By Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai
Traditional masquerades have one enduring commonality: they run backwards and forwards; jump up and down and generality create an atmosphere of chaos. At the end of their exertions, though, not much would have changed because both the masquerade and the spectators know one thing: it is all drama.
If any scenario can be used to describe the imbroglio surrounding Nigeria’s budget this year, it must be that of the dance of the masquerade – from the Presidency to the National Assembly and back again, with little substance by way of policies and programmes to create jobs, stimulate economic activity and reduce poverty. If anything, the Nigerian public who are little more than befuddled spectators are left with nothing but the dust from the meaningless exertions for which they would be charged about 5 trillion naira.
Nigerians heaved a sigh of relief in September 2012 when the Finance minister, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala announced that the N4.92trn 2013 draft budget had been concluded. She was emphatic that it would be presented to the National Assembly as soon as it resumed from its recess in September. Being the second time since 1999 that both chambers were likely to pass the Appropriation Act before year end, Nigerians thought the nation would mark a return to the normal budget cycle of January to December as opposed to the current cycle which runs from about April to March the next year, mainly due to arguments between the executive and the legislative arms and all the paraphernalia surrounding passing and signing the budget.
However, between the battle for an oil bench mark of $79 or $75, the N63bn added to the original budget proposal and the non-inclusion of a budgetary vote for the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Senate only confirmed receipt of the signed 2013 budget from President Goodluck Jonathan on the 14th March, thus ensuring that any hopes of a January-December budget cycle are crushed.
In the course of the budget analyses, we would see if like previous budgets, this budget does anything to put Nigeria’s battered economy on the path of growth or sustained development. What provisions does it offer the tens of millions of unemployed Nigerians with no hope of better future? What are its provisions for rescuing the 61% of Nigerians currently living in absolute poverty?
The 2013 Appropriation Act envisages spending N4.98trn, an increase of about 6% from the N4.69trn for 2012. This consists of statutory transfers of N387bn (7.7%); 11.9% (N591bn) is set aside for debt servicing; while personnel and overhead costs amount to N2.38trn (47.8%) and capital expenditure is some N1.62trn (32.5%). Less than one out of every three naira budgeted in 2013 would be invested in education, healthcare, roads and electricity. Whichever way one looks at these figures, they confirm surely that this budget is likely to be a failure on arrival.
For instance, with all the rhetoric that the cost of governance is reducing, one would expect figures that are closer to 25% as is the internationally acceptable standard for recurrent expenditure, but no, the recurrent budget is about 68% - more than double the capital expenditure provisions. In fact, 2013 recurrent figures show only a pathetic reduction of about 3.6% from the 2012 levels.
Let us look to the performance of the 2012 budget for an idea on the possible results of the 2013 budget, considering that the economic team is unchanged and contrary to expectations, the time of commencement of execution for the 2013 Appropriation Act would most likely replicate that of 2012.
Implementation in 2012 was shrouded in controversy; by the third quarter of the year, the finance ministry pegged implementation at 56% but when new facts emerged, the ministry reverted the figures to about 12.6%. The House of Representatives came up with a different figure entirely and issued a threat to have the President impeached if by September the same year the budget was not implemented 100%. The budget was not implemented 100% and neither was the president impeached. Interestingly, the implementation for the four quarters of 2012 fell below the projected estimates.
Looking at the above picture, it is clear that unless something drastic is done by government, the 2013 capital budget implementation will remain at similar levels with that of 2012 and the nation’s infrastructure deficit will continue to widen. There is the need to put in place checks and balances to ensure that Ministries, Departments and Agencies actually provide services with capital funds that have been budgeted and released to them.
One would have expected that the over-hyped performance contracts signed between the President and his ministers would lead to the weeding out of non performing ministers, or the Directors General of MDA’s that fall short on performance and implementation, but in spite of the dismal 2012 figures, they have all mostly retained their positions.
The President should be aware that this poor budgetary performance will turn out to be a major hurdle in his quest for a possible re-election. Nigerians will demand to know what he did with resources entrusted to him in the last five years before considering him for another term. The performance of this government has been below average at best and contrary to the Jonathan posters that flooded Abuja earlier in the year; we cannot describe poor performance as one “good term” and therefore deserving another.
An analysis of some key ministries would reveal the following structure: N278.8bn is budgeted for Health; about 79% (N223bn) of the entire sum is voted to recurrent expenditure, and 55.7bn (19.9%) for capital expenditure. The minister lamented a few days ago that the trio of HIV/AIDS, Tuberclosis and Malaria were still major public health issues in Nigeria. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Nigeria has the highest number of malaria cases in the world contributing about 30% to the global burden. Our current doctor to patient ratio is 1 to 3,500 people and this miserable capital allocation at tertiary level is not sufficient to adequately address the challenges facing this sector. How does a forward thinking government justify allocating under one-fifth of its health budget to capital expenditure?
Education is generously allocated some N427.5bn. Problem is, like health, the major chunk of its allocations are misdirected; N60.1bn (14%) is allocated to capital expenditure. At N367bn (85.8%), recurrent expenditure is about 6 times the size of capital provisions in a country where about 1.5m (8.7% of 6-14year olds) children of primary school age are not in school, and only about 57.9% of the adult population is literate in English and even school teachers cannot pass basic primary school tests. The allocation is hardly adequate to cater for qualified teacher recruitment, school construction and raising the literacy rate among Nigerians. Sadly, a large slice of the federal education budget and administrative energy go to secondary schools that ought to be the business of state governments, while tertiary education – the proper purview of the federal government, suffers.
While this column feels that ‘stricto sensu’, agriculture ought to be the business of states and local government, the federal intervention in the sector has been confused, with mixed results at best. Agriculture is apportioned some N81bn in 2013 showing an increase of about 3.4% over 2012 allocations of N78.98bn. N32bn (39%) is allocated to recurrent expenditure and a slightly higher N48bn (59.2%) to capital expenditure. This capital allocation also is not adequate for targeted intervention in a sector that once provided employment to about 70% of rural Nigerians but currently employs barely 35%. The decision to procure cellphones for un-named farmers instead of spending the amount on improved seedlings, agro-chemicals, fertilizers, extension services and farm-to-market infrastructure, is indicative of the “spend-without-results” symptomatic of virtually all Jonathanian programmes since 2010.
Ironically, if you look at the Presidency’s budget of about N35.5bn you would see that all talk about an anti-corruption fight is just that, talk. There is N14.4bn (40.5%) provision for ‘State House Headquarters’ while only N9bn (25%) is allocated to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. Worse still, there is a paltry allocation of about N1.3bn (3.6%) to the National Emergency Management Agency; it is not therefore surprising that the agency is incapable of responding timely to emergency situations, and when they do so, often too little, too late.
Incidentally, even as you read this, the Presidency has sent the 2013 Appropriation Act Amendment proposal back to the National Assembly for approval and has requested for the review of some clauses in the budget which, according to him, can be detrimental to the work of the executive arm of government. Even by the warped processes that characterize the method of budget making and non-implementation, this must be a new record: budget review after two weeks of passage and presidential assent.
Next week, this column would further analyze budgetary provisions for some federal ministries. It is hoped that somewhere in the continued budget disagreements between the National Assembly and the Presidency, the budget structure would be changed into a functional document that is guaranteed to bring about some sort of change. In its current form, the 2013 budget is nothing more than the dance of the masquerade: forward, backwards, up, down, raise dust, while our nation generally records increasing levels of poverty, deteriorating human development indicators, infrastructure deficiencies and youth unemployment!
Friday, 22 March 2013
Saturday, 16 March 2013
MY NIGERIA: The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts ...
