Former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, Godwin Emefiele, took a very big gamble last year by seeking the presidential ticket of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) while still in office. He raised the stakes even higher with a Naira redesign policy that was either not well thought-out or done with malicious intent. Incidentally, a certain AbdulRasheed Bawa was an enabler in what became a Naira confiscation policy. The suspended Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman told Nigerians at the time that “with this redesigning, dollar may massively fall, who knows, probably to N200.”

At the end, the Naira redesign exercise will go down as one of the most atrocious policies ever implemented in the country. The dollar did not fall as predicted by Bawa. Instead, the colossal cost in human suffering resulted in countless lives lost to hunger and deprivation. Such was the level of desperation by Nigerians that many were forced into trade by barter as a medium of exchange. The Centre for the Promotion of Private Enterprise (CPPE) estimated that the economy lost about N20 trillion to the scarcity of Naira. This despite warnings about potential pitfalls, including by the World Bank.

Risks are acceptable in policy decisions. But gambling can be dangerous. Borrowing from the thesis of the great German General Erwin Rommel, Robert Greene made a distinction between a gamble and a risk in his book ‘The 33 Strategies of War’. The difference, he wrote “is that with risk, if you lose, you can recover” while with a gamble, “defeat can lead to a slew of problems that are likely to spiral out of control”. Yet, as Greene also explained, “people are drawn into gambles by their emotions: they see only the glittering prospects if they win and ignore the ominous consequences if they lose. Taking risks is essential, gambling is foolhardy. It can be years before you recover from a gamble if you ever recover at all…”

That both Emefiele and Bawa took a gamble with the Naira redesign policy is beyond doubt. And my take on that was well documented on 16^th March, in my column, ‘Nigeria: From Top to Bottom…’ President Muhammadu Buhari (always looking for ‘thieves’ to catch, even when they may be sitting close to him) owned the policy from the outset. He made a national broadcast in its defence and offered no attempt to hold anybody accountable. But Emefiele would have been wise to fall on his own sword the moment the Supreme Court declared the entire exercise illegal. Especially considering his earlier presidential misadventure. Notwithstanding, there is no reason to arrest and detain him without trial.

I am aware of the sundry allegations of unwholesome practices against Emefiele and Bawa. But until evidence is provided, we don’t have to dignify such tales. Meanwhile, unresolved issues regarding their fate remain. The first is whether President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has the power to remove them given provisions of the EFCC Act 2004 and the CBN Act 2007. Before I make my point, let me state that in 2014, during the controversy that trailed a similar suspension of Emefiele’s predecessor, Khalifa Muhammadu Sanusi II, I sided with President Goodluck Jonathan. Though I saw no justification for the suspension, I argued for the powers of a president, which Sanusi challenged at the time. And my position has not changed.

In the United States, from where we borrowed the presidential system of government, the Federal Reserve Chair (equivalent of our CBN Governor) is also insulated from presidential interference. The office holder reports to Congress. But in the campaign leading to the American 2012 presidential election, the stewardship of Mr. Ben Bernanke became an issue, especially among Republicans. Newt Gingrich and Herman Kane said they would fire the Fed Chair if elected president while Mitt Romney said he ‘wouldn’t keep Ben Bernanke in office,’ and would rather ‘choose someone of my own.’

I cited two US cases to buttress my position that they knew what they were saying, even when no Fed Chair had ever been removed before by an American President. One, suspension of Edwin M. Stanton as Secretary of War in 1865 by President Andrew Johnson after succeeding the assassinated President Abraham Lincoln (to whom he was VP) without recourse to Congress. At that time, the ‘Tenure of Office Act’ had restricted an American president from sacking any member of cabinet without the express approval of the Senate. I also cited the 1926 Supreme Court ruling in the Myers v. United States which affirmed the power of President Woodrow Wilson to remove Mr Frank S. Myers, a First-Class Postmaster in Portland, Oregon from office without congressional approval. Despite a federal law that expressly stated: “Postmasters of the first, second, and third classes shall be appointed and may be removed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.”

