When it rains, it pours. Recently, I wrote an article on the marathon of development-focused governance, which I described as a “relay race”. I used the performance of Mr. Akinwunmi Ambode, the governor of Lagos state, as the reference point. I said though there were issues “here and there”, he had done well in several areas in less than three years. At the time I wrote, the waste management issue in the state was just rearing its head. As if that was not enough trouble, Ambode approved an upward review in land use charge. I have also seen documents showing incredible increases in vehicle licensing fees as well as heart-rending taxes for sinking boreholes.

Suddenly, the relatively controversy-free Ambode is engulfed by crises. Not one crisis, but a series. Protests have multiplied online and on the streets. Many are so angry they have gone to the extent of vowing to vote him out in 2019, even when they don’t yet know his opponent. What this tells me is that losing goodwill is sometimes much easier than putting butter on bread. For a governor who worked so hard to gain the respect and admiration of Lagosians to suddenly become a subject of harsh criticism, something has gone really sour. Although he might read political motives to some of the attacks against him, he also handed the bullets to his critics.

The messy waste situation in Lagos was the first to put Ambode on the cross. It is quite understandable. In any mega city, such as Lagos, there are certain failings that will attract immediate attention. One is sanitation. In the short run, you can paper over failings in housing, power, education and transportation, but you cannot cover up poor sanitation. The moment people start seeing refuse piling up like mountains, you don’t need any expert to tell them there is a problem. The eyesore is there for everyone to see and there is no amount of explanation that can suffice, especially when the state has been significantly refuse-free for years.

I have recently taken interest in the waste management logjam. Here is my summary. One, Ambode launched the Cleaner Lagos Initiative last year, unveiling an ambitious, comprehensive reform that extends to recycling, sorting and dumpsite management — beyond mere refuse collection and disposal. This, if I’m not mistaken, is meant to be an extension of the environmental policies of the administrations of Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and Mr. Babatunde Fashola between 1999 and 2015. I used to hear phrases like “waste to wealth” when Tinubu was in office, and I remember Fashola phased out the cart pushers, making waste collection better organised and more efficient.

Two, until now, private sector operators (called PSPs) managed both residential and commercial wastes. They majored on collecting and disposing refuse. They were reportedly getting paid two ways every month — from the customers and the state government. I won’t dwell on that today. Now, the Lagos state government has divided the franchise, granting the residential licence to Visionscape and the commercial one to the PSPs. Under the new system, as I understand it, only customers would pay the refuse collectors. Any other payment from the state government will be based on performance milestones (the banks call it targets).

Three, and not to be unexpected, the PSPs were un happy with the new arrangement. Although there was bigger value on offer — more transfer loading stations, recycling facilities, new landfill sites and waste-to-energy facilities — the PSPs were about to part with a guaranteed government payout of at least N300 million a month. There were unconfirmed reports that although 350 PSPs were officially registered and receiving payments from the state government, only 100 existed in the real sense. If true, nobody loses N300 million bonanza and keeps quiet just like that. The PSPs should be expected to take the “rational” decision of setting the house on fire.

They downed tools, went to court and the wastes began to pile up. Then the massive media carnage began, particularly on Twitter, and a new narrative took over. It became a dire situation. Visionscape was then directed by the government to clear all the mess. But as the obviously overwhelmed Visionscape was clearing the refuse, fresh piles were surfacing overnight. I can really understand the pushback, or apparent sabotage. Many of the “saboteurs” were arrested, along with their PSP trucks. I saw a few pictures of those arrested in the media, although I’m not sure the suspects are currently facing the music. That’s a different matter.

Let’s now look at Visionscape, the company in the eye of the storm. It was co-founded and promoted by Mr. Adeniyi Makanjuola, a young Nigerian entrepreneur. Makanjuola is one of those guys who run away from the media. I had never seen his face until I started doing some Google research for this article a few days ago. He is a scion of Mr. Remi Makanjuola, chairman of the Caverton Group. According to his brief profile on the website of Visionscape, the younger Makanjuola is a product of Financial Economics from the University of Essex, UK, and also has an M.Sc in Urban Planning and Development from the University College London.