MY NIGERIA: The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts ...: The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts by President Goodluck Jonathan has sparked a diplomatic standoff between Nigeria and the U...
The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts by President Goodluck Jonathan has sparked a diplomatic standoff between Nigeria and the United States, with the Americans threatening to punish Nigeria over Mr. Jonathan's action. Nigeria has in turn accused the United States of "meddlesomeness".
The U.S. had through its official twitter handle @USEmbassyAbuja on Friday condemned Mr. Jonathan's action, saying, "the #USG (United States Government) is deeply disappointed over the recent pardons of corrupt officials by GON (Government of Nigeria)." It added, "We see this as a setback in the fight against corruption."
A State Department official has now said the American government is not taking the matter lightly and might apply sanction as appropriate. Speaking at the U.S. Department of State's daily press briefing in Washington D.C. late Friday, Spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the development in Nigeria might jeorpardize the governance projects America is executing in Nigeria. The U.S. is the world's top donor. In 2012, it spent about $226 million on health and governance programmes in Nigeria. And about $600million has been requested for 2013, according to U.S. government data.
In response to a question on whether aid to Nigeria might be cut, Ms Nuland said, "We see this as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we've played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country obviously." She added, "We have made clear to the Nigerians that this puts a question mark on the kinds of work that we've been trying to do with them.
"We haven't yet taken the kinds of steps that you're suggesting Matt (the reporter who asked the question), but we're continuing to look at what's appropriate." Meanwhile, Nigeria's foreign ministry has summoned a top U.S. diplomat to explain why its embassy posted critical comments on Twitter over a presidential pardon given to the Nigerians convicted on corruption charges. The Nigerian officials filed an urgent request to speak to the U.S. deputy chief of mission over what it described as "meddlesomeness."
In a statement Friday, the ministry claimed the pardon granted Messrs Alamieyeseigha and Bulama is entirely consistent with the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution. The ministry said it hoped "that the Embassy of the United States of America would henceforth desist from making unwarranted comments on Nigeria's internal affairs which are capable of undermining the friendly relations that exist between them."
President Jonathan and the National Council of State had granted ex- Bayelsa Governor, Mr. Alamieyeseigha and ex-boss of the defunct Bank of the North, Shettima Bulama pardon in a move condemned by civil society and other interest groups. Both men had been convicted for corruption by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. Mr. Alamieyeseigha, who chose Mr. Jonathan as his running mate for the Bayelsa Governorship election in 1999, pleaded guilty to financial misappropriation and was sentenced to two years in prison.
Some members of the Council of States had told PREMIUM TIMES that it was clear from the president's mien and actions at the meeting that the pardon was targeted at Mr. Alamieyeseigha with the others only used as smokescreen. The ex-Bayelsa Governor's name was the first on the list of the pardon beneficiaries read by the president to attendees at the meeting including three former Nigerian heads of state.
Mixed reactions Nigerians have, however, reacted differently to the U.S. reaction. While some say the U.S. has by its actions showed that it would not support the seemingly pro-corruption action of the government, others accused the American government of meddling in Nigerian affairs especially when its former presidents also pardoned similar ex-convicts. "Who condemned USA when they pardoned Oliver North and the then president over Iran contra," a commentator by the name Ben Growp posted on PREMIUM TIMES website.
"Various American presidents have pardoned individuals, the most controversial being Marc Rich, whose wife Denise is a contributor to the Democratic Party. Clinton's actions were done a few hours to leaving office in January of 2001," another commentator by the username Lanre posted. Others like Odusanya Seye commended the U.S. statement. "As a patriotic citizen of Nigeria, I find this retarded move to pardon a convict shameful for a country whose inhabitant cry for justice," he said.
The U.S. had through its official twitter handle @USEmbassyAbuja on Friday condemned Mr. Jonathan's action, saying, "the #USG (United States Government) is deeply disappointed over the recent pardons of corrupt officials by GON (Government of Nigeria)." It added, "We see this as a setback in the fight against corruption."
A State Department official has now said the American government is not taking the matter lightly and might apply sanction as appropriate. Speaking at the U.S. Department of State's daily press briefing in Washington D.C. late Friday, Spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the development in Nigeria might jeorpardize the governance projects America is executing in Nigeria. The U.S. is the world's top donor. In 2012, it spent about $226 million on health and governance programmes in Nigeria. And about $600million has been requested for 2013, according to U.S. government data.
In response to a question on whether aid to Nigeria might be cut, Ms Nuland said, "We see this as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we've played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country obviously." She added, "We have made clear to the Nigerians that this puts a question mark on the kinds of work that we've been trying to do with them.
"We haven't yet taken the kinds of steps that you're suggesting Matt (the reporter who asked the question), but we're continuing to look at what's appropriate." Meanwhile, Nigeria's foreign ministry has summoned a top U.S. diplomat to explain why its embassy posted critical comments on Twitter over a presidential pardon given to the Nigerians convicted on corruption charges. The Nigerian officials filed an urgent request to speak to the U.S. deputy chief of mission over what it described as "meddlesomeness."
In a statement Friday, the ministry claimed the pardon granted Messrs Alamieyeseigha and Bulama is entirely consistent with the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution. The ministry said it hoped "that the Embassy of the United States of America would henceforth desist from making unwarranted comments on Nigeria's internal affairs which are capable of undermining the friendly relations that exist between them."
President Jonathan and the National Council of State had granted ex- Bayelsa Governor, Mr. Alamieyeseigha and ex-boss of the defunct Bank of the North, Shettima Bulama pardon in a move condemned by civil society and other interest groups. Both men had been convicted for corruption by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. Mr. Alamieyeseigha, who chose Mr. Jonathan as his running mate for the Bayelsa Governorship election in 1999, pleaded guilty to financial misappropriation and was sentenced to two years in prison.
Some members of the Council of States had told PREMIUM TIMES that it was clear from the president's mien and actions at the meeting that the pardon was targeted at Mr. Alamieyeseigha with the others only used as smokescreen. The ex-Bayelsa Governor's name was the first on the list of the pardon beneficiaries read by the president to attendees at the meeting including three former Nigerian heads of state.
Mixed reactions Nigerians have, however, reacted differently to the U.S. reaction. While some say the U.S. has by its actions showed that it would not support the seemingly pro-corruption action of the government, others accused the American government of meddling in Nigerian affairs especially when its former presidents also pardoned similar ex-convicts. "Who condemned USA when they pardoned Oliver North and the then president over Iran contra," a commentator by the name Ben Growp posted on PREMIUM TIMES website.
"Various American presidents have pardoned individuals, the most controversial being Marc Rich, whose wife Denise is a contributor to the Democratic Party. Clinton's actions were done a few hours to leaving office in January of 2001," another commentator by the username Lanre posted. Others like Odusanya Seye commended the U.S. statement. "As a patriotic citizen of Nigeria, I find this retarded move to pardon a convict shameful for a country whose inhabitant cry for justice," he said.
MY NIGERIA: U.S Sanctions against Nigeria over Pardon for ex-c...
MY NIGERIA: U.S Sanctions against Nigeria over Pardon for ex-c...: The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts by President Goodluck Jonathan has sparked a diplomatic standoff between Nigeria and the U...
U.S Sanctions against Nigeria over Pardon for ex-convict Alamieyeseigha, Bulama
The controversial pardon granted some ex-convicts by President Goodluck Jonathan has sparked a diplomatic standoff between Nigeria and the United States, with the Americans threatening to punish Nigeria over Mr. Jonathan's action. Nigeria has in turn accused the United States of "meddlesomeness".
