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

Your Excellency Muhamadu Buhari, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;

Professor Yemi Osinbajo, Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;

Senator Bukola Saraki, Senate President;

Honorable Yakubu Dogara, Speaker of the House;

Your Excellencies, executive governors of the Federal Republic of Nigeria;

Royal fathers;

Distinguished ladies and gentlemen.

And as you say in Nigeria, all other protocols observed. Thank you for welcoming me to Nigeria.

I've been coming here regularly since 2006, and I've always felt welcome. Nigerians usually greet me warmly. The first time I met the Sultan of Sokoto, I was honored that he greeted me with the gift of a white horse.

At some point during every visit, though, some brave person eventually asks me—very politely—"Why are you actually here?" It's an understandable question. Most American technology guys don't wander around Nigeria learning about its health system. But I think I have a good answer.

When we started Microsoft 40 years ago, we wanted to build a successful business, but we also wanted to make people's lives better. We believed computers could revolutionize the way people lived and worked. But back then only big companies could afford them. We wanted to give everybody access.

As I got older, traveled more, and learned more about the world, I realized that billions of people had a problem that computers couldn't solve. They lacked the basics of a good life: food, shelter, health, education, and opportunity.

And so I started my second career with my wife Melinda. With the money I'd been lucky enough to earn at Microsoft, we started working toward a different goal: a healthy and productive life for everyone.

That's why I come to Nigeria, and that's why Melinda and I will continue coming for as long as we are able. Our foundation's biggest office in Africa is here. We have committed over $1.6 billion in Nigeria so far, and we plan to increase our commitment. We have strong relationships with the federal government, state governments, businesses, NGOs, and civil society organizations. We are eager to support you as you work to make Nigeria a global economic powerhouse that provides opportunity for all its citizens—as you strive to fulfill this country's immense promise.

I'm blown away by how much Nigeria has changed in the past decade.

Consider the technology sector. That energy I talked about during the early days of Microsoft, our passion and our eagerness to take risks…. That's the same energy that powers technology hubs across Nigeria like Co-Creation and Enspire.

The novelist Chimamanda Adichie, who my wife especially admires, captured the country's spirit when she said her fellow Nigerians have "big dreams and big ambitions."

This line graph of Nigeria's per capita GDP shows where those dreams and ambitions can lead. With the exception of the recent recession, the slope goes straight up. As a result of this growth, Nigeria is now the biggest economy on the continent. You are rapidly approaching upper middle income status, like Brazil, China, and Mexico.

But growth is not inevitable. Nigeria has unmatched economic potential, but what becomes of that potential depends on the choices you make as Nigeria's leaders.

The most important choice you can make is to maximize your greatest resource, the Nigerian people. Nigeria will thrive when every Nigerian is able to thrive.

If you invest in their health, education, and opportunities—the "human capital" we are talking about today—then they will lay the foundation for sustained prosperity. If you don't, however, then it is very important to recognize that there will be a sharp limit on how much the country can grow.

You see this risk in the data. From the point of view of the quality of life, much of Nigeria still looks like a low-income country.

Let me give a few examples.

In upper middle income countries, the average life expectancy is 75 years. In lower middle income countries, it's 68. In low income countries, it's 62. In Nigeria, it is lower still: just 53 years.Nigeria is one of the most dangerous places in the world to give birth, with the fourth worst maternal mortality rate in the world, ahead of only Sierra Leone, Central African Republic, and Chad.One in three Nigerian children is chronically malnourished.

I do not enjoy speaking to you this bluntly when you have been gracious enough to invite me here. But I am applying an important lesson I learned from Alhaji Aliko Dangote. Recently, Aliko and I were having a conversation with several governors about their states' official immunization rates. Aliko's way of stressing the importance of accurate data was to tell us, "I didn't get rich by pretending to sell bags of cement I didn't have." I took from that that while it may be easier to be polite, it's more important to face facts so that you can make progress.

On immunization, you are already living that lesson: last year Nigeria revised its immunization coverage numbers downward to reflect more accurate sources, and I applaud you for those lower numbers. They may look worse, but they are more real, which is the first step toward saving and improving more lives.

I urge you to apply this thinking to all your investments in your people. The Nigerian government's Economic Recovery and Growth Plan identifies "investing in our people" as one of three "strategic objectives." But the "execution priorities" don't fully reflect people's needs, prioritizing physical capital over human capital.

To anchor the economy over the long term, investments in infrastructure and competitiveness must go hand in hand with investments in people. People without roads, ports, and factories can't flourish. And roads, ports, and factories without skilled workers to build and manage them can't sustain an economy.

In preparation for my visit, I asked a research institute at the University of Washington to model Nigeria's economic growth under three scenarios related to health and education, the core of how economists define human capital.

Here you can see Nigeria's per capita GDP growth from 2000 until today. If current education and health trends continue—if you spend the same amount in these areas and get the same results—per capita GDP flatlines, with economic growth just barely keeping up with population growth.



If things get worse, it will decline. Unfortunately, this scenario is a very real possibility unless you intervene at both the federal and state levels. Because even in the worst-case scenario, your national income level is about to make you ineligible for certain kinds of development assistance and loans that you've been relying on to fund your health system and other priorities. Without more and better spent domestic money, investment in your people will decline by default as donor money shrinks—a lose-lose scenario for everyone.

However, if you commit to getting better results in health and education—if you spend more and more effectively—per capita GDP will stay on its remarkable pre-recession trajectory.

This is the scenario we all want: Nigeria thrives because every Nigerian is able to thrive.

And the data makes it clear that this scenario is entirely within your reach.

What do I mean by investing in your people? I mean prioritizing health and education, the factors included in the model I just showed you. I also mean continuing to open up opportunities in the agriculture and microenterprise sectors, as the government has proposed in the ERGP. I mean creating the conditions where Nigerians can reach their goals while adding value to the economy—the win-win scenario.

Our foundation doesn't invest directly in education here, but the World Bank World Development Report that just came out makes it clear that education leads to improvements in employment, productivity, and wages.