In concluding one of the columns that I wrote on the Sanusi saga nine years ago, I referenced ‘The Second Treatise of Government: And A Letter Concerning Toleration’, where 17^th century English philosopher, John Locke argued that the people sometimes allow “their rulers to do several things of their own free choice, where the law is silent…and their acquiescing in it when so done.” Whatever the law cannot provide for, according to Locke, “must necessarily be left to the discretion of him that has the executive power in his hands, to be ordered by him as the public good and advantage shall require…”

Given the foregoing, I have no problem with the suspension of Emefiele “sequel to the ongoing investigation of his office and the planned reforms in the financial sector of the economy.” But arresting and keeping him and Bawa incarcerated indefinitely is the hallmark of military dictatorship. Under democracy and the rule of law, accused persons are presumed innocent until evidence is adduced in a court of law to secure conviction. Whatever the allegations against Emefiele, detaining him and subjecting him to street gossip and media trial without the ability to defend himself is unfair and illegal. The same goes for Bawa.

It must be stated that the Emefiele saga did not begin under the current administration. It started during the dysfunctional government of President Buhari. In an exclusive story in February this year, PREMIUM TIMES blew the lid on why the Directorate of State Security (DSS) was after Emefiele. The report referenced an affidavit deposed to before the Federal High Court last December, by Mr Umar Salihu, an official of the DSS. According to the affidavit, “there is reasonable suspicion that the respondent (Emefiele) was involved in terrorism financing, aiding and abetting acts of terrorism, economic crimes of national security dimension and undermining the security of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.” Salihu said the DSS made the application so that Emefiele could be detained for 60 days, “pending the conclusion of ongoing investigation …”

Although no details were provided, the main kernel of the allegations surrounded Emefiele’s presidential ambition for which he was said to have procured vehicles and disbursed funds. These resources, the DSS alleged, were “being channelled into funding of Unknown Gunmen, Eastern Security Network (ESN) and elements of IPOB, a proscribed organisation.”

It is interesting that the DSS made these damaging allegations against Emefiele as a sitting CBN Governor whose access to President Buhari was never at any point denied. That fact was not lost on the court. In throwing out the DSS’ application on 9^th December 2022, Justice John Tsoho said the request being sought ought to have been preceded by arrest. “This is not the situation here, as Godwin Emefiele, the CBN governor was shown on television, even last night, having an audience with the President of Nigeria,” the judge said. “It therefore seems that the applicant (DSS) intends to use the court as a cover for an irregular procedure which is unacceptable.”

Like Emefiele, Bawa was suspended more than a month ago by President Tinubu “to allow for proper investigation into his conduct while in office”, following “weighty allegations of abuse of office levelled against him.” Bawa was subsequently arrested and has since been detained by the DSS. Till today, Nigerians do not know what those “weighty allegations” are. But let’s come back to Emefiele. Following a court order that he be properly charged or released, DSS has come up with the accusation of possessing a gun and 23 rounds of live ammunition, apparently just to fulfill all righteousness. Pray, how do these relate to terrorism and financial crimes on which the entire drama was initially premised?

Given the needless hardship to which Nigerians were subjected during the Naira redesign fiasco, it is understandable that there is little sympathy for Emefiele. But this issue is not about his person. At stake are fundamental freedoms of a citizen and abuse of power. Tuesday’s Twitter post from the DSS official handle mocking one of the lawyers defending Emefiele with incendiary comments can be described as nothing but bad faith. And it is unfortunate. One of the major tragedies of Nigeria is that officials and institutions that are ordinarily supposed to uphold the law most often see themselves being above the law. Yet, the rule of law is founded on the principle that every citizen, no matter highly placed and regardless of the position they hold, is subject to the law. The same goes for public institutions.

No matter the offence for which a citizen may be charged, revenge is not the same thing as justice and state institutions should not be seen to be promoting such perversion. President Tinubu has spent the better part of his political career mouthing defence of fundamental freedoms for citizens. It would be tragic for the government he now heads to exhibit traits antithetical to those ideals. “He (Tinubu) was at the forefront as a NADECO man to chastise military governments for disobeying court orders. Now that power is in his hand, we will see whether he, himself will obey court orders,” a former Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) President, Joseph Daudu, SAN said last Thursday. I share his point of view.

