A mere four years after emerging from a civil war, in 1974, Nigeria was at the beginning of an oil boom. Then, as today, the country was in the middle of a debate about fiscal federalism and revenue allocation. Unlike today, however, there were significant differences: the country was under military rule and the men leading the debate were all soldiers. In the fifty years since then, the structure of this debate and the geo-political symmetries that define it have evolved only a little.

The immediate spark for the debate fifty years ago was the publication of the statutory allocations to the twelve states of the federation then for the fiscal year 1974-75. With a population of 2.5 million, Mid-West State received 139.9 million Naira or 23.7% of the allocation. Rivers State, whose population was 1.5 million, received 101.1 million Naira. 

Isawa Elaigwu, semi-official biographer of Yakubu Gowon, the army general who was Nigeria’s military head of state at the time observed about this that “while both Rivers and Midwestern States, comprising 7.3% (4 million) of the country’s total population, shared between themselves 40.83% (N241.00 million) of the total allocation to the states, the ten other states which accounted for 92.7% (51.6 million) of the country’s population, shared among themselves 59.17% (349.2m) of the statutory allocation.”

Usman Faruk, the Commissioner of Police who governed the North-Western State was unhappy with the dissension over the sharing of the allocation because, he said, all of them in the Supreme Military Council then agreed it. Joseph Gomwalk, another Commissioner of Police and then military governor of Gowon’s own Benue-Plateau State; and Jacob Esuene, who governed the South-Eastern State called for a more objective system of revenue allocation. If they knew what such a system looked like, they didn’t say. Kwara’s military governor, David Bamigboye as well as General Abba Kyari of the North-East went on record to call for a review of the allocation formula. For their part, Oluwole Rotimi and Mobolaji Johnson, military governors respectively of the Western and Lagos States advocated for “a revenue allocation formula that would guarantee responsible and stable government for Nigeria.”

Nigeria’s search for a workable federalism in many ways can be reduced to the search for precisely such a formula. It has proved elusive. If anything, it may have got even more so. In the 36 years between 1946 and 1980, spanning the colonial and post-colonial periods and including  military as well as elected civilian regimes, the country burnt through the reports of at least eight blue ribbon panels on the question of fiscal federalism. 

On the eve of independence in 1958, the report of Raisman Commission recommended the creation of a Distributable Pool Account (DPA) into which was to be paid 30% of revenue from mineral rents and royalties and from import duties. The regions retained 50% of the revenue from mineral rents and royalties from their region while the central government took 20%. 70% of the revenue from import duties went to the central government. 

Six years later and four years after independence, the Binns Fiscal Commission increased the DPA share of the income from import duties from 30 to 35% at the expense of the share of the central government. Importantly, the report set its face against the principle of derivation, replacing it with that it called the principle of “financial comparability.” On this basis, it recommended the sharing of the DPA receipts as follows: Northern Region 42%; Eastern Region 30%; Western Region 20%; and Mid-Western Region 8%. Lagos was then the federal capital. Up to this point, the fiscal balance largely favoured the regions who contributed resources to the central government. 

In 1968, Nigeria’s post-colonial crisis of state legitimacy had already exploded into a year-old civil war. Under pressure from both the economic costs of the war as well as its structural antecedents, Yakubu Gowon, the war-time Supreme Commander (as he was then known), called upon Chief I.O Dina, a former history lecturer at the University College Ibadan, to lead what the regime called an Interim Revenue Allocation Review Committee. 

The legacy of the Dina Committee recommendations was very far reaching and suited the regimental mood of the military. The Committee addressed frontally the issue of taxation and public goods. It recommended a centralization of taxation as well as the harmonization of the produce marketing boards which were until then mostly regional. The Dina Committee also recommended a centralization of the funding of higher education and the replacement of the DPA with what it called a State Joint Account. Additionally, the committee recommended that states should retain 100% of rent from onshore extractive operations on the basis of derivation and also receive another 10% of royalties revenue as derivation. 

Even in the midst of an existential conflict at the time, the fuss that followed in the wake of the Dina Committee report was deafening. Officially, the Federal Military Government rejected the Dina Committee Report. In reality, Isawa Elaigwu recalls that “….Gowon did not raise dust over the issue but quietly implemented most aspect of this report through the back door at the appropriate time.” The result is that the Dina Committee Report has been quite influential in shaping Nigeria’s version of federalism. 

Gowon enjoyed three advantages at the time in his handling of the unitarising tendencies that underpinned the recommendations of the Dina Committee. First, the civil war was an extenuating circumstance. Second, the regimental traditions of military government limited the degree of elite dissension. Third, as a military ruler, he ultimately did not have to suffer any institutional constraints similar to those imposed by a parliament or its equivalent under elected civil rule. 

For the current incumbent fifty years later, a civilian seeking to accomplish what would be the most far-reaching restructuring of Nigeria’s fiscal fundamentals in 110 years, none of these advantages exists and he suffers many more debilitations besides. 

By some coincidence, in the year that Gowon constituted the Dina Committee, the celebrated Kenya political scientist, Ali Mazrui, explained the challenges of structural stability in post-colonial African states in terms of two underlying crises of state legitimacy and of regime legitimacy. 

Fiscal reform on the ambition evinced by the proposals now under consideration in Nigeria assumes the existence of a capable state which enjoys affinity among citizens, an overwhelming percentage of whom should be documented. None of these can be taken for granted in Nigeria. The evidence from across the fields of financial inclusion, electoral participation, and taxation suggests that the proportion of documented Nigerians does not exceed 40%. It will take more than a few convenient ebullitions to address this. 

Any government will be challenged in addressing it. An administration that suffers from manifest issues of legitimacy lacks the currency to trade with in this situation. The crisis that afflicts the current proposals is that of a government unwilling to put in the work required to redress deficits of state and governmental legitimacy around the country. To address what is evidently a political problem, the government has chosen instead to escape into self-inflicted technocratic gobbledygook. 

Fiscal governance and reform is not as complex as the administration and its mouthpieces would like to suggest. Taxation is more than mechanical computation. It is the centrepiece of the social compact between a state and its citizens. With considered inadvertence, the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu has done itself a world of good by inspiring these increasingly raucous debates about the state of that compact in Nigeria or the lack of it. It will be best served by listening to the debate in humility while it learns.

A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu 

Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house of representatives, says the 10th house passed 89 bills across priority areas in one year.

Speaking during a workshop organised for the house of representatives press corps in Kaduna on Saturday, Abbas highlighted the performance of the lawmakers in the past 17 months.

