Managing and leveraging our hope quotient

THIS country does not allow young people hope", this was the rueful statement recently made to me by my younger brother, an amiable young man, who graduated, tops in his class, from Medical school about two years ago. I nodded at this casually uttered statement, which unknown to him was to have quite a profound effect on how I would begin to see, understand and empathise with the troubled youth of our country. In addition, it however provided great insight into the seemingly benign factor of how hope or the lack thereof, would significantly influence and possibly determine the psychology of this nation in years to come

When one pauses to deeply consider this, one begins to realise that the reluctance to hope and the unwillingness to unabashedly dream big dreams stymies development and produces seemingly innocuous, yet hugely damning consequences, for us all in the long run. It reminds me of a remark made of a terminally ill child who seemed so brave and admirably mature in the face of his looming fate: that such illnesses in children so young take away their dreams, but give them wisdom well beyond their years. It probably could be debated which was more desirable - dreams or wisdom? However, I am certain that most of us cherish the joyous naivety we exhibited in our youth as we tested life through somewhat opinionated and idealistic lenses. Ultimately, life has a way of gradually and dignifying-ly altering those rose-tinted lenses and bringing them in line with reality, but it does this in ways that cushion and manage what would otherwise be dysfunctional shocks to our system. The prevailing notion is that most of this realignment of our views ought to have happened by the time we turn 40 (hence the fool at forty notion ?) or else our fates thereafter lie sealed!

So what is the business of government with this concept of hope? All great nations, in addition to their obvious wealth and the strength of their institutions, provide an environment that enables the incubation of dreams. So strong is this incentive that it fosters not just the emotional daring, but also the means to live out these dreams. Fittingly, even if by coincidence, one can reference Barack Obama, who is today's exemplar of this fact, for his authorship of two books whose titles, respectively, acknowledge the immense value of "dreams" and of "hope". How would the spirit of enterprise, that today is America's main competitive strength, thrive if people could not foolishly dream? What would make a sophomore dunk the opportunity to graduate from Havard, as Bill Gates did, were it not for a "foolish" dream or what would make a political neophyte challenge the Clinton machinery for the highest office in the land, and in the process ignite the passions and dreams of people - old and young - across the globe, if not for a seemingly "foolish and audacious" dream?

Today, the United States views the, no longer benign, threat posed by China as a future world economic power with a great deal of wariness. However , almost all the literature that examines the dynamics of these two great nations duly conclude by not only acknowledging China's resurgence as a global economic power, but also make the point of lauding the freedom, openness and transparency of the American systems as a basis for speculating that the U.S. is likely to continue to have some significant dominance in global economics for a long while to come. And unfortunately, it is this singular dynamic that the opaque, communist regime in China may be least comfortable importing or imitating, as it portends great danger to its very power base.

So if the " hope" of a young Nigerian for a decent life in his country has been so greatly compromised - what do we (or can we) expect of him or her? Particularly where there are no compensatory default factors such as a decent family network, highly placed connections, access to foreign shores, access to decent education even in situations (made more dangerous as a result), where he sports a higher than average IQ? Where people have very little reason to expect decent rewards from otherwise meaningful endeavours, fundamental assumptions are turned on their heads and bemusement reigns. Today, most of our corporate and public leaders express huge frustration at the unwillingness of today's youth to apply themselves to meaningful, purposeful engagements and bemoan the seemingly easy recourse they take to militancy, kidnapping, fraud and other compromises for easy wealth. The situation cannot be simplistically reasoned away, but a key ingredient is that with hope frustrated, the negative feelings spawned seemingly appear to justify any actions taken to survive. That is why over and over again, we hear people wonder at how cheap life is in Nigeria. The reality is that people whose lives have little meaning can be easily compromised - even by themselves, as their view of life is relatively base and short-term in nature.

The need for hope must not be taken to apply only to the youth, but also to older Nigerians as well. It has been argued that the greatest force in life is "meaning" and that when meaning or the opportunity to pursue one's aspirations is snuffed out or greatly compromised, a man becomes a shell of himself. Nigerians born in the late 50s and 60s can be likened to the American equivalent of the baby boomer generation. These were children born in an environment of hope, high expectations and patriotism; individuals who grew up exposed to school systems seen as being at par with others all over the world - thus thoroughly equipping them to take their destinies into their hands. It is no wonder that this generation has suffered huge frustrations and significant psychological dislocations due to the largely unforeseen upsets that they have had to contend with. The reality is that many Nigerian professionals aged 40 to 60 , lack the realism, savvy, and survival skills of some of the much younger brood of Nigerians for this reason!

For a while now, I have settled it in my mind that the primary responsibility of any government is to provide for the economic well being of its citizenry and in this context despotic governments such as those in China, Libya and Saudi Arabia may have qualified as being effective, pragmatic regimes so far. However , today, I must qualify this view - while good governments do provide for the wealth and basic wellbeing of their citizens with the key objective of minimising the incidence of those living below the accepted poverty line, truly great governments operate at a much higher level and are in fact in the business of manufacturing hope.

As a result, the measure of a government's success must not lie simply in the per capita GDP index of a nation, but also in the measure of the prevailing Hope quotient among its people. The underlying principle here is the same with individuals, which is that any nation with a deficient Hope quotient risks entropy and long term degradation. Why? Because hope is what allows great people, and in turn great civilisations, continually re-invent themselves in the context of their prevailing realities - evolving and innovating along lines which even the most visionary of leaders may have failed to predict, thus buttressing the notion that sustainable development remains largely a bottom-up process.

The junky old train

LAST Saturday at Yaba, Lagos, I saw what would pass as a national embarrassment. The scenario has the capacity to further drag the already tattered image of Nigeria to the mud. It was a junky old locomotive supposedly retrieved from the junkyard and made to drag on the archaic rail track. Everything about that piece of machine was an eyesore. From the appearance, to the loud noise and the thick black smoke spewed into the atmosphere, I was dumb founded and dismayed at the decay in every perceivable thing that belongs to this country.

The locomotive, an antique in other climes, apparently belongs to the first generation of 10 Class 1001 diesel engines built by English Electric and introduced in 1955 by the Nigerian Railway Corporation (NRC). The same locomotives were sold to Ghana, New Zealand and Jamaica. But these countries have since changed from the "ancient locomotive" to the modern noiseless and smoke-free speed trains.

If Nigeria wants to operate a railway system, it should move with the rest of the world or call it quit with this railway mess. The country should be spared the shame of operating antiquated locomotives when the rest of the world is moving on modern computer-operated engines. If the country is not ready to build a modern functional railway system, it should forget about it and focus on other matters. Enough of this politics of railway. When will the change come?

