, deep-seated prejudice against the Igbo man. It is the reason why there is so much dithering over whether an Igbo President should one day emerge or not. It explains why a Yoruba landlord is reluctant to lease his property to an Igbo man in Lagos, even if he ends up doing so in spite of himself, for economic reasons. Psychologically, he thinks the Igbo man will spread like cancer and over-populate the property with his kinsmen or probably take the property from him.  It is also why the Hausa-Fulani believes that the Hausa-Fulani-Igbo rivalry will never end and that an Igbo Presidency would amount to an admission of defeat more than three decades after the war. The divisive tendencies in the country at this time take us back in history to the spirit of that same season of anomie. Nigeria’s civil war is all about the being-ness of Nigeria, whether indeed a mistake was made in 1914 by the colonialists or not. This is the Nigerian problem. We cannot run away from it. Yakubu Gowon was not the cause of the war, however. He helped to manage it as the man in the saddle at the time it erupted. Nigerians complain about Hausa-Fulani hegemony and the threat it poses. Gowon is even of Angas ethnic extraction from Plateau State.  It is facile to argue that he was an agent of the Hausa-Fulani hegemonists. But those who cling to that should remember that after the January 1966 coup led by Nzeogwu and others, the Ironsi “interregnum”, and the July 1966 counter-coup, it was circumstances rather than design that threw up an Angas man as Nigeria’s Head of State.  

When the civil war broke out, it was Gowon’s duty and responsibility to keep Nigeria together. We have a country today because he refused to shirk his responsibility. His training and office required him to defend Nigeria’s sovereignty and integrity. We owe the survival of Nigeria to Gowon’s determination. If he had dropped the ball, Nigeria would have long broken up. Those who refer to him as the “father of modern Nigeria” are in order to say so. Every believer in the idea of Nigeria must give credit to Gowon for the heavy burden of 1966-1970, and how his team of young men kept this country together in the face of the first major test it faced after independence. I use the word, team advisedly, because Gowon was not alone. Nigeria survived because he had around him and there were in circulation at the time, men and women who believed in the Gowonian ideology that keeping Nigeria One was a task that must be done. But there is another side to this viewpoint. The Igbos showed great valour in the battle-field.  They demonstrated skills in engineering and warfare which if sustained and assimilated could have made Nigeria an industrial nation today. But Nigeria has failed to focus on the strength and qualities of the people. We focus instead on blame-games, and thus, Igbos may never forgive Gowon over the Aburi accord, the loss of their properties in Port Harcourt and the North, the failed 20-pounds policy and the killing of their people.  

In this regard, in case the comment by Femi Fani-Kayode represents a mind-set, shared by a group or by others, I submit that it should be subjected to further interrogation to understand it properly. Fani-Kayode says, for record purposes, inter alia: “When the real history of the country is written, the role of Gowon and the other Nigerian commanders during the civil war will be put in proper perspective…The slaughter of 3 million Biafran civilians in that war is the greatest act of black on black genocide in human history. I cannot celebrate the birth of a man who presided over such carnage and neither can I describe him as a hero. Nigeria cannot make much progress or truly prosper until she apologises to the Igbos and Biafrans for the great evil that we visited on them during the civil war.”

It is right and proper to protest about genocide. Any form of humanitarian abuse is unacceptable be it in Northern Syria or Afghanistan or Biafra, Darfur or Srebenica. But General Yakubu Gowon does not deserve characterization as a war criminal. He is in every true sense a statesman of the first rank, for keeping Nigeria together in line with his professional mandate and for the steps he took subsequently to build a united nation. As soon as the war ended, he declared that there was “no victor, no vanquished.” Latter-day successors in a democratic dispensation probably need to learn something here. For them, every national issue is either “do-or-die”, and winner-takes-it-all with no in-betweens. Gowon introduced the concepts - the 3 Rs: Reconciliation, Reconstruction and Rehabilitation. Decades later, Nigeria has not succeeded with Reconciliation. Nigeria remains a divided country as seen in the various cases of violence in the country and the prevalent politics of division and distrust. It is the reason Igbos will not accept any apology. They are convinced that Nigeria is a country of insincere people. So much progress was made with Reconstruction. Gowon rebuilt Nigeria. The oil boom made that possible even if his critics also claim that the Gowon administration laid the foundation for the culture of waste, profligacy and corruption that turned Nigeria adrift. The Gowon administration simply went on a spending spree as oil money poured in, they say.  Gowon even reportedly boasted that Nigeria’s problem was not money but how to spend it. 