The U.S. had through its official twitter handle @USEmbassyAbuja on Friday condemned Mr. Jonathan's action, saying, "the #USG (United States Government) is deeply disappointed over the recent pardons of corrupt officials by GON (Government of Nigeria)." It added, "We see this as a setback in the fight against corruption."
A State Department official has now said the American government is not taking the matter lightly and might apply sanction as appropriate. Speaking at the U.S. Department of State's daily press briefing in Washington D.C. late Friday, Spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the development in Nigeria might jeorpardize the governance projects America is executing in Nigeria. The U.S. is the world's top donor. In 2012, it spent about $226 million on health and governance programmes in Nigeria. And about $600million has been requested for 2013, according to U.S. government data.
In response to a question on whether aid to Nigeria might be cut, Ms Nuland said, "We see this as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we've played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country obviously." She added, "We have made clear to the Nigerians that this puts a question mark on the kinds of work that we've been trying to do with them.
"We haven't yet taken the kinds of steps that you're suggesting Matt (the reporter who asked the question), but we're continuing to look at what's appropriate." Meanwhile, Nigeria's foreign ministry has summoned a top U.S. diplomat to explain why its embassy posted critical comments on Twitter over a presidential pardon given to the Nigerians convicted on corruption charges. The Nigerian officials filed an urgent request to speak to the U.S. deputy chief of mission over what it described as "meddlesomeness."
In a statement Friday, the ministry claimed the pardon granted Messrs Alamieyeseigha and Bulama is entirely consistent with the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution. The ministry said it hoped "that the Embassy of the United States of America would henceforth desist from making unwarranted comments on Nigeria's internal affairs which are capable of undermining the friendly relations that exist between them."
President Jonathan and the National Council of State had granted ex- Bayelsa Governor, Mr. Alamieyeseigha and ex-boss of the defunct Bank of the North, Shettima Bulama pardon in a move condemned by civil society and other interest groups. Both men had been convicted for corruption by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. Mr. Alamieyeseigha, who chose Mr. Jonathan as his running mate for the Bayelsa Governorship election in 1999, pleaded guilty to financial misappropriation and was sentenced to two years in prison.
Some members of the Council of States had told PREMIUM TIMES that it was clear from the president's mien and actions at the meeting that the pardon was targeted at Mr. Alamieyeseigha with the others only used as smokescreen. The ex-Bayelsa Governor's name was the first on the list of the pardon beneficiaries read by the president to attendees at the meeting including three former Nigerian heads of state.
Mixed reactions Nigerians have, however, reacted differently to the U.S. reaction. While some say the U.S. has by its actions showed that it would not support the seemingly pro-corruption action of the government, others accused the American government of meddling in Nigerian affairs especially when its former presidents also pardoned similar ex-convicts. "Who condemned USA when they pardoned Oliver North and the then president over Iran contra," a commentator by the name Ben Growp posted on PREMIUM TIMES website.
"Various American presidents have pardoned individuals, the most controversial being Marc Rich, whose wife Denise is a contributor to the Democratic Party. Clinton's actions were done a few hours to leaving office in January of 2001," another commentator by the username Lanre posted. Others like Odusanya Seye commended the U.S. statement. "As a patriotic citizen of Nigeria, I find this retarded move to pardon a convict shameful for a country whose inhabitant cry for justice," he said.
The U.S. had through its official twitter handle @USEmbassyAbuja on Friday condemned Mr. Jonathan's action, saying, "the #USG (United States Government) is deeply disappointed over the recent pardons of corrupt officials by GON (Government of Nigeria)." It added, "We see this as a setback in the fight against corruption."
A State Department official has now said the American government is not taking the matter lightly and might apply sanction as appropriate. Speaking at the U.S. Department of State's daily press briefing in Washington D.C. late Friday, Spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the development in Nigeria might jeorpardize the governance projects America is executing in Nigeria. The U.S. is the world's top donor. In 2012, it spent about $226 million on health and governance programmes in Nigeria. And about $600million has been requested for 2013, according to U.S. government data.
In response to a question on whether aid to Nigeria might be cut, Ms Nuland said, "We see this as a setback for the fight against corruption, and also for our ability to play the strong role we've played in supporting rule of law and legal institution-building in Nigeria, which is very important for the future of the country obviously." She added, "We have made clear to the Nigerians that this puts a question mark on the kinds of work that we've been trying to do with them.
"We haven't yet taken the kinds of steps that you're suggesting Matt (the reporter who asked the question), but we're continuing to look at what's appropriate." Meanwhile, Nigeria's foreign ministry has summoned a top U.S. diplomat to explain why its embassy posted critical comments on Twitter over a presidential pardon given to the Nigerians convicted on corruption charges. The Nigerian officials filed an urgent request to speak to the U.S. deputy chief of mission over what it described as "meddlesomeness."
In a statement Friday, the ministry claimed the pardon granted Messrs Alamieyeseigha and Bulama is entirely consistent with the provisions of the Nigerian Constitution. The ministry said it hoped "that the Embassy of the United States of America would henceforth desist from making unwarranted comments on Nigeria's internal affairs which are capable of undermining the friendly relations that exist between them."
President Jonathan and the National Council of State had granted ex- Bayelsa Governor, Mr. Alamieyeseigha and ex-boss of the defunct Bank of the North, Shettima Bulama pardon in a move condemned by civil society and other interest groups. Both men had been convicted for corruption by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC. Mr. Alamieyeseigha, who chose Mr. Jonathan as his running mate for the Bayelsa Governorship election in 1999, pleaded guilty to financial misappropriation and was sentenced to two years in prison.
Some members of the Council of States had told PREMIUM TIMES that it was clear from the president's mien and actions at the meeting that the pardon was targeted at Mr. Alamieyeseigha with the others only used as smokescreen. The ex-Bayelsa Governor's name was the first on the list of the pardon beneficiaries read by the president to attendees at the meeting including three former Nigerian heads of state.
Mixed reactions Nigerians have, however, reacted differently to the U.S. reaction. While some say the U.S. has by its actions showed that it would not support the seemingly pro-corruption action of the government, others accused the American government of meddling in Nigerian affairs especially when its former presidents also pardoned similar ex-convicts. "Who condemned USA when they pardoned Oliver North and the then president over Iran contra," a commentator by the name Ben Growp posted on PREMIUM TIMES website.
"Various American presidents have pardoned individuals, the most controversial being Marc Rich, whose wife Denise is a contributor to the Democratic Party. Clinton's actions were done a few hours to leaving office in January of 2001," another commentator by the username Lanre posted. Others like Odusanya Seye commended the U.S. statement. "As a patriotic citizen of Nigeria, I find this retarded move to pardon a convict shameful for a country whose inhabitant cry for justice," he said.
Wonders: Proxy 'APC' Sends E-Mail Using PDP Address! March 15, 2013 - By SaharaReporters, New York
Facts emerged on Friday that the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is behind the desire to register the controversial “African Peoples Congress,” as the “new party" mistakenly issued a statement in Abuja today using the email address of the ruling party.
Already, one Mr. Thomas Ibu, the PDP official in charge of the PDP Internet is being queried for the "national embarrassment" the mismanaged ruse has caused the party.
The statement was sent to reporters officially accredited to cover the PDP. It was copied to almost all the officials of the party, including its National Publicity Secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh, as well as party officials who work with Metuh in the Publicity Department, such as Keneth Gyado and Nwachukwu Ngige.
Metuh and those working with him in his department are said to be the brains behind the new “party.”
The bogus APC was hurriedly put together to thwart the efforts of the opposition, who have come together under the All Progressive Congress, from being registered by the Independent National Electoral Commission.