“I am pleased to highlight our significant strides in the past seventeen months. Our One-Year performance assessment scorecard reveals remarkable achievements, including passing 89 bills across our priority areas,” he said.

“These include the Electric Power Sector Reform (Amendment) Bill, 2023; the Federal Audit Service Bill, 2023; the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons Bill, 2023; the Armed Forces Act (Amendment) Bill, 2023; the National Assembly Library Trust Fund Act (Amendment) Bill, 2024; the Student Loans (Access to Higher Education) Act, 2024; the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act (Amendment) Bill, 2024; the National Anthem Bill, 2024; and the Traditional Complementary and Alternative Medicine Council of Nigeria (Establishment) Bill, 2023.

“These laws address critical aspects of governance, security, and economic reform.”

The speaker said besides lawmaking, the house of representatives undertook various initiatives to deepen public engagement and enhance the legislative process.

He said the house organised the national dialogue on state policing, a national discourse on Nigeria’s security challenges and a retreat on the effective implementation of the petroleum industry act (PIA), tax reform modernisation dialogues and the citizens’ town hall on the 2024 appropriation bill, among others.

“Beyond legislation, the House has undertaken various initiatives to deepen public engagement and enhance the legislative process,” he added.

“These include the National Dialogue on State Policing, the National Discourse on Nigerian Security Challenges, a retreat on the effective implementation of the Petroleum Industry Act, tax reform modernisation dialogues, the Citizens’ Town Hall on the 2024 Appropriation Bill, and the pre-legislative presentation of tax reform bills.

“These engagements underscore our commitment to ensuring that governance is inclusive, participatory, and responsive to the needs of all Nigerians.”

Abbas urged journalists to be cautious in their reportage of the activities of lawmakers to avoid misinformation.

At a separate event, the speaker announced the establishment of four new tertiary institutions in Zaria.

The institutions include a federal college of education, college of health sciences, a National Open University campus, and a college of legal studies.

He said the institutions will enhance Zaria’s educational infrastructure and provide critical resources for the region.

[TheCable]

Did you know that Nigeria and Ghana were once one country?Maybe I didn’t put that properly, but in the late 1800s, Nigeria, Ghana, Sierra Leone, Cameroon and The Gambia made up the British West African Territories, later renamed British West African Settlements, and had the same military, customs and police underone colonial administration. In fact, between 1907 and 1962, they spent the same currency — the British West African pound. You will find so many similarities between Nigeria and Ghana (need Imention the jollof rice?) but, ironically, our political cultures differ.I found their December 7 general election so fascinating that I cannot escape penning my thoughts on it.

No, I was not fascinated because Mr Mahamudu Bawumia, the candidate of the New Patriotic Party (NPP), conceded the presidential election to Mr John Mahama of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) before the final result was announced. This, to be sure, is not that strange in Ghana. Several times in the past, losing candidates gracefully accepted defeat. Bawumia, who is the outgoing vice-president, has boosted his credentials ahead of the 2028 general election by not being a bitter loser. The NPP lost by the highest margin of any party since 1996. The vote difference ofnearly 1.7 million is huge. The NDC now has double the seats of the NPP in parliament — another record from 1996.

Conceding the presidential election is a rare commodity in Nigeria. It has happened only once in our history — in 2015 when President Goodluck Jonathan called and congratulated President Muhammadu Buhari. Some said it was no big deal, but we have been holding presidential elections since 1979 and no other losing candidate has accepted defeat till date. Let me modify that. In 1993, Alhaji Bashir Tofa “congratulated” Bashorun MKO Abiola before the announcement of the final result. It turned out both candidates hadagreed to prepare congratulatory statements but Tofa’s message was mischievously leaked in the heat of the annulment politics. Heswiftly denied the statement.

I somehow find it fascinating that since 1996, Ghanaians hold their general election on December 7 every four years — and it doesn’t matter what day of the week it falls. It could be a Friday or a Sunday. In Nigeria, our elections must hold on Saturdays, otherwise there will be war. An attempt by the electoral commission to fix the 2003 elections during the Easter weekend was met with staunch opposition, and there is enough caution to not let the voting day “clash” with Ramadan. By the way, there is no movement restriction on election days in Ghana. The economy is not locked down. But we don’t believe an election can hold in Nigeria without a curfew. We are a special breed, aren’t we?

The most fascinating thing about Ghanaian elections for me is the tradition of ruling parties losing the general election. It is almost like it is programmed. It is becoming like the US where the Democrats and Republicans frequently alternate power. A part of me sees this as evidence of political maturity. Another part sayssomething else and I will discuss that shortly. But, by and large, Ghanaians have devised their own “power rotation” (as a senior friend puts it) between the two biggest parties — the NDC and NPP. In Nigeria, it took the opposition 16 years to unseat the ruling party. Many fans and enthusiasts of democracy would prefer this tohappen more frequently.

This tradition, or culture, took off on a rough note in 1992. Flight Lt JJ Rawlings had overthrown a military government in June 1979, installed a democratically elected administration in September of the same year, and overthrown the civilian government in 1981. He went on to rule Ghana as a military dictator for 11 years before finally bowing to the campaign for democracy in 1992. He founded the NDC, transmuted to a civilian president and ruled for two terms of four years each — the constitutional term-limit. Credit to him for putting a limit: most African military dictators simply transmute to “democratically elected” leaders and immediately begin a journey into life presidency.

The 1992 elections did not really go down well with the opposition. Rawlings was the candidate of the Progressive Alliance, which was made up of his NDC, National Convention Party (NCP) and the hilariously named Every Ghanaian Living Everywhere (EGLE). Rawlings formed the alliance to be able to withstand the NPP at the ballot and he won 58 percent of votes, leaving NPP’s Prof AlbertAdu Boahen trailing with 30 percent. Opposition candidates cried foul, accused Rawlings of electoral fraud, and boycotted the parliamentary elections in protest. But allegations of electoral fraud aside, the opposition parties were too fragmented and weak to make a dent on the Rawlings-led coalition. 

In 1996, Rawlings easily retained power: as the incumbent and Ghanaian leader for 15 years non-stop, that was not something to be unexpected. Even though his coalition — the Progressive Alliance— was re-elected with almost the same margin in the 1992 election, the opposition parties were collaborating better. Mr John Kufuor’s Great Alliance, made up of his NPP, and ironically, the same NCPthat aligned with the NDC in 1992, put up a brave fight but lost. Mr Kow Nkensen Arkaah, the vice-president, was the leader of the NCP but having fallen out with Rawlings, he decided to run with Kufuor. The opposition parties complained less this time: theyadmitted they had more work to do.