President Tinubu’s disruptive policy measures may ultimately be for the good of the country, but his government needs all the support it can get at this most vulnerable period. Nigerians are going through a very difficult period. The inflation rate jumped from 22.4 percent in May to 22.8 in June, according to data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) on Monday. By Tuesday, the pump price of petrol had gone haywire with a litre selling for between N617 and N630 thus increasing the woes of the ordinary people. Any suggestion of dictatorship will be most unhelpful under the present circumstance. In the public arena, as Senate President Godswill Akpabio reminded the new Governor of Akwa Ibom recently, “100 friends, not enough; one enemy, too many.” I hope presidential handlers can appreciate that.

Emefiele may deserve a comeuppance for the choices he made as CBN Governor and for getting so caried away as to imagine he could use his office to secure Nigeria’s presidency through the backdoor. But those are issues for another day. What we are dealing with in this unfortunate saga is the abuse of due process of the law, an affront on the fundamental rights of citizens, and authoritarian impulses by a critical state institution. No matter how ‘weighty’ the allegations against them, and regardless of how we view their stewardship, Emefiele and Bawa deserve their day in court. Or be released from detention!

Chidi Amuta at 70 

Come Monday, I intend joining the family of Dr Chidi Amuta and a few friends in Lagos at the dinner to mark his 70^th birthday. We had to convince him before he agreed to the ceremony. Teacher, writer, journalist, and public intellectual, Amuta has been one of my most invaluable professional mentors from whom I have learnt a lot. He is also a member of THISDAY editorial board and a national asset.

Amuta started his career as a lecturer at Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, in 1979 (he graduated from the University with a First Class) before moving to the University of Port-Harcourt in 1981 as a Senior Lecturer in the Department of English. He was at various times a Visiting Fellow, Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy, Boston USA; founding editorial board member, The Guardian newspaper; Director, Imo State Directorate for Rural Development (DIFRI); Group Editorial Adviser and Chairman Editorial Board, Daily Times; Managing Director, Post Express Newspapers and Executive Director, Tanus Communications. He has also authored several books, including ‘Towards A Sociology of African Literature’, ‘The Theory of African Literature: Implications for Practical Criticism’, ‘Prince of the Niger: The Babangida Years’ and ‘Writing the Wrong: A Collection of Articles’. Incidentally, at the public presentation of ‘Writing the Wrongs’ nine years ago, I was the reviewer. In that review, I spoke about Amuta’s attention to detail, his curiousity and sense of humour.

I can recall some of his columns that distinguish him as a writer. ‘Give Us the Mad Cows’ for instance dramatizes the vexation in some countries about the mental state of some cows that were bound for the pots of soup anyway. And here is the opener: “…a veteran of the ‘tombo bar’ accosted me the other day. He had just heard about these mad cows from somebody who heard it from somebody who happens to know somebody else who has the unhealthy habit of reading newspapers. The Nigerian chain of information control and command, for your information, is a mixture of oral tradition and enlightened rumour in print. The subject was infuriating to him: that any group of rational adults should allow their public discourse and political energies to be hijacked by, of all subjects, mad cows…”

As Dr Amuta joins the elite septuagenarian club on Monday, I can only wish him happy birthday, long life and good health.

2023 Teens Conference

Online registration for the 2023 edition of the teens career conference of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, The Everlasting Arms Parish (TEAP) continues. With the theme, ‘Wake Up and Take Responsibility’, Chairman of both UBA and Heirs Holdings, Mr Tony Elumelu, CFR, is being joined on 19^th August by two British women, Ms Dorota Oakley Matuszyk and Ms Juliet Lamin as speakers. Like previous editions, this year’s conference will bring together teenagers from Abuja and its environs, to listen to expert advice on career choices in today’s dynamic and challenging world.