At the age of 23, he launched a successful helicopter charter service under the umbrella of his father’s marine support business, the Caverton Offshore Support Group. He eventually stepped out of his father’s shadows and, in 2014, moved on to UAE to co-found Visionscape — an environmental utility company — alongside Harry Ackerman, a Briton, and Ali Ahli, an emirati, with focus on emerging markets. Ironically, Visionscape was not even the company that won the bid for Lagos waste management. Averda, Suez, Veolia and Visionscape vied for the job. Averda and Veolia, owned and managed by Lebanese entrepreneurs, were shortlisted. Visionscape lost out.

However, when the Lagos state government insisted on a naira-denominated payment agreement, the shortlisted companies backed out, and Visionscape came back into reckoning. It is relatively new but currently operates in parts of UAE and Belgium. It pulled out of Sierra Leone when the Ebola epidemic broke out. Despite the Lagos setback, it is already in talks with authorities in Ghana, Kenya, Mali and FCT, according to reports. It only recently got a foothold in the UK with the acquisition of Gelpack Excelsior. Visionscape is also constructing transfer loading stations across Lagos and building a landfill in Epe — said to be the first of its kind in West Africa.

I will now give my opinion. It appears to me that the government did not do its homework very well before reforming the waste management system. There is nothing wrong with Ambode’s Cleaner Lagos Initiative, in my opinion, but I have this impression that he did not do enough consultation before changing what he met on ground. Things are more nuanced that they appear. Lagos has become a shining example across the nation. However, if the government and the powerful politicians do not manage their affairs with tact and wisdom, they will be the losers in the end. Ambode must take another look at stakeholder management. Everybody still can be a winner.

As I always say, the political management of reform is as important as the reform itself. But while the waste management crisis can be easily resolved (as soon as the streets are free of waste and efficiency sets in, the rest becomes history), the revenue drive of the government is a different kettle of fish. The underlining assumption is that Lagos is the economic nerve centre of Nigeria where real business is done and real money is made, and so the state should leverage on that to raise tax revenue. A mere N100 increase in any tax handle automatically guarantees the government billions of naira in extra revenue. Therefore, the temptation to keep milking the populace is hard to resist.

But as much as Lagos wants to continue to set the pace, there is a price to pay. There is a level of taxation that will inevitably activate resistance from the citizens. This has its own socio-political implications. There is, of course, the other side of the coin: if Lagos cannot raise tax revenue to finance its projects, it is either the projects are stalled or the state piles up more debts to execute them. It’s very tricky — and Ambode must beat a retreat to find a neat balance. He is facing a baptism of fire and how he wades through these challenges is yet another test of his leadership skills. We are watching. Keenly.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

LIYA SHARIBU

It seems Christians are more willing to suffer for their faith in places where they are minorities. Liya (Leah) Sharibu, the only Christian among the kidnapped Dapchi schoolgirls, was held back by Boko Haram reportedly because she refused to be forcefully converted to Islam. A little girl is willing to pay the ultimate price for her faith. This is a country where Christians have reduced their faith to collecting anointing oil and anointed handkerchiefs for “miracles”. We are more fired up by prayers and testimonies over contracts, cars and mansions. Liya has thrown a challenge: there is something deeper worth living and dying for. Vanities.

DAPCHI DRAMA

There is so much scepticism about the Dapchi saga. Many critics think everything was a game: the conduct of security agencies prior to the abductions, the confident pronouncements of government officials that the girls would “soon” return because Buhari is better than Jonathan, the fact that Boko Haram never claimed responsibility or released videos as they normally do, the “triumphant” return ride given to the girls by Boko Haram, and the claim that no ransom was paid (not even “fuel money” for the long trip). Parents of the released girls wouldn’t bother about the scepticism anyway. Whatever, their daughters are back. My condolences go to the bereaved parents. Heartbreaking.

