Apartheid in Nigeria?

A rather bizarre advertisement appeared recently in a Nigerian newspaper. In the said advert, the owners of a housing estate in Lekki, a suburb of Lagos, had put up some apartments for renting. They, however, said in the publication that the apartments were for expatriates only.
Nigerians could not apply. No reason was expressly offered in the publication for excluding Nigerians from applying to live in the choice estate.
Not surprisingly, the publication has sparked public outrage against the owners of the estate for what most people see as rank apartheid against Nigerians in their own country.
Responding to the controversy, a spokesperson for the property owners, Rasaq Okoya Properties Ltd, said in a tone indicative of remorse, that the advert was not intended to insult Nigerians. According to her, the only reason for the caveat as to who may apply and who may not, was that most Nigerians usually considered their rents too high and may not be able to pay. She said the apartments were usually made to suit expatriates who simply want a place where there is good security and all the conveniences.
By implication what the property owners were saying is that Nigerians can do with anything less suitable while the expatriates want the best in their living environment. This sort of self-denigration is bad for the image of the country. It also speaks volumes on how Nigerians often treat their fellow citizens with less than the respect and dignity they deserve.
There ought to be an official way of checking this sort of outright discrimination against Nigerians in their own country and by their fellow countrymen. Whatever the grounds, property owners must realize that the battle of the present age is that of the equality of all human beings, regardless of their race or social and economic status. Those who openly treat others as less than human commit a serious crime against humanity.
Rasaq Okoya Properties Ltd and all others who may be like-minded must desist from that sort of insult. It must not be said that there is any part of this country in which Nigerians are not permitted to live if they can afford it. And those who deliberately pitch their prices in such a way as to exclude Nigerians must also realize the damage they are doing to the dignity and psychology of the nation’s youth.
After all, what else is apartheid if not a system in which Blacks or certain people are forced to live away from white people? In the then apartheid South Africa, black and white people lived in separate neighbourhoods and their children attended separate schools. It was quite offensive and obnoxious. No wonder the world, in one voice, condemned such a system and saw to it that it was eventually dismantled in a country where Blacks constituted more than 80 per cent of the population.
The public’s anger over the Lekki housing apartheid policy is therefore perfectly understandable. We agree with the human rights community that the government must stop that sort of nonsense before it becomes a normal practice by property owners and managers. While those who placed that advert could be conceded their right to give their apartments to whoever they please, this right does not permit them to insult the sensibilities of Nigerians against the intentions of the Nigerian constitution.
Not even the explanation by a spokesperson of the property owners could atone for that brazen apartheid against Nigerians. By assuming that no Nigerians can afford to live in the apartments, the property owners, themselves Nigerians, can be accused of either over-pricing their property or believing the worst about their fellow countrymen. Pricing is known to be an effective tool of discrimination. The action of the company is hardly patriotic. We believe that no such egregious insult will be tolerated by any self-respecting people.
The Rasaq Okoya Properties Ltd, owned by the respected Okoya family, got this wrong. The company should therefore see the necessity to tender an unreserved apology to Nigerians for treating them with such gratuitous disdain.

Privatising the Airports

If there was one more needed proof that government is a bad business manager, it is shown in the poor state of the nation’s airports , which from inception, have been under the management the Federal Government .
Oftentimes, users of the nation’s airports—local and international—go through harrowing experiences in coping with the ever dilapidated facilities. From the cooling system through the toilets to even the conveyor belts, there is evidence of decay.
For visitors and even Nigerians returning home from trips abroad, the word is the same. Nigerian airports are outdated. They fall short of global standards. Airports could still be outdated and yet functional, but many Nigerian airports are not. Not even the home-sick Nigerian who arrives the Murtala Mohammed International Airport could ignore the substandard nature of the air-conditioning system and the long wait for his luggage to reach him on an old conveyer belt around which anxious people are crowded.
Neither the funds yearly allocated to the aviation agencies, nor the revenue they generate have been able to turn around the fortunes of the nation’s airports. Government, in all honesty, will admit that apart from its inability to operate the nation’s airports, it lacks the funds to modernise them.
It is against this backdrop and our belief in private sector-led growth that we support the eventual decision of the Federal Government to concession the airports to private operators or privatise them. Indeed, for the sake of human safety and the public relations statement it makes to visitors, a nation’s airports are far too important to be run shoddily.
For a start, the government has concluded plans to concession four of the airports in the country. They include the Murtala Mohammed Airport, Lagos, Mallam Aminu Kano Airport, Kano, Port Harcourt Airport, Omagwa and the Margaret Ekpo Airport, Calabar.
The scheme, if well handled, will indeed, save the airports from further rot and eventual collapse. However, we urge the adoption of best practices and transparency in the concession arrangement. Unlike the problematic concession of some government agencies, this must be made to follow all known due process, as any under-the-table deal will compromise standards and ultimately jeopardize the essence of the privatisation scheme in the first place.
It is gratifying that the Chairman, Board of Directors of FAAN, Chief Ebitimi Banigo himself has declared that with the privatisation scheme, “we are charting a new direction with renewed vigour. That new direction, we believe, should be embraced by all stakeholders.....the new direction engenders great opportunities and possibilities. Opportunities to invest, train and build for our today and future.”
Banigo’s vision of giving the country ‘one of the best Airport groups in the world’ is laudable.
However, these declarations by Banigo, should serve as the operative benchmark that should guide the privatisation exercise, especially as he noted that, “we are focused on positioning all our airports with all stakeholders for long term, sustainable growth and delivering increased and quality service for passengers and all users of our airports”.
The imperativeness of the concession plan appears the only redemptive measure that can rescue the nation’s airports and raise them to match global standards. We believe that a proper handling of the ones now slated for the privatization should make it an inevitable scheme for the other airports in the nation.
All said, the need for the privatization of the airports cannot be over-emphasised, just as the means of doing so is key to its overall success.

Does Africa Need Food Aid?

The Group of 8 at its last meeting pledged 20 billion dollars in agricultural aid to African countries to the delight the beggarly African leaders and some aid agencies, but not everybody is happy about it.
Although the amount, which is for three years, does not compare favorably with the $13.4 billion which the G8 said it disbursed between January 2008 and July 2009, aid groups said the new pledge in Italy is more clearly focused and could be more beneficial.
For the first time, instead of being given directly as food aid, these funds are to be allotted for building an agricultural economy in African nations in need. It is for agricultural infrastructure such as fertilizer and seed, grain storage vessels and plant variety research.
Although the form of the aid looks more decent than the traditional food handouts, it still does not justify Africa’s food insecurity. Not even the on-going global economic meltdown justifies the level of poverty in the continent.
According to the United Nations, the number of malnourished people most of who are in Africa, has risen in the past two years and is expected to top 1.02 billion this year. This reverses decades of declines.
For years, the face of Africa has been the poor and hungry malnourished child with flies perched on his lips. Considering Africa’s enormous resources, we find this face of the continent unacceptable.
The same view was expressed by US President Barack Obama during the announcement of the aid. "There is no reason Africa should not be self-sufficient when it comes to food," Obama said, recalling that his relatives in Kenya live "in villages where hunger is real," though they themselves are not going hungry.
Africa’s geography and environment are in direct contrast to its political and social circumstances.
According to observations made by the British charity Oxfam, development efforts have been in place all over the continent throughout the past two decades, yet Africans continue to grow poorer with each passing year. Africa is blessed with all the resources that make for greatness — human, material, and ecological. The continent harbours more than 40 percent of the world’s potential hydroelectric power supply; the bulk of the world’s diamond and chromium resources; 30 percent of the uranium; 50 percent of the world’s gold; 90 percent of its cobalt; 50 percent of its phosphates; 40 percent of its platinum; 7.5 percent of its coal; 8 percent of its known petroleum reserves; 12 percent of its natural gas; 3 percent of its iron ore; 64 percent of the world’s manganese, 13 percent of its copper, vast bauxite, nickel and lead resources, and millions of untilled farmlands.
But a continent that is so rich in natural resources has been plagued by destructive leadership motivated mainly by greed. Most African leaders have personalised their countries and appropriated the countries’ resources in such a greedy manner that some of these shameless leaders are richer than their countries.
We believe that the poverty and devastating diseases that serve as the hallmark of the average Africa citizen’s daily existence is caused by the widespread failed leadership on the continent. It is a continent where citizens have no opportunity to change their failed and inefficient leaders. Rather, it is a continent, where leaders plunder state treasuries and suppress their people to sit tight over the ruins. They build themselves into monsters, thinking that they are powerful, when indeed they should build institutions to strengthen democracy and good governance.
Speaking in Ghana shortly after the G8 summit, President Obama noted that Africa does not need strong leaders but strong institutions - “ capable, reliable and transparent institutions are the key to success .....those are the things that give life to democracy, because that is what matters in people's everyday lives.”
While we agree that some drought stricken African countries genuinely need food aid, we believe that with effective and visionary leadership, hunger would not have been pervasive in those countries.
Despite the desirability of the food aid, we believe that poverty and hunger can only be sustainably addressed with economic growth and development. And that these have a clear linear relationship with good governance. Therefore, we urge the G8 to also use all the opportunities available to it to promote good governance in Africa. This include efforts to ensure that even the aid they provide to the continent is used effectively. Also, Africa, more than food aid, deserves foreign investment.

Let There Be Light!