Today, though, more than half of rural Nigerian children can't read and write.

The conclusion is inescapable: Nigeria's economy tomorrow depends on improving its schools today.

The same is true of health, our foundation's primary focus area.

In 1978, Dr. Olikoye Ransome-Kuti, who later became the Nigerian minister of health, helped establish primary health care as the global standard. We now know that a strong primary care system takes care of 90 percent of people's health needs.

Tragically, 40 years after Dr. Ransome-Kuti helped other countries set a course for the future, the Nigerian primary health care system is broken.

The evidence for this can be found in the epidemic of chronic malnutrition, or stunting. As the name suggests, chronic malnutrition is not a disease children catch. It is a condition that develops over time because they are deprived of a diverse diet and the services a strong primary health care system provides.

The consequences of stunting are devastating. Though stunted children are defined as shorter than average, we're not particularly concerned about their height. What we're concerned about is their brains, or what Akin Adesina calls "gray matter infrastructure."

This is a picture of the brain of a single normally developing infant. And next to it is a picture of the brain of a single chronically malnourished infant. Every brain and every child are different, but you can clearly see the difference in the number of neural connections in these two brains. And once this kind of damage is done, it's very hard to repair.

In Nigeria, one in three children is chronically malnourished and could therefore be at risk. This is a tragedy for each one of these children; it is also a huge blow to the economy. According to the World Bank, addressing the stunting crisis in Nigeria would add almost $30 billion to the GDP.

So what will it take to solve stunting? It will take a focus on agricultural development, nutrition, and primary health care.

A functioning primary health system has six features.

Adequate funding.Good facilities located in the right places.Skilled and dedicated health workers.Ample stocks of essential equipment and medicines.Patients who know about the system and want to use it.And a mechanism for collecting the data needed to improve quality.

I believe the Nigerian primary health care system is not adequately funded. But it also doesn't get the most out of its current funding. I want to re-emphasize that last point about data. More transparency would lead to more accountability, which would strengthen governance, leadership, and management, which would improve quality across the board.

I visited a health clinic in Bodinga LGA in Sokoto yesterday, and it reminded me why I do this work. I'd like to ask all of you to spend one hour at a health center in the next month. I think you'll see how the system can be improved—and how much good it will do when it is.

I know Nigeria can build up its primary care system, because I've seen what you accomplish when you meet health challenges head on.

As many of you know, we've been very close partners in your fight against polio.

As you can see on this graph, the hard work of hundreds of thousands of local leaders and health workers since the turn of the millennium has paid off. Nigeria has not had a case of wild polio virus in more than a year.

But the graph also shows that you've reported zero cases before, only to learn that the disease was still circulating in tiny pockets hidden by insecurity. It would be catastrophic to let your guard down when you're on the verge of eliminating the disease once and for all.

I believe—because I have seen your work in the field as recently as yesterday—that you will do what it takes to end polio in Nigeria. We will be here, working side by side with you, until you do.

Though health is our foundation's primary area of expertise, it's not the only thing we do, and it's not the only thing I mean when I say Nigeria should invest in its people. Healthy people need opportunities to thrive.

One of the most important of these opportunities is agriculture, the sector that nourishes most Nigerians and supports half the population, especially the poorest.

The agricultural sector is a pillar of the Nigerian economy. It accounts for a large proportion of your GDP, and during the oil price collapse and recession, it helped cushion the economy. But it still has a lot of potential to grow.

The majority of Nigerian smallholder farmers lack access to the seeds, fertilizer, and training they need to be more productive, and they lack access to the markets they need to profit from their labor.

The government has taken important steps to fill these gaps, with both more investment and a series of smart policies to encourage private sector investment.

These reforms lay the foundation for a booming agricultural sector that feeds the country, helps end chronic malnutrition, and lifts up tens of millions of smallholder farmers. I urge you to build on this good work.

One of the barriers that continues to prevent smallholders from thriving is their lack of access to finance. Like good roads, finance connects farmers to opportunity, yet only 4 percent of Nigerian farmers currently have a loan to grow their business.

In a country where three quarters of people have mobile phones, digital financial services provide a solution to this problem. In fact, digital finance offers the potential to boost the economy from top to bottom.

Right now, more than 50 million Nigerian adults are at the whim of chance and the informal economy. With access to digital financial tools, they can cope better with disasters that threaten to wipe them out, build assets and a credit history, and gradually lift themselves out of poverty.

Consider the impact this would have on businesses. Of the 37 million micro, small, and medium enterprises in Nigeria, more than 99 percent are micro. Their lack of access to finance is a leading reason why these businesses can't grow. With digital payments, savings, and credit, they will finally have the resources to plan for the future.

According to the best estimates, digital financial services will create a 12.4 percent increase in Nigeria's GDP by 2025. Meanwhile, oil accounts for about 10 percent of Nigeria's GDP. Imagine adding another oil sector and then some to the economy, but one whose benefits spread far and wide and reach almost every single Nigerian.

There is another benefit to digital financial services that will make everything I'm urging you to do much easier: it will vastly improve the government's ability to tax and spend efficiently.

Let me pause for a moment to say, I am confident that one thing you've been thinking as I've been talking is that, while you would like to spend more on health and nutrition and education and agriculture, you don't have the money to do everything. I appreciate the fact that what you can spend is a function of what you raise.

Nigeria's government revenue as a percentage of its GDP is by far the lowest in the world, at 6 percent. That makes investing in your people difficult. The next lowest country, Bangladesh, collects 10 percent of its GDP. If you got yourself up to second-to-last in the world, you would have an extra $18 billion to budget. Obviously, you're aiming higher than that, but it gives you some idea about the scale we're talking about.

We want to support you in your work to mobilize more resources to invest in your country. That's why our foundation is working with the Nigeria Governors' Forum to help states track internally generated revenue.

Ultimately, raising revenue to invest in growth will require delivering on the government's commitments to the Nigerian people, and convincing them that they will get a return on their taxes.