RELOOTING?

President Buhari must hear this! Any moment from now, the federal government will pay $16.9 million to two lawyers for their “services” in the imminent return of $321 million Abacha loot to Nigeria. What services? The loot was recovered from Luxemburg in 2014 through the services of a Swiss lawyer, Enrico Monfrini. He was fully paid for the job. The money was then domiciled with the Swiss attorney-general pending when Nigeria would sign an undertaking of “good behaviour” before its return to the country’s coffers. In 2016, the Nigerian attorney-general suddenly engaged new lawyers to do absolutely nothing — for a cool fee of N6 billion only. Nigeria!!!

PRIVATE POLICE

When the inspector-general of police announced the “immediate” withdrawal of police officers attached to VIPs (and their girlfriends, presumably), I laughed as if my favourite comedian, Okey Bakassi, was at full throttle. I must have heard the “immediate withdrawal” pronouncements at least a dozen times in the last 19 years. It is usually reversed. This time around, it took the IGP less than 24 hours to reverse the order (“for now,” he said — and that is what they usually say). In truth, Nigeria belongs to the elite. They own us. In case you don’t know, having a police orderly in Nigeria is not just a security measure; it is more of a status symbol. Twisted.

As the Nigerian legislature deliberates over a hate speech bill, a point to ponder is whether to go one step further and seek to abolish hate itself. Sure, this sounds whimsical. But, it isn’t. Well, at least not entirely. You see, to grapple with hate speech, we have to first grapple with hate. After all, the first springs from the latter. So, let’s give it a try, understanding hate, that is.

To begin with, everybody hates something or somebody some of the time. Some people hate something or somebody all of the time. And the hate can range from the harmless to the consequential.

People hate lawyers (but regularly retain them). Most people hate politicians (then turn around and prostrate before them). Politicians hate the press (but then hanker for its attention). Presidents are some of the most hated people in the world (as well as the most beloved and revered).

In this sense, we all — our legislators included — indulge in hate speech all of the time. In fact, we probably say “I hate…” more often than “I love….”

Of course, the legislators’ concern is with a different kind of hate speech, the vitriol directed by members of one ethnic group towards another. Yet, it is important to reflect on the continuum of hate to grapple with the challenge of criminalizing hate speech.

You see then that the lead statement about abolishing hate is not a whimsical jab at the Nigerian legislature. It is rather a way of drawing attention to the fact that hate will be expressed for as long as people hate. Hence, it might be more productive to focus on reducing the causes of hate than to criminalize hate speech — vulgar, misguided and subversive as it might be.

Psychologists broadly classify hate as having affective and cognitive basis, that is, prejudices and reason. “In general terms, (the causes) include culture and what it transmits to people, social conditions such as difficult life conditions and the processes they generate, group relations such as conflict, especially intractable conflict, and the personal experience of individuals and the orientation it creates to human beings in general, to the self, and to members of particular groups,” writes Professor Ervin Staub in summarising his chapter in the book, The Psychology of Hate.

One doesn’t have to think too hard to see how all of these factors apply to Nigeria. We all grew up with narratives about other ethnic groups, far and near.  And often these narratives reflect pejorative views of the other and superior notions of ourselves. Sometimes the narratives inhere in myths, things that might have never happened. Sometimes, they reflect actual events that took place in the distant or recent past, such as the Nigerian civil war.

Such experiences provide the context for interpreting and reacting to current events, such as the ongoing atrocities by ostensible herdsmen. They have probably generated more vitriol than anything else in our recent history.

Intentionally or unwittingly, political leaders are catalysts for hate. And no Nigerian leader has fit this bill more than President Muhammadu Buhari. By disregarding the fact that appointments to federal offices are the most tangible evidence of inclusiveness to Nigerians, he has stoked ethnic suspicion more than his recent predecessors combined.