A member of the party's National Working Committee said the Presidency, which is laboring under heavy national and international lampooning following the pardon granted convicted former governor Dipreye Alamieyesegha, was fuming with anger over the new embarrassment.
"This is an operation we ought to carry out cleanly, without letting the world know that we are ones behind the new party. But the bubble has burst now with this silly mistake. Too bad," the NWC member said.
In the email titled, "EMERGENCY PRESS RELEASE", the PDP appendix APC raised the alarm that its members were being “threatened.”
Full text of the statement:
The African People’s Congress has uncovered plots by some faceless persons believed to be inspired by desperate elements in the so-called merger group to attack and possibly eliminate key officers of the African People’s Congress (APC).
This came to light barely twenty four hours after APC, its National Headquarters, logo, manifesto and constitution were unveiled to Nigerians and indeed Africa.
After the elaborate event and appraisal meetings and stakeholders’ interactions that followed at the National headquarters, most officers of the party left the secretariat late yesterday. At about 10.15pm when an officer of the party, Hon Dan Iloabanafo and some administrative staff were getting ready to close the Secretariat for the day, two men came round the backside of the office claiming they wanted to register as members of the party, a feature that has become common place in the secretariat, but Iloabanafo advised them to come back the next day or any other week day. The hoodlums insisted they preferred to be registered immediately, and while the party officer was trying to explain things to them, they pulled out guns and demanded the whereabouts of the Acting Chairman who had left the Secretariat earlier.
After moving from one office to the other and satisfying themselves that the Acting Chairman was not in the office, the gunmen left ,muttering words that were barely audible but suggested that there were other highly placed persons complicit in the plot but preferred to be kept out of the plot.
Against this backdrop, the APC wishes to reiterate that no amount of intimidation or harassment can deter it from pursuing its lofty goals and aspirations in the interest of the good people of Nigeria.
We are too busy to engage in hollow exchanges as initiated yesterday by Chief Tom Ikimi, who fruitless shopped for excuses, claims and assertions to justify their failures and political inadequacies.
As the “assemblage of windpipes” which the merger group represents, Ikimi rushed off to the press on learning of the unveiling of the APC and our firmness of purpose; to ventilate a most pedestrian assertion’ such that can only be expected of school-age children or demented teenagers.
As their helter-skelter search for means to undermine the APC continues, we wish to alert Nigerians of their grand plot of smuggling a back-dated application for registration into the INEC, an action that could plunge Nigerian democracy into the woods of lawlessness. For APC, that is most unacceptable.
It is indeed pathetic that same people that claim to pursue the deepening of democracy cannot abide by the letters of the constitution and due process.
While the merger racketeers continue to fiddle, the APC leadership would be paying a visit to the victims of the Madallabomb blast this weekend as an expression of our people-centred objectives.
In anticipation of the issuance of our certificate of registration, a meeting of National Officers of the party would hold at the party headquarters next week to commence mobilisation and sensitization of Nigerians preparatory to the launching of our about to be registered party.
Signed: Barr. Sa’id Balogun, Ag. National Secretary
MY NIGERIA: Wonders: Proxy 'APC' Sends E-Mail Using PDP Addres...
MY NIGERIA: Wonders: Proxy 'APC' Sends E-Mail Using PDP Addres...: Facts emerged on Friday that the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is behind the desire to register the controversial “African Peoples ...
Exposed: PDP ‘Hatchet Man’ behind rival APC registration
All Progressives Congress had persistently alleged that the PDP was behind the registration of the African Peoples Congress.
The man behind attempts to register the African Peoples Congress is a card carrying member of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, who has carried out several hatchet jobs for the party hierarchy in the past.
The African Peoples Congress, in a surprise stunt, beat the All Progressives Congress, a result of a merger of four opposition parties, to commencing a registration process with the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
The All Progressives Congress has alleged that African Peoples Congress move was orchestrated by the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in order to stifle its operation.
This allegation, findings show, was not a wild one.
The registration
The lawyer, Samuel Chinedu, who filed the application of the African Peoples Congress, APC, to INEC, woke on Friday to see that he had become popular, a dimension he had no idea his life will take.
The Nation newspaper had, on Friday, ran a story on the lawyer detailing the manner of transaction he had with INEC by applying to register the African Peoples Congress.
The story, in which Mr. Chinedu said he was just a young lawyer, went viral.
He gave the name of his patron and the details of their transaction.
“Ugochinyere Ikenga approached me sometime in February 2013 to put in an application for the registration of a political party by name African Peoples Congress,” Mr. Chinedu told The Nation.
“He paid me an initial sum of N30, 000 and later added another N50, 000 and a Samsung Galaxy phone after I had filed the papers, with a promise that he was going to settle me after the party must have been registered.
“I filed the application in the honest belief that it was just another political party because even the application I entered at INEC only bears the name African Peoples Congress. The acronym APC was not included in the application,” Mr. Chinedu said.
He said he never envisaged that there was an ulterior motive to the registration of the African Peoples Party.
“There was no way I could have visualized, whether or not there was an ulterior motive in the registration of that political party. I was, however, surprised to see my name all over the newspapers, including a sample of the application letter I wrote to INEC.
“I wish to let Nigerians know that I am not a politician in anyway whatsoever. I regret the issues at hand and the dimension the entire thing is taking,” he said.
Mr. Ikenga, the strategist
Mr. Ikenga, PREMIUM TIMES findings show is not only a card carrying member of the PDP, but has been involved in several hatchet jobs within the ruling party.
Mr. Ikenga, also a lawyer, had on March 10, 2012, approached a Federal High Court in Lagos, asking it to stop Bamanga Tukur from vying for the position of PDP national chairman.
He told the court that he is a card-carrying member of the PDP, and requested to stop Mr. Tukur on the grounds that he was not qualified to lead the PDP, having allegedly “failed, and/or neglected to re-activate his membership” in accordance with the party’s constitution, after his expulsion from the party for anti-party activities on May 31, 2001.
Apart from instituting the court action, Mr. Ikenga also led a protest to the Wadata Plaza secretariat of the party, to press home their demand for the disqualification of Mr. Tukur.
Before challenging the emergence of Mr. Tukur, Mr. Ikenga had also gone to court to seek to stop the emergence of a former National Chairman of the party, Okwesiliezi Nwodo from assuming office.
Mr. Ikenga filed a suit filed at the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, on June, 9/2010 asking for an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the PDP or its agents from appointing Mr. Nwodo as the Party’s National Chairman.
‘Hatchet job’ beyond PDP
Mr. Ikenga had also attempted to force the extension of the tenure of former chairman of INEC, Maurice Iwu, at a time Nigerians were unanimous in their call for the professor’s sack from the electoral body.
Mr. Ikenga had on April 2, 2010 led three ‘pro-democracy groups’ to the National Assembly to stage a rally seeking for tenure extension for Mr. Iwu. The three groups, the Alliance for Defence of Democracy, National Youth Coalition for Progressive Transformation and the Northern Patriotic Forum went to the Assembly to request for extension for Mr. Iwu “to enable him to conduct the 2011 general elections”.
“Electoral process can only be consolidated where there is continuity in leadership,” Mr. Ikenga said in his address at the rally.
He argued that section 157 of the 1999 Constitution made provision for the re-appointment of the INEC chairman, “so why are people crying even when the chairman has two months to go,” he said.
The rent- a-crowd
One common feature Mr. Ikenga is known for is his ability to easily mobilise a crowd for a protest in the Nigerian capital.
People who know and have worked with the lawyer in the past allege that he is available to the highest bidder as a hatchet man; and sometimes goes to satellite towns in the Nigerian capital to rent the crowd he uses for his protests.