At the time he became Head of State in 1966, Gowon was just 32. He was the first and the only Nigerian Head of State to date to marry in office. He exchanged vows with a certain Ms. Victoria Zakari at the Cathedral Church of Christ, Marina, Lagos in 1969, meaning he ruled Nigeria initially as a young bachelor!  It was nothing unusual at the time– many of his colleagues and others in other professions who were the leading lights of colonial and post-colonial Nigeria were all young men. Today’s youths in Nigeria have been unable to start at the top as early as their fathers and grandfathers did. Many blame Gowon for this: Rather than diversify the economy, he squandered Nigeria’s riches. He was allegedly too obsessed with how to spend money, he failed to prepare Nigeria properly for the future. 

But there was Rehabilitation. Under Gowon, a lot was done to move beyond the civil war. Igbos were given an opportunity to re-integrate into Nigeria. he was instrumental to the formation of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). He built new universities. He established the National Youth Service Corps to promote national unity. However, his critics allege that although he did so much after the civil war, much of it was anti-Igbo, he also saw too much money and he began to over-enjoy his stay in office. He had planned to leave office in 1976, but he changed his mind, and that led to his being pushed out of office by his own boys in a bloodless coup in 1975.  Gowon made the mistake of getting too comfortable in power. That is his hubris. He was even accused of involvement in the February 13, 1976 coup that led to the death of his successor, General Murtala Muhammed. He had to remain in exile in the United Kingdom until President Shehu Shagari granted him state pardon in 1981.  He returned to Nigeria in 1983.  

Nonetheless, in his years out of office, General Yakubu Gowon has remained a stabilizing force in Nigerian politics and society. He is the main spirit and influence behind the “Nigeria Prays” movement, a spiritual, inter-denominational movement that believes that a country can be made wholesome through spirituality. Gowon is the prototypical father-figure in the public space. He supports every government. He attends every state event that he can. He stays away from every kind of public combat or disagreement. He has tried to make up with those who disagree with his civil war policies including Professor Wole Soyinka who was detained under his watch. Gowon, the strong military dictator, has mellowed into a gentle old man who prays for Nigeria. He is also the first former military Head of State to develop himself educationally after office. He obtained a Ph.D in Political Science from the University of Warwick (1983). At 85, he can look back on Nigeria’s progress through the years, and reflect on the role he played, but whatever he thinks of the rot that has overtaken the country he keeps that information very closely to himself, perhaps out of guilt or hope or regret. The best tribute that Nigerians can pay in his honour is to rediscover the ideals of the three Rs and ensure that Nigeria never experiences another civil war. Gowon will be remembered as the Nigerian leader who fought a civil war and became an “apologetic” advocate for peace and reconciliation. But he must tell his story: what exactly happened in Aburi? 

If anyone is looking for a valid illustration and the most scandalous evidence of fake news, fake speech, and hate speech, such a researcher needs not look farther than the comedy of errors and the misanthropic drama that overtook Aso Villa, the seat of Nigeria’s Presidency, during the weekend that just passed. 

We all woke up, Thursday morning to be told that our President, 76-year old President Muhammadu Buhari was going to take one of his female ministers, 44-year old Sadia Umar Farouk, Minister of Humanitarian Affairs as wife, on Friday, October 11. Nigerians by nature, love gossip, mischief and entertainment, but this was something different, far more dramatic than theatre itself. Understandably, the story trended on social media and caught public imagination. It became hot news. It was a perfect the Lion and the Jewel material. Is Buhari, 76, trying to celebrate his victory at the polls and at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal with some renewed activity in the same “other room” that he himself reminded us of?  Would he behave like Bala Mohammed, Governor of Bauchi state and take a new bride to celebrate electoral success? If he were to do that, he would not be the first old man to grab a jewel at old age. Olokun Eshin in Wole Soyinka’s award-winning play, Death and the King’s Horseman had to drop something in the “other room” at old age. But the wife of the President that we know, is Aisha Buhari. Has she fallen out of favour? Is Baba Buhari trying to replace her, more so as she suddenly disappeared from the other room and the Villa after the elections, and stories went around that she was somewhere abroad on vacation instead of staying with her husband, to provide some special attention that old men require? Islam encourages but limits variety. Is the President seeking variety?