Remarkably, the same thing is happening in the United States, where President Donald Trump’s divisive rhetoric and policies have taken racial animosity to the highest heights in recent American history.

So, what are the antidotes for hate? “They include … constructive fulfilment of basic human needs; humanizing the other and the experience of positive connections to people who belong to different groups,” writes Staub, an emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst.

Staub also recommends: “self-awareness both as an individual and as a group member, which among other benefits enables people to see the impact of their actions on others; and healing from past victimization and reconciliation between groups and individuals who have harmed each other.”

How about that for a challenge to Nigerian legislators?

Case for hate speech

In any case, is hate speech useful in some ways? I’d say yes. Winston Churchill, the World-War II era British prime minister, reputedly said at a White House meeting in 1954 that, “To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war.” He was making the case for patient dialogue with the Soviet Union, the West’s emerging communist nemesis in the years after World War II.

One could take his reasoning one step further to dealing with hate speech.Sure, there is danger when falsehood and incendiary claims are allowed full rein. But criminalizing them beyond existing laws against libel and incitation to violence carries even greater danger.

For one thing, there is the steam effect, the reality that pent-up anger will explode at some point. In contrast, expressing it freely might have a cathartic effect. Thus, social media might be serving as the psychologist’s couch, where people vent their frustrations, whether well-grounded or not.

Moreover, leaders are better off knowing the depth of anger out there, whether the anger is justified or not — whether the leaders are culpable or not. Else, they risk the fate of Queen Marie Antoinette of revolutionary-era France and long before her Emperor Nero of ancient Rome.

In sum, it is much more beneficial to try to combat hate than to criminalize hate speech.

Nigeria’s dwindling fortunes in oil palm production aptly capture the character of a country that has consistently and woefully failed the test of managing success. The same also applies, in a wider sense, to the neglect suffered by the agriculture sector, which once served as the mainstay of the country’s economy, but has been relegated to a mere sideshow, having been supplanted by oil and gas as the main revenue earner.

It is sad that a country that was once the world’s leading producer of palm oil has become a major importer of the same product. But because of the importance of palm oil in cooking and as an industrial raw material, the commodity continues to be in very high demand in Nigeria and beyond.  While the current domestic production stands at 970,000 metric tonnes per annum, the demand is put at 2.7 million metric tonnes yearly. This means that, despite the scarcity of foreign exchange, the country has to get the shortfall through import.

Available reports show that the country spent a whopping N116.3 billion importing about 450,000 tonnes of crude palm oil last year. From controlling the global market share of 43 per cent in the early 60s, Nigeria is now a bit part player, shamefully boasting just a paltry 2.9 per cent of global palm oil production. This is indefensible since she has the right weather and soil conditions suited to the growth of oil palm.

Regrettably, Indonesia, which was nowhere near Nigeria, is now the world’s largest producer of oil palm produce, followed by Malaysia, both in Asia. Now stuck in the fifth position, unable to produce anything close to the needed quantity to service domestic demand, let alone for export, Nigeria’s fortunes stand in sharp contrast to those of her Asian competitors. Also ahead of Nigeria are Thailand and Colombia.

Nigeria’s case has continued to defy logic. The country has woefully failed to take full advantage of the areas in which she has comparative advantage. The neglect of palm produce in Nigeria also brings to mind the fate suffered by other cash crops, which has made it difficult for the country to achieve her set target of diversifying the economy from the current oil-reliant status. This has always left the country stranded in event of the usual fluctuation in crude oil prices in the international market.