Everyday, Nigerians in most parts of the country wake up with the hope that electricity supply, taken for granted in other countries, would be restored in their homes and offices.
They get to work only to be reminded by humming generating sets that their hope is dying. Dying, but not dead, so they nurse the hope that by the time they get back home, a miracle would have happened to save them from buying petrol or diesel for their generators or sleeping in darkness.
For those who can afford that luxury of running generators every day and so can watch or listen to the news, nobody gives them hope that there would be a change in their dashed hopes.
If they are lucky to hear any excuse at all from government, the shameful power supply is blamed on the activities of militants and stories of ongoing projects. Just as if the poor Nigerian, who is expected to pay tax and be patriotic, is responsible for the action of the militants. We are not unaware of the militants’ action on gas supply but to act as if the poor Nigerian deserve to take the blame for it is not acceptable.
Electricity supply in the country, in spite of the promises by government, has collapsed. And shamefully so for a country that is so richly endowed with gas, hydro electricity potentials and coal.
What makes this sad scenario even more discomfiting is the apparent lack of credible assurance to halt this culture of darkness.
First, work on the National Independent Power Projects (NIPP) that the previous administration initiated and partially executed was halted without due consideration of the intricacies of the industry. For two years, the sites of the installations that would have contributed meaningfully to the nation’s depleting power generation laid waste, thereby heightening apprehension among Nigerians that the huge resources committed to revamping the problematic sector had been squandered.
In the same breath that the presidency stopped further execution of the NIPPs, it also announced that it would declare a state of emergency in order to galvanize the afflicted sector. Since then, however, similar promises have been issued without corresponding action. Instead of pragmatic attempts at actualizing what is, after all, a cardinal goal in the federal government’s beautiful seven-point agenda, government officials charged with delivering improved electricity supply have continued to churn out excuses for underachievement. It has become so convenient to blame everything on militants.
In the past, low water level at the hydroelectric dams was a ready scapegoat for the poor performance of the power authorities. But now, even in the middle of rainy season, supply of electricity has worsened. We are now told that water levels will peak in October.
And with this unfortunate position come dire consequences for the economy and individuals. At the beginning of this year alone, industry capacity utilization fell from 42 per cent to 35 per cent in just three months. The trend has continued. Some companies are forced to downsize or shut down, while many artisans who depend on public power supply have been thrown into unemployment.
It is difficult for industries to survive in such a hostile environment. In recent months, they have incurred an additional 40 percent rise in energy costs as they strive to source electricity independently. Early this year, for instance, Peugeot Automobile of Nigeria (PAN) spent N800 million on generators. While some companies have relocated to neighbouring West African countries to obtain adequate power, many others have simply folded up.
It came as a great relief when the government promised to supply 6,000 megawatts of electricity by December 2009 but for now there are growing doubts about the target. Nobody has assured that when all the infrastructure have been instaled, there will be enough gas to feed them.
People in authority need not be reminded that, on its own, sufficient electricity is a big catalyst for empowering the citizenry. Millions of jobs and businesses would automatically spring up the moment electricity supply is normalised.
Interestingly, in March this year, the Governor Gabriel Suswan Committee on the NIPP submitted its report to the President. It reads in part: “Having undertaken comprehensive studies of the NIPP projects, it has become apparent that completing the whole programme as initiated is the right way to go… The NIPP is our joint investment and solution to power problems for now with added potential for the future.”
Sadly, however, even after giving the nod for the continuation of those projects and large funds allocated to them, the nation is still in darkness, and the cost to individuals and firms is enormous. What Nigerians need now is to be given substance to their hope that is dwindling. At least someone in government should show enough respect for Nigerians to show concern and apologise to the people who have incurred losses to this culture of darkness.

NSE: Engaging in enlightened self-interest

"Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin." Romans 4:7-8

THE use of the term leadership gap here attempts to capture an aspect of leadership distinct from and above-and-beyond that which is attributable to personality. To place it within context, it is used as plural - identifying competencies that are likely to be in short supply relative to a development or the management of an issue. It is by no means reflective of an assessment of any individual personality but the collective.

At this time, the leadership issues that threaten to extend the declining market confidence in the Nigerian Stock Exchange beyond the significant and sustained crash in share prices goes way beyond a simple matter of filling positions; yet this aspect of the issue represents a hurdle we must overcome if we are to address the substantive issues thrown up.

At the very heart of the matter is the question of motive, culture and practice in an institution that represents a critical medium of wealth creation in our society. All men of honour and goodwill must therefore be concerned about the ill-wind that has made its way into the affairs of the institution, one we must arrest and address.

The pronouncements from commentators on all sides in the last few weeks have been disturbing just as they have been insensitive and factually questionable as to relevance to the needs of the market.

This situation has escalated over time with a series of misinformation and disinformation about the realities of the market, the value of the banks exposure to the capital market, the going concern of listed firms, the planned demutualization of the NSE, the election of a new president to the council of the NSE and on-going management changes and plans for the post Ndi Okereke-Onyuike era. Some of the commentaries have been very personal and damaging to reputations.

This conflict agenda, known only too well in political arenas, is not usually associated with a self-regulatory organisation that has, as part of its history, a list of distinguished Nigerian professionals. This legacy is now threatened. The summary of these developments is manifested in the increasing air of doubt over who assumes the mantle of leadership of the NSE Council. It is a needless exercise.

This is definitely not helpful to our economy and most certainly our markets. This cannot be a time to provide 'politics' a home in our market place when 'ideas' and 'selfless service' are needed. The front and centre issue for the post-crisis era must be the articulation and execution of the reforms needed to reposition the stock exchange as well as the reclaiming of the professional and moral authority of the leadership of the exchange. These are not impossible tasks given the quality, commitment and pedigree of those entrusted with the responsibility.

The key in all of this, is the appreciation and understanding of the public sentiment/mood on matters affecting the economy and our financial markets; and the alignment of actions, whether popular or otherwise, that are necessary to nudge the market towards a confidence zone.

This can only be achieved by the deft handling of sensitive issues through deeds and utterances that help to build rather than divide and not those that lean towards character assassination or a 'trial by the mob' approach. This market must repudiate the introduction of the 'political arena type' machinery to resolving its challenges. The realities of the economic downturn is setting in fast and creating an unsettling of money flow to the detriment of all concerned. No one would benefit from 'finger pointing' or 'blame allocations' - the agenda of fifth columnists who seek to divide rather than pull together.

The market is dealing with the banking sector challenges of expunging from its books verified toxic assets arising from exposures to margin loans, aviation and oil & gas sector financing that were especially prone to the global financial crisis. This must be placed in context against the backdrop of a Nigerian economy contracting monthly, a heightened and politically tense climate, civil unrests and insurgency from religious intolerance, election disaffection and the Niger Delta agitation which has assumed an expanded territorial scope of operations and impact.

All these have coalesced to extend the decline in the investors' capacity to spend as well as save/invest. Investment clubs, co-operatives and individual investors have and are losing members, infractions by brokers have risen compared to previous years, defaults have gone up and the business of share investing is under strain such that heating up the clime is an unwelcome response.

These are unusual times which call for an unusual sense of responsibility from the leadership. We are at a stage where 'self interest' must be set aside for the sake of the larger goal. The goal therefore must be to embrace these conflicts as a sign of the growing range of perspectives and viewpoints on what is needed in the market place at this time. We are sure that not all the views can be accommodated and in this lies a challenging task of ensuring that the arguments are not about 'victors' or the 'vanquished' but about being a 'market' able to deliver on its objective - wealth creation.

We intend on our part to explore how the understanding of these conflicts add up in helping the market reach the optimal solutions required to move it forward, as opposed to the current focus on personalities. After all, the leadership of the NSE comprises strong personalities and persons of high professional and social standing must be concerned about the message this conflict sends to the market about them.

Our hope is that by confronting the issues head-on, we may be able to place the developments in context, as imperfect as they may be, and create a basis to move on towards the work needed to achieve the market of our dreams.

The true accomplishment in this exercise must be the insight it provides the 'principal actors' to re-engage on issues. What is therefore the central issue here? That the Presidency must not move in accordance with the council's laid-down succession practice to Alh. Aliko Dangote because of his 'role' in the AP saga for which the SEC has adjudicated upon. This cannot be anything more than a fallacy.

There have been at least five processes that the matter has gone through and none has returned an indictment that might form a credible basis for such an action. Alh. Aliko Dangote may not be the most popular man on Broad Street at this time and not a few persons will have their reasons for this and are entitled to but the council cannot allow itself to operate on the basis of suspicion.

Frankly, I am not sure if I have read the 'tea leaves' properly here - determining to make a stand and even risk antagonizing people in authority and power. This must be the price for deviating from script and a politically correct approach which would have meant 'sitting on the fence'. It is also the case that by not 'looking the other way' and 'minding my business', we might risk alienation from the market we serve.

In every citizen's life, there comes a time, when the resolution of a dilemma in favour of one's conscience and conviction represents the most important sacrifice to nation and institution building. This must be one of such moments. We therefore embrace the challenge as all we have ever set out to do as a service provider is to reinforce the belief in the capital market as a veritable source of wealth creation guided by rules and the best of professionalism. Ours is a mission founded on the need to serve as a critical component of market confidence and a bridge on issues; and there cannot be a better time to live up to that ideal than now - as we descend into our summer of personality crisis. This is our reason for being in business. It is this business that I am minding.

At some point in the conflict, there will be an opening when settlement is possible, when angst turns to anticipation of a solution. The politically savvy know when this opportunity presents itself and the best of them always have one ear to the door of resolution, and when the time seems right, they open it.