Specifically, the objectives of the conference are to: Teach teenagers to take responsibility for their future; have their imagination fired through interaction with accomplished professionals in the society; make them realize that no matter the odds, they can reach their goals, and get them to understand that God still intervenes in the affairs of men. It is usually a day of fun with music, food, and drinks while attendance is completely free of charge.  But intending participants must register online by visiting www.rccgteapteens.ng

• You can follow me on my Twitter handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com

For the past thirty years  when fuel importation began during the Sani Abacha-led  administration, Nigeria has been saddled with very bad leaders who are very myopic and suffer from poverty of ideas. How else can one explain three decades of fuel importation without thinking of the long-term effects on the nation's economy and the citizens as a whole. In an opinion piece published by the Cable online newspaper on March 29,2021, this writer warned against the impending economic catastrophe if fuel subsidy was removed without local production of fuel. Nigeria has abundant crude oil reserves, but unfortunately, the country is unable to refine a litre of fuel. It is indeed a tragic paradox in an oil-driven economy. Nigeria depends absolutely on imported fuel due to several years of  leadership failure, sabotage and official corruption. The price of fuel depends on the exchange rate of the Naira to the Dollar. Since the abrogation of fuel subsidy regime on May 29,2023 by the present administration and the unification of the exchange rate of the Naira, the price of fuel has jumped from #190 to #617. This is happening at a time when the citizens are already impoverished. Nigeria is regarded as the poverty capital of the world. Nearly the entire 200 million people have been pushed into extreme poverty.

The monolithic economy has always been very fragile and vulnerable to external shocks. The cost of living has risen astronomically while the income level of the vast majority of the people has remained stagnant. There are no social safety nets to cushion the effects of severe economic hardship. The electricity distribution companies are also planning to increase electricity tariff anytime from now. The citizens can no longer breathe due to economic suffocation. Only the parasitic political class is taking care of itself.

Public office holders enjoy free fuel apart fro jumbo emoluments and other perquisites of office. They do not know where the shoe pinches or feel the excruciating pains the people are passing through. There is widespread lamentation across the country as poverty has been weaponized.

For inexplicable reasons, successive administrations have refused to take a concrete decision on the moribund Nigerian National Petroleum Company's refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna. The refineries have been in a state of coma for a very long time, while huge sums of money have gone down the drain under the guise of "Turn Around Maintenance". The best policy option is outright privatization of the refineries to international core investors with track records. The refineries have become wasting assets without any benefit to the country. It is obvious that the NNPC is incapable of running the refineries efficiently and optimally.

Apart from the privatization of the refineries within a well-defined timeframe, other policy options include upward review of transport and housing allowances of workers; empowerment programme for youths in terms of job creation; reduction of custom tariff on imported raw materials for the manufacturing sector; provision of subsidized agricultural inputs especially tractors and fertilizers to boost food production; and provision of mass transit buses for transportation. The Federal and State Governments need to collaborate together to reduce the hardship of the citizens.

In order to curtail rising cost of fuel, the Federal Government has to intervene pending the time local production of fuel will commence. Hiding under the so-called "market forces" to determine the price of fuel is very dangerous and counterproductive. The people cannot be blamed for leadership failure to fix the refineries. Already, the citizens have been pushed to the wall and there is a limit to human endurance. The primary responsibility of government is to ensure the welfare of the people. Nigeria belongs to all citizens not just the privileged few.

Faramade is Programme Director and Editor-in-Chief of Journalists Against Poverty (Twitter.com//@JournalistsAga3)

Mr. Bola Ahmed Tinubu never ceases to amaze. He never ceases to exhibit the different shades of the moral decadence that compelled a vast majority of Nigerians who voted in the 2023 presidential elections to roundly reject him. The shade currently trending centers on sheer hypocrisy.

In two different stops at the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU), Tinubu appealed to the African states to ensure that the menace of terrorism and military coups in the continent are something of the past. He also attempted to promote the rule of law. Coup d’état and terrorism, by the way, are historically the two of the major misadventures that tend to threaten the African corrupt elite.

Seemingly worried that Mr. Tinubu failed to address the key concerns of the ordinary people, the Nigerian Vanguard Newspaper in its editorial page of July 13, 2023, countered as follows:

“Tinubu has already identified terrorism and the resurgence of military coups as some of the problems of the region. Let us also add the mass migrations to Europe and America, particularly the desperate migrations through the Sahara Desert. We also have the problem of armed and violent nomadic herdsmen causing a major security threat in Nigeria.”