I was prompted into making these comments after beholding a sordid sight of what moves in Nigerian as train. I was returning with my daughter from Yaba on that day. We drove through Herbert McCauley towards Jibowu intersection. After being passed by the traffic police, I joined the road heading to Ojuelegba which has a railway crossing. There was a traffic hold-up as I drove a few metres. In a moment, there was thick black smoke spewing into the air from the Yaba end. My daughter wondered if a house was burning. In a few seconds, there was a loud blare from what appeared to be train passing the level crossing.

Indeed, it was a train. But the sight was very ugly. The horizon from the Yaba end turned black from the thick smoke billowing from the rusty locomotive engine. As the train crawled along the dusty rail track, the smoke and noise increased. Soon, the entire place was enveloped in noxious carbon monoxide fumes from the train. The track became dark as the old cargo train zoomed on. As the road was reopened and we ahead, I looked to my right in the direction of the moving train but could see nothing but thick black smoke that swallowed the entire train along the rail track.

What a mess of pollution? Why should the engine be allowed to pollute the environment in such manner? If we can't do the right thing and get modern trains, must we go to the junkyard and retrieve old engines and put them on the track as train? What image does this paint of Nigeria? I remembered Mrs. Dora Akunyili and her re-branding campaign. How do you re-brand Nigeria when more than five-decade old train is what the country could afford in this 21st century world?

It was at that point that my 18-year old daughter commented: "Daddy, so there is train in Nigeria? I thought a house was burning!" I didn't know how to respond to the girl. Should I say yes, we have train. In that case, she would create the impression that what she saw was what trains are elsewhere. Or, should I say no, when in fact she had seen a "train". I managed to tell her that Nigeria used to have functional trains but because of mismanagement and corruption, the trains were abandoned and they became disused. I told her that as a matter of fact, I didn't know from where that train was coming or where it was going because it is unusual to see trains in Lagos.

After 18 years of living in Nigeria and in Lagos for that matter, it is sad that my daughter who has completed secondary school and awaiting university admission has never seen a train. What she knows about train is what she read from textbooks in school. Daily, she passes the railway crossings in Lagos without any sign that there is a rail track passing there. The entire rail tracks from Apapa to Ido, Oyingbo, Ebute Metta, Yaba, Oshodi and so on have been taken over by refuse dumps, overgrown bushes and commercial activities. And of course no train is operating to disrupt the disorder.

It was recently that the Fashola administration, under its urban renewal programme dislodged most of the illegal occupants of the railway lines as well as cleared the refuse dumps. That effort, for the first time in recent years exposed the rail tracks such that people could see them. It is, perhaps, in the same vein that the NRC ventured to operate on the tracks. But because the Corporation has no modern trains, it probably went into its junkyard, retrieved an old locomotive and put it on track all in the name of operating a railway.

The antiquated train I saw at Yaba reminded me of a recurrent ugly syndrome in Nigeria's socio-economic development experience. Everything in this country usually starts well but deteriorates as time goes on. This is contrary to what obtains elsewhere. Ideally, the beginning of something provides a base for further improvement. Thus, having built a thriving railway system in the 60s, 70s and early 80s, the sector should have transformed into a vibrant modern organisation. The rail gauge should have been expanded from single to standard and the trains in the fleet changed to modern ones. But none of this has happened.

What we have witnessed instead is continuous depreciation from what used to be a functional railway system that ferried passengers and goods from the south to the north and vice versa. For example, available statistics show that the railways ferried over 11 million passengers in 1964 but by 2003, 40 years later, the figure dropped drastically to mere 1.5 million. Similarly, freight figures dropped from about 3 million tonnes to less than 10, 000 tonnes. But all that is now history. The NRC has been rated the most decrepit in the world. All the former staff of the Corporation have become abandoned property. Their retirement benefits and other entitlements are not paid. They live in misery and regret ever being part of that dead organisation. Many have died in penury.

The decay in the NRC is enormous that without commitment and political will, this country may never have a functional railway again. Different proposals have been made in the last couple of years without anything coming out of them. The government appears to be paying lip service to the railway issue. As the years go by, the situation becomes worse and the cost of rebuilding a collapsed railway empire becomes outrageous. For me, all the attempts made to revamp the railway system so far are haphazard and can hardly make any difference without fundamental restructuring of the NRC.

The most urgent change needed in this regard is to repeal the omnibus NRC Act of 1955 that established the Corporation and conferred absolute monopoly right on government while disallowing private sector participation in the delivery of railway services. Without doubt, the 54-year old legislation has become obsolete and is no longer in tune with the new development philosophy of Public-Private-Partnership (PPP). The attempt, last November, by the National Assembly (NASS) to repeal the Act was widely acclaimed by the public as a necessary step towards liberating the railways from suffocating official bureaucracy and corruption. The NASS should expedite action on the repeal of the retrogressive Act to liberalise the environment for private sector investment.

Subsequently, a separate Ministry of Railways (MoR) should be created. I have in a previous comment in this column stressed on the need for such a ministry. That would be the only viable framework to supervise and account for the huge investments in the rail system. For example, the Abacha government awarded a $500 million contract to the Chinese Civil Engineering and Construction Company (CCECC) but the money went into the drains without any result. The last Obasanjo administration also awarded another $8 billion contract to the same company to design, construct and maintain a 1, 315 standard gauge from Lagos to Kano and again the contract was mired in controversy over graft and inadequate funding.

At a recent Senate public hearing on transportation, the Auditor-General for the Federation, Robert Ejenavi reportedly said that the country has spent a total of N124.9 billion on railway projects from 1999 to 2008 without any improvement. There is nobody to account for the huge investment. Certainly, the Minister of Transport can't effectively oversee road and railway transport at the same time. Treating something as big and complex as the railways like a parastatal is part of the problem. Only a full-fledged MoR would be able to effect changes. Except this and other measures are taken, we can as well forget about the railway in this country.

Why religious violence persists in Northern Nigeria

I AM writing in reaction to the Editorials of The Guardian (Monday March 2, 2009) on The Bauchi Religious Conflict and (Thursday April 23, 2009) on Religious Violence in Minna. The two editorials focused on religious bloodletting in two Northern states - Bauchi and Niger - and how this savage act could be eradicated. Personally I am alarmed by the recurrent cases of religious riots in this country.

I think it is a shame that almost 50 years after independence Nigerians are still attacking and killing themselves in the name of religion. That Nigerians of different faiths have not learnt to live, love and tolerate one another. And that the government has failed to tackle this social menace and national disgrace. There is no doubt that most cases of religious violence have taken place in Northern Nigeria. Hence it has become pertinent for us to begin to tackle this vexing question. Why does religious violence persist in Northern states? First of all I agree with The Guardian (April 23) that "this problem persists because culprits go unpunished". Yes they do.