One such opening presents itself on August 6, 2009 when the election of a new president to assume leadership of the NSE council will take place. The esteemed council owes the market that much.

Africa and the G8

THE G8 Summit of eight most advanced countries of the world (United States of America, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Italy and Russia) recently had its periodic meeting at L'Aquila in Italy and confronted as usual the world's most pressing problems, significant among which were the current global economic crisis, global warming, Iran's nuclear programme, global poverty and food security to mention just the issues. The environment was less rancorous compared to the meeting in Gleneagles in 2005 but decisions were less far-reaching. Africa's mention was significant for the recount of failed pledges and promises of the past and these were appropriately highlighted by critics and development observers.

The Summit agreed among other things that farm aid and development assistance will be boosted by $20 billion over the next three years. It is doubtful whether the international community is taking the G8 seriously after their negligible performance following the Gleneagles failed promise of increasing annual aid by $50 billion, a significant amount of which ($25 billion) was ear-marked for Africa. Africa got on the alert and expectedly the crusade against corruption was swung into high gear and good governance got a boost in preparation for a golden age of development assistance. Promises of mouth-watering aid package are normally accompanied by a renewed period of great expectations in governance and growth, the likes of which substantial and widespread debt forgiveness of the last decade brought about.

Although the developed countries so represented by the G8 failed dismally on their promise, it should be noted that when they do deliver, governance and economic growth change dramatically in favoured countries, an example of which the Ghanaian success story represents. The Gleneagles promise that was expected to consolidate the gains of debt forgiveness was dashed and developing countries particularly can only take solace in giving less weight to L'Aquila's pledges.

African countries in particular must wake up to the realisation that the promised goodies by G8 are not what is badly needed for their development, but as President Barack Obama intoned, countries must face up to the challenge of vastly reducing corruption and ensuring political stability, paying careful attention to the abiding link between good governance and enhanced prosperity. Indeed, even if the promises and pledges materialise, without these issues at the forefront of development agenda, an enduring progress will be hard to come by. The bell of self-reliance continues to ring loud and clear and only those countries that listen to it and apply the message will get to the promised land of development.

It is difficult to get any country to give another country its hard-earned resources to squander like developing countries do. It is true that some countries still give aid despite this observed scenario, but it is only because they in the process expect a much larger return to their own economy. This is the story of aid in Africa and other countries that harbour a high deficit of political instability and poor governance. The donor only pretends to be interested in the country's progress. Some donors, if not most, are of this mould and it means that African leaders should act wisely and push for self-development of their countries rather than push for aid, with cap in hand.

The more righteous donors among the G8 realise and believe that aid must have a moral tone in addition to the consideration that it guarantees the security of the entire world. African countries should therefore be selective in their search for aid and should not open their doors to 'cash and carry' donors. The development programme self-established by African countries seeking aid should be the starting point and focus of this search. The departure from this principle has not only derailed the development process in Africa countries, it has engendered corruption in the polity. It is difficult to imagine that for all the decades of so-called development assistance what can be seen in most of Africa is declining per capita income. The donors blame this on population growth in Africa but evidence continues to show that their use of aid to derail development in Africa in pursuit of their own agenda is largely to blame.

A disproportionately large percentage of the aid goes back to the donor countries in payment for the import of their goods and services in addition to the employment of experts from their own countries even when such experts are available in the recipient countries. It is a truism that no country, however poor, totally lacks experts in the world of today and some of the donor countries even have a worse profile of experts than some of the host countries. Even when experts are lacking in one country, they can be sourced from another, yet some donor agencies pretend that a whole region is lacking in a particular expertise.

African leaders must be at the driving seat of any aid that comes to their country and be fully alert to issues surrounding aid because in most cases the aid is not as useful as it is meant to be. Some donor agency staff nurse misgivings before coming to Nigeria, yet they become so fascinated by the allure of existence in Nigeria and try to prevent their transfer from the country. Leaders must realise that only when these nuances of aid are actively fought can countries benefit from it. It is on this note that the promises and pledges made at the last G8 Summit must be welcome and steps taken to realise them within the time-frame.

Democracy and a tale of two republics

RECENT political events in the West African Republic of Niger and the Central American Republic of Honduras raise the vexed issue of the instutionalisation of democracy, as a socio-political concept, and its protection by the governed through the institutions of the state. Watchers of global political happenings may be well aware of the subsisting scenarios in both countries. Experts in the field can already forecast the outcomes in both countries. While the events are worrisome, this experience is not unique to these two countries. Africa is particularly plagued by this malaise.

Let me paint a picture for the reader: a 'democratically' elected leader of a state, desirous of continuing in power for, almost always the case (or maybe the excuse), the continuation of the 'good policies and work' of his administration at the assumed request of the people, suggest to the people that the Constitution be amended to allow for his continuation in office for another term. He plans a referendum on the subject but before it holds, the Supreme Court of the land nullifies his plan as ultra vires and unconstitutional.

Wanting not to be defeated in carrying out the 'people's wish' as a committed leader, he announces the dissolution of the legislature or dismissal of security chiefs and/or arrest of anyone opposed to the idea and informs the people that the Supreme Court's decision is confined to the trash bin. Interpose Niger and Honduras into this scenario and you get two non-fictional settings for political unrest as a result of two presidents' desire to carry out their 'people's wish'. We can always tell the real reasons behind the assumed 'people's wish'.

However, two ideas are related here. Two countries impoverished by corruption and bad policies will not actively and desperately seek the continuation, beyond the constitutional limit of two terms, of leaders who have not displayed the intellectual capacity to govern. And any economic policies that have not elevated Niger and Honduras beyond their abysmal rating by international organisations as two of the least developed and least secured countries in the world cannot be the fulcrum for an agitation for extension of term. Unfortunately, leaders in most developing countries do not reason this way.

This is sadly usually done in the name of democracy; a very sexy and current political phenomenon in developing countries and advanced by the powerful overlord, America. For as long as these leaders defile the Constitution and ignore court orders in the name of democracy, the United Nations Organisation, international and regional political bodies, world leaders, particularly those of the supposed free world would race to outdo one another in condemning any conceived plots or executed plans to unseat these leaders. The poser is: when and how can the people intervene in the usurpation of political power (which belongs to the people) by their leaders?

And as corollary: Has the Honduran military acted in violation of the constitution by removing the errant former president Manuel Zelaya Rosales and replacing him with the Speaker of Congress, Roberto Micheletti? Is the military, as a security institution of the state, not charged with the task of protection the people's political power by acting as it did in Honduras? Should the act of removing the president and replacing him with the person whom the constitution recognises as a replacement in situations as this, be termed a coup de tat? Whose interest is really at stake and how is it to be protected?

These, I think, are the questions political scientists must deal with in devising solutions to the increasing practice of term elongation and disregard for unfavourable court decisions by sit-tight leaders world over. Each time world bodies and leaders sprint to condemn good-intentioned efforts to oppose unconstitutional term elongation by state institutions and groups, they invariably encourage watching leaders to perfect their plans and effectively deploy state machinery to achieve same result. Examples abound in Africa and beyond. Autocratic sit-tight leaders do conduct elections which are always won by them; they review and amend constitutions to accommodate their continued hold on power; stifle political participation by the people and discourage political education via association.

They conduct flawed periodic elections so as to qualify for the elite class of world democracies and attract foreign economic aids which are usually diverted and/or misspent. International bodies and leaders cannot be oblivious of these political subterfuges devised to hoodwink them into legitimizing these leaders' reigns. The world has to choose between entrenching functional democracy and lip-servicing adjectival democracy. From Mugabe's Zimbabwe, Kibaki's Kenya, Biya's Cameroon, Sassou-Nguesso's Republic of Congo to Gabon, to name a few, the developing world is beset by the prevalence of adjectival democracy akin to historical fiefdom.

In choosing between both, we must remember whose interest democracy serves. And as a continent least developed and least secure among all continents, Africa must realise that the concept of democracy is not altruistically preached to it as a means to greatness but as a measure of her acceptance into the comity of world democracies. The world is content with us being adjectival democracies as long as internal strife keeps us undeveloped and thus always needing high interest yielding aid.

The bogey of state creation

THE view expressed recently by a group of about 50 lawmakers led by Senator Ayogu Eze to the effect that more states will be created in Nigeria before the 2011 general elections, and that this will be a prerequisite for the amendment of the Nigerian Constitution is rather curious. The argument for the creation of states is well-worn and even hackneyed. It purports to usher in even development to all parts of the country. But it often masks the real intentions of its protagonists. Nigeria is metaphorically seen as a large piece of cake surrounded by a conclave of rats. Everyone wants a bite of it but no one cares much about what happens thereafter. The negative aspects of state creation are often overlooked.

With each state created, we became less Nigerian than before. All those from whose states new ones were excised will attest to this truth - the fight over tables and chairs, the retrenchments and the loss of pension rights. Since Nigeria no longer has development plans to which states could buy into, creating more states can only mean creating more leaking pockets. Moreover, as Nigerians have seen, there is virtually no control over the financial behaviour - some might say recklessness - of governors whilst in office and increasingly whilst out of it.

At independence Nigeria had three regions. Then it became four with the creation of the Mid-West. The civil war saw the creation of 12 states. Since then the number of states has increased to 19 until now we have 36 excluding Abuja. Nigeria has more or less determined that for purposes of administrative convenience the country should be divided into six zones. There are about 350 languages in Nigeria, should we give each linguistic group a state of its own? What purpose is served by the unending balkanisation of the country? States need not be created on the basis of tribe and tongue but viability. What Nigeria lacks is good governance at all levels, an enlightened citizenry and the creation of a level-playing field in our politics.