The 2000 election was a different ball game. The opposition parties were better organised, better resourced and better prepared this time. Kufuor ran again, this time against NDC’s Prof John Atta Mills, Rawlings’ VP who replaced Arkaah. Contrary to fears of violence, the election went peacefully and NPP defeated the ruling party and a sitting vice-president after two rounds of voting. Rawlings lost power, in a sense, after having ruled Ghana for 19 years on the trot. The NDC was displaced from power after just two terms by the man who had lost to Rawlings four years earlier. This was considered the ultimate model of civilian-to-civilian transitionin developing democracies.

Kufuor got his second term in 2004 by defeating Mills again, this time without a run-off. But Kufuor’s NPP lost power in 2008 as Ghanaians decided to show the ruling party the red card — the second time in 16 years. And it was third time lucky for Mills, who defeated NPP’s Nana Akufo-Addo, the former attorney-general and minister of justice. Mills needed a run-off to win the closest election in Ghanaian history. Akufo-Addo led the first round with 49.13percent while Mills had 47.92 per cent. But having not scored the required half of the total votes, Akufo-Addo faced a tension-soaked run-off that ended with less than one percent margin in favour of Mills, the law professor-turned-politician.

The next three elections were something you could never make up: Akufo-Addo vs Mahama all the way. Mahama was vice-president to Mills, who died a few months to the 2012 elections. Mahama was sworn in to replace Mills as required by the constitution. He then had a go at presidency. He defeated Akufo-Addo, who was now losing for the second time in a row. But both of them squared off again in 2016 and Akufo-Addo finally won — at third try. That was the third time a ruling party would be sent packing. Akufo-Addo defeated Mahama again in 2020. Now, Mahama has defeated Akufo-Addo’s vice-president to return to power. And this is the fourth time a ruling party would lose.

Meanwhile, why is another part of me feeling uneasy with thisGhana “power rotation”? I would say that sometimes voters judge wrongly by blaming all the economic misery on the ruling party. The fundamentals of many African economies are not right and changing governments hardly solves the major problems. If the structure of the economy is warped, implementing major changes can hurt the citizens who will now take it out on the ruling party and vote them out. But years down the line, they will look back and say “even the previous government was not this bad”. They choose another party again but the problems remain. This is good for democracy but it can equally be very tricky.

Let me illustrate. When Ghanaians voted out Mahama in 2016, the national currency had fallen to an average of GH¢4 to the dollar. Voters were angry because it was GH¢1.95/$ when Mahama became caretaker president in 2012. They voted him out in favour of Akufo-Addo but things only got worse (it is now GH¢16/$ with the attendant impact on the cost of living). Voters were angry againand began to yearn for a return to the “good old days” when NDC was in power. Well, NDC is back but if the economic fundamentalsdo not change (and reform can come with more pains), it could be GH¢30/$ by 2028 when another election is due. And voters would again long for the “good old days” of NPP.

For me, though, the major positive in the unofficial “power rotation” is that people own the democracy. It belongs to all. It is in the interest of everyone that the democratic order is maintained. The opposition parties have a stake. The voters have a stake. Part of the frustration with our democracy in Nigeria is the notion that you have to be in the ruling party to win. This has led to a culture of defections to the ruling party and the weakening of opposition and competition. It is almost like you are wasting your time being in the opposition. Some PDP members have not forgiven Jonathan for conceding to Buhari in 2015 and failing to use state machinery to hold tight to power.

Democracy is sweeter when the field is level and participants are given a fair crack of the whip. When people go into elections already feeling defeated, the competitive feature of democracy is in ruins. A level-playing field allows for promotion of alternative ideas. The possibility that a ruling party can lose an election should also, ordinarily, propel incumbents to deliver the goods. It should serve as an incentive for performance in order to retain power. It has the potential to curtail complacency. At a time in Nigeria, to get the PDP ticket was the most critical thing. Winning the actual election was a mere formality. The APC has now fully replaced the PDP in this aspect of the game. It is what it is.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

RIVERS DISORDER

The court of appeal on Friday set aside a federal high court orderrestraining the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) from disbursing financial allocations to the Rivers state government. The federal high court did not have any constitutional power on the finances of states, the appellate court ruled. Even those of us who did not study law knew that the federal high court ruling was completely out of order, but we could only shake our heads in disbelief and despair. The conduct of some judges in matters relating to Rivers state will have to come under the intense scrutiny of the National Judicial Council (NJC) because some of these pronouncements do not make any sense at all. Troubling.

TJ’S TRAUMA

Tijjani Babangida, former Super Eagles’ player, has spoken out about one of the most traumatic experiences a human being can ever have. In an accident on Kaduna-Zaria road early 2024, he lost his younger brother, Ibrahim, who also played for Nigeria at cadet level. His one-year-old son, Fadil, died from his injuries. The nanny had a fracture. The wife lost an eye and had to undergo facial reconstruction. “After three months in the Netherlands, I was finally able to tell her that our child was in the car when the accident took place. She [asked] about his name. She can’t remember anything about him,” Babangida said in a documentary by his former club, Ajax. Heartbreaking.

SOCIAL MALAISE

An affliction that the social media has brought upon the human race is the ease with which people fabricate malicious and defamatory tales. Someone recently forwarded a post to me and asked if it was true. It was something about Hon Bello el-Rufai, federal lawmaker and son of the former governor of Kaduna. I did not think twice before replying that it was fake. The figures quoted in naira and dollars in the post were insane. I was shocked that some people believed it and even shared it on social media. A lawyer has apologised for sharing without verifying. The character assassination on social media cannot go on like this, otherwise we should just kiss civilisation goodbye. Disgusting.

NO COMMENT

Are you following events in Syria? They have a new saviour named Abu Muhammad al-Golani. He led the rebel groups to overthrow the government of President Bashar Al-Assad, the dictator who came to power in 2000 to replace his dictator father who had died after almost thirty years in power. Father and son took turns to terrorise Syrians before a group of terrorists decided to put an end to the reign of terror. Al-Golani, the rebel leader, was a member of Al-Qaeda at some point and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). He was once jailed for terrorism. Syrians are happy that the Devil has overthrown Satan. Al-Golani is even enjoying good coverage in the Western media. Wonderful.

Unlike in the last 24 years of his power and crushing majesty, Bashar al-Assad had a decision quickly made for him. The choice between flying out of  Hmeimim air base  in his super luxury presidential jet and a rugged military version of the Russian SU 35 duty jet was quickly made for him in the thick of darkness. The special squad of military intelligence officers detailed by Vladimir Putin and the elite squad of his own intelligence service to ferret  him out of Damascus had no time for protocol niceties. Their task was simple: fly Assad and his family safely out of Syria and into Moscow where the grounds had been prepared for his life in exile. Roughly three hours of flight into uncertainty.