Since independence, there has been a clear lack of political will to bring to justice those who mastermind religious uprising in the North. The editorial (March 2) says it is as a result of a failure of government and is indicative of bankrupt and inept leadership. I totally agree. Just take a look at all the cases of religious crisis in Northern Nigeria. None was thoroughly investigated or had their perpetrators adequately punished. In most cases commissions of inquiry are set up. And after that nothing is heard about the commission's reports and recommendations. Whenever religious riots occur, arrests are made but later most of those arrested are released. In a few cases some of those arrested were brought to count but were later acquitted for want of evidence. Punishment is a deterrent to crime. And as long as the states in the North refuse to prosecute and adequately punish these criminals who indulge in religious carnage, the problem will persist.

I am also in agreement with The Guardian that religious mayhem in Northern Nigeria is caused by poverty and unemployment. And that the government should do more to provide jobs to the youths. An idle mind, they say, is a devil's workshop. In the North the idle minds are the workshop of fanaticism and bigotry. But we must not forget that it is not only in the Northern states that we have unemployed restless youths. Other states in Southern Nigeria, other nations in the developing world, have armies of unemployed youths. So why is it that it is only in the North that jobless youths take up the work of religious terrorism and bloodshed, and nothing else.

It is also true that the recurrent religious uprising in the North is as a result of a failure of security intelligence and law enforcement. Beyond that, I suspect some foul play on the part of our security agents - I think they collude and conspire with those who mastermind religious conflicts. That is why most religious clashes have caught our police and intelligence outfits napping.

But I disagree with The Guardian that religious violence occurs because many religious believers do not read their holy books well enough. I think they do. The holy books form the basis of religious indoctrination which all religious believers receive from cradle to the grave. We just need to acknowledge the fact that while the holy books contain teachings of love, tolerance and respect for human lives, they also contain passages that sanction and sanctify hatred, tolerance and bloodshed. The sacred texts have injunctions that promise eternal life and paradise to those who die fighting the cause of God or Allah or those who die battling infidels and other enemies of God or Allah.

As long as religious leaders continue to preach such hateful messages and believers continue to blindly accept them, religious violence will not stop. More importantly, religious uprising occurs because Northern Nigeria has a tradition of jihadist Islam - that is a kind of Islam that is practised or promoted through fighting and violence. Islam came to Northern Nigeria around the 11th century but the 1804 Jihad of Sheikh Uthman dan Fodio radicalised Islam. It foisted on Northern Nigeria a militant form of Islamic faith. It enthroned a kind of Islam that is promoted and defended with bows and arrows, swords and cudgels. Jihadist Islam sanctifies violence as an act of faith, as a demonstration of piety and as a virtuous way of living and of relating with infidels and non Islamic faiths or institutions. Jihadist Islam regards non-believers as 'enemies' who should be conquered, converted or subdued by force. As long as the jihadist Islamic mentality persists in Northern Nigeria, religious conflict will not cease.

Related to the above point is the imposition of Sharia law. Sharia is the weapon of political and radical Islam. The imposition of Sharia on most states in Northern Nigeria was marked by widespread violence, riots and clashes. It has created a situation of suspicion, hatred, division and antagonism between Muslims and non-Muslims. The imposition of Sharia emboldened fanatics and gave legitimacy to Islamic fundamentalism. Ideally, governments should be neutral in religious matters. They should be impartial arbiters and guarantors of the rights of all individuals no matter the religion or belief. But in most states in Northern Nigeria it is not the case.

And as long as states in the North remain biased for Islam, and continue to promote Islam and implement Sharia; as long as the states continue to mix religion and politics and refuse to separate mosque and state, as long as states in Northern Nigeria refuse to recognise, respect and defend individuals of different faiths, religious hatred and uprising will not go away.

Religious violence is bad. It is not good for any nation. It is not good for Nigeria. It is not good for the North. It is not good for the South. It is not good for Muslims. It is not good for Christians. It is not good for believers and non-believers. Religious violence is a barbaric practice that should not be identified with modern Nigeria. Hence I'm calling on states in Northern Nigeria and the Federal Government to join hands in rooting out the scourge of religious conflict and bloodshed. For the sake of national peace, unity, development and progress.

Why religious violence persists in Northern Nigeria

I AM writing in reaction to the Editorials of The Guardian (Monday March 2, 2009) on The Bauchi Religious Conflict and (Thursday April 23, 2009) on Religious Violence in Minna. The two editorials focused on religious bloodletting in two Northern states - Bauchi and Niger - and how this savage act could be eradicated. Personally I am alarmed by the recurrent cases of religious riots in this country.

I think it is a shame that almost 50 years after independence Nigerians are still attacking and killing themselves in the name of religion. That Nigerians of different faiths have not learnt to live, love and tolerate one another. And that the government has failed to tackle this social menace and national disgrace. There is no doubt that most cases of religious violence have taken place in Northern Nigeria. Hence it has become pertinent for us to begin to tackle this vexing question. Why does religious violence persist in Northern states? First of all I agree with The Guardian (April 23) that "this problem persists because culprits go unpunished". Yes they do.

Since independence, there has been a clear lack of political will to bring to justice those who mastermind religious uprising in the North. The editorial (March 2) says it is as a result of a failure of government and is indicative of bankrupt and inept leadership. I totally agree. Just take a look at all the cases of religious crisis in Northern Nigeria. None was thoroughly investigated or had their perpetrators adequately punished. In most cases commissions of inquiry are set up. And after that nothing is heard about the commission's reports and recommendations. Whenever religious riots occur, arrests are made but later most of those arrested are released. In a few cases some of those arrested were brought to count but were later acquitted for want of evidence. Punishment is a deterrent to crime. And as long as the states in the North refuse to prosecute and adequately punish these criminals who indulge in religious carnage, the problem will persist.

I am also in agreement with The Guardian that religious mayhem in Northern Nigeria is caused by poverty and unemployment. And that the government should do more to provide jobs to the youths. An idle mind, they say, is a devil's workshop. In the North the idle minds are the workshop of fanaticism and bigotry. But we must not forget that it is not only in the Northern states that we have unemployed restless youths. Other states in Southern Nigeria, other nations in the developing world, have armies of unemployed youths. So why is it that it is only in the North that jobless youths take up the work of religious terrorism and bloodshed, and nothing else.

It is also true that the recurrent religious uprising in the North is as a result of a failure of security intelligence and law enforcement. Beyond that, I suspect some foul play on the part of our security agents - I think they collude and conspire with those who mastermind religious conflicts. That is why most religious clashes have caught our police and intelligence outfits napping.