Right now, Nigeria's fiscal situation is at what you might call a low equilibrium. In return for low levels of service, people pay low levels of tax. We hope to help you reach a higher equilibrium rooted in effective and transparent investments in people. This equilibrium would trigger a virtuous cycle.

More government revenue would lead to more money to spend on health and education. Better health and education, and investment in sectors like agriculture, would lead to more productive farms and factories. More productive farms would lead to more prosperous farmers who could expand their farms or invest in other businesses, especially if they had access to credit and other financial tools. These thriving farms, factories, and new businesses would lead to more government revenue. And the cycle would start again.

Triggering that cycle will require bolder action—action you have the power to take as leaders, governors, and ministers focused on Nigeria's future.

CONCLUSION

Nigerians are known around the world for their big dreams and big ambitions.

Together with the Dangote Foundation, we will be here to help you achieve your dreams and ambitions. You have the support of the international community. The Nigerian private sector will continue to invest. We are eager to help, but we know we can't lead. You must lead.

I believe in the grand vision of Nigeria's future. I believe in it because I've seen it. It's represented by this line—the line that depends on healthy, educated people and the surge of economic activity they will unleash.

And that means that the future depends on all of you—and your leadership in the years to come.

Thank you.

In the past stories on National Development Plans dominated the headlines especially in the early seventies.

Professor Adebayo Adedeji (87) under General Yakubu Gowon was the founder and Chairman of the National Youth Service Scheme. He also the drafted the treaty of the ECOWAS which was established in May 1975 after over three years of arduous negotiations with sixteen governments and countries divided into Anglophone, Francophone and Lusophone spheres of influence.

But years ago, he was more known as PROFESSOR OF NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, for he was the Architect of the economic development and reconstruction of post-civil war Nigeria when he drafted the second and third Development plans with inputs from brilliant technocrats’ years ago.

The first Nigerian National Development Plan was launched in 1962 with six-year target that envisaged the spending of about$1,900,000,000 on development and productivity enhancing projects. The plan was prepared by the Minister of Economic Development, Alhaji Shehu Usman Aliyu Shagari (93) in concert with United Nations and Ford Foundation experts including the late Economist Wolfgang Stolper.

Actually the preamble for the first development plan in Nigeria was formulated in 1945 as a result of the British government initiative for the promotion of economic and social advancement of the colonies stemming from the 1940 Colonial Development and Welfare Act. The plan made provision for the capital expenditure of a total of 55million pounds of which the British government provided 23million pounds.

After the civil war thanks to Chief Obafemi Awolowo (1909-1987) as Minister of Finance and his successor, Alhaji Shehu Shagari, Nigeria economy rose rapidly. The “Super Permanent Secretaries” at that time impressed on General Yakubu to save for the raining day by launching the Second National Development Plan.

He then tapped on Professor Adebayo Adedeji to serve as Minister for National Planning and Reconstruction. Professor Adedeji had just graduated from Harvard University and who at the age of 36 had become a full-fledged Professor at the University of Ife now Obafemi Awolowo University, OAU. In addition, General Gowon brought brilliant Economists from the civil service to help Professor Adedeji in engineering the second National Development Plan. General Gowon created a Central Planning Office (CPO) between the nineteen and twenty- second floors in the now abandoned Independence building at the Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), Lagos. The office was headed by Chief Gilbert Prince Obiajulu Chikelu, who was then, a director in the Ministry of Statistics.

Other members of that planning office included Chief Olu Falae, Chief John Oyegun, Dr. S.O. Omobomi, Joseph Oyewole Okunfulire, Mr. Boye Ilori, Mr. Peter Aliu, Mr Funso Adetiba, Chief Ayo, C. Olumese, G.C. Ndagoba, Mr. A. Ajijo, Chief Femi Akande, Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Remi Olowude, Chief J.B. Ilori, Otunba Gbenga Tiamiyu, and Chief John D. Edozien while the permanent Secretary then was Chief Ime Ebong. The deputy was Chief N. Okubadejo from Ijebu-Ode.

While Chief Chikelu was the Director Planning, he had three people who were working directly with him. They were Chief Samuel Oluyemi Falae, who later became the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Chief John Evboyomwan Kenneth Oyegun, who later renamed himself Chief John Odigie Oyegun when he became the Governor of Edo state and Chief Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, the Okwadike who later became Governor of Anambra state. Chief Oyegun became Permanent Secretary at the age of 36 before Chief Falae and Chief Ezeife. Following protest, Chief Falae finally became Permanent Secretary while Chief Ezeife who, because of the Civil War was a Senior Lecturer at the Makerere University, Kampala in Uganda came back to be Permanent Secretary in 1982 in the Ministry of Labour and Productivity and later Permanent Secretary, Nigerian Enterprises and Promotion Board.

The nation owes these officers a debt of gratitude.

The Third National Development Plan which commenced on the 1st April, 1975 and was due to end on the 31st March, 1980 but was extended by nine months to give the various civilian state governments more time within which to prepare their programmes of activities for the Fourth Plan period.

Many projects commenced during the Second Plan were completed in the Third Plan period and reasonable progresses towards implementation of new ones were made. Example of such projects include the cement works at Calabar, Ukpilla, Nkalagu, Shagamu, Yandev and Ashaka; the pulp and paper projects at Jebba, Calabar and Iwopin---four commercial vehicle assembly plants, two passenger car assembly plants; two petroleum refineries at Warri and Kaduna; two iron and steel plants at Ajaokuta and Aladja; and three steel rolling mills at Katsina, Jos and Oshogbo. Impressive achievements were also recorded in the transport sector. Over 10,000 kilometres of roads were built or rehabilitated, and among these were expressways such as the Lagos-Ibadan, the Lagos-Badagry, the Enugu-Port Harcourt and the Benin-Shagamu Expressways. New Airports were built in most of the State Capitals, a New International Airport was built in Lagos, and new sea ports were developed in Lagos, Warri, Calabar and Port Harcourt. 