Prior to the discovery of petroleum in commercial quantity, Nigeria was a global power in cocoa cultivation and export, next only to Ghana. Today, Ivory Coast leads the world in cocoa production, followed by Indonesia, Brazil and Ghana. Nigeria languishes somewhere in the seventh position. The famous groundnuts pyramids have literally vanished from Kano, while the cultivation of cotton has been virtually abandoned, in the absence of a thriving local textile industry. Rubber is nowhere to be found. This is the tragedy of a nation that has chosen to depend solely on oil and gas.

But this is a trajectory that has to change. It is unfortunate that the Senate has had to go to the extreme of calling for the ban of further imports. Nonetheless, that cannot be the solution. When an essential commodity is in short supply, the solution is not to ban its import, but to encourage local production to meet demand. An outright ban now will only worsen the level of smuggling, which is already a very serious problem. Experts have reported that over 400,000 metric tonnes was smuggled into the country last year, leading to massive loss of revenues in duties and tax to the government. They also complain about the negative effect of smuggling on local production.

The government has to come up with an innovative policy to encourage a return to the farms to produce oil palm. Investors should be encouraged to take advantage of research findings of the Nigeria Institute for Oil Palm Research in Benin City to access improved high yielding seedlings to be able to cultivate oil palm at plantation level rather than the old methods of the past. There are already plantations in Imo, Cross River, Rivers and many other parts of the country.

Relegating palm oil to the background as a result of crude oil finds was a big mistake that will continue to haunt Nigeria. Apart from being a money spinner, cultivation and processing of oil palm create jobs on a far larger scale than the crude oil industry. Besides, while the gains derivable from oil and gas are finite, those from oil palm cultivation and processing are almost inexhaustible. New plantations of oil palm can be developed when the old ones die off, but when the crude oil wells dry up, that is the end.

A 2017 report in GlobeAsia, an Indonesian business magazine, quoting the chairman of Indonesian Palm Oil Association, Joko Supriyono, said about 50 million Indonesians build their lives around palm oil and its derivatives, either directly or indirectly. Indonesia’s Cargill, a top palm oil firm, had $107 billion revenue in 2016. These are some of the reasons why our government should take special interest in the oil palm industry, just as it is now doing with rice. Special grants should be provided and, in a matter of less than 10 years, Nigeria could become a world leader once again.

Punch

Dateline: May 29, 2015.

After another valiant and probably final attempt to become Nigeria’s president, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (Rtd.) has fallen short yet again. Nigerians have for the fourth time in a row refused to give the Daura-born septuagenarian and former military Head of State the opportunity he desperately craves to lead the country. We take a detailed look at Muhammadu Buhari, the soldier turned democrat who promised to bring change to Nigeria. We shall examine his plans to transform Nigeria and the opportunities the country might have missed by not granting his seeming altruistic, persistent and patriotic desire to lead the largest black country on earth to the Promised Land.

BUHARI HAD PLANNED TO REVIVE NIGERIA’S ECONOMY
In the next few years, Nigerians may wish they had given Muhammadu Buhari the opportunity he begged for to make the country’s economy the fastest-growing economy in the world with a real GDP growth averaging more than 10% annually. He had laid out a concrete plan to create three million jobs per year and to ensure that 720,000 jobs are created by the 36 states in the federation per annum (20,000 per state).

Buhari swore that all the refineries in the country would be fixed within two years. This would drastically reduce fuel importation, ending the much-abused and corruption-ridden fuel subsidy regime and most importantly, Nigerians would never experience scarcity of petroleum products ever again.

The plan to create additional middle-class of at least two million new home owners in his first year in government and one million annually thereafter would have quelled brain drain. Furthermore, his well-articulated proposal to create an additional middle class of at least 4 million new home owners by enacting national mortgage single digit interest rates for purchase of owner occupier houses as well as reviewing the collateral qualification to make funding for home ownership easier, with 15 to 30 year mortgage terms would have seen many Nigerians in the diaspora returning back home in millions to enjoy better life in the fatherland.