But I disagree with The Guardian that religious violence occurs because many religious believers do not read their holy books well enough. I think they do. The holy books form the basis of religious indoctrination which all religious believers receive from cradle to the grave. We just need to acknowledge the fact that while the holy books contain teachings of love, tolerance and respect for human lives, they also contain passages that sanction and sanctify hatred, tolerance and bloodshed. The sacred texts have injunctions that promise eternal life and paradise to those who die fighting the cause of God or Allah or those who die battling infidels and other enemies of God or Allah.

As long as religious leaders continue to preach such hateful messages and believers continue to blindly accept them, religious violence will not stop. More importantly, religious uprising occurs because Northern Nigeria has a tradition of jihadist Islam - that is a kind of Islam that is practised or promoted through fighting and violence. Islam came to Northern Nigeria around the 11th century but the 1804 Jihad of Sheikh Uthman dan Fodio radicalised Islam. It foisted on Northern Nigeria a militant form of Islamic faith. It enthroned a kind of Islam that is promoted and defended with bows and arrows, swords and cudgels. Jihadist Islam sanctifies violence as an act of faith, as a demonstration of piety and as a virtuous way of living and of relating with infidels and non Islamic faiths or institutions. Jihadist Islam regards non-believers as 'enemies' who should be conquered, converted or subdued by force. As long as the jihadist Islamic mentality persists in Northern Nigeria, religious conflict will not cease.

Related to the above point is the imposition of Sharia law. Sharia is the weapon of political and radical Islam. The imposition of Sharia on most states in Northern Nigeria was marked by widespread violence, riots and clashes. It has created a situation of suspicion, hatred, division and antagonism between Muslims and non-Muslims. The imposition of Sharia emboldened fanatics and gave legitimacy to Islamic fundamentalism. Ideally, governments should be neutral in religious matters. They should be impartial arbiters and guarantors of the rights of all individuals no matter the religion or belief. But in most states in Northern Nigeria it is not the case.

And as long as states in the North remain biased for Islam, and continue to promote Islam and implement Sharia; as long as the states continue to mix religion and politics and refuse to separate mosque and state, as long as states in Northern Nigeria refuse to recognise, respect and defend individuals of different faiths, religious hatred and uprising will not go away.

Religious violence is bad. It is not good for any nation. It is not good for Nigeria. It is not good for the North. It is not good for the South. It is not good for Muslims. It is not good for Christians. It is not good for believers and non-believers. Religious violence is a barbaric practice that should not be identified with modern Nigeria. Hence I'm calling on states in Northern Nigeria and the Federal Government to join hands in rooting out the scourge of religious conflict and bloodshed. For the sake of national peace, unity, development and progress.

Tackling the scourge of poverty

Recent economic forecasts by the World Bank indicate that the ranks of Nigerian citizens below the poverty line would swell by 18 million in the current year, as the global financial crisis persists. On the African continent, where a total of 90 million people are potential victims of the economic downturn, it is predicted that that number would sink into poverty, in a year when projected growth rate (two per cent) would be surpassed by birth rate.

Forecasts of this nature, based essentially on global trends, hardly reveal the complete picture for individual countries within a definite period of time. In other words, the decline in standards of living could be worse, with higher numbers than predicted falling into poverty, depending on the peculiar circumstances of countries.

Nigeria, specifically, could face grimmer scenarios, with the near-collapse of basic infrastructure, widespread shutdown of manufacturing companies, job losses as well as high inflation in prices of foodstuffs and other basic essentials. Revenue inflows, too, have shrunken sharply, with the implication that government spending may grow leaner as the year progresses.

These forecasts must be appreciated for what they are – a wake-up call to all tiers of government to put in place appropriate mechanisms to minimise potential adversities. After, a full decade into democratic governance, the standard of living of citizens has been on a steady downward slide. Among initial intimations of the systematic deterioration was the 2004 report of Britain’s Department for International Development. That report read in part: “Our findings show that in the last five years the poverty level in Nigeria is on the increase. From less than 50 per cent living below the poverty line in 1999, more than 70 per cent are now living in absolute poverty.”

Nigeria has had the National Poverty Eradication Programme and similar initiatives under the Nigeria Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy as official measures to reverse the trend. Unfortunately, the various poverty alleviation programmes failed to achieve set targets as they soon became part of an elaborate system for party patronage. A few privileged individuals cornered the budgetary allocations, from year to year, to the utter exclusion of target beneficiaries.

With this gloomy picture, the government has to take a critical look at its management of available economic resources with a view to initiating measures that could engender a fairer distribution of same, in accordance with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, as set out in Chapter II of the Constitution. Section 16 (1) (b) enjoins the State to “control the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity.”

A situation where 32 per cent of disbursements from the Federation Account is paid out to 17, 474 public functionaries as salaries and allowances, as was the case between June 1999 and May 2007, is indeed most scandalous. It points to a fundamental flaw in national economic planning and resource allocation, and is in clear breach of the nation’s Constitution. The Federal Government, in conjunction with the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, could redress such anomaly and ensure that cost of governance does not constitute an impediment to national development and the general well-being of the majority of citizens.

Mass poverty is a threat to society as a whole and must be prevented at all costs. The unprecedented crime rate today, especially armed robbery, kidnapping for ransom purposes, human trafficking, prostitution, especially among teenagers, is a clear result of an economy gone awry.

Top among policy options available to government is the revamping of the country’s productive base. The most urgent action to be taken is rehabilitate the nation’s infrastructure. Electricity supply has to be improved to boost industrial operations as well as productivity among small businesses. All plans to embark on massive rehabilitation of roads and modernize the railway system should be implemented speedily. Education should be made accessible to all citizens, especially at the primary and post-primary levels, as it will enhance individual capacity for productive work. To create wealth and alleviate poverty there must be a sustained improvement in the economy’s global competitiveness.

Why religious violence persists in Northern Nigeria

I AM writing in reaction to the Editorials of The Guardian (Monday March 2, 2009) on The Bauchi Religious Conflict and (Thursday April 23, 2009) on Religious Violence in Minna. The two editorials focused on religious bloodletting in two Northern states - Bauchi and Niger - and how this savage act could be eradicated. Personally I am alarmed by the recurrent cases of religious riots in this country.

I think it is a shame that almost 50 years after independence Nigerians are still attacking and killing themselves in the name of religion. That Nigerians of different faiths have not learnt to live, love and tolerate one another. And that the government has failed to tackle this social menace and national disgrace. There is no doubt that most cases of religious violence have taken place in Northern Nigeria. Hence it has become pertinent for us to begin to tackle this vexing question. Why does religious violence persist in Northern states? First of all I agree with The Guardian (April 23) that "this problem persists because culprits go unpunished". Yes they do.