The fourth and last development was launched by President Shehu Shagari on January 12, 1981 at the National Assembly then in Lagos, presided over by the then Senate President, Dr. Joseph Wayas. He told the nation on that day that,” the Fourth Plan is being launched at a time when the country’s production of crude oil, which is the main source of government revenue and foreign exchange earnings, has virtually stabilized. A basic strategy of the Fourth Plan would therefore be the promotion of optimal utilization of resources. Oil is a wasting asset. The resources generated from this sector must therefore be used to promote all round expansion in the productive capacity of the economy so as to ensure self-sustaining growth in the shortest possible time”.

When the Military came to power they jettisoned the idea of development plans and replaced it with rolling plans.

But these days we don’t hear much of any development plan. We are bedeviled with internal security and insurgency to the extent that Nigeria has the highest number of displaced persons in Africa. I guess the only development plan we have now is the National Assembly that consume 30 to 35% of our capital votes. Something is wrong with our system.

At an apparently belated visit to the herdsmen-ravaged Benue State on March 12, President Muhammadu Buhari openly admitted that he was not aware that the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Mr. Ibrahim Idris, did not comply with his order to relocate to the state in January after the dastardly killing of 73 people by the herders. During a meeting of stakeholders in Makurdi, the state capital, Buhari said that he was surprised at the flouting of his earlier order. He said:  “I’m not aware that the IGP did not spend 24 hours in the state as directed by me, I am getting to know in this meeting.” The president had been told that Idris did not spend up to 24 hours in Benue State after the presidential directive.

It would appear that the president visited Benue, Taraba and Plateau states only after the barrage of attacks on him for keeping silent in the face of the calamities that befell the people whom he swore to protect. The open admission also gave Nigerians cause for worry because, during his visit to Taraba State where he said that the number of those killed in the state was far higher than the number of those killed in Benue and Plateau states, he had claimed that he did not have to jump up and down at every calamity since he had enough security briefings about occurrences in the country. So, how come he was unaware of the IGP’s conduct in Benue?

The president’s statement on the IGP is indeed very worrisome. For one thing, it suggests that there are strategic things that go on in the Presidency that he ostensibly doesn’t know about. The open admission also suggests that some other persons control the levers of the Presidency. This confirms the uproar about one and a half years ago on the existence of some cabals in the Presidency which take decisions on critical national issues. The danger in this is that, since these anonymous decision-makers are not answerable to the people, they have no moral responsibility to factor them into their actions.

The issue of which election comes first in the 2019 general elections has dominated national discourse for some time now. While the National Assembly has passed a bill that put the National Assembly poll first and presidential election last and sent to President Muhammadu Buhari for his assent, the President has refused assenting to the bill citing among other reasons, conflict of laws.

The President’s argument is that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is the only body charged by our extant laws to fix timetable and sequence of elections in the country.

In other words, Buhari is saying that the lawmakers have no right to determine the order of elections. But the lawmakers are insisting, that the National Assembly is by law allowed to fix the order or sequence of elections while the electoral umpire fixes the timetable.

My question is what is the difference between election timetable and order of election? I am not a lawyer but I believe that somebody who fixes the timetable for an election should be the one to determine which of the elections comes first as they do in WAEC and NECO examinations.

Since Buhari returned the bill to the National Assembly, they have or are still deliberating on how best to react to the problem at hand. While there are strong indications that the National lawmakers might override the President on this issue, speculations are also rife that both the presidency and the lawmakers might reach for a political solution. If this fails, they may go to the courts to seek for interpretations of existing laws on election sequence and who fixes it between the National Assembly and INEC.

While we wait how the politics of election sequence plays out, it is germane to offer some of my thoughts on the raging matter. Those opposed to having the presidential election first are of the view that having presidential poll first will naturally produce a bandwagon effect for any party that wins it. What is exactly bandwagon effect? How does it operate? Is it logical and scientific or a mere guess work? Has it been proven that it works? We need urgent answers to these probing posers.

Essentially, the kernel of the argument is that if the All Progressives Congress (APC) wins the presidential poll, Nigerians will align with the winning party and such will affect the outcome of the poll. They may have a point here. In Nigeria, winners of elections have relations and friends while losers are treated as orphans. But have the proponents of this bandwagon thesis forgotten that in 2015 the presidential election was held first yet an opposition party came from nowhere and defeated the incumbent president, the first time in Nigeria’s electoral history? Did Buhari’s victory in the 2015 poll have a bandwagon effect on the other remaining polls?

I think that the answer is capital NO. If the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) could not have the bandwagon effect then, how come the ruling party now will have it in 2019? If the argument that any election that held first will have a bandwagon effect, it then means that to avoid the bandwagon effect, let’s conduct the entire elections in one day. That method will invariably kill and eliminate the bandwagon effect.

Is INEC prepared to have the entire elections in one day? I do not think so. The logistic problems will be so daunting that they will mar the polls. The logistic problem is the major headache that the electoral umpire will face if it conducts all elections in one day. If INEC cannot conduct the entire polls in one day, we should then forget this unnecessary argument over the order of elections and face other pressing issues.

The problem in Nigeria today goes beyond the sequence of a general election. The bandwagon argument is absolute bunkum. It is not worth the time and energy dissipated on it at the moment. The bandwagon effect does not exist in reality. It only exists in the figment of some people’s imagination. It is neither here nor there. What determines who wins election in Nigeria is far beyond which election comes first or not.

By not assenting to the bill, Buhari is indirectly insisting that the presidential poll should come first as it was in 2015. Although Buhari has not indicated interest in the poll, his body language suggests otherwise. I do not know if Buhari is afraid of losing the poll if the presidential poll comes last. But if I were Buhari, I would have assented to the election re-ordering bill and damn the consequences

That would have endeared him more to many voters. His refusal to do so is casting doubts and suspicion on how the 2019 exercise will look like. And to add drama to the unfolding episode, INEC hurriedly released election sequence and timetable for the next 35 or so years. The umpire’s action is within the realm of the drama of the absurd. Why fix election timetable and sequence for a period of 35 years? What Nigerians should be more concerned about is making our electoral processes more reliable and credible.