With his evacuation from the Presidential fortress in Damascus, Assad’s two and half decades of tyranny over Syria was over, thus ending over fifty years draconian dominion of the Assad dynasty over Syria.  This was an exile long and well prepared for. In spite of the elaborate arrangements laid out by Putin  for his unexpected guests, the Assad family had made serious arrangements for this eventuality.

With an estimated loot of over $2 billion tucked away in Russian and other banks, the Assad family owns a series of super luxury apartments worth over $40 million located in Moscow’s eight tallest apartment block. It is of course unlikely that the Assad clan would quarter in these luxury abodes in the immediate. For security and diplomatic reasons, they are more likely  to be housed in specially provided dachas made available by their ubiquitous host with all VIP security protection arrangements.

Russia’s pretension as an honest broke had collapsed. It has sustained its patronage of Assad under the guise that it could get Assad to give up its chemical weapons arsenal and neutralize elements of ISIS in Syria. All that did not happen. In the wake of the Assad overthrow, Russia has played up a narrative that it encouraged Assad to surrender to a peaceful transfer of power. That, too, is a bogus lie concocted in case Syria becomes ungovernable, necessitating an Assad return.

Back in Damascus, a virtual street carnival  and mob sight-seeing has gone on for over a week and half. The mob is out on a tour of the places that up until last week were hallowed ground of a despicable   and dreaded tyrant. Fear is gone with the tyrant and left in  its place the dread of uncertain freedom. Common folk have gone sight-seeing and treasure- hunting in Assad’s palace. Common people are looting treasured art pieces, venturing into presidential bedrooms, savoring the remnant aroma from what used to be the presidential cuisine with alluring menus on wall display. On the streets, irate mobs have torn down huge posters and billboards of the fallen dictator.  Poor people and plain street urchins are trampling on Assad posters and even urinating on them!

More tellingly, the Assad prison cells have been thrown open. People who have been in detention for decades are being released for the first time. Some can hardly remember their own names or their precise identity. Even their relations can hardly recognize them. Taken together, the Damascus postcards are quite familiar in all places where history overturns the bastions of autocracy and power absolutism.

The images and footages are familiar. Images of tumbling statues and opened up palaces: The Caecescus in Romania. Ferdinand and Imelda Marcus in the Philippines,  Haille Mengistu Mariam in Ethiopia, Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The postcards from the palaces of fleeing tyrants and triumphant street mobs carry a uniform imprint.

With the coordinated and mass supported rebel overrun of Damascus and the sacking of the Assad regime, the long drawn  Syrian revolutionary flourish that gathered momentum following the Arab Spring of 2011 has made land fall. The Arab Spring was a spontaneous street based revolt against authoritarian rulers in most of the Arab world. The revolt brought about varying degrees of political change and even regime changes in countries as diverse as Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain. In Syria, the revolt was beaten down with maximum ferocity by Bashar al-Assad following in the footsteps of his late father. Multiple faction rebellion followed and a bloody civil war ensued.

Dissidents and rebels were hunted down, rounded up and killed, jailed, tortured or chased into exile. Those who survived organized into factional rebel groups parading diverse ideologies and waging mostly religious fundamentalist crusades.  But they all had one enemy- Assad and his autocratic regime.  He in turn dug in  and entrenched his dictatorship.  He reinforced his military strength,  tightened the levers of repression, and reduced the democratic freedoms of Syrians.

He reached out to Iran, Russia and Turkey as well as extremist terrorist groups in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories  adjoining Israel. Assad alienated moderate Arab countries like Jordan which was presided over by his childhood palace friend, now King Abdallah, son of the late King Hussein.

Of course, Syria was a fertile ground for all manner of fringe religious  fundamentalist terrorists. All manner of international interests were aligned with the various rebel factions. ISIS found a safe haven in parts of Syria. The over 13 rebel groups opposed to Assad were supported by powerful local and international  power interests: The US was poised against ISIS remnants. Turkey was pitched to the north in support of separatist Kurds seeking  autonomy to the north of Syria. Iran, Saudi Arabia were digging for support and foothold in a regional power bazaar.  Israel has remained fixated on the Golasn Heights. A multi pronged civil war erupted and  raged since the Arab Spring.

Syria’s economy which had before  the revolt boasted one of the highest GDP per capita in the region was plunger into chaos and crisis. Poverty and mismanagement followed. The only feature of the Syrian  state alive was the Assad presidency and its supporting military infrastructure.

What has united the rebel groups that have finally toppled and sacked the Assad regime is a simplistic hunger for a civil, inclusive, sovereign and peaceful Syria. From their pronouncements so far, this hunger is above their sectarian differences. They have to fight to restore Syria, to ensure the return of normal social services and to mend the broken heart of a nation that was once a promising destination in the Middle East.

Of all the rebel groups, HTS is easily the most prominent from the perspective of political influence. Led by Sharaa (Al-Jolani), a known terrorist on whose head the US has placed a bounty of $10 million. In the civil war years, HTS, supported by Turkey,  was in power in the Idlib province where the imprints of his more liberal governance was in evidence.

There is evidence that he ran a more liberal version of Islamic fundamentalism. Some women were allowed not to wear hijab. Men did not have to wear overgrown beards while professional women ran social services in health and education. Leading Western powers like the US and the UK who maintained a hard posture towards HTS and its leader now have to watch and see to what extent the moderation of factional leaders like Jolani can pervade the future government of Syria.

The defeat of the Assad regime has literally reduced Syria into a carcass for the hounds of international power. In a purported chase after remnants of ISIS and other trouble makers,  the United States has not let off in its serial bombardment and strikes targeted at ISIS related rebel forces still operating in Syria. 

Israel is feverishly pursuing its own national security interests by exploiting the period of statelessness in Syria to weaken a resurgent Syria as a staging post for hostile activity against the state of Israel.  It  is targeting chemical and biological weapons sites as well as military hardware locations. Israel is exploiting this period of vacuum to destroy whatever is left of the military capability of the Syrian state. It is carrying out multiple strikes per day. The strategic objective of these strikes is to weaken Syria and make it an unattractive destination for hostile actions against Israel. These actions are also aimed at whittling down the influence of Iran in the neighborhood.