Since independence, there has been a clear lack of political will to bring to justice those who mastermind religious uprising in the North. The editorial (March 2) says it is as a result of a failure of government and is indicative of bankrupt and inept leadership. I totally agree. Just take a look at all the cases of religious crisis in Northern Nigeria. None was thoroughly investigated or had their perpetrators adequately punished. In most cases commissions of inquiry are set up. And after that nothing is heard about the commission's reports and recommendations. Whenever religious riots occur, arrests are made but later most of those arrested are released. In a few cases some of those arrested were brought to count but were later acquitted for want of evidence. Punishment is a deterrent to crime. And as long as the states in the North refuse to prosecute and adequately punish these criminals who indulge in religious carnage, the problem will persist.

I am also in agreement with The Guardian that religious mayhem in Northern Nigeria is caused by poverty and unemployment. And that the government should do more to provide jobs to the youths. An idle mind, they say, is a devil's workshop. In the North the idle minds are the workshop of fanaticism and bigotry. But we must not forget that it is not only in the Northern states that we have unemployed restless youths. Other states in Southern Nigeria, other nations in the developing world, have armies of unemployed youths. So why is it that it is only in the North that jobless youths take up the work of religious terrorism and bloodshed, and nothing else.

It is also true that the recurrent religious uprising in the North is as a result of a failure of security intelligence and law enforcement. Beyond that, I suspect some foul play on the part of our security agents - I think they collude and conspire with those who mastermind religious conflicts. That is why most religious clashes have caught our police and intelligence outfits napping.

But I disagree with The Guardian that religious violence occurs because many religious believers do not read their holy books well enough. I think they do. The holy books form the basis of religious indoctrination which all religious believers receive from cradle to the grave. We just need to acknowledge the fact that while the holy books contain teachings of love, tolerance and respect for human lives, they also contain passages that sanction and sanctify hatred, tolerance and bloodshed. The sacred texts have injunctions that promise eternal life and paradise to those who die fighting the cause of God or Allah or those who die battling infidels and other enemies of God or Allah.

As long as religious leaders continue to preach such hateful messages and believers continue to blindly accept them, religious violence will not stop. More importantly, religious uprising occurs because Northern Nigeria has a tradition of jihadist Islam - that is a kind of Islam that is practised or promoted through fighting and violence. Islam came to Northern Nigeria around the 11th century but the 1804 Jihad of Sheikh Uthman dan Fodio radicalised Islam. It foisted on Northern Nigeria a militant form of Islamic faith. It enthroned a kind of Islam that is promoted and defended with bows and arrows, swords and cudgels. Jihadist Islam sanctifies violence as an act of faith, as a demonstration of piety and as a virtuous way of living and of relating with infidels and non Islamic faiths or institutions. Jihadist Islam regards non-believers as 'enemies' who should be conquered, converted or subdued by force. As long as the jihadist Islamic mentality persists in Northern Nigeria, religious conflict will not cease.

Related to the above point is the imposition of Sharia law. Sharia is the weapon of political and radical Islam. The imposition of Sharia on most states in Northern Nigeria was marked by widespread violence, riots and clashes. It has created a situation of suspicion, hatred, division and antagonism between Muslims and non-Muslims. The imposition of Sharia emboldened fanatics and gave legitimacy to Islamic fundamentalism. Ideally, governments should be neutral in religious matters. They should be impartial arbiters and guarantors of the rights of all individuals no matter the religion or belief. But in most states in Northern Nigeria it is not the case.

And as long as states in the North remain biased for Islam, and continue to promote Islam and implement Sharia; as long as the states continue to mix religion and politics and refuse to separate mosque and state, as long as states in Northern Nigeria refuse to recognise, respect and defend individuals of different faiths, religious hatred and uprising will not go away.

Religious violence is bad. It is not good for any nation. It is not good for Nigeria. It is not good for the North. It is not good for the South. It is not good for Muslims. It is not good for Christians. It is not good for believers and non-believers. Religious violence is a barbaric practice that should not be identified with modern Nigeria. Hence I'm calling on states in Northern Nigeria and the Federal Government to join hands in rooting out the scourge of religious conflict and bloodshed. For the sake of national peace, unity, development and progress.

Kidnappers and the death penalty

THE recourse by some states to the death penalty as the appropriate punishment for kidnappers appears to be understandable at first blush, bearing in mind the atrocious and traumatic nature of the criminal act. Kidnapping has suddenly become a favourite pastime of many criminally minded Nigerians, mainly because of its potential to yield easy returns. Relatives of kidnap victims as well as organs of the state will naturally do anything to secure the release of their loved ones.

But the spate of laws being passed in some states of the federation stipulating capital punishment for kidnappers calls for caution. The death penalty may not serve any purpose. Since kidnapping became the preferred option firstly of militants in the Niger Delta, and lately of common criminals who abduct people for money, some of the states affected have considered drastic measures to combat the scourge. At least two states have proposed the death penalty, and the proposals may soon become laws. In Akwa Ibom State, the House of Assembly has passed the bill, with the governor, Chief Godswill Obot Akpabio expressing his readiness to grant his assent. He has described kidnapping as a serious threat to lives and property as well as the economic and socio-political development of society.

We cannot agree more that kidnapping is indeed a sinister phenomenon. Often, it covers all the elements of armed robbery and more, including murder, assault and the deprivation of victims who consequently suffer huge trauma. Akpabio argues that the condition in Europe, where the death sentence has been abolished, is different from that of Nigeria.

This argument cannot easily be faulted, except that if Europe discovered after 400 years that it had made a mistake in adopting capital punishment there is no reason for Nigeria to wait 400 years before adopting a more acceptable position. Akwa Ibom's decision to punish kidnappers by death is intended to check the menace of kidnapping, militancy and terrorism in the region. Similarly, a bill prescribing death for kidnappers, already passed by the Imo State House of Assembly, is awaiting the signature of Governor Ikedi Ohakim. Amnesty International is urging the governor not to sign the Bill, because death penalty is anachronistic.

Clearly, the attempt by some state governments to prescribe the capital punishment for kidnapping in their jurisdictions is an expression of the society's revulsion to a nagging problem that is fast becoming endemic. The underlying assumption is that a drastic problem requires a drastic solution.

However, a number of countries worldwide have reportedly abolished the death penalty in law or practice. In the last 10 years, about three countries have on the average abolished it yearly. Yet, more than 60 per cent of the world's population lives in countries that support the punishment in varying degrees. The four most populous countries in the world - China, India, the United States and Indonesia - apply the death penalty. In Europe, Article 2 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union prohibits the practice, while the United Nations has, at different times, passed draft resolutions urging nations to abolish the practice.