But the Vanguard did not stop there.

The paper reminded Tinubu that “The common cause of these problems is bad governance. ECOWAS must, like their European counterparts, adopt a uniform set of governance principles that will help unleash the vast human and natural resources potentials of sister states.”

The Vanguard concluded that “A Nigeria in shambles is another reason that ECOWAS is in shambles. A country in a situation of virtual failure cannot lead a regional economic community to success.”

Nothing can be nearer to the truth.

Besides highlighting that Tinubu ignored the more pressing needs of the ordinary people, the Vanguard editors stated in clear terms that Nigeria, a bastion of bad governance, lacks the moral high grounds to counsel other African states on coups and terrorism. This goes without saying that the Life-Leader of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) government lacks the credibility to speak on such violent extremism, let alone the rule of law.

For instance, as the APC Leader, Tinubu never opposed the wanton abuse of the rule of law under the regime of President Muhammadu Buhari. A perfect example is the case of a frontline Nigerian human rights activist and the 2023 presidential candidate of the African Action Congress, Omoyele Sowore, who was detained for over five months in 2019 without bail. Sowore’s crime was the mere mention of revolution against bad governance. Yet, the current occupant of Aso Rock never decried such brazen injustice notwithstanding that he and Buhari had at different times threatened revolution when Goodluck Jonathan was in power. 

Even under the current Tinubu rule, Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has remained in jail, even though a court of law in the land had declared him innocent. There is also the case of the immediate past governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele, who was bundled and thrown in jail without bail. Of course, these are clear abuses of the rule of law.

Let’s then dive into the main gist of this essay: Coup D’état. Marriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as “a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics, especially: the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group.” Clearly, beyond the typical overthrow of government as Nigerians know it, the free world knows that any power gained through illegal alteration of state authority or any confluence of violence and other electoral irregularities is a pure coup d’état.

Tinubu’s hypocrisy with terrorism is even more apparent. The same Marriam-Webster Dictionary defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” But it is a common knowledge that violent extremism is Tinubu’s stock in trade.

Recall that he never for once condemned the various acts of terrorism promoted and sponsored by his associates against non-indigenes living in the State of Lagos during the 2019 and 2023 general elections. Tinubu continues to maintain stoic silence while Asari Dokubo (a notorious hoodlum who claims him as a father) goes about brandishing guns, terrorizing an entire tribe. Osama Bn Laden did not crash planes into the New York towers by himself; his associates did.

Mr. Tinubu has every reason to be nervous. As the Vanguard Newspaper had counseled, the solution to coup and other social vices is good governance. Let me now add that good governance in Nigeria and Africa in general begins with true war against corruption. But the problem of the moment is that expecting a meaningful war on corruption from the APC National Leader is as futile as attempting to fetch water with an Ugbo basket.

The only solution, therefore, is Tinubu’s outright removal either through the courts or impeachment, so that Nigeria can enthrone an authentic leader capable to provide the desired good governance.

SKC Ogbonnia writes from Ugbo, Enugu State. 

IF there’s one thing Nigerians seem to be clear on about the proposed measure to ease the immediate harsh effect of the fuel subsidy removal, it is that they are not interested in the conditional cash transfer scheme. Under this plan, the Federal Government is to transfer N8,000 over a six months period to poor Nigerians or low income-earning households, the so called poorest of the poor.

It is a palliative measure that comes directly from the passage of the bill that amended the 2022 supplementary budget after the Federal Government had secured a World Bank loan of $800 million. It is from this loan that the government would source the N500 billion that will constitute the pool from which poor Nigerians would have their accounts directly credited with N8,000. This, it is expected, would help them tide over the worsening effect of the removal of the subsidy on fuel on May 29, 2023.

As was the case with the removal of the subsidy on fuel, this latest proposal was not an original idea of the Bola Tinubu administration. The palliative measure was first proposed by the Muhammadu Buhari administration ahead of the planned removal of oil subsidy. While the administration was able to push the bill through the lower house of the 9th National Assembly, in the eleventh hour of President Buhari’s time as president, it didn’t have enough time to get it through the Senate. Nigerians would remember their sense of outrage about the government’s action then. They thought it was yet another attempt at drawing Nigeria further into the bind of debt peonage.