As presently constituted the vast majority of the 36 states cannot survive without regular doses of financial infusion from the federal government which in turn survives on the rent it collects from oil. Oil being a depleting commodity, the Nigeria's current model of "federalism" cannot endure. We must ask whether we see states as centres of productivity or centres of consumption. Regretfully the latter seems to be the case hence all are clamouring for their share of the cake. When the protagonists achieve their aim, they become the lord and master of a new fiefdom. Predictably, they would again marginalise some minority elements in their midst. For this country to grow, politicians must wean themselves from the politics of sharing and grabbing and embrace the politics of imaginative thinking and problem-solving.

When members of the Ayogu Eze committee promise to amend the constitution, have they reckoned with the difficulties involved not just at the federal level but at the state level as well? The veiled blackmail that the creation of new states would be a prerequisite for the amendment of the much maligned 1999 Constitution does not hold water. Surely it is preposterous to argue that if no new states were created, the Nigerian constitution cannot be amended forever.

This country is besieged with enormous problems in almost every direction. Squabbling over the creation of states by legislators who never advocated state creation before the awful general elections of 2007 that brought them to power is a distraction. If these legislators are true nationalists, why do they not consider the opposite of state creation - the merger of existing states into six zones, for instance? All are agreed that Nigeria made more progress when we had three regions than now. The need to rationalise the state structure has become imperative owing to foreseeable difficult times ahead. Nigeria runs a most expensive bureaucracy. A situation where 70 to 80 per cent of the nation's income is frittered away on personnel costs is simply unacceptable. Instead of fragmentation what Nigeria needs is consolidation.

We call on our legislators to show some evidence of deep thinking about the future of this country, and to direct their energies towards more important tasks. The less they think of their personal welfare and influence, the better legislators they are likely to become. The air of Nigeria is thick with politics but light on problem-solving capacity.

The worsening insecurity in the country

THE alarming rate of kidnapping in Nigeria in recent times, particularly in the South-East and South-South states has compounded the already frightening insecurity situation in the country. Before now, Nigerians had contended with the onslaught by armed robbers that have overrun the entire country. What started as a local problem largely as an aftermath of the civil war in the south quickly spread to other parts of the country. Today, no part of the country is free from the ravages of violent armed robbers. Not even in the far northern states, where life used to be absolutely safe. No more again. Armed robbers have taken root all over the country.

Since the advent of violent armed robbery, the government has done everything within its power to address the problem. The most violent approach, perhaps, was the setting up of armed robbery tribunals whose judgment led to the conviction and execution of hundreds of armed robbers by firing squad. That was during the military era in the 70s and 80s. It was erroneously believed that the option of firing squad for convicted robbers would bring the menace to an end. But that was wrong. Experience has shown that not even the public execution of the robbers could stop the deadly evil. As it were, there were cases of people whose cars were stolen even at the execution ground. That only ridiculed the option.

After a long concerted effort by government, it became obvious that the solution was ineffective as the number of robbers increased by the day. Following that reality, the armed robbery tribunals went under and public execution of convicted robbers was stopped or suspended. That in a way meant that the criminals had won as the situation went back to square one. Some people had insinuated that the public execution approach was a military solution. A civilian government would be incapable of meeting force with force. Hence, across the federation, there are hundreds of convicted criminals on death row languishing in prisons of which the state governors are reluctant to accede to their execution.

Ever since the demise of the tribunals and public execution of robbers, it is not clear what other option government has adopted to deal with the hydra-headed problem. Whatever strategy is in place certainly is ineffective given the increased number of armed robbers all over the place. While top government officials, politicians and the rich are given security coverage; the ordinary citizens are left at the mercy of the men of the underworld. Nothing can be more frightening than to be confronted with the reality that one is not safe in the country, not even in the serenity of one's home.

While the country is still battling with armed robbery, the most frightening kidnapping monster gradually crept in. I have used armed robbery to illustrate the emerging ugly trend of kidnapping because the two have similar origin. While armed robbery started as fallout to the civil war, kidnapping started as fallout to the armed conflict in the Niger Delta region over resource control. The proliferation of arms in all cases is the driving force. When an environment is created for the proliferation of arms and ammunition, then there is anarchy. Kidnapping and armed robbery are twin sisters; as such, the solution to the two is the same. The economic engagement of the idle minds in gainful employment is the way out.

In a spate of three years, kidnapping and hostage taking have spread from the Niger Delta creeks to the mainland. The monster has spread and taken deep root in the Southeast where thousands of able bodied but unemployed youths abound. Within the Southeast, Anambra State is the epicenter followed by Imo and Abia. In Anambra State for instance, residents sleep with half an eye! There is apprehension everywhere. The situation has got to the point whereby the banks are often closed and only operate skeletal services. Criminals who now target both the expatriates and all classes of Nigerians whose family could provide large ransom have infiltrated what started as pockets of abduction of mainly foreign oil workers in the Niger Delta as part of the "struggle to liberate the region".

A Police Affairs report released last week said the Southeast is the kidnapping region of Nigeria. The report says about 512 persons have been kidnapped in Nigeria this year alone, up by nearly 70 per cent from 2008 figures. Given the worrisome trend, virtually everybody is at risk of being kidnapped. Nigeria is currently among the top ten kidnapping countries. That has placed her among the ranks of Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya Region of Russia and Philippines, where violent criminal activities are rampant.

The effects of unbridled armed robbery and kidnapping on the economy are enormous. While the country is in the throes of infrastructural decay including lack of electricity for industrial development, the added woe of escalating criminal activities have dealt a heavy blow on the country's quest for foreign direct investment. The news at the disposal of the international community is that Nigeria is most unsafe to live and have investment. Thus, before any foreigner contemplates of coming to Nigeria, he or she would not only be calculating the high cost of investing in the country but also the safety of his or her life. Without doubt, this is the most unfavourable development in the country.

If Nigeria were placed side by side with the other countries in the kidnapping club, it would be found that most of those countries are at war. No sane person would dream of investing in a war torn country. The only viable investment in such crisis-ridden countries is arms and ammunitions, for that is what is profitable in the main. That explains why there is arms proliferation in the country. Given the conflict in the Niger Delta, some armed merchants must have found a ready market for their product. And so, more arms are being smuggled into the country. But since Nigeria is not officially at war, what we have at present is a break down of law and order due to security lapses on the part of government.

Kidnapping has assumed frightening proportion because the Federal Government took it as a problem of the Niger Delta. Evil is like cancer, it sticks at a spot and spreads from there if untreated. That was how armed robbery started as a problem in the south before it spread to other parts of the country. Since kidnapping had never been part of our cultural experience, the cankerworm would have been nipped in the bud if it had not been confused with militancy and taken as a localized problem in the creeks.

But even at that, the problem has not become endemic in most parts of the country, particularly the west and the north. What it means is that it could still be contained if the authorities are willing and determined to address it. If nothing is done to deal with this problem, I am afraid that in the next five to 10 years, armed robbery would be a child's play to kidnapping. It would get to a point when travelling from one part of the country to the other would be a major risk. Kidnappers would then hijack travellers on the highways and abduct as many as they want. The situation is tending toward that ugly scenario.

Against this backdrop, the security meeting convened last week at the instance of the Senate to address the problem is a step in the right direction. According to reports, the Senate had summoned the Minister of Internal Affairs, Dr. Shettima Mustapha, the Minister of State (Internal Affairs), Mr. Demola Seriki and some top security chiefs behind closed doors on the worsening security situation in the country. Chairman of the Senate Committee on Information and Media, Senator Ayogu Eze said the meeting was "informed by a recent motion in the Senate urging the Federal Government to take urgent steps to address the high rate of kidnapping and security lapses in the country".

At the end of the meeting, he said "we are satisfied that what needs to be done is being put in place to ensure that our country does not run into anarchy". It is important that the meeting is treated with the urgency it deserves. Whatever strategies were fashioned out to deal with the problem should be seen as a short-term measure. There is need to address the problem on long-term basis. The only viable solution is to work towards creating employment for the masses of able-bodied men and women roaming about the streets. The Federal Government can't do it alone. The states and local government councils should be involved. The Senate should involve the security chiefs of these tiers of government whenever strategies are being worked out. A collective effort is required to deal with the problem.

The worsening insecurity in the country

THE alarming rate of kidnapping in Nigeria in recent times, particularly in the South-East and South-South states has compounded the already frightening insecurity situation in the country. Before now, Nigerians had contended with the onslaught by armed robbers that have overrun the entire country. What started as a local problem largely as an aftermath of the civil war in the south quickly spread to other parts of the country. Today, no part of the country is free from the ravages of violent armed robbers. Not even in the far northern states, where life used to be absolutely safe. No more again. Armed robbers have taken root all over the country.

Since the advent of violent armed robbery, the government has done everything within its power to address the problem. The most violent approach, perhaps, was the setting up of armed robbery tribunals whose judgment led to the conviction and execution of hundreds of armed robbers by firing squad. That was during the military era in the 70s and 80s. It was erroneously believed that the option of firing squad for convicted robbers would bring the menace to an end. But that was wrong. Experience has shown that not even the public execution of the robbers could stop the deadly evil. As it were, there were cases of people whose cars were stolen even at the execution ground. That only ridiculed the option.