By far, the most potent argument against capital punishment is its potential to result in a miscarriage of justice, evident in the wrongful execution of innocent persons. In the U.S., newly available DNA evidence has led to the exoneration of more than 15 death row inmates since 1992. But DNA evidence is only available and applicable in a fraction of cases.

It is for these and some other reasons that organisations and human rights activists have campaigned for the abolition of the death penalty, calling it a "cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment." Amnesty International which is in the forefront of this campaign, considers it to be "the ultimate denial of human rights." So far, the campaign is yielding dividends. As at May 1, 2009, 93 countries have abolished capital punishment, while 58 have actively retained it. Even in the U.S., as at March 18 this year, 15 states and the District of Columbia have banned capital punishment.

We sympathise with the states where kidnapping is rampant. Kidnappers stand condemned, but killing them judicially is not necessarily the solution. Governors faced with the kidnapping dilemma, or indeed any form of violent crime need to first examine the effectiveness of the security systems in their states. How pro-active have the Police and the State Security Service (SSS) been in tackling the menace? How many kidnappers have been apprehended and subjected to existing laws on kidnapping, no matter how weak these may be?

We believe that there is at present, a failure of security and intelligence in many parts of the country. The primary task is to bring kidnappers to book. This would require a better understanding of their methods and profiles, and the capacity to enforce the law. State governments and the police may consider forming special anti-kidnapping squads, if only to contend with the criminals who now operate almost without opposition. Kidnapping is a brand of terrorism, for which the country's security outfits should be properly trained. Greater attention should also be paid to the justice administration system, which is slow and ineffective. Where kidnappers or perpetrators of other violent crimes are caught, they should be speedily tried and sanctioned where appropriate.

In the circumstance, and in a country where the justice administration machinery is itself weak, it may be better and safer to elongate prison terms for kidnappers or even jail them for life as a deterrent. The cost of possible execution of innocent persons is inadvisable.

In addition, government should invest in public education and enlightenment regarding preventive measures that can be taken as well as the management of the trauma of kidnapping. In the long run, government must appreciate that these crimes have gradually assumed the present dimension as a result of dwindling job opportunities in the country, and the failure of the system. A growing army of unemployed youths now takes to kidnapping as a means of livelihood. Providing jobs for the jobless is a major challenge for the Nigerian government at all levels.

The Niger Delta genocide

AS I write, the Nigerian State has unleashed its Armed Forces, the largest on the African continent, on the hapless and long over-exploited people of the Niger Delta. A most horrendous and fratricidal onslaught, the ongoing military blitzkrieg has been conceived to brutally subjugate, and if need be annihilate, a target group that has championed the Niger Delta struggle for a decade now. The commando-like pounding of Niger Delta communities and creeks is nothing but war. Yet, the Federal Government has not convincingly shown the world any instance of a casus belli. So far thousands of innocent citizens have died, hundreds of thousands displaced, hunger and hardship now stalk the living.

The Niger Delta debacle is avoidable. However, Nigeria's ruling elite ever so well steeped in buccaneering engagements have conspired to make life "short, nasty and brutish" for Niger Deltans. At the core of the Niger Delta crisis is the deliberate unwillingness of the nation's misruling hegemony to rule well. Infernal misrule, monumental corruption, Machiavellian manipulation, Mephistophelian guile and utter disregard for fairness, equity and justice all culminated in the ongoing imbroglio.

The fact remains that the Niger Delta is one of the most naturally endowed regions in the universe. Its oil and gas account for over 95 per cent of Nigeria's revenue. Yet, Niger Deltans live in abject poverty having lost all the insignia and appurtenances of humanity. A torched landscape, polluted air and rivers now define the Niger Delta. Gone are the enchanting flora and fauna, the fishes, and all that once made the region an arcadia. The Nigerian State and oil multinationals have visited both ecocide and genocide on the Niger Delta region. The tragedy of the Niger Delta is already too well known to be recounted here.

The ongoing state orchestrated war will achieve nothing. It will further exacerbate the crises. The Niger Delta fighters, be they revolutionaries, militants, or "criminals" as the state brands them, should be invited to a peace talk. What is needed is neither force nor monologue. The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) is not a shadowy or shambolic organisation. It is a well organised movement in the vanguard of the Niger Delta struggle. It is in the best interest of all for the Nigerian State to recognise the body and "jaw jaw" with its leaders; one of whom is Henry Okah whom the Nigerian State has taken hostage. The resistance being put up by MEND is justifiable. In all history, every people under such inhuman oppression ultimately took up arms to right wrongs. MEND has repeatedly and most eloquently articulated its demands which a well-meaning state should not hesitate to grant. Such contentious issues as adherence to the principles of federalism and resource control form the raison d'etre for MEND's struggle.

Successive Nigerian rulers have always been short-sighted, if not the Niger Delta debacle would not have been. The crisis in the region portends grave danger not just for Nigeria, but for Africa and probably the world. As the crisis escalates, the loss in human terms would aggregate a holocaust. Its effect on the Nigerian economy would be suicidal. The Federal Government says it is losing N8.7 billion daily to the ongoing crisis. This is a testimony to the diabolic intent of the Nigerian State. The region is the nation's cash cow yet it is so impoverished. Ever so astigmatic, the Nigerian State is yet to gauge the future consequences of the ongoing action.

Ever so quick at giving a dog a bad name in order to hang it, the Nigerian State has again and again called the agitators criminals, militants and other denigrating labels. But the fact should be known that the state made them so. The real culprits are not the fighters, but government functionaries past and present who run Nigeria aground. Those men and women who stole our future for their today. To be sure they have their collaborators in the private sector, in the armed forces, police, universities, judiciary, in fact everywhere. The Niger Delta struggle, and indeed the struggle to reclaim Nigeria will not end until these cabals are undone. They swell their ranks everyday, but certainly they cannot undermine the struggle.

There is really no doubt that the Niger Delta struggle has been infiltrated by criminals. However, these "criminals" are ironically agents of the ruling party. They form the bulk of thugs they used to rig elections in 1999, 2003 and 2007. The "criminals" also work hand in hand with politicians in hostage taking, kidnapping, bunkering and in perpetrating other heinous acts. The "criminals" are also on the pay rolls of governors, legislators, military officers, business barons, among others who are in the sleaze of ruining Nigeria and the downtrodden. This is a country with a cancerous soul!.

The ongoing war in the region has given the lie to Niger Delta governors' claim that they have achieved peace. It is a lesson to them that they should begin to build peace instead of buying it. The Yar'Adua government should begin to implement the recommendations of the Niger Delta Technical Committee. The MEND revolutionaries are not likely to give up the struggle until they are convinced that the government is serious and sincere. They have seen through the sham in gestures such as the Niger Delta Development Commission, Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs, Six moths Amnesty period and other such hokum designed by the Nigerian State. The federal government should invite the fighters for sincere dialogue. All the stolen billions being recovered from thieves in positions of authority should be ploughed back to develop the region. The Niger Delta governors should also stop the massive corruption going on in the states. There is an emergency on hand, and they cannot afford to fiddle like Nero. They should use the billions they receive every month for the welfare of the people. They shall know no peace until the people are contented.