Buhari loves Naira, the much-abused national currency so much. It should be recalled that during his previous stint as Head of State, he broke ties with the International Monetary Fund, when the fund asked the government to devalue the naira by 60%. That is the reason why his promise to make the naira equal to the dollar should have been taken seriously by Nigerian voters. Can you imagine exchanging N1000 for $1000? Did Nigerians just shoot themselves in the foot?

BUHARI WOULD HAVE BROUGHT BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL NIGERIANS
In the years to come, political philosophers will continue the debate on why Nigerians rejected Buhari, thereby surrendering an opportunity for a better country and a better life for all and sundry. A look at Buhari’s patriotic plans for the country would reveal a man who is keen on seeing that the common man enjoys far better quality of life than is obtainable at the moment. Buhari has planned:
At least one functioning airport in each of the 36 states.
The reduction of the infant mortality rate to 3%.
Reducing maternal mortality by more than 70%.
Reducing HIV/AIDS infection rate by 50% and other infectious diseases by 75%.
Increasing the number of physicians from 19 per 1000 population to 50 per 1000.
Free Education at primary, secondary and tertiary institutions for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) and Education.
Improving life expectancy by additional 10 years on average.

The import of the last point is that for all Nigerians who would die this year, under a Buhari administration, they would have lived for additional ten years!

A man who understands the healthcare needs of the country, Buhari had assured that he would increase the quality of all federal government-owned hospitals to world class standard within three years and would impose a ban on all government officials from seeking medical care abroad. This means that the millions of dollars currently being spent yearly by government officials in medical tourism would have become a thing of the past.

BUHARI WOULD HAVE ENSURED EQUITY AND FAIRNESS FOR ALL NIGERIANS
It is unfortunate that unfounded allegations of autocracy, nepotism and religious irredentism were used by Buhari’s detractors to impugn his reputation and turn the mind of many voters against him. But a look at Buhari’s plan for transforming Nigeria would reveal a genuine strategy to eradicate state of origin, replacing that with state of residence to ensure Nigerians are Nigerians first, before anything else. He also planned to initiate action to amend the Nigerian Constitution with a view to devolving powers, duties, and responsibilities to states in order to entrench true Federalism and the Federal spirit. These plans are anything but autocratic or sectional.

Added to these, there have been some reported skirmishes between some Fulani herdsmen and farmers in some parts of the country leading to the death of some Nigerians. As one of the prominent Fulanis in Nigeria and also the owner of a herd of cattle, as president, Buhari would have used his power and influence to bring such clashes to an end.

BUHARI WOULD HAVE CRUSHED THE BOKO HARAM INSURGENTS
An incident that was not given prominence in the context of the current Boko Haram insurgency was that in 1983, when Chadian forces invaded Nigeria in the Borno State, Buhari used the forces under his command to chase them out of the country. This shows that the former Head of State does not compromise with the territorial integrity of Nigeria. It is also on record that Buhari was not just an armchair general. He was actively involved in a previous battle to preserve Nigeria’s territorial integrity, participating actively in Afikpo, Ogoja, Enugu, Awka, Abagana and Oji River during the Nigerian Civil War.

So it goes without saying that with Buhari at the helm of affairs of the country, he would never allow an inch of Nigeria’s territory to be controlled by the Boko Haram terrorists and the insurgency would come to a quick end. Another motivating factor for Buhari would be the July 2014 bomb attack on his life by Boko Haram in Kaduna in which 82 people were killed. Buhari would have no mercy on those that wanted him dead.

Also Buhari was once the governor of the defunct North East State, an area that today comprises the following states – Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Taraba, Gombe and Bauchi. Among these states are all the epicentres of the Boko Haram insurgency so he naturally understands these terrain and it would make it easier for him to crush the insurgents for good.

Added to these, it is unthinkable that the Chibokgirls abduction, which has made Nigeria a laughing stock in the comity of nations, would have happened under a Buhari administration. No leader with such military experience as Buhari can ever allow terrorists to kidnap innocent school girls under his watch.