After a long concerted effort by government, it became obvious that the solution was ineffective as the number of robbers increased by the day. Following that reality, the armed robbery tribunals went under and public execution of convicted robbers was stopped or suspended. That in a way meant that the criminals had won as the situation went back to square one. Some people had insinuated that the public execution approach was a military solution. A civilian government would be incapable of meeting force with force. Hence, across the federation, there are hundreds of convicted criminals on death row languishing in prisons of which the state governors are reluctant to accede to their execution.

Ever since the demise of the tribunals and public execution of robbers, it is not clear what other option government has adopted to deal with the hydra-headed problem. Whatever strategy is in place certainly is ineffective given the increased number of armed robbers all over the place. While top government officials, politicians and the rich are given security coverage; the ordinary citizens are left at the mercy of the men of the underworld. Nothing can be more frightening than to be confronted with the reality that one is not safe in the country, not even in the serenity of one's home.

While the country is still battling with armed robbery, the most frightening kidnapping monster gradually crept in. I have used armed robbery to illustrate the emerging ugly trend of kidnapping because the two have similar origin. While armed robbery started as fallout to the civil war, kidnapping started as fallout to the armed conflict in the Niger Delta region over resource control. The proliferation of arms in all cases is the driving force. When an environment is created for the proliferation of arms and ammunition, then there is anarchy. Kidnapping and armed robbery are twin sisters; as such, the solution to the two is the same. The economic engagement of the idle minds in gainful employment is the way out.

In a spate of three years, kidnapping and hostage taking have spread from the Niger Delta creeks to the mainland. The monster has spread and taken deep root in the Southeast where thousands of able bodied but unemployed youths abound. Within the Southeast, Anambra State is the epicenter followed by Imo and Abia. In Anambra State for instance, residents sleep with half an eye! There is apprehension everywhere. The situation has got to the point whereby the banks are often closed and only operate skeletal services. Criminals who now target both the expatriates and all classes of Nigerians whose family could provide large ransom have infiltrated what started as pockets of abduction of mainly foreign oil workers in the Niger Delta as part of the "struggle to liberate the region".

A Police Affairs report released last week said the Southeast is the kidnapping region of Nigeria. The report says about 512 persons have been kidnapped in Nigeria this year alone, up by nearly 70 per cent from 2008 figures. Given the worrisome trend, virtually everybody is at risk of being kidnapped. Nigeria is currently among the top ten kidnapping countries. That has placed her among the ranks of Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya Region of Russia and Philippines, where violent criminal activities are rampant.

The effects of unbridled armed robbery and kidnapping on the economy are enormous. While the country is in the throes of infrastructural decay including lack of electricity for industrial development, the added woe of escalating criminal activities have dealt a heavy blow on the country's quest for foreign direct investment. The news at the disposal of the international community is that Nigeria is most unsafe to live and have investment. Thus, before any foreigner contemplates of coming to Nigeria, he or she would not only be calculating the high cost of investing in the country but also the safety of his or her life. Without doubt, this is the most unfavourable development in the country.

If Nigeria were placed side by side with the other countries in the kidnapping club, it would be found that most of those countries are at war. No sane person would dream of investing in a war torn country. The only viable investment in such crisis-ridden countries is arms and ammunitions, for that is what is profitable in the main. That explains why there is arms proliferation in the country. Given the conflict in the Niger Delta, some armed merchants must have found a ready market for their product. And so, more arms are being smuggled into the country. But since Nigeria is not officially at war, what we have at present is a break down of law and order due to security lapses on the part of government.

Kidnapping has assumed frightening proportion because the Federal Government took it as a problem of the Niger Delta. Evil is like cancer, it sticks at a spot and spreads from there if untreated. That was how armed robbery started as a problem in the south before it spread to other parts of the country. Since kidnapping had never been part of our cultural experience, the cankerworm would have been nipped in the bud if it had not been confused with militancy and taken as a localized problem in the creeks.

But even at that, the problem has not become endemic in most parts of the country, particularly the west and the north. What it means is that it could still be contained if the authorities are willing and determined to address it. If nothing is done to deal with this problem, I am afraid that in the next five to 10 years, armed robbery would be a child's play to kidnapping. It would get to a point when travelling from one part of the country to the other would be a major risk. Kidnappers would then hijack travellers on the highways and abduct as many as they want. The situation is tending toward that ugly scenario.

Against this backdrop, the security meeting convened last week at the instance of the Senate to address the problem is a step in the right direction. According to reports, the Senate had summoned the Minister of Internal Affairs, Dr. Shettima Mustapha, the Minister of State (Internal Affairs), Mr. Demola Seriki and some top security chiefs behind closed doors on the worsening security situation in the country. Chairman of the Senate Committee on Information and Media, Senator Ayogu Eze said the meeting was "informed by a recent motion in the Senate urging the Federal Government to take urgent steps to address the high rate of kidnapping and security lapses in the country".

At the end of the meeting, he said "we are satisfied that what needs to be done is being put in place to ensure that our country does not run into anarchy". It is important that the meeting is treated with the urgency it deserves. Whatever strategies were fashioned out to deal with the problem should be seen as a short-term measure. There is need to address the problem on long-term basis. The only viable solution is to work towards creating employment for the masses of able-bodied men and women roaming about the streets. The Federal Government can't do it alone. The states and local government councils should be involved. The Senate should involve the security chiefs of these tiers of government whenever strategies are being worked out. A collective effort is required to deal with the problem.

The worsening insecurity in the country

THE alarming rate of kidnapping in Nigeria in recent times, particularly in the South-East and South-South states has compounded the already frightening insecurity situation in the country. Before now, Nigerians had contended with the onslaught by armed robbers that have overrun the entire country. What started as a local problem largely as an aftermath of the civil war in the south quickly spread to other parts of the country. Today, no part of the country is free from the ravages of violent armed robbers. Not even in the far northern states, where life used to be absolutely safe. No more again. Armed robbers have taken root all over the country.

Since the advent of violent armed robbery, the government has done everything within its power to address the problem. The most violent approach, perhaps, was the setting up of armed robbery tribunals whose judgment led to the conviction and execution of hundreds of armed robbers by firing squad. That was during the military era in the 70s and 80s. It was erroneously believed that the option of firing squad for convicted robbers would bring the menace to an end. But that was wrong. Experience has shown that not even the public execution of the robbers could stop the deadly evil. As it were, there were cases of people whose cars were stolen even at the execution ground. That only ridiculed the option.

After a long concerted effort by government, it became obvious that the solution was ineffective as the number of robbers increased by the day. Following that reality, the armed robbery tribunals went under and public execution of convicted robbers was stopped or suspended. That in a way meant that the criminals had won as the situation went back to square one. Some people had insinuated that the public execution approach was a military solution. A civilian government would be incapable of meeting force with force. Hence, across the federation, there are hundreds of convicted criminals on death row languishing in prisons of which the state governors are reluctant to accede to their execution.

Ever since the demise of the tribunals and public execution of robbers, it is not clear what other option government has adopted to deal with the hydra-headed problem. Whatever strategy is in place certainly is ineffective given the increased number of armed robbers all over the place. While top government officials, politicians and the rich are given security coverage; the ordinary citizens are left at the mercy of the men of the underworld. Nothing can be more frightening than to be confronted with the reality that one is not safe in the country, not even in the serenity of one's home.

While the country is still battling with armed robbery, the most frightening kidnapping monster gradually crept in. I have used armed robbery to illustrate the emerging ugly trend of kidnapping because the two have similar origin. While armed robbery started as fallout to the civil war, kidnapping started as fallout to the armed conflict in the Niger Delta region over resource control. The proliferation of arms in all cases is the driving force. When an environment is created for the proliferation of arms and ammunition, then there is anarchy. Kidnapping and armed robbery are twin sisters; as such, the solution to the two is the same. The economic engagement of the idle minds in gainful employment is the way out.

In a spate of three years, kidnapping and hostage taking have spread from the Niger Delta creeks to the mainland. The monster has spread and taken deep root in the Southeast where thousands of able bodied but unemployed youths abound. Within the Southeast, Anambra State is the epicenter followed by Imo and Abia. In Anambra State for instance, residents sleep with half an eye! There is apprehension everywhere. The situation has got to the point whereby the banks are often closed and only operate skeletal services. Criminals who now target both the expatriates and all classes of Nigerians whose family could provide large ransom have infiltrated what started as pockets of abduction of mainly foreign oil workers in the Niger Delta as part of the "struggle to liberate the region".

A Police Affairs report released last week said the Southeast is the kidnapping region of Nigeria. The report says about 512 persons have been kidnapped in Nigeria this year alone, up by nearly 70 per cent from 2008 figures. Given the worrisome trend, virtually everybody is at risk of being kidnapped. Nigeria is currently among the top ten kidnapping countries. That has placed her among the ranks of Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya Region of Russia and Philippines, where violent criminal activities are rampant.

The effects of unbridled armed robbery and kidnapping on the economy are enormous. While the country is in the throes of infrastructural decay including lack of electricity for industrial development, the added woe of escalating criminal activities have dealt a heavy blow on the country's quest for foreign direct investment. The news at the disposal of the international community is that Nigeria is most unsafe to live and have investment. Thus, before any foreigner contemplates of coming to Nigeria, he or she would not only be calculating the high cost of investing in the country but also the safety of his or her life. Without doubt, this is the most unfavourable development in the country.