An average election loser in Nigeria believes that he is rigged out while the winner praises the impartiality of the umpire to high heavens. In fact, some candidates had been rigged-out by those with connections and big pockets. Most Nigerians believe that their votes don’t usually count. They believe that the results are already made before the voting starts. Instead of rushing to fix election timetable for 35 years, INEC must map out strategies to make the 2019 polls free, fair and credible.

That is where the problem lies and not the order of the polls. A situation where the outcomes of many elections are determined at the tribunals does not send a good signal of our electoral process. Instead of the current verbal war over election sequence, let’s work towards making our elections more credible, believable and acceptable. If we can get free and fair poll from INEC, the sequence of the poll will be immaterial and of no effect whatsoever.

One of God’s blessings on Africa is the richness of our sayings. Here in Nigeria, specifically, South West, against lower standard or gross misconduct, a culprit is admonished to copy the nearest shining example like a better gifted dancer in a gathering. It is the most refined form of rebuke. Underlining that stricture are the best intentions, wish or at least hope for an inevitable change, especially as events in various spheres contrast to Nigeria’s.

Six months ago, German Chancellor, Angela Merkel,  emerged from general elections  with a new mandate but not comfortable enough  to go it alone in case of economic imperatives for Europe’s strongest economy and one of the strongest in the world. Since that time, Chancellor Merkel had been negotiating for a coalition government with the various minority parties, a common feature when necessary after elections in that country. From the first few weeks to many months, the seeming outgoing administration kept negotiating for a new coalition. The civilised features of the six-month search for a coalition government in Germany should be a shining example for Nigeria. Throughout, the smooth political atmosphere was never disrupted by hustlers in the system parading as leaders.

Of course, there were wheeling and dealing. But uppermost on all sides were strictly national interests and the welfare of ordinary German citizens who voted for the near-stalemate. While negotiations lasted for six months, none of the seven active political parties, including the maverick Greens, undermined another or sold out the people’s mandate for convenient self-serving political purposes. Chancellor Merkel in particular never encouraged criminal carpet-crossers from rival parties in a do-or-die affair, to remain in government after three terms of four years each. In return for that admirable statesman-like gesture, all members of her ruling party never plotted overnight against her while rival opposition parties never attempted to subvert the people’s mandate. After successfully concluding negotiations for a new coalition government, Merkel remains the Chancellor (equivalent of Prime Minister) .

Herein lies the lesson for Nigeria where, should the country, under parliamentary system, face the near-stalemate as was in Germany, any corrupt tactics, carpet-crossing through group ethnic/religious solidarity, money influence or ministerial offers, would have been employed either within the ruling party or opposition party,  a form of corruption that has been institutionalised in this country. For the avoidance of doubt, the six months it took President Buhari to compile his ministers must not be compared to Chancellor Merkel’s six months in search of a coalition government. Under a presidential system, there was never any threat to Buhari’s mandate.

As a sovereign nation, South Africa is unique in partcular standard. Before majority rule, apartheid system operated during which, no matter how distasteful, the ruling white settlers set some standard among which was transparent governance, such that at the collapse of the apartheid system, political leadership fell on a rare human being, Nelson Mandela. Not only did the man maintain but he also improved on the integrity on governance, a legacy he inherited. For a man who spent 27 years in jail in pursuit of majority rule, it was remarkable that Mandela was in office for only one term of four years before voluntarily quitting office into retirement. That distinction throughout his tenure and the rest of his life could ideally have been trans formed into some national ideology. Only two administrations after Mandela (less than 16 years later), Mandela’s legacy  has been rubbished.

President Jacob Zuma, one of Mandela’s successors, was not only humiliated out of office but has also been slated for criminal trial on allegations of large-scale corruption during his tenure, a rare punitive measure in Africa, since such leaders perpetuate themselves in office. A lesson for Nigerians, especially notorious state governors whose sole aim is to be elected and make their billions. Remarkably, heads of government in South Africa don’t enjoy immunity under the constitution. Not helping matters is the complicit Nigerian judiciary, whose members, through lawyers as conduit pipes, routinely amass wealth and property. The supposed major financial crime prosecuting authority in Nigeria seems to deliberately misperform in its duties by leaving escape routes for otherwise big convicts to escape through technical points under the law.

Way back in 2007 and unknown to the French, the then President Nicholas Sarkozy, much against election rules, allegedly collected foreign funds from Libya’s Muamar Gadaffi, who, after ruling for 42 ears consecutively, presided over his country’s billions of petro-dollars such that he neither knew how nor where to spend the money.  Gadaffi later faced the people’s revolt during which he was lynched. Lately, his beneficiary, ex-French president Sarkozy, spent two days with French police interrogating him on the Libyan financial contribution to his 2010 presidential campaign funds. This should be a lesson not just for our politicians but especially for Nigerian security agencies on their effectiveness in monitoring foreign contributions to election funds. A former French president held for two days under interrogation by the police which, in the past, took orders from him? Are Nigerian politicians taking note?

By far, the most impacting political lesson is for Lagos State government and the ruling party, All Progressives Congress. Until lately, Lagos State would appear to be the most secure for any group in charge of Alausa. That would be before the recent public resentment against the outrageous rise in land charges. Owing to its cosmopolitan status, Lagos State electorate must be appreciated as the most discerning and cannot be taken for granted. Mentality of those in government that Nigerians would pay whatever levy after initial protests is outdated. The fact that after a dubious and so-called reduction in the rate of new land charges, opposition and protest have not abated should make the message clear. Governor Akinwunm Ambode assembled his privileged class, billionaires, landed gentry, industrialists and manufacturers and desribed them as stakeholders. That is only insignificantly true as they have acquired more billion since May 29, 2015. Hence Ambode’s “stakeholders,” in some kind of stage management hailed him with the revulsion that not only was the new land charge affordable to them but also very liberal.