This time around, however, he’s moved beyond public protests to sponsoring what could turn to a be a major political upheaval in Nigeria; as the All Progressives Congress have insisted that they would not change name to accommodate the African Peoples Congress.
Ikenga does not like to be disturbed
When PREMIUM TIMES contacted Mr. Ikenga to confirm if he was behind the registration of the African Peoples Congress, he declined comment.
“Why is everybody calling me about this thing? Today is my girlfriend’s birthday and these calls from journalists is pissing her off,” he said before he cut off the line.
The PDP would also not respond to the reason one of its members sponsored the formation of a rival party or if he had the backing of the party to carry out the action.
The National Publicity Secretary of the PDP, Olisa Metuh, did not answer or return calls made to his phone.
MY NIGERIA: Exposed: PDP ‘Hatchet Man’ behind rival APC regist...
MY NIGERIA: Exposed: PDP ‘Hatchet Man’ behind rival APC regist...: All Progressives Congress had persistently alleged that the PDP was behind the registration of the African Peoples Congress. The man behind ...
Transparency International Calls On President Jonathan To Rescind Controversial Pardon Of Corrupt Politician
Transparency International, the global anti-corruptionorganisation, has asked President Goodluck Jonathan to rescind the pardon granted to Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, the former governor of the oil-rich state of Bayelsa, who was convicted for money laundering and other serious corruption offences in 2007.
“This decision undermines anti-corruption efforts in Nigeria and encourages impunity. If the government is serious about uprooting public corruption, sanctions against those who betray the public trust should be strengthened, not relaxed,”said AkereMuna, vice-chair of Transparency International.
Following the pardon, Mr. Alamieyeseigha will now be able to stand for public office again. His businesses will also enjoy official patronage which, given his friendship with Mr. Jonathan, could be considerable.
Transparency International urged President Jonathan to show that he is committed to fighting corruption and endorse the efforts of law enforcement agencies to end impunity for corrupt officials.
Nigeria was ranked 139 out of 174 countries in the 2012 Corruptions Perceptions Index. Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has prosecuted and convicted a number of high-profile corrupt individuals since its inception in 2003, but most of them have escaped effective sanctions.
Tuesday, 12 March 2013
JTF killed Civilians not our Members- Boko Haram
Radical Islamist sect, Jama’atu Ahlis Sunnah Lidda’awati Wal Jihad, better known as Boko Haram, yesterday pooh-poohed the Joint Task Force’s claim that its operatives killed 52 insurgents on Friday in Jajeri, a settlement in the outskirts of Maiduguri.
Abu Zinnira, a new purported spokesman of the sect also dismissed the reported killing of 20 members of his group who attacked a military barracks in Monguno in northern part of Borno State on Sunday, 3rd March, 2013, insisting that on the two occasions, soldiers had only succeeded in killing civilians.
It would be recalled that spokesman of the JTF in Borno State, Lt. Colonel Musa had on Saturday told journalists at a media briefing that 52 insurgents had been killed, 20 of them on Friday and a large cache of arms and ammunitions, including anti aircraft missiles were recovered, few hours after President Goodluck Jonathan completed his two day visit to Borno and Yobe States.
Though Zinnira was mum on the arms recovered by the JTF, he however said it is not true that their members had been killed.
“The truth of the matter is that we are the ones that triumphed during the encounter because we killed many soldiers and destroyed four armoured personnel carriers (APCs). What is obvious is that the JTF had only succeeded in killing innocent civilians, not our members as they claimed.” he said.
Abu Zinnira, a new purported spokesman of the sect also dismissed the reported killing of 20 members of his group who attacked a military barracks in Monguno in northern part of Borno State on Sunday, 3rd March, 2013, insisting that on the two occasions, soldiers had only succeeded in killing civilians.
It would be recalled that spokesman of the JTF in Borno State, Lt. Colonel Musa had on Saturday told journalists at a media briefing that 52 insurgents had been killed, 20 of them on Friday and a large cache of arms and ammunitions, including anti aircraft missiles were recovered, few hours after President Goodluck Jonathan completed his two day visit to Borno and Yobe States.
Though Zinnira was mum on the arms recovered by the JTF, he however said it is not true that their members had been killed.
“The truth of the matter is that we are the ones that triumphed during the encounter because we killed many soldiers and destroyed four armoured personnel carriers (APCs). What is obvious is that the JTF had only succeeded in killing innocent civilians, not our members as they claimed.” he said.
Nigerian Islamists increasingly turn guns on the West
By Tim Cocks
LAGOS (Reuters) - For a long time it seemed the violent Islamist groups plaguing Nigeria were more interested in their grievances with the government than in any global jihad against Western "infidels".
The killing of seven foreign hostages in Nigeria this week - confirmed by Italian and Greek authorities although not by Nigeria's government itself - showed that, increasingly, this is no longer the case.
Ansaru, an obscure group that had seemed to operate on the margins of the main Islamist insurgency labelled Boko Haram, is emerging as a much more explicit threat to Western interests.
That threat will only grow as relations between al Qaeda-linked Islamist groups in Africa's vast Sahara region and some homegrown Nigerian militants flourish.
"It is now clear some Nigerian groups are hand in hand with terrorist organisations in the sub-region. You can no longer separate Nigeria from terrorism across Africa," said Charles Dokubo of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs.
Ansaru announced on Saturday that it had killed a British, an Italian, a Greek and four Lebanese construction workers they had abducted in northern Nigeria's Bauchi state last month. It said this was because of efforts by British and Nigerian security forces to forcibly rescue them.
Greece and Italy confirmed the news on Sunday and Britain said it was likely to be true. Nigerian officials have declined to confirm or deny it. Ansaru has posted a video online of what it said were the bodies.
Unlike the better known Boko Haram, whose main fight is with Nigeria's government and which normally strikes domestic targets like police stations, politicians or Nigerian Christians, Ansaru is explicitly focused on jihad (holy war) against the West.
While Boko Haram wants an Islamic state in religiously-mixed Nigeria - Africa's most populous state and biggest oil producer, Ansaru sees the country as launchpad for reprisals against the West over its involvement in places like Mali.
SMALLER, MORE FOCUSED
Intelligence sources say Ansaru is smaller and more focused than Boko Haram, whose movement is increasingly fragmented.
It has also forged much more direct ties with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), the Algerian-born outfit that French forces chased out of towns in the northern desert of Mali last month.
"Links between them and AQIM are much clearer than links between Boko Haram and AQIM," said a security official in Abuja.
"They came out of the same seed as Boko Haram, but there was a difference in ideology. Their ideology is closer to AQIM's."
That difference became clear in January 2013, when Boko Haram - whose Hausa-language name means "Western education is sinful" - carried out a major attack on the north's biggest city of Kano that killed 186 people.
Ansaru, then largely unknown to authorities, explicitly broke away from Boko Haram, denouncing the attack because it said most of the victims were Muslims. Nonetheless, security officials say it retains loose operational ties with Boko Haram.
Its full name - Jama'atu Ansarul Musilimina Fi Biladis Sudan - means "Vanguards for the Protection of Muslims in Black Africa". Analysts say this shows it wants to be seen as distinct from AQIM, which is run by mainly Arab Algerians.
Ansaru claimed a dawn raid on a police station in Abuja last year, where it said hundreds of prisoners were released.
It has since risen to prominence with several high-profile attacks and kidnappings, including an ambush of Nigerian troops heading to Mali from central Nigeria in January, in a place hundreds of miles from its base in the north's main city Kano.