If Nigeria were placed side by side with the other countries in the kidnapping club, it would be found that most of those countries are at war. No sane person would dream of investing in a war torn country. The only viable investment in such crisis-ridden countries is arms and ammunitions, for that is what is profitable in the main. That explains why there is arms proliferation in the country. Given the conflict in the Niger Delta, some armed merchants must have found a ready market for their product. And so, more arms are being smuggled into the country. But since Nigeria is not officially at war, what we have at present is a break down of law and order due to security lapses on the part of government.

Kidnapping has assumed frightening proportion because the Federal Government took it as a problem of the Niger Delta. Evil is like cancer, it sticks at a spot and spreads from there if untreated. That was how armed robbery started as a problem in the south before it spread to other parts of the country. Since kidnapping had never been part of our cultural experience, the cankerworm would have been nipped in the bud if it had not been confused with militancy and taken as a localized problem in the creeks.

But even at that, the problem has not become endemic in most parts of the country, particularly the west and the north. What it means is that it could still be contained if the authorities are willing and determined to address it. If nothing is done to deal with this problem, I am afraid that in the next five to 10 years, armed robbery would be a child's play to kidnapping. It would get to a point when travelling from one part of the country to the other would be a major risk. Kidnappers would then hijack travellers on the highways and abduct as many as they want. The situation is tending toward that ugly scenario.

Against this backdrop, the security meeting convened last week at the instance of the Senate to address the problem is a step in the right direction. According to reports, the Senate had summoned the Minister of Internal Affairs, Dr. Shettima Mustapha, the Minister of State (Internal Affairs), Mr. Demola Seriki and some top security chiefs behind closed doors on the worsening security situation in the country. Chairman of the Senate Committee on Information and Media, Senator Ayogu Eze said the meeting was "informed by a recent motion in the Senate urging the Federal Government to take urgent steps to address the high rate of kidnapping and security lapses in the country".

At the end of the meeting, he said "we are satisfied that what needs to be done is being put in place to ensure that our country does not run into anarchy". It is important that the meeting is treated with the urgency it deserves. Whatever strategies were fashioned out to deal with the problem should be seen as a short-term measure. There is need to address the problem on long-term basis. The only viable solution is to work towards creating employment for the masses of able-bodied men and women roaming about the streets. The Federal Government can't do it alone. The states and local government councils should be involved. The Senate should involve the security chiefs of these tiers of government whenever strategies are being worked out. A collective effort is required to deal with the problem.

Wole Soyinka at 75

Over the years, Professor Oluwole Akinwande Soyinka (better known as Wole Soyinka) has amply demonstrated how best to use one’s talents for the advancement of society. His award of the prestigious Nobel Prize for Literature a boost to the international rating of Nigeria, especially at a time the country’s image was at its lowest ebb. Still, the literary icon is so dissatisfied with the socio-economic and political situation in his native country that his entire life has been devoted to the quest for a better society.
Soyinka, who clocked 75 on July 13, is one of the greatest gifts of Mother Nature to Nigeria. Born in Ake, Abeokuta in the present Ogun State on July 13, 1934, the first African Nobel laureate in Literature has, through the years, made his marks as an erudite scholar, a literary giant, a formidable critic of bad governments and especially an ardent foe of military regimes. He could even be described as a one-man opposition to bad governance, where government appears to have suppressed or bought over political opposition.
His interest in the arts manifested early when, as a pupil of St. Peters School, Ake, Abeokuta, he perfectly acted the role of a magician in a drama presented during one of the school’s prize-giving day ceremonies. Even at Government College, Ibadan, Soyinka distinguished himself as a prominent member of the school’s drama society.
In 1952, he was admitted into the then University College, Ibadan where he studied English, History and Greek. His first poem was published in The University Voice, the official newsletter of the students union in 1953.
Soyinka left Ibadan for Leeds University, UK in 1954. His first short story, Madam Etinne’s Establishment, was published in the university’s magazine, The Gryphon in 1957. He returned to the country in 1960 and formed a drama group, ‘The 1960 Masks’, which acted as a catalyst to his theatre activities. His play, A Dance of the Forests, won the first prize for the Independence play-writing contest.
Probably Africa’s most influential playwright, Soyinka is one of the wittiest and most sophisticated writers Nigeria has ever produced. His polymathic literary accomplishment is legendary, being unusually versatile in all the three genres of literature --- Poetry, Prose and Drama. His versatility was handsomely rewarded in 1986 with the prestigious Nobel Prize for Literature, making him the first African to win that award.
Soyinka has survived many attempts to silence his voice, including imprisonment, harassment by security agents and even exile in the course of his relentless agitation for peace, freedom and good governance.
In the aftermath of the annulment of the June 12 1993 election, believed to have been won by the late Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Soyinka was in the forefront of pro-democracy activists agitating for the restoration of the Abiola mandate. He went on exile in November 1994 to escape persecution by the Sani Abacha regime but he continued the struggle for democratic rule from there.
Soyinka is not an armchair critic. He was once involved in policy formulation during the Ibrahim Babangida regime. One of his concerns led to the establishment of the Federal Road Safety Commission (FRSC), which he briefly headed as the pioneer corps marshal.
Some people however criticise him for being instrumental to the founding of Pyrates Confraternity in his University of Ibadan days. The concept of the group, which was a noble intention of fighting elitism and tribalism on campus, was invariably contaminated to be the foundation for campus terrorism across the country today.
We salute this irrepressible critic and illustrious son of Nigeria who has remained the conscience of the nation, forever keeping corrupt regimes on their toes.

Nigeria House Must not Fall

Nearly five months after world attention was drawn to the rot at the “Nigeria House” located in the Manhattan business area of New York, United States the building is yet to be fixed. In that incident, the Chief of Defense Staff, Air Chief Marshal Paul Dike, Chief of Army Staff, Lt. General Abdulrahman Dambazau and other government dignitaries were trapped in the elevator of the building built with the tax payer’s money.
The Nigeria House was built between 1992 and 1993 by the Federal Government. Although it houses the Nigerian Embassy and staff of the Nigerian Permanent Mission to the UN, it was also meant to generate funds through the rent of properties to private companies.
But now, the building is in a sorry state. Most of the facilities, including the heating and air conditioning system, elevators, offices, the curtain glass on the building have not been replaced for more than 16 years.
Recently, the Minister of National Planning, Dr. Shamsudeen Usman went to inspect the 21-storey building and came back with an open lamentation that the building was seriously deteriorating. Earlier, Nigeria’s Permanent Represen-tative to the UN, Professor Joy Ogwu met with the Minster and also confirmed that the building was in a deteriorating condition and needed “total rehabilitation” to enable it conform to New York building code and other requirements. Also, the immediate past former Nigerian Ambassador to the United States, General Oluwole Rotimi had severally raised alarm about the deplorable state of the embassy building.
When last March the army generals and high-ranking government dignitaries were trapped in one of the elevators of the building, this paper published an editorial calling for an immediate repair work on the building. Several Nigerians followed suit and similarly called on the Federal government to effect urgent repair work on the building.
We are rather disappointed that up till now the Federal Government is yet to commence renovation work on the building. This is a building Nigerians in the US as well as those at home have been proud of. It has been an appropriate venue for hosting many dignitaries from Nigeria.
This Nigeria House in New York must not fall. The Nigeria House is not just any building, it is a symbol of Nigeria located right at the heart of the prestigious Manhattan business area of New York. It stands out amidst other high rise buildings of other nations and corporations. Under international law, the House is inviolable and enjoys full international protection and immunity. Therefore, to be lukewarm in the maintenance of such an important building is very regrettable.
Once again, we urge the Federal Government to commission urgent repair work on the building. The Committee set up to study “a proposal for the maintenance and possibility of engaging private managers” to carry out repairs on the building should expedite action. There is need for immediate action, not unnecessary government bureaucracy. If, as in the past, it is for the Ministry of Works to repair the building, the urgency of the task should not be lost to bureaucracy.
There is the tendency for New Yorkers and visitors who do not know Nigeria to see the deplorable condition of the Nigeria House in New York as a reflection of the conditions in Nigeria. Therefore, to protect our international image, we must act fast now and fix the building. That big house in upscale New York ought to be the pride of our nation.