Here is a question for Governor Ambode.What has changed in the earning capacity and/or purchasing power of poor and helpless Lagos residents and genuine stakeholders since May 29, 2015, to warrant the  astronomical indirect hike in rent? It is not too late to pre-empt an on-coming political lesson inherent in public reaction to the new land charges. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

CJN’s response to National Assembly

Ordinarily,  those charged with specific powers under the Nigerian constitution should be allowed to exercise their function. Specifically, the judiciary is to interpret the law as exercised by the executive or the National Assembly. It might also be the law under that purpose that the National Assembly wrote the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, on the suit filed by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on the amendment of the Electoral Act by the National Assembly, a suit yet to be determined by an Abuja high court judge.

Still on whether or not the National Assembly can be obstructed, through  judicial process, from performing its legislative function, what is the record of the National Assembly since 1999 on this controversial claim? Certainly, members of the National Assembly are either ignorant of or pretend to be ignorant of their record or are suffering from amnesia. In short, National Asembly members are exhibiting two different but contradictory views. Today, National Assembly is wrongly laying claim to be sacrosanct in its power to legislate. Whereas, the same National Assembly members shot themselve in their feet by halting themselves through a court ruling from carrying out their legislative duties. This particular case must interest the Chief Justice, in responding to the letter from the National Assembly.

Under Obasanjo’s presidency, seven members of the  House of Representatives displayed to Nigerians and the world the sum of three million five hundred thousand naira said to be from Aso Rock, with the claim that the amount was meant to induce them to impeach serving federal House Speaker Ghali Na’Abba. Each of the seven members of the  House of Representatives owned up to being offered five hundred thousand naira, equivalent of today’s five million naira. The former Speaker, had, through strict mornitoring, been checking federal expenditure under Obasanjo;s administration. Hence, the probability was there that, as claimed by the seven members of the House of Representatives, the money was sent from Aso Rock to instigate the Speaker’s impeachment. To ascertain the truth, the House of Representatives, under Ghali Na’Abba as Speaker decided on a full probe.

As the probe commenced on the source of the blood money, a dissident section of Representatives headed for an Abuja high court to obtain an injunction permanently restraining the probe panel from inquiring into the source of the bribe. The injunction was granted and that was the end of the story till today. Both former Speaker Na’Abba and former the  House of Representatives member Macebuh are living witnesses. That was how the National Assembly set the precedent of halting the legislature from performing its functions.

Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara,  declared yesterday that some persons are “intimidating” the Judiciary to “gag” the National Assembly.

Dogara, who said this at plenary yesterday, did not mention names.

He spoke on a motion raised by Razak Atunwa, from Kwara State, on a recent court judgement restraining the House from holding public hearing on the Hijab controversy.

There has been a dispute between the Nigerian Law School and Amasa Firdaus, a law graduate, who was not called to Bar, on the grounds that she wore a Hijab to the Call to the Bar ceremony.

The matter was taken to the house of representatives and a public hearing was fixed for it.

A coalition of lawyers, however, filed a suit asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to stop the House from conducting the hearing- a prayer the court granted.

At yesterday’s plenary, the lawmakers accused the judiciary of “crossing the line” regarding its constitutional role.

Dogara, on his part, said the court judgement infringes on the powers of the House and will not be tolerated.

“We know that Nigeria is not a Banana Republic and operates on basic principles such as rule of law and separation of powers, which states that none of the arms of government should gag the other.

“Just as we cannot gag the judiciary, we also expect same from them. We make laws and the constitution only empowers them to interpret the laws.

“But, for us to sit here and the judiciary tells us what we should consider and not consider and when to sit, then, we are no longer practising democracy.”

He said with the way the judiciary is going, “nothing stops them (the judges) from coming tomorrow and saying the National Assembly cannot sit.

“I don’t think it is us that is intimidating the judiciary, as it is being alleged. It is some people that are intimidating them from somewhere else, to gag the National Assembly.

“We have respected the judiciary a lot and we expect same from them. When the judiciary gets to the level they are now, that spells danger for our democracy. If they insist they must continue this way, we have to part ways.”

Thereafter, Dogara set up an ad-hoc committee to interface with the judiciary and look into the matter.

On December 12, 2017, Amasa was not permitted by the Body of Benchers to enter the International Conference Centre, Abuja venue of the ceremony because she flouted the dress code and insisted on wearing her lawyer’s wig on top of her hijab.

The hijab is a headscarf worn by many Muslim women who feel it is part of their religion.

Amasa called the refusal of the Nigerian Law School to call her to the bar a violation of her right to freedom of religion as protected by Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution.

The call to bar is the official moment where an individual is sworn into a law society or court and obtains the licence to practise law in that jurisdiction.

President of the Nigerian Bar Association A.B. Mahmoud vowed that the association would look into the situation.

Sun

In the expression of the virtue of gratitude, Most Reverend Matthew Kukah, by his own admission, is prone to the lapse of being superfluous. His funeral ovation at the burial of Joseph Danlami Bagobiri, Bishop of the Catholic Bishop of Kafanchan on Thursday, 15th March 2018 bears testimony and equally provided a heart wrenching insight into the ordeal of the Christian population of Southern Kaduna in Kaduna state.

It is difficult to come terms with the revelations of institutional socio-political discrimination that holds the indigenous Christian population of the region in thrall and cast them as serially violated second class citizens. Lamenting the plight of the victim population, Kukah revealed

“After nearly thirty years of the creation of their state, none of them had occupied the seat of a Governor. None had qualified to represent the State as a Minister. They looked around and found a land barren of both federal and state government presence. There were no state television signals as we had to rely on Plateau State television for media coverage. There were no roads, not a single industry sited anywhere in the state.… It would take a combination of President Obasanjo and Alhaji Makarfi to change the course of the history of the people of Southern Kaduna. It was in 1999 that Senator Isaiah Balat was appointed a Minister to represent Kaduna State. Even then, the key northern Muslims protested saying that Senator Balat was a Christian not a northerner.

Then came the historic appointments of both Lt. Generals Martin Luther Agwai and Yusuf Luka to the positions of Chief of Army Staff and for Agwai, Chief of General Staff. When I met President Obasanjo and thanked him for this, he said to me: There is nothing to thank me for. These two gentlemen were the best, they had the best career records and so we did not do them a favour. I felt sorry for General Obasanjo because he did not seem to understand that in the eyes of the mafia, merit, excellence, competence, was tied to religion and region and that in our case, being a Christian excluded you from certain positions”.