DEADLY
The survival rate of hostages seized by Ansaru is low. The group was suspected of being behind the killing of a British and Italian hostage a year ago in northwest Nigeria during a botched attempt to rescue them by British and Nigerian forces.
It also claimed responsibility for the kidnapping in December of a French national, still missing. � Why it so readily kills the hostages it goes to such lengths to seize is not clear, although it is standard in jihadist manuals that hostages are to be killed in the event of a rescue attempt. A German killed by another al Qaeda-affiliated group last year also died when their house was raided.
"The last time they killed hostages, it was clearly a blunder by the Nigerian forces. I have a strong suspicion these deaths were caused by something similar," said Mohammed Junaidu, a northern opposition politician and former legislator.
Italy and Greece have both denied there was any attempt to free the seven. Britain has remained quiet.
Rivalry between Ansaru and Boko Haram could push the latter to take a more international outlook. Boko Haram claimed a bombing of the U.N. Nigeria headquarters that killed 25 people in August 2011 - although intelligence officials believe it may have been planned by fighters who now belong to Ansaru.
A group claiming to be Boko Haram claimed the kidnapping of a French family in northern Cameroon last month - the first time they have been directly linked with abducting Westerners.
"While Boko Haram's campaign was driven by domestic factors during its formative years, there are growing risks that some elements within (it) will also adopt a more transnational approach, increasing targeting of foreign interests," said Roddy Barclay, Africa analyst at Control Risks.
LAGOS (Reuters) - For a long time it seemed the violent Islamist groups plaguing Nigeria were more interested in their grievances with the government than in any global jihad against Western "infidels".
The killing of seven foreign hostages in Nigeria this week - confirmed by Italian and Greek authorities although not by Nigeria's government itself - showed that, increasingly, this is no longer the case.
Ansaru, an obscure group that had seemed to operate on the margins of the main Islamist insurgency labelled Boko Haram, is emerging as a much more explicit threat to Western interests.
That threat will only grow as relations between al Qaeda-linked Islamist groups in Africa's vast Sahara region and some homegrown Nigerian militants flourish.
"It is now clear some Nigerian groups are hand in hand with terrorist organisations in the sub-region. You can no longer separate Nigeria from terrorism across Africa," said Charles Dokubo of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs.
Ansaru announced on Saturday that it had killed a British, an Italian, a Greek and four Lebanese construction workers they had abducted in northern Nigeria's Bauchi state last month. It said this was because of efforts by British and Nigerian security forces to forcibly rescue them.
Greece and Italy confirmed the news on Sunday and Britain said it was likely to be true. Nigerian officials have declined to confirm or deny it. Ansaru has posted a video online of what it said were the bodies.
Unlike the better known Boko Haram, whose main fight is with Nigeria's government and which normally strikes domestic targets like police stations, politicians or Nigerian Christians, Ansaru is explicitly focused on jihad (holy war) against the West.
While Boko Haram wants an Islamic state in religiously-mixed Nigeria - Africa's most populous state and biggest oil producer, Ansaru sees the country as launchpad for reprisals against the West over its involvement in places like Mali.
SMALLER, MORE FOCUSED
Intelligence sources say Ansaru is smaller and more focused than Boko Haram, whose movement is increasingly fragmented.
It has also forged much more direct ties with al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), the Algerian-born outfit that French forces chased out of towns in the northern desert of Mali last month.
"Links between them and AQIM are much clearer than links between Boko Haram and AQIM," said a security official in Abuja.
"They came out of the same seed as Boko Haram, but there was a difference in ideology. Their ideology is closer to AQIM's."
That difference became clear in January 2013, when Boko Haram - whose Hausa-language name means "Western education is sinful" - carried out a major attack on the north's biggest city of Kano that killed 186 people.
Ansaru, then largely unknown to authorities, explicitly broke away from Boko Haram, denouncing the attack because it said most of the victims were Muslims. Nonetheless, security officials say it retains loose operational ties with Boko Haram.
Its full name - Jama'atu Ansarul Musilimina Fi Biladis Sudan - means "Vanguards for the Protection of Muslims in Black Africa". Analysts say this shows it wants to be seen as distinct from AQIM, which is run by mainly Arab Algerians.
Ansaru claimed a dawn raid on a police station in Abuja last year, where it said hundreds of prisoners were released.
It has since risen to prominence with several high-profile attacks and kidnappings, including an ambush of Nigerian troops heading to Mali from central Nigeria in January, in a place hundreds of miles from its base in the north's main city Kano.
DEADLY
The survival rate of hostages seized by Ansaru is low. The group was suspected of being behind the killing of a British and Italian hostage a year ago in northwest Nigeria during a botched attempt to rescue them by British and Nigerian forces.
It also claimed responsibility for the kidnapping in December of a French national, still missing. � Why it so readily kills the hostages it goes to such lengths to seize is not clear, although it is standard in jihadist manuals that hostages are to be killed in the event of a rescue attempt. A German killed by another al Qaeda-affiliated group last year also died when their house was raided.
"The last time they killed hostages, it was clearly a blunder by the Nigerian forces. I have a strong suspicion these deaths were caused by something similar," said Mohammed Junaidu, a northern opposition politician and former legislator.
Italy and Greece have both denied there was any attempt to free the seven. Britain has remained quiet.
Rivalry between Ansaru and Boko Haram could push the latter to take a more international outlook. Boko Haram claimed a bombing of the U.N. Nigeria headquarters that killed 25 people in August 2011 - although intelligence officials believe it may have been planned by fighters who now belong to Ansaru.
A group claiming to be Boko Haram claimed the kidnapping of a French family in northern Cameroon last month - the first time they have been directly linked with abducting Westerners.
"While Boko Haram's campaign was driven by domestic factors during its formative years, there are growing risks that some elements within (it) will also adopt a more transnational approach, increasing targeting of foreign interests," said Roddy Barclay, Africa analyst at Control Risks.
Monday, 11 March 2013
Jonathan’s Amnesty Denial For Boko Haram Illogical – ACN
The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) said President Goodluck Jonathan’s tactless show during his belated visit to Borno and Yobe States last week has worsened the Boko Haram insurgency that has killed and maimed hundreds of innocent people, especially in the two states.
In a statement issued in Lagos on Monday by its National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, the party also said while the decision to grant amnesty to any person or group is the prerogative of the government, the argument advanced by the President for denying amnesty to Boko Haram members is as illogical as it is puerile.
It said for a President who has unwisely stayed away from the beleaguered part of the country for too long, last week’s visit only succeeded in inflicting additional pain and insults on the victims of the insurgency, who could have used a little dose of succour and empathy from their leader.
”There is no doubt that there has been an upsurge in attacks and killings since the President’s visit, with the clashes between the JTF and the insurgents leaving many dead, drive-by shooting in Kano claiming the lives of innocent people and the unfortunate killing of foreign hostages who were abducted last month in Bauchi.
”If this upsurge can be used as a barometer to measure the success or otherwise of the President’s visit, then one can only reach one conclusion: The visit is a total failure!” ACN said
The party also expressed shock at the way the President, openly displaying anger when what was needed was temperance, talked down on the people, who have suffered so much in the hands of Boko Haram, at his town hall meetings
It said the misplaced anger of the nation’s number one citizen, who virtually tongue-lashed the prominent citizens who spoke on behalf of their people at the town hall meeting, can only attract sympathy for the insurgents among the beleaguered population, thereby worsening the crisis.
”The President wanted to appear tough in dealing with the Boko Haram insurgents. There is no problem with that, except that he directed his anger at the wrong people, the same people who have been victimized by Boko Haram.
This is called double whammy,” the party said.