The Third –Term Plot in Niger

Like a recurring cancer, the sit-tight syndrome that has characterized political leadership in Africa for decades is in the making yet again. This time it is happening in Niger Republic. Already, the clandestine moves by President Mamadou Tandja to prolong his stay in power has produced troubling consequences that are set to get worse if prompt actions are not taken from within and outside the country to arrest the malady.
Tandja who is due to step down in December this year after two terms of five years each has now gone the familiar but unfortunate way of dictators. He has unilaterally dissolved the parliament and sponsored the drafting of a new constitution designed to deliver to him a third straight term in office. He has also deployed security forces to beat the increasingly vocal opposition into submission. To further demonstrate his resolve to alter the very constitution that put him in his country’s saddle, he has ignored Niger’s Constitutional Court’s ruling against the referendum slated for August 4, 2009 on the so-called constitution review. And having assumed emergency powers “to safeguard the interest of Niger people”, the world can now expect full-blown dictatorship from the leader of the mineral rich but one of the poorest nations on earth.
This unfolding drama becomes even more ridiculous when Tandja’s rationalizations are considered. The 71-year-old president insists that he needs more time to introduce a full presidential system of government that would empower the president to spearhead comprehensive governance. His supporters point to his achievements, notably a hydroelectric dam, an oil refinery and the 1.2 billion euro Imouraren uranium mine being handled by French energy giant, Areva, and argue for continuity. They also see Tandja as the only one who can quell the rebellion being prosecuted by the Tuaregs north of Niger.
These reasons are, at best, laughable. Whatever project or programme the president has not been able to complete in the one decade of his rule should be left for another person to execute. One lesson Tandja and indeed the ruling elite in Africa should learn fast is that public service can only thrive when institutions, and not individuals, are nurtured and strengthened. Rather than make persons invincible and promote them to tin gods, political and economic structures should be founded in such a way that they become enduring. That way, the absence of anybody would not ground the workings of government. Today, the larger part of Africa is in a deplorable state largely because public positions have been personalized.
With the current challenge posed by Tandja also comes an opportunity for the international community, especially the rest of the continent, to be united against the monster of perpetuation of political power. Violent anti-government protests have been staged by Nigeriens. The opposition has even called on the armed forces to disobey the president and has pronounced a no-retreat situation. Also, in his capacity as the chairman of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), President Umaru Yar’Adua of Nigeria has sent a high-powered delegation headed by General Abdulsalami Abubakar to Niamey to attempt to douse the tension there.
But the task of halting the dangerous trend in the world’s second largest producer of uranium must not end there. If Tandja continues along the present path, he should be ostracized first by ECOWAS and then the rest of the African Union (AU. Niger has had its own share of despots. And even now as before, the continent is host to rulers who have chosen to sink with the countries they are supposed to lead selflessly, preferring to subvert existing laws and further their own personal agenda.
The world should not wait until pictures of despair, disease and death begin to emerge from Niger before acting to save Nigeriens from the ambition of one man.

Niger Delta and Crime Barons

Given the imperatives of peace in the Niger Delta, for which the Federal Government has granted amnesty to the militants, it would be expected that the same government would go all the way, sparing nothing, at ensuring that the peace initiative is not only achieved but sustained.
The recent unconditional pardon to MEND leader, Henry Okah, is a demonstration of the extent government wishes to go in restoring peace in the region. But the statement credited to Vice President Goodluck Jonathan, that some powerful crime barons are frustrating the amnesty plan offered by government raises some concerns.
Coming from a government official with access to intelligence reports, that could not have been a false alarm. We believe, like the Vice President, that indeed some influential Nigerians have, over the years, benefited from the roguery and sheer brigandage in the Niger Delta. Many Nigerians share this view too.
But given the advantage of security information at his disposal, we expected the Vice President to go ahead to expose the crime barons. We believe that unless they are exposed, even the release of Okah, as part of the peace deal, may not lead to the achievement of sustainable peace in the region.
Ordinarily, the dropping of all charges and eventual release of Okah, though not entirely a sine qua non for the return of peace in the region, should promote an atmosphere conducive enough to facilitate the return of peace.
But this can only be achieved if all obstacles to the peace deal (including unmasking the crime barons) are removed and dealt with.
The 60-day ceasefire declared by the militants should further promote dialogue and negotiation between government, the militants and other stakeholders.
It is difficult to understand why the government has kept secret the list of the persons said to have been found in Camp 5, the operational base of the militants. We fear that this may thwart the entire peace process, because those who benefit from the crisis may work against the return of peace and order to the region. Many of the persons whose names were found in the camp’s register were said to have had rounds of transactions with Government Tompolo and other militant chieftains. From the history of the Niger Delta crisis, it is not unlikely that some of those caught in the web of complicity are politicians, crude oil thieves and other powerful individuals.
Whatever it is, government has shown lack of courage in confronting the reality of this case. We fear that government has not demonstrated enough courage to getting to the bottom of the crisis, which has cost the nation huge human and material resources. We believe that the release of such names will not only serve as deserved embarrassment to the persons concerned, it will force down the level of the rage in the creeks.
Indeed, we suspect that many of the “Big Men” involved in the support and even sponsorship of the militants are beneficiaries of the crisis.
Given the quantum of ill gotten wealth such cartel operators receive from the crisis, they are most likely to work against any plan that will end the crisis, because if the crisis ends, then their source of ill-gotten wealth would have ended too.
In the light of the above, we call on all parties to pursue the peace deal with all sincerity. We commend the ceasefire declared by the militants and hope it will lead to final cessation of hostilities in the region. The release of Okah and the amnesty offer should combine to accelerate not only needed confidence building, but ultimately, the restoration of peace and order in the region. Peace can only be sustainable when those who benefit from the crisis are exposed and punished.

Failed Banks Debtors

Today Nigerians know better why 13 of the nation’s banks went under some years ago, leaving their depositors and staff in agony from which many of them have not recovered.
Reports released the other day by the Nkechi Nworgu-led Senate committee on banking and finance gave out the names of some prominent Nigerians who took huge loans from the ill-fated banks but failed to pay back. They had used their privileged positions as directors in such banks to funnel jumbo-size loans to themselves but either failed or refused to pay back. Reeling under the debilitating weight of such un-repaid loans, the affected banks collapsed.
The more shocking part of all this is that these defaulters, if not defrauders, had never had to face the law which their actions contravened. Almost all of them still swagger around the country as if they have done nothing wrong despite the anguish that their action had caused many unsuspecting Nigerians.
Despite calls for proper investigation of the collapse of the banks, it was not until recently that the Senate waded into it and uncovered what has come to look like a can of worms. When those entrusted with the safe-keep of depositors’ funds turn out to be the undoing of such treasures, then something is wrong with the system.
In commending the Senate for its painstaking investigation and making the names of these defaulters public despite obvious pressures not to do so, we urge that it makes good its promise to bring them to book through the relevant government agencies. The Senate also needs to widen its investigation. There may be others who are equally involved in this heartless profiteering.
For clear reasons, the action of these loan defaulters must be seen for what it is: an act of economic sabotage. By their greed and irresponsible act, they had not only made depositors, and even other shareholders lose their money but also made workers of the collapsed banks to lose their jobs. Both developments have had very grave impact on the social and economic well-being of the nation.
While all the ruined careers and wasted investments may not be redeemed, those behind such recklessness must not be allowed to get away with a mere slap on the wrist. Regardless of their social standing, they must be made to face the full wrath of the law and to pay back that which they took from the failed banks. The National Assembly must ensure that not only are the offenders properly penalized but also that the relevant laws aimed at checking such insider-abuse are strengthened in the nation’s corporate governance. It is possible that such insider-abuse is still happening today. We need not wait for more banks to fail before serious measures are taken to stamp out this unhealthy practice.
It may not be possible to eradicate fraud altogether from any financial system. But it will be sad to create the impression that any set of individuals can defraud the system with impunity. If that happens, then the authorities would be fueling crime in a sector so critical to the economic health of the nation. That is why in other countries economic crimes such as tax evasion, criminal manipulation of the stock market and violation of specific financial laws are visited with severe penalty. The Bernard Madoff episode in the United States is a very recent example. For committing financial crimes against the system, the 71-year-old Madoff was sentenced to a jail term of 150 years. He was also stripped of all his possessions under a $171 billion forfeiture order. But the crime was so evident that he refused to appeal the sentence.
The essence of Madoff’s sentence is to deter others who may be inclined to toe that line. Nigeria should do no less with economic saboteurs

Electronic passport as Nigeria's image purifier

THE project on re-branding Nigeria has attracted so much attention that we completely forgot about an important and strategic feature of a related campaign to re-position Nigeria's image in the international community through the new electronic passport (e-passport). All commendations must go to Turai Yar'Adua, President Umaru Yar'Adua's wife, who visited Brussels in the last week of June 2009 and reminded us how our new electronic passport is quietly transforming the image of Nigeria.

This is the best idea I have read so far since the Federal Government launched its controversial project designed to change the way Nigeria and Nigerians are perceived by other countries. If not for the obvious conflict of interest implications, I would have recommended that Mrs Yar'Adua should be appointed immediately to an adjunct position as Nigeria's Roving Ambassador on Image Re-design.

What revolutionary ideas did Turai Yar'Adua raise in Brussels that we have not heard before? Well, here you have it. She told her audience: "Our international passport is now electronic and only genuine Nigerians who provide the required data get access to it. This has added to our good image and restored to Nigerians abroad the lost dignity."

Did Mrs Yar'Adua say that the new electronic passport has "restored to Nigerians abroad the lost dignity"? Where? When? How? It is absolutely nonsensical to suggest that the new electronic passport has restored to Nigerians residing overseas the dignity they lost a long time ago. It will take much more than a passport change before the world can begin to view us differently. Mrs Yar'Adua's enthusiastic comment must have been driven by an overflowing sentiment for some kind of national re-birth. More troubling is that her statement was cooked and garnished with fallacy. If Mrs Yar'Adua's objective was to make us believe that Nigeria's image has changed positively since her husband became president, she should have a quiet talk to the people who are on the receiving end of western stereotypes directed at Nigerians.

The best way to establish the truth in Mrs Yar'Adua's assertion is to subject it to a practical test. That test would involve asking all Nigerians residing overseas - especially those who hold the new electronic passport - whether they have experienced any significant change in the way they are perceived by their host country or whether they have noticed a change in the way they are treated at international airports.

Mrs Yar'Adua seems stuck on her idea about the effectiveness of the new electronic passport to override past transgressions committed by Nigerians when she argued: "Sometimes those prostitutes in Europe who claim to be Nigerians are not Nigerians; but I agree that they are Africans, but certainly not all of them are Nigerians." According to ThisDay newspaper, Mrs Yar'Adua spoke as a guest of the executive members of the "Nigerians in the Diaspora Organisation Europe (NIDOE)", as well as the Nigerian Business Group in Europe, members of some NGOs that are located in Europe and officials of the Nigerian embassy.