Before I go any further, I need to make a mental note of a phenomenon that illustrates the wide ranging comprehensiveness of the contemporary Nigerian tragedy. I extracted the above referenced excerpt to prove a point I wanted to make about the propensity of Kukah to lapse into superfluous gratitude. But the excerpt turned out to be quite revealing of the enormity of a different subject matter and makes it a compelling topic, all by itself, for this space.

Now, the greater tragedy is that were I to make a commitment, here and now, to devote my next commentary to the eminently meritorious subject matter of Southern Kaduna, I would not be able to vouchsafe the validity of the commitment. The reason for this is that in the intervening period between now and the next due date, the probability is that Nigeria would have played host to another contending tragic occurrence or revelation of calamitous proportions.

Such is the nature of the transition Nigeria has made between yesterday and today-akin to the biblical metaphor of the juvenile foolhardiness of king Rehoboham- “my father laid a heavy yoke on you, I will make it even heavier; my father scourged you with whips, I will scourge you with scorpions”

Said Kukah “Democracy requires lots and lots of patience and hard work. And I think we are mightily grateful to ourselves as a people that despite the frustrations, despite the temptations, unlike before: we have witnessed 16 to 17 years of patience on the side of the military because if it were 20 to 30 years ago, we would have had at least three or four coups already. I think it is a measure of the faith of the military itself on the urgency of democratization that has kept them in the barracks. But I think the politicians and the political class cannot take this patience for granted. What we have experienced in the last few years has made us a laughing stock of other nations,”

I was surprised and mildly irritated that this sort of apologetic pandering to the Nigerian military can come from Kukah. The inevitable question that arises is-who appointed the military, judge and superintendent over our affairs? We had better be able to take their patience for granted because the last time I checked, anyone, including, especially the military, who seeks to overthrow or supplant a constitutionally elected authority, is liable to the crime of treason. Investing the military with patriarchal oversight over Nigeria is a dangerous and curious proposition and coming from someone not of Kukah’s good faith pedigree would have aroused suspicion of the ulterior motive of testing the ground for military intervention.

Kukah himself knows that this language of expression of frustration with the governance of Nigeria is not tenable and amounts to a retroactive legitimation of the culture of coup d’états and military intervention.

Still I was not of a mind to join issues on the topic; and decided to rule the uncharacteristic bluster as unintended gaffe to which we must not lend unwitting orchestration. And then it transpired that within weeks of the Kukah gaffe, the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekeremadu, would ultimately stoke a controversy on the subject matter. The first inkling I got was repeated disclaimers in the media to the effect that the remarks of Ekweremadu should not be misconstrued as suggesting that Nigeria’s escalating crisis of governance passes as condition precedent to military intervention.

As one of the highest individual stakeholders in the contemporary civil democratic rule in Nigeria, any such suggestion (by him) portends a self-destructive military rule baiting.

Again I dwelt no longer on it until Professor Bolaji Akinyemi drew attention to the controversy in his interview with ThisDay ‘. “We don’t learn from history; not only politicians but even the public. That was really what Ekweremadu was saying: that the politicians –if the antelope decides to be so proud that it just marches with majesty and pomp and pride, it must remember that there are hungry lions around; that the field isn’t cleared. That’s all Ekweremadu was saying. Let those who have ears to hear, let them hear,” It was at this juncture that I finally decided that I would not only go in search of the full story of what Ekweremadu purportedly said, I will, in addition, take up the trending topic on this page.

According to Ekweremadu “The problem in Nigeria is that our democracy is receding. Who says army cannot take over, let us not joke with our democracy that is the issue. The house of a senator was destroyed in Kaduna state; we are talking about Kwankwaso who was stopped from going to his state where he ruled for eight years. In Kaduna, Shehu Sani cannot organize a meeting and we are about a democracy? On subsequent reflection and from the avalanche of reactions to this report, Ekweremadu must have learnt that employing the specter of military intervention as a bogey man (against degenerate politicking) is not such a wise public recourse for an elected incumbent-especially in Nigeria.

One of the critical lessons we have learnt from the history of military intervention in Nigerian politics is the opportunistic nature of such interventions. Military coup broadcasts in Nigeria invariably find justification in the logic and expressions hitherto employed by prominent civilian figures to denigrate and repudiate their collective misconduct.

Coincidentally, Akinyemi himself became a figure of fate of this tradition when his appeal for an interventionist disannulment of the 1993 Presidential election was employed as the irresistible pretext for the intervention and perpetuation of the dictatorship of General Sani Abacha.

As it evolved from July 1966 (up until the advent of the Fourth Republic in 1999), the received wisdom of the political history of Nigeria was that military rule interventions amounted to little more than the reversion of power to the military wing of the hegemonic Northern ruling class-which became the default mode of ascension to political power and control since the counter coup of 1966. As the guarantor of this hegemony, the military became the dominant wing who would decide when to intervene and when to restore civil democratic rule.

Extrapolating from our chequered political history, military rule interventions are precipitated and legitimized by governability crisis attendant on a burgeoning breakdown of law and order and in the specific experience of Nigeria often as a stratagem for the preservation of regional political hegemony.

Put in less flirtatious language, the position of the aforementioned public functionaries is that these conditions have been met by the extant political reality of Nigeria. And if there have been no attempts by the Nigerian military to usurp power, explanations for the institutional restraint will be found in the following factors.

First was the self-de-legitimation of military dictatorship by the crisis of the annulment of the 1993 Presidential elections and its culmination into the brutal personal dictatorship of Abacha. Second was the relative professionalization of the military beginning with the decision by President Olusegun Obasanjo to purge the institution of politically compromised officers. Third were the political stabilization instruments of power rotation and the facility of a successful transfer of power from an incumbent President to the opposition candidate in the 2015 general elections.

Fourth is globalization and its domination by triumphant capitalism; and the attendant values of liberal democracy. Going forward and running counter to this trend is the resurgent dictatorship in Russia and China-reinforced by the global economic ascendance of the latter.