It is shocking that President Yar'Adua has not made any public statement about the on going pogrom. However, it is more shocking that the baby Speaker of Nigeria's House of Representatives, blabber mouth Dimeji Bankole has commended the soldiers for murdering Niger Deltans, and has urged them to extend the holocaust to Bayelsa and River States. All Niger Deltans whether, Efik, Ibibio, Urhobo, Ijaw, Itsekiri, Isoko, Anioma, etc, must rise and rally round the present cause. They should mobilise and internationalise the campaign to emancipate the region. They should let the world know the facts of the ongoing Niger Delta genocide.

The fallacy in automatic ticket

AUTOMATIC ticket simply means that those who are occupying an executive elective position - Presidents, Governors and Council Chairpersons - are automatically re-nominated to run for a second term at the expiry of their first term. And in our system this is usually for positions that have a two-term constitutional limitation. My thesis in this article is that everything is wrong with this idea of automatic ticket. It is anti-democratic and also anti-party. Let me explain why.

First, our constitution creates for all citizens the right to vote and be voted for. To run for an office is to exercise a constitutional right to be voted for. To ask for automatic ticket is to monopolise the right to be voted for, and by implication deny other citizens and equally legitimate political aspirants, that right.

The question then is why should we allow any one person to exercise that monopoly? The only justification for that is if it can be shown that it is in the public interest to allow such a monopoly. Any serious democracy takes the position that it is in the public interest when allowing such a monopoly on the given occasion confers collective benefit on the people. This is usually the case when the person claiming the monopoly has performed so well in public office that his or her constituency can attest to that performance by the popularity rating he or she enjoys in the constituency. In that case, if you field any other person for an election in the constituency, this other person will be defeated.

In other words, a person who qualifies for that monopoly must be one who because of his or her stellar performance in the first term of public office should be the constituency's preferred choice. And proof of this credible performance is that the person will win in a primary election, which is a party's internal mechanism for allowing its rank and file membership to choose who should represent them in a general election. This is why credible - free and fair - primaries are such a good instrument for democratic choice of candidates for prospective elections. If you think you are a miracle president, governor or council chairman in your first term, rather than go around hustling for automatic nomination, go and prove your claim to good performance by winning in a credible primary. It is as simple as this!

But why do some of our people run away from the primaries test? There are two reasons: One is that some of our political leaders do not have strong commitment to democratic practices. They mouth democracy but they do not play democracy. They want to boast of being popularly elected but they do not hesitate to rig the election to get there. Therefore all those who ask for automatic ticket show a poor commitment to democracy. And because it is against the public interest to allow it, a democratic party leadership should disallow it by insisting that all aspirants for public office - whether first term or second term - should go for the party's primaries.

The second reason why some people run away from primaries is that the party leadership who organises these primaries may make a mockery of these primaries by denying them transparency. Thus, primaries may become unpopular either because they are rigged by the aspirants themselves to promote their inordinate ambition for power or they are rigged by the party leadership for their favoured candidate by denying level playing field to all the contestants. But the solution to all these is not to run away from primaries but to insist on making them credible.

Moreover, since the constitution of the party (in this case, the PDP) insists on primaries, it means that all those who are asking for automatic ticket are swinging against the interest of the party. Automatic ticket, which seeks to by-pass primaries is against the constitution of the party. This means that the proponents of automatic ticket are anti-party. But they hurt the interest of the party in another more fundamental sense by seeking to deny all other interested party members the right to contest for office. This creates disaffection in the party and provokes some original strong believers in the party to leave the party because of the injustices inherent in denying them the constitutionally guaranteed right to be voted for, that is, contest for office.

Automatic ticket hurts the interest of the party in still another sense: by protecting the contestant from proving himself/herself in the popularity test represented by primaries, the party risks losing the election by fielding an unpopular candidate. Let us not forget that the most important function of a political party is to compete for the power to govern, and it is only by winning election that it can acquire the power to govern. Therefore fielding unpopular candidate through automatic ticket exposes the party to the danger of losing the election and defeating her interest in acquiring the power to govern. If proponents of automatic ticket remember that they are contributing to the defeat of their party in election, then they should regard themselves as bad party men and women - men and women who for their personal greed for power work against the interest of the party. They err by putting their personal desire for power above the capacity of the party to win the power to govern.

But the concept of automatic ticket has a slightly different ring when applied to legislators or members of the National Assembly. Under our 1999 Constitution, legislators are not limited to two terms. In fact they are supposed to go on as long as they can win elections. So while not speaking the language of automatic ticket to them, they are nevertheless encouraged to go on for more terms. There are at least two reasons for this.

One, making good laws requires experience, knowledge and skills. These are properties that are developed over time. The more terms a legislator serves the more effective he or she is in developing the skills required for good legislation. Therefore, it is good for the system to encourage legislators to deepen their legislative skills by running for more than one term.

Second, because of the incessant military disruption of our political order, our legislators have not had the experience of historical continuity in their legislative experience. This makes our legislature the least developed of the three branches of government. Therefore, in order to help our legislature develop more experience we should decrease the turnover in our legislatures by encouraging the members to run for more terms so as to acquire more legislative skills and experience. This does not translate to automatic ticket though! All it means is that the political party should encourage legislators who have shown promise to go on to run for more terms so that the legislature will benefit from their accumulated experience over many terms.

This is the spirit behind the PDP leadership's declarations of support for members of the National Assembly to go for more than one term. This is different from automatic ticket. What is involved here is to attempt to decrease the turnover in the legislature by encouraging members to go beyond one or two terms. And of course, it is expected that those to benefit from this support will be those who have performed well as first or second term legislators. It will be recalled that the previous administration deliberately cut off otherwise effective legislators from going on for a second term for other self-serving political interests.

The present NWC wants to discourage the deliberate attempt by party hierarchy to cut short the number of terms of legislators. It rather wants to encourage legislative longevity for members of the National Assembly. Therefore every aspirant that meets the minimum requirement stated in the constitution and manifesto of the party should be nominated for re-election only after their participation in the primaries. This is consistent with democracy and the interest of the party. But legislators who show strong promise by their performance should be encouraged to go on for more terms. This helps to promote the institutional development of the legislature. This does not mean that they will not go for primaries. This, however, creates a challenge for the party to device ways of monitoring and evaluating the performance of elected lawmakers.