Mrs Yar'Adua believes that the anti-forgery features of the new electronic passport, as well as the processes that applicants have to go through before they can receive the new passport, have made it difficult for non-Nigerians to obtain the passport. Of course, non-Nigerians have no business lining up to receive Nigerian passports. Okay, now that only genuine Nigerians can access the electronic passport, should we expect a significant reduction in the number of crimes committed by genuine Nigerians? Mrs Yar'Adua must be careful not to advertise the flawed impression that only non-Nigerians are involved in criminal schemes.

While it is true that a number of convicted criminals serving time in various prisons in different parts of the world are not genuine Nigerians by birth or citizenship (even if they hold Nigerian passports which they obtained fraudulently), we must honestly admit also that Nigeria did not lose its image on the basis that many foreigners used false Nigerian passports to commit crimes.

I am not persuaded that the new electronic passport has positively transformed the image of Nigeria and Nigerians in the eyes of the rest of the world. Nigeria lost international respect a long time ago owing to a number of reasons. These include but are not limited to the involvement of Nigerians - private individuals and government officers, students and teachers, legislators and lawyers, politicians and military leaders, pastors and members of their congregation -- in so many criminal activities such as illicit drug trafficking, "419" financial fraud, insurance scams, and the manufacture of many twisted ideas designed to beat the law at home and overseas.

It is simplistic to suggest that the new electronic passport has fixed Nigeria's image problem. It hasn't. And it will not change in any considerable manner the way the world perceives Nigeria and Nigerians. If it was that easy, if all that every country had to do to change its image was to change its passport, we wouldn't be where we are today. Nigerians at home and overseas, who have been demonised and stereotyped by the international community because of the iniquitous conduct of a few other Nigerians, would have regained public respect easily by switching to a new electronic passport.

If passport change was all we needed to regain our image, a new market on passport re-design would have sprung up all over the world. And the Federal Government would not have plunged itself into the contentious enterprise officially intended to re-brand Nigeria.

Here is the fallacy in Mrs Yar'Adua's patriotic but baseless comment. The new electronic passport has not and will not make customs officers, drug law enforcement agents, quarantine and immigration officers at international airports across the world to extend to Nigerian passport holders the same privileges they accord to holders of other countries' passports. It just won't happen because the electronic passport will not change the mindset that overseas law officers have against Nigerians, the negative stereotypes that are cast on many Nigerian passport holders, and western perceptions of Nigerians as dishonest people, drug pushers and financial fraud scammers?

Nigeria's image problem is not so much about the Nigerian passport. The problem lies with the name Nigeria -- and what Nigerians have done to damage that name. When customs officers at international airports sight the name Nigeria on a passport, they become hysterical not because of the colour of the passport but because of the criminality associated with the name Nigeria.

The behaviour and attitude of western officials to Nigerian passport holders is simply a reflection of the pictures in their heads about the capacity of Nigerians to invent and implement criminal ideas with relative ease. We may not like it but that is the message that runs through the brains of western officials whenever they identify Nigerians. Westerners commit similar or worse crimes but their officers often do not express as much alarm as they do when Nigerians are involved. There is something in the mind of western officials, particularly those officers at international airports, which tells them to do any of the following when they cite Nigerians: to run for cover, to raise their level of alertness or to guard their loincloth.

To argue that mere possession of Nigeria's new electronic passport has wiped away the negativity that is associated with many things Nigerian is to stretch optimism to a new level. Mrs Yar'Adua would like that to happen but the facts on the ground are not in accord with her perceptions. To be sure, the rigorous processes required before applicants are issued with Nigeria's new electronic passport will reduce the blatant abuses that marred the image of the old passport and the holders of that passport. But it will not change the way the world reacts to the name Nigeria. Our faults are not in our passport but in our national name.

To change our image, we don't necessarily need to change our passport. We must do a lot of things. First, we must change our behaviour, the way we do things, our orientation toward obtaining goods and services through dishonest means, our inclination toward corrupt enrichment, our fondness for evading tax, our veneration of looters of public treasury, our perception of government property as nobody's property, and our acceptance of corrupt practice as the right way to do things.

Budget 2009, Federal Government and the House of Representatives

FOLLOWING their joint investigation into the implementation of the 2009 Appropriation Act, the House of Representatives' Committees on Appropriation and Finance found that "the Federal Government's actual revenue (expendable fund) was N27.98 billion higher than the budgeted figures during the first four months of the year 2009". Although the Presidency had indicated last May that there was a 30 per cent shortfall in the budgeted revenue in the first quarter, funds were obtained from both revenue sources not captured in the Appropriation Act and the Excess Crude oil account to cushion the projected revenue gap for the year. Nonetheless, the House observed that the President had not followed due process as the right thing to do was for Mr. President to seek the prior approval of the National Assembly (NASS) before endorsing any withdrawal from the Excess Crude Oil account. We agree and urge the President to always abide by the rules.

Given the ostensible excess revenue above, the House rejected any claim that inadequate funding posed any constraint and insisted that the president should implement the budget fully or risk possible impeachment. It will be recalled that, apart from inadequate funding, the point was made that most of the constituency projects which the legislators inserted in the budget without any consultation with the executive arm that would be required to supervise their execution, lacked proper design and costing and were therefore unimplementable.

The report of the joint committees to the House was conveniently silent on the stated make-or-mar requirements for projects to be included in the budget . In the circumstance, we share the position of the executive and hold that such constituency projects have no place in the 2009 budget. Hence, instead of dissipating energy on unnecessary confrontation by embarking on impeachment proceedings against the President, the legislators should accept the home truth that they cannot rig the budget, for self-enrichment as was the intention under the 2009 budget. Therefore, legislators will do well to begin early consultations for an acrimony-free 2010 budget.

We, however, laud the legislators for the present resolve to rev up their oversight activities and put an end to the high levels of the budget under-implementation which the executive arm has exhibited in the last 10 years of democracy. The presidency is expected to implement any well-prepared budget to the highest degree possible. But the National Assembly has to do a thorough job in its laudable mission. For instance, although the House accused the executive arm of selectively implementing the 2009 budget, it is not clear what proportion of the mutually approved projects has been implemented. Every odd Wednesday, the Federal Executive Council announces the award of one contract or another, but that forms only a part of the project execution.

Seven months into the 2009 fiscal year, the news was that some legislators during the consideration of the joint committee's report attributed the current rash of industrial action to the executive arm's failure to implement relevant aspects of the budget. Maybe, with the unimplementable constituency projects out of the way, it is long overdue for the president to submit the promised supplementary budget that will restore the initial projects whose provisions were either slashed or removed outright to accommodate the ill-conceived pet projects of legislators. Going forward, the National Assembly should not only satisfy itself that all mutually approved projects are being physically and verifiably executed as scheduled but also keep the public abreast of achieved levels of implementation in each case at regular intervals.

Now, in the current search for enhanced budget implementation, a number of legislators have wondered why capital votes were usually returned unspent at the end of the year while the unspent overhead component vanished into thin air. For selfish reasons, legislators tend to equate release of funds to full budget implementation. But it is quite obvious from experience that the release of budgeted funds as it currently plays out actually detracts from faithful implementation of the budget. In order to ensure improved budget implementation, therefore, accrued revenue for specific projects should be left in the perfect safety of the federal treasury from where it could be released strictly in direct settlement of client firms or individuals as and when the projects are duly executed or other commitments mature.

What the National Assembly needs to do is to quickly enact legislation barring the premature release of budgeted funds to the MDAs ahead of project execution because the practice, apart from posing problems to monetary policy management, turns MDAs into middlemen that would rather trade with the funds at their disposal to further base interests than faithfully facilitate early and sound execution of the projects for which the funds were earmarked.

Again, in their new-found zeal to ensure that the budget is implemented as passed (we repeat the proviso that the budget be well prepared), the legislators, unfortunately, failed to recognise the mother counter-budget practice that has stunted the national economy for over three decades. All budgets as passed constrain government to expend realised (actual) naira revenue domestically plus a safe and duly specified dose of deficit. Over the last decade of democracy, for instance, the level of implementation of the capital budget in any given year was below 50 per cent officially. Government trumpeted the savings which took the form of unreleased and returned unspent funds. Thus the decade witnessed seemingly unbroken budget surpluses, which would ordinarily foster relatively conducive economic environment.

On the other hand, the prevailing reality of intractable excess liquidity, high inflation, deteriorating naira exchange rate, inhospitable production environment, prohibitive lending rates, comatose real sector and massive unemployment, in the cause-and effect realm of economics, are incontrovertible evidence of excessive government deficit spending.

Since the non-oil receipts are undisputed actual revenue whose expenditure is non-inflationary, we are left to conclude that the naira equivalents that are substituted for Federation Account dollar proceeds for sharing among the three tiers of government and which make the bulk of what the joint committee earlier termed "the Federal Government's actual revenue (expendable fund)" do not meet the test of realised revenue qua revenue.

Consequently the crusade for the executive arm to implement well-prepared budgets as passed in order to achieve high levels of budget execution must begin by getting the executive arm to go through the universal banks in order to convert and properly monetise Federation Account dollar allocations to the three tiers of government into actual naira revenue for government expenditure.