BUHARI IS A SELF-MADE MAN OF UNQUESTIONABLE INTEGRITY
Muhammadu Buhari is a self-made man. He lost his father at the tender age of four and was one of 23 bereaved children. In spite of this apparent challenge, he dared the odds to rise to zenith of his chosen career. This latest failed bid to rule Nigeria cannot diminish his standing as one of the greatest Nigerians ever.

For someone who has been petroleum minister, head of state, and chairman of Petroleum Trust Fund, the latter which was described by former president Olusegun Obasanjo as a parallel government, neither Buhari nor any of his family members is known to own any choice property in any of the major cities in the country. None of them is also known to own substantial shares in any major company in Nigeria.

Buhari would never compromise on his principles and has been consistent in his opposition to the ruling PDP. Even when his fellow ANPP party members agreed to join Yar’Adua’s government, Buhari stood firm and alone in the face of a monumental betrayal. He did make a solemn promise to amend the Constitution to remove immunity from prosecution for elected officers in criminal cases and would have publicly declared his assets within 100 days of being sworn in as president.

Now Nigeria may have lost the opportunity of giving the reins of power to an upright man, a man different from the rest of the Nigerian political class who use every opportunity to plunder our collective patrimony. Nigerians may forever regret a missed opportunity to have a leader with a track record of honesty and forthrightness who would curb most of the country’s ills.

BUHARI WOULD HAVE ENSURED A MOST PEACEFUL AND CRIME-FREE NIGERIA
The former Head of State was so concerned about the wellbeing of Nigerians that prominent amongst his strategies for transforming the country was state and community policing, establishment of Crime Squad to combat terrorism, kidnapping, armed robbery, militants, ethno-religious and communal clashes nationwide, establishing a conflict resolution commission to help prevent, mitigate and resolve civil conflicts within the polity and ensuring permanent peace in the Niger Delta and other conflict prone areas such as Plateau, Taraba, Bauchi, Borno and Abia.

These well-articulated but now stillborn proposals would have made Nigeria the most peaceful country in sub-Saharan Africa, if not the world.

BUHARI’S POLITICAL PARTY IS THE REAL DEAL
The All Progressive Congress (APC), under whose platform Buhari ran for president is not like any other political party Nigerians have ever seen. It is populated mostly by those who have maintained a consistent opposition to the 16-year maladministration of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) as well as former members of the PDP who left the party when they realised that their principles and integrity were being tarnished by association.

The APC manifesto is so comprehensive and superb that no kind of summary can ever do justice to it. The contents of this extraordinary but ultimately stillborn document would be a permanent scar on the psyche of Nigerians for decades and maybe centuries to come.

BUHARI’S REJECTION MAY LEAVE NIGERIANS WITH DEEP REGRETS
The noble intentions of Muhammadu Buhari for Nigeria are too numerous to mention. He promised to abolish the annoying Office of the First Lady. This means that his wife, Aisha Buhari, would have neither an office nor aids and would hardly engage in any official function. This would lead to elimination of unnecessary waste of public funds on an office not recognised by the constitution. Some analysts believe that had he been given the mandate to be president, many Nigerians would struggle to remember the name of the wife of the president after one year in office.

However, all these have become aborted dreams as millions of Nigerians have conspired to ensure that the gallant and tenacious desire of Muhammadu Buhari to become Nigeria’s democratically elected president never came to fruition. In the process, they may have foolishly denied themselves the promise of a better life and the realistic prospect of a united, peaceful and prosperous country.

Buhari may shed tears, maybe more tears than he shed the last time he failed in an attempt to lead Nigeria. However, he should be consoled that when the time comes, there would be no better message engraved on his tombstone than: Here lies Muhammadu Buhari – the best democratically-elected president Nigeria never had.

Mayor Ikoroha is an author and public affairs analyst. He is on Twitter as @tellthemayor