Soon enough, the story gained traction. On social media, invitation cards were distributed and persons were invited to Aso Rock to attend the Fatiha, that is the Muslim wedding after mosque on Friday. Samples of the invitation card were distributed electronically with the Buhari family of Daura and the Farouk family of Zamfara inviting friends and associates to the marriage of their son, Muhammed and their daughter, Sadia. Congratulatory messages were posted online too, and there were images showing that some foreign dignitaries were already in Nigeria to attend the wedding of the year. Conspiracy theories also surfaced to address such questions as: where is Aisha Buhari, the wife of the President? Why would she abandon her husband for months and nobody would know where she is?  Some commentators concluded that the cabal had finally managed to get rid of her, by getting for the President, a less confrontational woman who would stay out of politics and leave the cabal in Aso Villa alone. Friends of Aisha Buhari expressed concern about her plight.

They asked: Has the Aso Villa Cabal now become so powerful that they would also choose a wife for the President? The tales lingered. One compatriot called me to ask if I had heard anything about the President’s alleged marital crisis. I told him I knew nothing, and that I thought Nigeria had far more important issues at hand than the President’s bedroom choices. The guy told me off, noting that Nigerian journalists are the laziest in the world!  “The President of Nigeria is about to sack his wife and marry another one, and you are talking about Nigeria’s budget? Is that the kind of journalism you people are practising?,” he quipped.  Photos of the would-be bride were circulated widely with such comments as: “she actually looks like Aisha Buhari”, “she will make Baba happy,” “she is a pretty one, Baba chose well”.   For hours, President Buhari was presented on social media as a Romeo or better still, an Adonis who managed to catch the fancy of a pretty 44-year old young, delectable woman. Some spoil-sports raised questions however, about the appropriateness of an incumbent President having an alleged amorous relationship with a woman he has just appointed a Minister and to whose Ministry he has assigned responsibilities and assignments taken away from his Vice President. There was no limit to the stories.

But the bubble eventually burst. It took the intervention of the woman who had been married away to debunk the story. She published a number of tweets to confirm that she was not about to marry President Buhari. She was not even in the country! We later learnt that there was no wedding in the offing, the invitation cards were fake, and there was indeed absolutely no competition in the President’s “other room”. Many heaved a sigh of relief. Others felt that their fun had been spoilt. Millions just kept quiet wondering about the manner in which a lie caught up with an entire nation, seized the multitudes and became the truth for more than 24 hours. The dust finally settled when Aisha Buhari suddenly returned home to claim her bona fide rights.  There was even a video making the rounds, again on social media, showing that she was not allowed access to her room in the Villa. It turned out that this was an old video, criminally de-contextualized to promote a lie. But it was a true video nonetheless as confirmed further by one Fatima Daura, another commentator on the Aso Rock saga, who has also been quoted as saying her father is not arranging a new wife for the President.  So, is it the President’s body language that is fuelling this? Or is there mutual distrust in the President’s bedroom? 

Four quick takes. One: Students of fake news, hate speech, and fake speech would find in the Aisha Buhari marital fake drama of 2019 a locus classicus. It is furthermore, an indication of the kind of damage that persons who have access to social media can wreak. The way it is, any one with a miserable smart phone, one of those cheap little things with internet connection, or a blog site, an Instagram or twitter page can just sit in an unknown corner of the universe and cook up a story about innocent persons, put their photographs together and allege anything from romance to rape, dalliance and an actual wedding. Last weekend, Nigerians gave President Buhari a wife, married her off, collected bride price on her family’s behalf and gave the First Lady of Nigeria, such a massive heartache that smoked her out. Human beings are very wicked. I am now tempted to see the reason in the argument that there should be some regulation of social media content, despite my commitment to free speech. A situation whereby any anonymous character can just hide in one corner, create a terrible tale and disrupt the public order is dangerous for our democracy. It is an abuse of free speech. What happened last weekend is enough to be treated as treasonable felony. 

What if the First Lady, Aisha Buhari, had collapsed and slumped upon hearing that her husband planned to take another wife? What if Sadiya Umar Farouk’s family had acted on the information and accused the President openly of kidnapping their daughter? His position as President certainly does not give him the right to grab another man’s daughter without due process, especially as he took an oath of office to respect the rule of law! What if Aisha’s children had confronted the President to defend their mother only to realize that they were responding to fake news and hate speech? Whoever tried to cause a revolution in the President’s household should be identified, investigated and sanctioned. Who released that fake video? For what reason? Who published the fake wedding news and arranged to make it go viral? Fake news is unacceptable. It runs contrary to all known principles of journalism: truth, accuracy, objectivity and fairness. If the security agencies know what they are doing, they will take a deeper look at this matter. 