On the President’s argument that amnesty cannot be granted to ”ghosts”, ACN said he simply missed the mark.
”If the President claims that Boko Haram members are ghosts, who then are the members of Boko Haram that the JTF regularly claims to have arrested or killed? Does it mean the 52 Boko Haram members that the JTF claimed to have killed, in its latest press release dated March 9th 2013, are actually ghosts?
”What about the Boko Haram members that are being tried in court? Could the government have been trying ghosts?
And what about those Boko Haram members who were declared wanted last year? Are they also ghosts? Also, the government’s spokesmen have said publicly that the government is talking with Boko Haram through back-channels.
So the Jonathan Administration has indeed been talking to ghosts?
”Mr. President, there is nowhere in the world where insurgents have erected a headquarters building and put up a sign to say ‘we are insurgents, come and get us.’ By their nature, insurgents don’t engage in a march past, displaying their weapons. That is why intermediaries are used to reach out to them,” the party said.
ACN said while it strongly condemns the Boko Haram insurgents, their senseless killing of innocent people and attacks on the security agents, it believes that the use of force is not the only option open to the government to end the crisis.
In a statement issued in Lagos on Monday by its National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, the party also said while the decision to grant amnesty to any person or group is the prerogative of the government, the argument advanced by the President for denying amnesty to Boko Haram members is as illogical as it is puerile.
It said for a President who has unwisely stayed away from the beleaguered part of the country for too long, last week’s visit only succeeded in inflicting additional pain and insults on the victims of the insurgency, who could have used a little dose of succour and empathy from their leader.
”There is no doubt that there has been an upsurge in attacks and killings since the President’s visit, with the clashes between the JTF and the insurgents leaving many dead, drive-by shooting in Kano claiming the lives of innocent people and the unfortunate killing of foreign hostages who were abducted last month in Bauchi.
”If this upsurge can be used as a barometer to measure the success or otherwise of the President’s visit, then one can only reach one conclusion: The visit is a total failure!” ACN said
The party also expressed shock at the way the President, openly displaying anger when what was needed was temperance, talked down on the people, who have suffered so much in the hands of Boko Haram, at his town hall meetings
It said the misplaced anger of the nation’s number one citizen, who virtually tongue-lashed the prominent citizens who spoke on behalf of their people at the town hall meeting, can only attract sympathy for the insurgents among the beleaguered population, thereby worsening the crisis.
”The President wanted to appear tough in dealing with the Boko Haram insurgents. There is no problem with that, except that he directed his anger at the wrong people, the same people who have been victimized by Boko Haram.
This is called double whammy,” the party said.
On the President’s argument that amnesty cannot be granted to ”ghosts”, ACN said he simply missed the mark.
”If the President claims that Boko Haram members are ghosts, who then are the members of Boko Haram that the JTF regularly claims to have arrested or killed? Does it mean the 52 Boko Haram members that the JTF claimed to have killed, in its latest press release dated March 9th 2013, are actually ghosts?
”What about the Boko Haram members that are being tried in court? Could the government have been trying ghosts?
And what about those Boko Haram members who were declared wanted last year? Are they also ghosts? Also, the government’s spokesmen have said publicly that the government is talking with Boko Haram through back-channels.
So the Jonathan Administration has indeed been talking to ghosts?
”Mr. President, there is nowhere in the world where insurgents have erected a headquarters building and put up a sign to say ‘we are insurgents, come and get us.’ By their nature, insurgents don’t engage in a march past, displaying their weapons. That is why intermediaries are used to reach out to them,” the party said.
ACN said while it strongly condemns the Boko Haram insurgents, their senseless killing of innocent people and attacks on the security agents, it believes that the use of force is not the only option open to the government to end the crisis.
The North on its own by Hakeem Baba-Ahmed
The North on its own by Hakeem Baba-Ahmed
If you want to go quickly, go alone.
If you want to go far, go together. Hausa Proverb
To describe the outcome of the visit of President Jonathan to Borno and Yobe States as an anti-climax would be an unpardonable exaggeration. It will be safer to say that the President has left behind a confused and disappointed people. This will include people who thought their age, pedigree, social standing and proven records of service to the nation will impress the President when they spoke with him. They will now go through a very painful process of self evaluation, and may retreat for a long while owing to a damaging loss of face and prestige.
But there are others who will see many positives in the visit. Some will see the President’s refusal to grant amnesty, or respond to demands for removing the JTF as a singular act of courage and statesmanship. In this group, you will count some elements in the CAN and other groups who believe that amnesty for Boko Haram is unjust, a sign of weakness and defeatist. There are also some elements of the security community which will see amnesty as capitulation, and the removal of the JTF as an invitation to the enemy to take over. It is also quite probable that governors and other politicians in the region fear that they will be promptly slaughtered and bombed out of existence without the JTF, even if it had not protected General Shuwa and many other prominent politicians in the past. In any case the appearance of a President unwilling to concede an inch to a community which had expected much would not have gone unnoticed among certain circles that believe that it is not the President’s job to put this fire.
Although he broke no new grounds in language, style or substance, President Jonathan opened up some fresh dimensions to this damaging conflict. In one fell swoop, he repudiated the advise of the Sultan and the Borno Elders to grant amnesty to members of the Jamaatu Ahlil Sunnah Lidda’awati Wal Jihad (JASLWAJ) who have shown an inclination towards a settlement. Against evidence that there are splinter groups willing to negotiate, the President says it is all or nothing. Bring out your ghosts who are responsible for your conditions, and we will talk, he told the elders. If amnesty is required, we will consider it.
The President also wore his Commander-In-Chief toga very well during the visit. He spoke passionately in defence of members of the JTF and the reasons behind their presence. The community has created the reasons for the JTF, which is doing a marvelous but difficult job. If you do not want them, remove the causes for their presence in the first place. With regards to massive and prolonged detentions and torture of suspected young men and their families, hundreds who died in crossfire or during rampaging vengeance by the JTF, billions in losses, a collapsed economy, dislocated social structures, towns and villages full of orphans, the President’s positions is the same: give me assurances here and now that attacks and violence will stop, and the JTF will disappear. The President was on such a roll, he told the elders to stop playing to the gallery and condemn the insurgency in explicit terms, because they are toying with national security which he will not compromise.
The townhall meeting in Maiduguri ended with President Jonathan looking tough and inflexible, and the entire elderly assets of the people of Borno State looking thoroughly whipped and dejected. If some serious thinking and strategizing had preceded his visit, it may have advised him to take a tough stand, the type you take when you talk to a conquered people. For in truth, the people of Borno and Yobe States are a conquered people. Between the insurgency and Jonathan’s security apparatus, their Elders Forum had long been rendered useless. The people have suffered as much as they could suffer if they are in a war, and possibly less if the war had rules. No one can influence the insurgency or the JTF; or so it seems, until you ask who was so spectacularly successful in providing security cover for 10 APC governors just a few days ago, or who convinced all those elders to meet with the President. These elders are themselves targets of the insurgency, which they are accused of harbouring. They and the Sultan and the JNI are now on record as having been repudiated by the President on amnesty.
The leaders of the people of Borno State who met with the President would now have suffered a further setback in terms of their image and standing. The insurgency which is destroying lives and the economy would have benefitted immensely from the sorry outing of these elders. Now it can roll out its propaganda drums, and remind the community that it has no cover, and hint at particularly young people that it represents the only solutions to their problems. The federal government appears to have washed its hands clean of any involvement in the search for a solution to this conflict beyond bunkers, checkpoints and towns and cities full of rampaging soldiers. The President declined suggestions and options, and gave none of his own. Everyone reeled out the same old positions: the community wants dialogue and amnesty; the President wants leaders of the community to eliminate the insurgency. And the war goes on.