Much more needs to be done to ensure success of the venture

In a bid to deepen the national conversation on the anti-graft war – against the background of the very low rating of Nigeria in the latest Transparency International (TI) Global Corruption Perception Index – the Savannah Centre for Diplomacy, Democracy and Development (SCDDD), in collaboration with the Arewa Research and Development Project (ARDP) and the Centre for Democratic Development, Research and Training (CEDDERT), recently organised a two-day roundtable discussions on “The Future of the Fight against Corruption in Nigeria”.

Participants at the sessions, drawn from the three arms of the federal government as well as members of the Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), included Senate President Bukola Saraki, Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution, Mr Okoi Obla, a former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mr Nuhu Ribadu as well as representatives of the Directorate of State Security Services (DSS), senior members of the media, the academia and other stakeholders.

Even so, the executive, the legislature, the judiciary and the media as critical stakeholders, must necessarily pool their efforts to successfully tackle the menace of graft in the system. Emphasis on preventive measures through the enactment of relevant laws by the National Assembly, for instance, will help in no small measure. Indeed, anti-corruption efforts should be driven more by institutions rather than personalities.

In addition, there should be a national policy and comprehensive strategy based on accurate awareness of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to fighting corruption within the Nigerian society. The approach must also include taking the highest risk with potential to make the maximum impact by including prevention, education and enforcement while underscoring the importance of effective deterrence with maximum impact and sustainable efforts over time. But in the main, as the summit also wisely concluded, the judiciary remains very critical to any efforts to fight corruption on a sustainable basis.

There was a debate as to whether or not the federal government should establish specialised anti-corruption courts for efficiency, speed, integrity and expertise. While we agree that the government should move in that direction, the following factors, as agreed by many, should also be considered: the relationship of the special courts to the regular judicial courts; the size of the anti-corruption courts; the procedures for appointing and removing special judges; the substantive scope of the anti-corruption court’s jurisdiction, and the relationship of the specialised courts to procedural authorities.

There is no doubt that in the efforts to rid the country of the stigma of corruption, a lot more remains to be done by the agencies saddled with the assignment. The federal government needs to involve the people at the grassroots whose drive would further compliment the efforts of the institutionalised agencies. Nigerians must also interrogate the growing culture of religiosity without godliness.

Thisday

After one month of a heartrending experience in Boko Haram captivity, which seemed like an eternity to their parents, most of the latest victims of the terror group’s pastime of mass abduction of schoolgirls are back in the warm embrace of their loved ones. In a dramatic turn of events, no fewer than 105 of the 110 schoolgirls stolen from the premises of the Government Girls Science and Technical College, Dapchi, in Yobe State, on February 19, have now regained their freedom.

But while this might have come as a huge relief to a thoroughly embarrassed government and its security agencies, it cannot in any way mitigate the serious security breach that resulted in the mass abduction of over 100 innocent schoolgirls, in the first place, by some deranged bandits, especially after a similar incident in Chibok in neighbouring Borno State almost four years ago. In an event of uncanny similarity, some 276 schoolgirls of the Government Girls Secondary School in Chibok preparing for their final examination were carted away in trucks on the night of April 14, 2014. Unfortunately, close to four years after, over 100 of them are yet to return home.

According to the account of acclaimed rights group, Amnesty International, which has, however, been vehemently disputed by the Nigerian Army, at least five calls were made to the military and the police, alerting them to the impending arrival of the notorious terror group’s members, but no action was taken to stop them. Although the military describes AI’s claims as “outright falsehood and a calculated attempt to whip up sentiments,” the rights group insists both the military and the police had up to four hours to mobilise and repel the invading insurgents.

Whether the AI account is true or not, many things happening within the North-East region, the epicentre of the counter-insurgency operations, suggest a high level of loose security. Apparently driven by the false belief that Boko Haram has been largely subjugated because it no longer occupies territory, a lot has been left undone in the area of holding down captured areas. This has allowed Boko Haram the freedom to roam the whole space unchallenged. The released girls’ account of how they were transported long distances and even stopped at some places to prepare food did not depict a group that was under much pressure.

Besides, the cavalier manner in which the girls were reportedly dropped off by Boko Haram at different spots in Dapchi, although the Minister of Information, Lai Mohammed, said it was agreed for them to have free passage, was hardly different from how they came in on the night of the February 19 abduction. The child abductors were said to have cruised into town in a motorcade and dropped off the girls and even had time enough to warn the parents against allowing the girls to return to school.

While it is true that the counter-insurgency efforts have achieved a measure of success over the years, it is obvious that much more would have been achieved if clear and well-defined targets were set and people were held responsible for failure to meet such targets. If, for instance, people had been held responsible for the Chibok girls’ abduction, perhaps the Dapchi incident would have been avoided.

The government should not fail to overhaul its security; it is a strategic imperative in warfare for generals to be changed or reassigned if the expected results are not achieved. Recently, Saudi Arabia had cause to rejig its security following the failure to achieve the desired result in its current military campaign in Yemen. Besides, the war against Boko Haram is not expected to be fought for ever; it has been going on for nine years and efforts should be made to end it swiftly.

While the government should be commended for trying to acquire sophisticated weapons to fight Boko Haram, it should not be forgotten that, more than anything else, effective intelligence holds the key to winning the war. The Nigerian authorities should not fail to invest in intelligence, both human and electronic, that could help to sway victory their way.

Sadly, the return of the Dapchi girls has not been like the classic tale of an adventure that had a purely happy ending, as five of the girls did not survive the trauma of the Boko Haram captivity. Their mates, whose jubilation for regaining freedom was slightly tempered by the thought of their dead colleagues, said the five died of suffocation in the congested condition in which they made their forced and unprepared trip. There is also the sad story of Leah Sharibu, who is yet to be released on account of her religion. She is being held back because she rebuffed attempts to force her conversion from Christianity to Islam. Never again should the authorities allow the mass kidnap of girls. Boarding schools should be shut and effective security personnel placed in all schools.