The neutralization of  a humbled Syria can only add to Israel’s depletion of Hezbollah in Lebanon and the virtual devastation of Hamas in Gaza to create a more quiet neighbourhood for Israel. Unfortunately, these developments can hardly advance the cause of Palestinian statehood. Whatever negotiations take place  now on the matter will only have the Arabs and Palestinians  negotiating from a position of  demonstrable weakness.

As a strategic influence in the region, Russia has paid a price for its war against Ukraine. Clearly, the sacking of Assad is an indirect defeat of Russian influence in the region. Russia had lost the capacity to protect Assad regime in Syria given  its exhaustion in Ukraine. With a casualty of over 350,000 dead Russian soldiers in Ukraine and the raging costs of the war on its economy with crippling sanctions, Putin had no difficulty reaching the inevitable conclusion that Syria was no longer worth the trouble. Continued Russian involvement in Syria would impress no one in particular and be of no immediate strategic or economic interest. It is better off negotiating with whoever comes to rule Syria to protect whatever is left of Russian military hardware in Syria.

In every place where power places itself above responsible governance and the pursuit of the common good, the collapse of the Assad dynasty holds lessons. It is at once the lesson of absolutism as a temptation of power. It is also the lesson of the narrow pursuit of self -interest over and above the common interest and the collective good.

The transience of power is the most obvious lesson that has since been learnt by even the most pedestrian Banana Republic autocrat. They know power is transient  hence they spend their days in office preparing for the decades they will spend after office. They know the things they  are likely to miss out of office hence they spirit those things away to their retirement hideouts. 

Above everything and relevant to every clime, the destruction of Syria and the eventual collapse of the Assad dynasty shows how the prospects and promise of a nation can be destroyed by the limitless power appetite of one family and one man.

For the Nigerian state in its present state of creaking disrepair, the fall of Assad’s tenuous autocracy demonstrates how easily a state besieged by multiple threats can eventually fall apart. For those in doubt, the threats that confront and could fell the Nigerian state are not far too different from the ones that afflicted Syria and led to the recent collapse.

These include: spiraling insecurity,  random and casual violations of human and citizen rights, unchecked sectarian divisions, unbridled corruption among political leaders and increasing regionalism of political discourse and contest.

The Syrian postcard is specific. But its images are universal and apply in every  nation where power gravitates towards absolutism.

*Focus on something useful, not Badenoch, Atiku’s aide tells Shettima

The leader of the United Kingdom Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch, has again taken a dig at Nigeria’s Vice President, Kashim Shettima, in her recent interview, saying she is a Yoruba and has nothing in common with the northern part of the country. 

This is as the spokesman for the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 election, Atiku Abubakar, Phrank Shaibu, asked those criticising Badenoch, to embark on a moment of introspection.

Vice President Shettima, recently, slammed her for denigrating Nigeria in her recent interviews with British media, especially her views on immigration and corruption by the Nigerian public officials, and urged her to drop her Nigerian name. 

While her spokesperson has responded to the criticism from Shettima, Badenoch sparked fresh identity controversy while speaking with British media, The Spectator, recently. 

According to her, Northern Nigeria is a haven for Islamism and Boko Haram. She expressed dismay at how she’s being identified as Nigerian, noting that she identifies less with the country. 
She said, “I find it interesting that everybody defines me as being Nigerian. I identify less with the country than with the specific ethnicity (Yoruba).”

“I have nothing in common with the people from the north of the country, the Boko Haram where Islamism is.
“Being Yoruba is my true identity, and I refuse to be lumped with northern people of Nigeria, who ‘were our ethnic enemies,’ all in the name of being called a Nigerian.”

Continuing, Badenoch recalled how her surname was linked to a warrior and protector of the crown, adding that she was ready to die protecting the country (United Kingdom).
“Somebody once told me when I was very young that my surname was a name for people who were warriors. They protected the crown, and that’s what I see myself as doing.

“I am here to protect, and I will die protecting this country because I know what’s out there,” she added.

Meanwhile, Shaibu, the spokesman for the presidential candidate of the PDP in the 2023 election, Atiku, asked those criticising Badenoch, to embark on a moment of introspection.
Specifically, Shaibu urged Vice President Shettima to find something useful to do rather than concentrating on Badenoch.

In a post on his X page yesterday, Shaibu asked the vice president to find something useful to do with his time instead of berating Badenoch.

He wrote: “Those criticising @KemiBadenoch should pause for a moment of introspection. The mere fact that her name is Kemi or that she has Yoruba roots does not automatically render her Nigerian.
“After all, Arsenal’s Gabriel Jesus @gabrieljesus9 is not the son of God. @officialSKSM should find something useful to do with his time.”

[Thisday]

The Epe Local Government Council Chairman, Princess Surah Animashaun, has said the Grand Chief Commander Award conferred on a member of Lagos State Governor's Advisory Council (GAC), Alhaji Shakiru Akanni Seriki-Bamu by the Prestigious Epe club, is an award well deserved.

A statement by the LG Chairperson, Princess Animashaun, said, “Akanni Seriki-Bamu has successfully made a masterpiece out of Epe division and Lagos State at large. The award is a confirmation of the Seriki-Bamu’s popularity and credence as a progressive leader who has continued to use his resources for the common good of all.

“His exemplary leadership, selfless service, and invaluable contributions to the growth and development of our beloved community is a testament to the prestigious award and recognition.

“Akanni Seriki-Bamu has so far shown a firm resolve to creating a better reality for everyone in Epe division, your tireless efforts to promote unity, progress, and social welfare in Epe division have not gone unnoticed.

"Indeed, you are a shining example of dedication, integrity, compassion, selflessness and community spirit that is worth emulating, we are proud to associate with you and celebrate your exceptional leadership, achievements as personality of inestimable value."

"Your immense contributions has made Epe, a model Council of good governance, and we are quite delighted that he is being recognised with the Grand Commander of the Prestigious Epe Club.

"May this recognition inspire you to continue serving our community with the same passion, relentlessness, vision, energy, wisdom, and generosity that have made you a highly revered figure in Epe division and nationally."

"I find it interesting that everyone defines me as a Nigerian. I identify less with the country than with my specific ethnic group. I have nothing in common with the people from the north of the country, the Boko Haram, where Islamism is. Being Yoruba is my true identity and I refuse to be lumped with the northern people of Nigeria who were our ethnic enemies, all in the name of being called a Nigerian"- @KemiBadenoch. 

Kemi Badenoch MP, the leader of the British Conservative Party and Opposition in the @UKParliament, has refused to stop at just denigrating our country but has gone a step further by seeking to divide us on ethnic lines.