Two: This is also about the private lives of public persons. It is a trite point that when you take on a public role, you give up a part of your privacy. The President of a country in particular is public property: voters have every right to ask after his well-being, pry into his personal life, raise questions about how he conducts himself, because whatever he does can easily affect the fortunes of the country. Only God knows for example, how many foreign investors heard the story about a cooked up conflict in the President’s household, and simply decided in the last 72 hours to hold on until there is concrete information about the situation. But how far should the public go? Is there a little zone of privacy available to the President and his family?  I guess stretching this democracy thing all the way to the President’s bedroom and his choice of women may be a case of too much democracy. It is also a kind of auto-suggestion that should be ignored by the President. We need some order in the President’s household to enable him focus properly on his job.   

Three: Mrs Aisha Buhari has since disclosed that she went abroad for medical treatment and also decided to take a little vacation based on her “doctor’s instruction,” and that explains her absence from Nigeria. I note that she has not disclosed the nature of this ailment. Couldn’t she have consulted Nigerian doctors? Don’t we have enough doctors in Nigeria to attend to whatever ails her? 

Four: I think the Presidency mismanaged the messaging process. They allowed the rumour to spread for far too long before intervening.  Is it possible for the President of Nigeria to take a second wife and plan an El-Fatiha wedding without the entire Villa knowing?  Couldn’t they have shut down the rumour much earlier?  Their silence caused the frenzy. 

A colleague of mine, a young lady wondered why Mrs Aisha Buhari, also seeing that this was a case of fake news and hate speech had to rush back from the United Kingdom as if her life was at stake. She asked whether Mrs Buhari doesn’t trust her husband. My response to her is that Mrs Buhari has shown great courage, determination and promptitude by defending her territorial control over the President’s “other room”. Let no one blame her for as they say, “possessing her possession.” It is Minister Sadiya who owes us an explanation for that wedding that didn’t happen

Meanwhile, as Nigerians enacted various scenes in the melodrama of the President’s private life, I spent part of the weekend attending birthday parties. Hajia Bola Shagaya, former banker turned oil industry magnate and leading entrepreneur was 60. She had a party in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory on Thursday and another party for the Lagos crowd on Saturday. I attended the Lagos party which was held at the Eko Hotel Convention Centre. This was a party that showed class, influence and relevance. It was one of those don’t-miss-it parties. 

Anybody who is somebody was there: an indication of the scope and extent of the influence, impact, and reach of the celebrant, who in more than two decades has become one of the leading lights of the Nigerian political, social, and business establishment. Not many know about her involvement in politics, but in Kwara State, she is one of the major political influencers even if she chooses not to advertise the scope of her influence publicly on the national stage. Many politicians in that state owe their ascendancy to her support and influence. The Bola Shagaya that I know is a very humble and kind woman, affable and approachable, and very prayerful. As Presidential spokesperson, she was a strong behind-the-scene pillar of support for me. She would always call to guide me or draw my attention to certain developments within the crazy space of Nigerian politics. She also supported my family. When my son Richard was born she came visiting, not minding our humble abode. She is a mentee and role model to generations of young women who look up to her. She is an absolutely wonderful woman, a good citizen and an asset to the Nigerian community. She deserves to be celebrated. Congratulations, Hajia. Long may you live! 

I left the Shagaya party at a little after midnight, but by noon on Sunday, I was at yet another 60^th birthday party: that of my friend and brother, DIG Taiwo Lakanu. Taiwo turned 60 last week Friday and was pulled out of the Police Force. On Sunday, his wife and children threw a special birthday party for him. Lakanu, the Aare Akogun of Lagos is one of those rare persons anyone would wish to know. He is that kind of friend that everyone must have. He is loyal, frank, straightforward and very dependable. I must have written tons of articles criticizing the Nigeria Police and policemen in the last 30-something years but Taiwo Lakanu is exceptional. He is a good ambassador of the Nigeria Police and one of the finest officers I have ever met.  It is not surprising that he has distinguished himself in every posting that he has had: from being Head of SARS and DPO in Lagos, SA to IGP Tafa Balogun, to Ekiti to Imo to the Headquarters in Abuja. There is even a street named after him in Imo State! I had nursed the hope that he would one day become Nigeria’s Inspector General of Police because he has all it takes: the knowledge, the operations experience, the intellect, the personality, the social network and the right attitude. But now, he is 60 and in line with the rules, they have sent him home. Akogun of the Universe, salute!... Great tour of duty…I believe Nigeria can still make use of his talent. As he starts a new life as a retired DIG, a lawyer and an expert, we wish him well.