The feeling then was that the Buhari administration could leave such proposal to the next government that was due to take over from it in a short while. Even though the departing administration was very keen on pushing this bill through the National Assembly, a mere window dressing that saw it working up to a few hours before the inauguration of the Bola Tinubu administration, it was not eager to give effect to its proposed removal of the subsidy on fuel. That was the dirty job Tinubu was left to execute. This took the bottom out of Garba Shehu’s claim that his then principal, President Buhari, did Bola Tinubu a favour by not yanking off the subsidy on fuel when he had all the time in the world to do that. Otherwise, said Shehu, Tinubu would have lost the election that brought him into office.

The whole point of this then is that, the Tinubu administration is only following up on and executing an approved proposal of its predecessor that was obviously intended for the good of Nigerians. If not for anything else then, the fact that the World Bank loan was to ameliorate in the immediate the unsavoury outcome of subsidy removal, may be enough justification for Tinubu to want to see it through. Isn’t this what Nigerians mean when they talk of government being a continuum? But we should still ask if Tinubu needs to swallow every bitter pill Buhari left for him including one as potentially counterproductive as the one on cash transfer?

Providing cash transfer as palliatives to Nigerians is a well-beaten path Nigerians are not treading for the first time. They have very unhappy tales to tell about this. Thus, the present proposal comes across to them as a poisoned chalice in view of their past experience. As pointed out above, it was the Buhari administration that originated the idea of a World Bank loan that would be used to provide palliatives in the event of the removal of fuel subsidy. All the Tinubu administration has done is to tinker with the details of that plan.

In its original conception, the Buhari government made arrangements for only 10 million Nigerians to benefit from the palliatives. And rather than N8,000 that the Tinubu administration intends to pay Nigerians, the Buhari administration made provision for just N5,000 per person or household. That administration’s social empowerment programmes such as Market Moni, Trader Moni and Farmer Moni that were anchored by the office of the former Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo, provided the template for the proposed cash transfers. The main difference between that and this is that funds given under the social investment programmes of Buhari were repayable loans whereas the present cash transfers in question are “gifts”.

But the bitter experience of how a previous palliative regime was both poorly and criminally managed has taught Nigerians not to believe in schemes like this. Street wisdom tells us that experience is the best teacher. This is an advisory that is now part of everyday parlance. Are Nigerians now to disbelieve the evidence of their eyes? They’ve been badly bitten once. Is there any crime in being shy a second time around? Those prone to periodic amnesia would be reminded that about this time three years ago, Nigeria like the rest of the world was in the throes of the deadly COVID-19 pandemic when we were grounded by a medical lockdown. All economic and commercial activities came to a grinding halt. The effects were at once very immediate and severe in the extreme aside the morbid fear many nursed of contracting the rampaging pandemic.

It was under these circumstances that the Buhari administration came up with the idea of offering palliatives to the people to assuage their plight. Billions of tax payers’ money was expended on the so-called palliatives by both the Federal and state governments under the overall superintendence of Sadiya Umar Farooq, the Humanitarian Affairs Minister. Corporate organisations, groups and individuals felt called upon to act and everyone gave from the generosity of their hearts. Alongside this, the Federal Government in Abuja went ahead with a so-called home feeding scheme for school children at a time they were all home. Registers were opened across neighbourhoods, towns and states. But for the most part, Nigerians only heard of these palliatives but saw nothing of them.

It wasn’t until the #EndSARS protests of October 2020 by young Nigerians in reaction to the state’s anti-people activities that the whole world got to know the sham that was the palliatives scheme. They invaded and laid bare warehouses where foods and goods meant to be distributed to Nigerians were kept by criminal politicians and public servants. It’s true that Nigerians can use some help right now, call it palliatives or whatever. But they would as likely as not only hear of these palliatives but never get to enjoy them. Beyond this, the idea seems not well thought through. It amounts to no more than subsiding consumption where the government should be investing in infrastructure.

For how long can an individual, much less a family, sustain themselves on N8,000 today?