She claims that she never regarded herself as being a Nigerian but rather a Yoruba and that she never identified with the people from the Northern part of our country who she collectively describes as being "Boko Haram Islamists" and "terrorists". 

This is dangerous rhetoric coming from an impudent and ignorant foreign leader who knows nothing about our country, who does not know her place and who insists on stirring up a storm that she cannot contain and that may eventually consume her. 

It is rather like saying that she identifies more with the English than she does with the Scots and the Welsh whom she regards as nothing more than homicidal and murderous barbarians that once waged war against her ethnic English compatriots! 

All this coming from a young lady of colour that is a political leader in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-cultural country that lays claim to being the epitome of decency and civilisation! What a strange and inexplicable contradiction this is.

Her intentions are malevolent and insidious and her objective, outside of ridiculing and mocking us, is to divide us and bring us to our knees.

I am constrained to ask, what on earth happened to this creature in her youth and why does she hate Nigeria with such passion?

Did something happen to her when she lived here which she has kept secret?

Was she the victim of some form of deviant behaviour, abuse or perversion that has resulted in trauma, long term psychological damage & mental health issues?

Is this why she sees red and gets her pretty knickers in a twist whenever she hears "Nigeria"? 

Why does the mention of the name of our country trigger such compulsive, violent and aggressive emotions and impulses in her? 

Given her pathological hatred for Nigerians these are legitimate questions that need to be answered. 

She hates us with what the Bible describes as "a perfect hatred" yet in a much publicised and widely read open letter written in 2010 during her first bid to be elected into the UK Parliament she begged the Nigerian community in her constituency to support her.

At that time, when she still needed us, she identified with Nigerians but everything changed after she was  elected.

At that point, in her conflicted and confused mind, all Nigerians became demons, all Englanders became angels and her disdain and contempt for us was unmasked!

She hates us with a perfect hatred yet she still has the effontry and nerve to haul her rotund posterior back to our country with one Hamish, who I am told is her English husband, to watch polo at the Lagos Polo Club.

This is the same country that she has described as being a lawless jungle and corrupt stinking edifice from which no good can come and that is filled with nothing but apes, monsters and the criminally insane.

The truth is that the creature called Kemi Badenoch is nothing but a b*tch on heat. She needs to be tamed and caged.

She is Aunty Jemima on steroids and the President of the International House Ni*gers Association. 

Her Nigerian passport (if she still has one) ought to be revoked and she should never be allowed to set her leperous foot in our country again.

She should take Vice President Kashim Shettima's @KashimSM counsel seriously and drop Kemi as her name.

She should formally wipe her maiden name of Adegoke off the record as well and publicly renounce  and disavow her father, mother, siblings and Nigerian lineage and heritage. 

She does not want to identify with us and we do not want to identify with her. 

She sees us as being corrupt and evil and we see her as being the devil incarnate and the spawn of satan. There can be no fellowship between us. 

The truth is that she is no longer a mere irritant or the inconsequential object of our contempt and ridicule but she can now be comfortably and legitimately described as 'public enemy number one' of our beloved nation.

She should stick to the affairs of her  UK, face it's ruling Labour Party and it's Prime Minister Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer and LEAVE NIGERIA ALONE! 

On a lighter note it is a pity that I stopped playing polo many years ago because if it had been in my days that she attempted to visit the Lagos Polo Club she would not have got past the gate and if she managed to do so our grooms and horseboys would have pasted her self-hating, unpatriotic, ungrateful, treacherous and ever so plain face with Argentinian pony dung before tarring and feathering her. 

How times have changed!

(FFK)

Ghana has pulled off another feat in democratic consolidation after successfully conducting a ninth round of generally peaceful Presidential and Parliamentary Elections. While democratic elections have become a norm in the country, the 2024 General Elections were distinct in various aspects that challenged the resilience of democracy, yet, Ghanaians rose to the occasion

Forty-eight hours after the poll, the Electoral Commission (EC) announced processed results from 267 out of 276 constituencies, and declared former President John Dramani Mahama, candidate of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC), as the winner and President-elect with 56.55% of the votes against 40.61% scored by the out-going Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia, the presidential fag-bearer of the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP).

Indeed, less than 24 hours from the close of balloting, Vice President Bawumia had telephoned President-elect Mahama to concede defeat. 

Also, following the declaration of the official results by EC, out-going President Nana Akufo-Addo congratulated Mahama on “his decisive victory” and invited him to a meeting to initiate the transition process.

There was no rocket science to it, but a matter of political actors respecting the will of the people.

The two dominant political parties had agents in almost all the more than 40,000 polling stations, who monitored process and relayed polling results to their party data system for parallel vote collation/tabulation.

Like in most elections, the run-up to Ghana 2024 was not without political tension, misinformation, disinformation, fake news and hate speech, culminating in violent incidents in some Regions/Districts, with at least one or two reported deaths and injuries.

Even after the results of the presidential race were announced, shootings, looting and destruction of public and private properties were still reported in some volatile regions. Police reported some arrests and promised prosecution of culprits.

Similar post-election violence is not uncommon in Ghana, but it reached a crescendo in the 2020 elections when eight people were killed.

Some critics believe that the “unsatisfactory” handling of the 2020 election killings and the lack of public confidence in some public institutions, might have contributed to the government’s defeat at the poll.

The other factors include economic hardship, allegations of official corruption, nepotism and “political arrogance” exhibited by some public officials.

Also, artisanal illegal gold mining, locally called “galamsey,” and its negative environmental consequences (including degradation of water bodies and destruction of forest reserves) have become a major political issue, with the two major political parties trading allegations over complicity.

Equally concerning were the menace of violent extremism and vigilantism or the use of thugs/private security agents by politicians, despite the existence of the Anti-Vigilantism and Related Offences Act 999 of 1999.

The combined effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused severe economic disruptions across the globe, currency fluctuation and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which has impacted food security for many African countries, have left the Ghanaian economy reeling out of control amid high inflation and unemployment, especially among the youth. Also, the country’s debt crisis and engagement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for economic recovery might have played a significant role in the outcome of the elections.

Akufo-Addo and Mahama, who will become Ghana’s 13th President since the country’s independence from Britain in 1957, have now locked horns in four presidential battles with both emerging victorious on two occasions - (2012 and 2024 Mahama) and (2016 and 2020 Akufo-Addo).

The 2020 race produced a hung parliament with the two dominant parties having an equal number of MPs in parliament, and the opposition NDC producing the parliamentary Speaker for the first time in the country’s political history. The decision by four MPs to quit their parties and the Supreme Court’s order stopping the Speaker from declaring the MPs' seats vacant had aggravated the political tension.