There are very important lessons which can be drawn from the president’s visit, though. One is that President Jonathan has no plans to go beyond the current strategy of containment through the use of force to resolve this conflict. The people of the northeast and the north generally should therefore accept this as a reality. But in this war, hundreds or thousands of people have been arrested. They have rights, and they are not ghosts. If government is under no pressure to intensify the search for resolution, the laws of the land must not stop working until it does. Those arrested without being tried should not have their plight highlighted only by the insurgency. If they have committed crimes, they should be prosecuted. If not, they should be freed immediately.
Similarly, the rights of all local citizens against undue harassment and illegal treatment by agents of the state must be protected by all Nigerians, but particularly by those whose jobs are to monitor and police their rights. It is not acceptable that only foreign human rights organizations and media should raise issues around massive human rights abuses.
The second lesson from the visit is that the North is really on its own on the issue of this insurgency. Substantial elements from other parts of Nigeria which feel that this insurgency grew under the cover of northern political establishment will clap at President Jonathan on his return from Borno and Yobe. This will be tragic. This insurgency is a national threat, and the north is only its first target. The northern political and religious establishment was its first casualty. A reading of the insurgency which suggests that it is essentially a northern/Muslim affair will have more damaging consequences than it does at the moment.
The final lesson is that the north needs to look further inwards and find a solution to this problem itself. The communities which suffer the most from this insurgency must take a stand, and this will involve risks and consequences. There really is no option than for communities to organize and challenge both the insurgency and the excesses of the agents of the state. Right now the people appear and behave like a vanquished people. The only question is whether they have been conquered by the insurgency or the JTF. Professor Nur Alkali told the President that the ancient people of Borno have gone through many disasters in their 1000 years history. They need to look into that rich legacy to find solutions to their current problems. They wont come from Abuja.dndnd
If you want to go quickly, go alone.
If you want to go far, go together. Hausa Proverb
To describe the outcome of the visit of President Jonathan to Borno and Yobe States as an anti-climax would be an unpardonable exaggeration. It will be safer to say that the President has left behind a confused and disappointed people. This will include people who thought their age, pedigree, social standing and proven records of service to the nation will impress the President when they spoke with him. They will now go through a very painful process of self evaluation, and may retreat for a long while owing to a damaging loss of face and prestige.
But there are others who will see many positives in the visit. Some will see the President’s refusal to grant amnesty, or respond to demands for removing the JTF as a singular act of courage and statesmanship. In this group, you will count some elements in the CAN and other groups who believe that amnesty for Boko Haram is unjust, a sign of weakness and defeatist. There are also some elements of the security community which will see amnesty as capitulation, and the removal of the JTF as an invitation to the enemy to take over. It is also quite probable that governors and other politicians in the region fear that they will be promptly slaughtered and bombed out of existence without the JTF, even if it had not protected General Shuwa and many other prominent politicians in the past. In any case the appearance of a President unwilling to concede an inch to a community which had expected much would not have gone unnoticed among certain circles that believe that it is not the President’s job to put this fire.
Although he broke no new grounds in language, style or substance, President Jonathan opened up some fresh dimensions to this damaging conflict. In one fell swoop, he repudiated the advise of the Sultan and the Borno Elders to grant amnesty to members of the Jamaatu Ahlil Sunnah Lidda’awati Wal Jihad (JASLWAJ) who have shown an inclination towards a settlement. Against evidence that there are splinter groups willing to negotiate, the President says it is all or nothing. Bring out your ghosts who are responsible for your conditions, and we will talk, he told the elders. If amnesty is required, we will consider it.
The President also wore his Commander-In-Chief toga very well during the visit. He spoke passionately in defence of members of the JTF and the reasons behind their presence. The community has created the reasons for the JTF, which is doing a marvelous but difficult job. If you do not want them, remove the causes for their presence in the first place. With regards to massive and prolonged detentions and torture of suspected young men and their families, hundreds who died in crossfire or during rampaging vengeance by the JTF, billions in losses, a collapsed economy, dislocated social structures, towns and villages full of orphans, the President’s positions is the same: give me assurances here and now that attacks and violence will stop, and the JTF will disappear. The President was on such a roll, he told the elders to stop playing to the gallery and condemn the insurgency in explicit terms, because they are toying with national security which he will not compromise.
The townhall meeting in Maiduguri ended with President Jonathan looking tough and inflexible, and the entire elderly assets of the people of Borno State looking thoroughly whipped and dejected. If some serious thinking and strategizing had preceded his visit, it may have advised him to take a tough stand, the type you take when you talk to a conquered people. For in truth, the people of Borno and Yobe States are a conquered people. Between the insurgency and Jonathan’s security apparatus, their Elders Forum had long been rendered useless. The people have suffered as much as they could suffer if they are in a war, and possibly less if the war had rules. No one can influence the insurgency or the JTF; or so it seems, until you ask who was so spectacularly successful in providing security cover for 10 APC governors just a few days ago, or who convinced all those elders to meet with the President. These elders are themselves targets of the insurgency, which they are accused of harbouring. They and the Sultan and the JNI are now on record as having been repudiated by the President on amnesty.
The leaders of the people of Borno State who met with the President would now have suffered a further setback in terms of their image and standing. The insurgency which is destroying lives and the economy would have benefitted immensely from the sorry outing of these elders. Now it can roll out its propaganda drums, and remind the community that it has no cover, and hint at particularly young people that it represents the only solutions to their problems. The federal government appears to have washed its hands clean of any involvement in the search for a solution to this conflict beyond bunkers, checkpoints and towns and cities full of rampaging soldiers. The President declined suggestions and options, and gave none of his own. Everyone reeled out the same old positions: the community wants dialogue and amnesty; the President wants leaders of the community to eliminate the insurgency. And the war goes on.
There are very important lessons which can be drawn from the president’s visit, though. One is that President Jonathan has no plans to go beyond the current strategy of containment through the use of force to resolve this conflict. The people of the northeast and the north generally should therefore accept this as a reality. But in this war, hundreds or thousands of people have been arrested. They have rights, and they are not ghosts. If government is under no pressure to intensify the search for resolution, the laws of the land must not stop working until it does. Those arrested without being tried should not have their plight highlighted only by the insurgency. If they have committed crimes, they should be prosecuted. If not, they should be freed immediately.
Similarly, the rights of all local citizens against undue harassment and illegal treatment by agents of the state must be protected by all Nigerians, but particularly by those whose jobs are to monitor and police their rights. It is not acceptable that only foreign human rights organizations and media should raise issues around massive human rights abuses.
The second lesson from the visit is that the North is really on its own on the issue of this insurgency. Substantial elements from other parts of Nigeria which feel that this insurgency grew under the cover of northern political establishment will clap at President Jonathan on his return from Borno and Yobe. This will be tragic. This insurgency is a national threat, and the north is only its first target. The northern political and religious establishment was its first casualty. A reading of the insurgency which suggests that it is essentially a northern/Muslim affair will have more damaging consequences than it does at the moment.
The final lesson is that the north needs to look further inwards and find a solution to this problem itself. The communities which suffer the most from this insurgency must take a stand, and this will involve risks and consequences. There really is no option than for communities to organize and challenge both the insurgency and the excesses of the agents of the state. Right now the people appear and behave like a vanquished people. The only question is whether they have been conquered by the insurgency or the JTF. Professor Nur Alkali told the President that the ancient people of Borno have gone through many disasters in their 1000 years history. They need to look into that rich legacy to find solutions to their current problems. They wont come from Abuja.dndnd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)