Ghana has 24 registered political parties.

Thirteen (13) fielded presidential candidates, while fifteen (15) had candidates for the parliamentary elections, complemented by independents. Nonetheless, the ruling NPP and the opposition NDC remain the dominant parties, alternating control of political power three times in 32 years (2000, 2008 and 2016) and now in 2024.

According to the EC, 900,000 new eligible voters were added to the national voter’s register in 2024 bringing the total to 18,774.159 (15% higher than in 2020), in an estimated national population of 34.42 million.

In a marked departure from tradition, the 2024 political campaigns were more of a door-to-door affair than public rallies. The NDC’s stronghold is the Volta Region and parts of the North and Muslim community, while the NPP draws its majority following from the Akan ethnic group, mainly from the Ashanti and other Southern Regions.

Religion is not overly contentious in Ghana, but the 2024 poll tested the country’s religious tolerance. 

It was the first time in Ghana’s history that two candidates from the two major political parties, professing different faiths came from the same region, the North. Mahama is Christian and Bawumia a Muslim.

In the end, Mahama recorded a sweeping victory with a more than 1.5 million majority vote margin, the highest since 1992. 

There is no perfect election. However, Ghana has demonstrated that an electoral process, which is a multi-stakeholder responsibility is integral to the entrenchment of democratic culture, nurtured by strong and resilient institutions.

As the icing on the cake, Ghana, for the first time, also has its first elected female Vice President, Prof Nana Opoku-Agyemang, Mahama’s running mate in the 2024 elections.

Local and international election observers, including from ECOWAS, the African Union and the Commonwealth, and civil society organisations, were unanimous in their positive assessment of the outcome of Ghana’s latest elections, the professionalism of most actors, and the transparency of the electoral process bar the isolated violent incidents, which they captured in their reports with recommendations particularly on collation and results management for the relevant authorities to address.

Incidentally, the ECOWAS Election Observation Mission to Ghana was led by Nigeria’s former Vice President Namadi Sambo, while the West African Elders’ Forum was headed by his boss, former President Goodluck Jonathan. The fact that President Jonathan, with Sambo as his deputy, also telephoned then-candidate Muhammadu Buhari to concede defeat in Nigeria’s 2015 presidential election, just as Bawumia has done in Ghana, was not lost on the international community.

By and large, after the successful and peaceful presidential and parliamentary elections in Senegal and Liberia, the outcome of Ghana’s elections is a strong message that democracy, with all its flaws, is the way to go, by providing the people with the mechanism to periodically change leaders who fail to deliver.

The conversation on the credibility or transparency of elections remains open-ended, but a flawed election is not enough reason to jettison democracy.

With the January 2025 deadline fast approaching on the notice issued by the junta leaders of the Alliance of Sahel States, AES, to pull their countries - Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger from ECOWAS, the message from Accra is that it is never too late for a patriotic leader to do the right thing in the interest of the people.

The citizens of AES countries are going through severe socioeconomic hardship, insecurity and political isolation, which could only worsen, with an avoidable humanitarian disaster if their countries should unceremoniously quit ECOWAS.

ECOWAS might have made some mistakes in its approach to halt the wave of military incursions into politics in West Africa, but that is no justification for military coups or unconstitutional change of governments.

Since their withdrawal announcement, the junta leaders have made little to no progress on constitutional rules or implementation of their transition programmes. They should not vindicate the notion that they are opportunistic power grabbers.

For their part, ECOWAS leaders must put their house in order at the national and regional levels by ending bad governance, corruption, human rights violations, election rigging as well as “constitutional and ballot box coups.”

Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communications

“Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains. One man thinks himself the master of others but remains more of a slave than they are” - Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

One of the (once-upon-a-time) immovable pillars of our justice system is that a man is presumed innocent until otherwise proven. The man so accused is therefore allowed all his rights and privileges until the charges against him are proven. He is accorded his liberties and freedom. His honour and integrity are not only left intact, they are also held as sacrosanct. No one may abridge his rights. No one may look him in the eyes and pronounce him guilty. He may not be ostracised by anyone.

 And no punishment can - and should - be levied against him. He must be free as air and must be taken before a court of competent jurisdiction, charged with offences known to law. He must have his day in court - unhindered and unmolested. No obstacles must be hewn his way - otherwise, that in itself will amount to an obstruction of the cause - and course - of justice which, in itself also, is a serious offence.

That is why, once a case is in court, no one is allowed to comment on it again. In legal parlance, the case/comment is said to be sub judice. The court must be left alone to pronounce on the matter. You don’t have to be a lawyer to know why this should be so. Don’t distract the judge(s). Don’t arrest their judgment before it is delivered. Don’t incite the public against any likely outcome. Avoid a likely breakdown of law and order. Don’t influence the judges with your comments, position or personality. Don’t intimidate or harass them either.

 But once judgment is delivered, you are then free to review it and pass comments. Usually, there are opportunities for an appeal. Even in our traditional society, once a matter is taken before the elders for adjudication, the combatants sheath their swords. After each one has stated their own side of the case, they wait patiently for the “judge” or “judges” to ruminate over the matter and pronounce judgment.  

It appears that is no longer the case here! Senior lawyers not only discuss matters before the court with relish but also deliver "judgment" on them! As it stands today, the accused is deemed guilty once he has been so alleged. His cloak of innocence is shredded once he or she gets tarred with this or that allegation. In the trending case of Dele Farotimi versus Chief Afe Babalola and others, you will be wrong if you think Farotimi is the only one whose innocence is denied him ever before he had had the opportunity to appear before a law court - competent or incompetent.

 While Chief Afe has been “tried” and “convicted” in the court of public opinion before he had had the opportunity to utter a word, the Establishment appears to have made up its mind on the guilt of Farotimi what manner of punishment to inflict (and is already being inflicted) ever before he could have his day in court. To the Establishment, the question is not whether he is guilty but the kind of exemplary punishment to inflict on him to serve as deterrent to others as well as make him an object lesson to any other “hot head”that may want to imitate him.

Why ban a book when the matter has not even been joined in court? What is there to be debated again when you have already banned the book that is in contention? That book, as well as Farotimi, ought to be presumed blameless until those against it have proven their case that it does not qualify for a place on the bookstand - and not before it is found to be so guilty. What is parading naked before us is not the administration of justice but vendetta, victimization and anti-intellectualism all rolled into one.

 No book deserves to be banned. At the very worst, you order that the “offending” portions be expunged once the case for it had been proven in a court of competent jurisdiction. The actions already taken against Farotimi’s book while he is yet to be given the opportunity to defend what he wrote is anti-intellectualism. What if, in the end, Farotimi wins his case or have they concluded that he cannot?

 As an editor, I won cases of alleged libel that many had thought not win-able. If you successfully plead justification. If you convince the judge that it is the public interest. And natural occurrences can terminate a case of libel, slander, or defamation.

Why did they take Farotimi to court in manacles? I found the position held by Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and an Ekiti indigene like Chief Afe Babalola, very instructive. Titled “Beyond The Removal Of Dele Farotimi’s Handcuffs”, Falana said: “In the last 20 years or thereabout, this is the fourth time that the restraint of suspects has been condemned in the media. Two days ago, Mr. Dele Farotimi who is currently standing trial in Ado Ekiti for criminal defamation was handcuffed by the authorities of the Ado Ekiti Correctional Centre. 

"As there was no basis for the restraint, the action of the prison management was deprecated in the media. Since the detained lawyer had not exhibited any form of violence, some lawyers argued that the treatment meted out to him could not be justified under Section 7 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act which provides that a suspect or defendant may not be handcuffed, bound or subjected to restraint except: (a) there is reasonable apprehension of violence or an attempt to escape; (b) the restraint is considered necessary for the safety of the suspect or defendant, or (c) by order of a court.

”In the last 20 years or so, this is the fourth time that the restraint of suspects has been condemned in the media. Specifically, the decision of the authorities to handcuff Tafa Balogun (a former Inspector-General of Police), Olisa Metuh (a former chieftain of the PDP), Agba Jalingo (an online publisher) and Dele Farotimi (a lawyer) was greeted with opprobrium in the media. Based on the condemnation of the humiliation of such suspects, the restraint of each of them was hurriedly discontinued. Hence, Mr. Dele Dele Farotimi was not handcuffed to the Magistrate Court yesterday. 

’In several WhatsApp groups, petit bourgeois lawyers and journalists have congratulated themselves for the social media campaign that compelled the prison management to discard Mr. Dele Farotimi's handcuffs. However, on a daily basis, lowly-placed criminal suspects are handcuffed to and from the several High Courts and Magistrate Courts in all the states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory. As if that is not enough, such suspects are regularly leg-chained like slaves in sugar plantations in the Americas during the slave trade. 

 ”The dehumanisation of poor suspects is considered normal by the elite in our stratified society. For instance, a couple of months ago, a police command paraded a suspect before the electronic and print media for stealing five tubers of yam valued at less than N10,000 to feed himself and his family members. At about the same time, a public officer accused of stealing over N100 billion was neither handcuffed nor paraded before the media. 

”It is only when politically-exposed persons and the elite are charged with criminal offences that lawyers and journalists wax lyrical and pontificate so passionately on the sanctity of the presumption of innocence enshrined in Section 36 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act. 

”Under the current democratic dispensation, four judgments of the Ecowas Court and domestic courts in Nigeria have declared the parade of suspects illegal on the ground that it is prejudicial to the right of fair hearing. Based on such judicial decisions, the human rights community mounted a vigorous campaign for an end to the practice of parading suspects by law enforcement agencies in Nigeria. 

”Although the campaign has not succeeded, the Lagos State House of Assembly prohibited the parade of criminal suspects via an amendment of the Criminal Law carried out in February 2009. Since the House of Assembly of other states failed to adopt the progressive position of the Lagos State Government, our law firm has filed a suit in the Federal High Court seeking to stop the Nigeria Police Force, EFCC, ICPC and other security agencies from further parading criminal suspects in chains. 

”However, in marking this year's Human Rights Day, the National Human Rights Commission held a conference at Abuja on December 5, 2024. In his goodwill message delivered at the conference, Mr. Hashimu Argungu, the chairman of the Police Service Commission (PSC), condemned the practice of parading suspects in chains. It is hoped that the Nigeria Police Force will soon ban all police commands from subjecting poor suspects to handcuffs and leg chains before the media. 

”In order not to be accused of hypocrisy, Nigerian lawyers should join the campaign to ban detaining authorities from further subjecting all suspects and defendants to the restraint of handcuffs and leg chains unless it is authorised by a court. Nigerian lawyers should also ensure that suspects and defendants are not exposed to any form of media trial. Journalists should also stop the contemptuous culture in the media by which pages of newspapers, television and radio studios as well as myriad online platforms have been turned into parallel trial courts.

”The point that I am struggling to make is this: the campaign for humane treatment of suspects should not end simply because the prison authorities have removed the handcuffs on Mr. Dele Farotimi. In other words, it is time that the handcuffs and leg chains on other suspects and defendants were removed”

Well said! I cannot now remember the activist whom the Establishment sought to shame by putting him in chains; but rather than bow his head in shame, he held up his manacled hands for everyone to behold and denounced it as the symbol of a decadent society and the shame of those upholding and promoting it. And my mind went to Rousseau quoted above. 

Those who think themselves the master of others are the worst of all slaves. The handcuffs on some men’s hands are nothing compared to the handcuffs on some other persons’ minds and souls! Neither do we need Rousseau to tell us that Nigeria is a country where everyone is born free but are everywhere in chains - chains even worse than those Femi Falana is railing against here.

Once upon a time the thinking was that the judiciary, touted as the “last hope of the common man”, would help break the chains holding the people down; but today we know better! To break their chains, the people must take their destiny in their own hands and, that way, also help break the chains on the judiciary’s own hands and legs!  

Today, the Bar and Bench are the worst enemies of the Judiciary. They are the ones trampling the norms and basic rules that once were the unshakable pillars of their profession. They are the ones "learned" enough to maneouvre the nooks abd crannies of the law, cutting corners here, laying ambush there and exploiting the loopholes carefully and deliberately created to serve selfish ends. They are the ones encouraging media trial. They are the ones leading litigants or acceding to the desire of litigants to pervert the cause and course of justice. They are the ones who say, see and treat the law as an ass, They are the ones fouling the temple of justice and polluting its fountain. They are, therefore, also the ones best placed to clean its Augean stable. Judgment, and restoration, must start from their two houses - the Bar and the Bench! The blame cannot be shifted anywhere and to anyone else, be it litigants, the media or politicians!

Programme: City Talks with Reuben Abati

Time: 12:00

Guests Oluwagbenga Ajiboye 

(Executive Director Transmission Service Provider (TCN))

Topic: The Recurring National Grid Collapse

Date: December 14, 2024

Join Zoom Meeting

https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732

Passcode: 600206