Commitment to democracy means willingness to live with its results even when they do not favour us. The greatest threat to our democracy comes from our political elite. These are the people who place their desire for power over and above democratic tenets and practices. That is why when they are in office they do not use their position to advance the frontiers of democracy. They come round to shouting democracy only when they lose power and can become victims of tyranny. They do not like democracy when they are in power because democracy tends to restrain their arbitrary exercise of power. They do not like that restraint on their power, but they come to value the restraint when another person is wielding power against them.

Automatic ticket is anti-democratic. It is neither in the public interest nor even in the interest of the party. But it continues to be the swan song of politicians whose greed for power runs ahead of their party and public interest. These breed of politicians have little or no commitment to democratic principles and practices. They only pay lip service to democracy.

Auditor-General’s report on Customs

The Auditor General for the Federation has released a damning report, which has uncovered massive fraud in the operations of the Nigerian Customs Service. Testifying before the House Committee on Customs and Excise, the AGF, Mr. Robert Ejenavi, catalogued the sharp practices uncovered in the department. He listed under-assessment of duties, transfer of funds without authority, over-payment of telephone bills by the management, delay in remittance of revenue by banks, abuse of orders on waiver, concessions and exemptions and non-remittance of government revenues to relevant government accounts as some of the sharp practices in the Customs Department.

The AGF further accused the department of non-release of payment vouchers for audit inspection, non-return of personnel/cash advances and uncertified capital payments. The audit report said the NCS could not explain the disappearance of customs equipment, including arms, ammunition, seized vehicles and goods, even as the department purchased fake bullet-proof jackets, among other sharp practices. Some aspects of the report captured outright stealing of government property, including cases of disappearance of anti-smuggling patrol vehicles and the carting away by retiring officers of seven new Toyota Hilux vehicles estimated at N52 million.

The AGF also told the House that some 18 vehicles worth about N350 million reportedly acquired for use at the air-wing Kaduna were not sighted during the audit checks.

The details of Ejenavi’s audit report are similar to the one issued by the former Acting AGF, Mr. Vincent Azie, for 2001 on various sectors of government business. The Azie report came out with a damning verdict of “lack of financial discipline” in the system as it uncovered over-invoicing, non-retirement of cash advances, lack of audit inspection, payment for jobs not done, double debiting, contract inflation, lack of receipts to back-up purchases made, flagrant violation of financial regulations, and release of money without approving authority.

Surprisingly, successive governments in the country have treated AGF reports with contempt. The Obasanjo administration did not only throw out the 2001 audit report, the author, Azie, was ridiculed at the Federal Executive Council meeting and subsequently removed from office on the flimsy excuse that his six months of acting in that capacity had expired. Last year, the Senate Committee on Public Accounts had accused the executive arm of deliberately working to frustrate the statutory functions of the office of the AGF when it made an attempt to expunge the N1 billion voted for the AGF’s office from the 2008 Appropriation Act.

It has always been a harvest of scams in the NCS. Last June, it was reported that N287 million got missing from the revenue generated by the service. In November, it was again reported that the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission had commenced investigation into a N2.5 billion case of fraud in the NCS. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had also arrested two customs officials in connection with a N3 billion rice duty scam slammed against the Vaswani Brothers. Another report said that the agency failed to remit about N13 billion to the Federation Account.

No doubt, the AGF Office has discharged its constitutional responsibility by presenting the report to the National Assembly. The report reflects a total breakdown of the General Order, which guides civil service operations. It also captures the inherent weakness in the anti-graft institutions.

The Office should be empowered to carry out periodic, independent and objective appraisals of government agencies and departments. Indeed, if the Office is properly funded, its anti-corruption role will curb the culture of rampant looting of the till.

The National Assembly should prescribe sanctions against individuals and firms the report found to have engaged in embezzlement and financial malpractices. The relevant agencies, especially the EFCC, should not ignore the latest AGF report. It should move immediately to arrest and prosecute all indicted officials. The FG should take immediate steps to improve the integrity of public expenditure.

Why Obama is going to Ghana

"OL'boy, are you watching CNN now?"

"No. I dey Tarmac dey chop life"

"What are you chopping?"

"Peppersoup. Correct isi ewu and nkwobi"

"Be careful. You may be taking a typhoid concoction."

"No. Oh. This one cures malaria. It is specially prepared. And the thing sweet no be small. Leave me make I chop the life of my head."

"Look, that's not why I called. I think you should go and watch CNN right now. It is a sad day for Nigeria. In fact every Nigerian must hide his or her head in shame."

"What is it again this time? Dis kin country wey no go let person rest. Problem today. Wahala tomorrow. To be a Nigerian na crime?"

"Obama is visiting Africa in July and he is not coming to Nigeria"

"And so? Is he a Nigerian? Let him go to his Kenya. Obama is coming to the land of his fathers. Is that why I should stop enjoying my nkwobi?"

"Did you hear what I said? How many bottles have you taken? Obama is coming to Africa on a presidential visit in July and he is visiting Egypt and Ghana. He and Michelle, his wife, will spend two days in Ghana. I think that is an insult to Nigeria. I mean the Americans are deliberately rubbishing us."

"But you should know why? That is America's own way of sending a strong message that they are unhappy with the situation in Nigeria."

"That is why I am sad."

"That is how the American foreign policy process works. It is based on a reward and sanctions principle, if you like - carrot and stick. America goes out of its way to reward countries that are doing well. It sanctions those that appear to be doing badly and a sanction can be in any form. Obama flying over Nigeria to go to Ghana is an act of snobbery. It is the most painful form of sanction"

"But what is it that Egypt is doing well?"

"It is a strategic choice. Egypt is a strategic U.S. ally in the Middle East and America's major bilateral partner."

"Nigeria is also strategic. We sell crude oil to the United States. American oil companies are Nigeria's Joint Venture partners. We supported the U.S. African High Command in the Gulf of Guinea. We have a long history of relationship with the United States. We are the most powerful, the most populous..."

"I beg. Leave that matter oh. Nigerians can't fool anybody with that slogan anymore. Don't you get it? You want Obama to come to Nigeria shortly after the shameful electoral process in Ekiti? You want him to visit Abuja and address your National Assembly? The same National Assembly where the lawmakers are being accused of corruption? You want Obama to attend a dinner in Nigeria where nearly all the people he would come across will be persons who organise the snatching of ballot boxes, the distribution of bribe, oil thieves, tax evaders, treasury looters, and aggressive Nigerian women who will be waiting for Michelle to go to the ladies for a second so they can swoop on the U.S. President, and squeeze their numbers into his palm? You think the Americans don't know?"

"You are not serious. You should stand up for your country. We are not worse than Pakistan or Egypt, and even Obama's Kenya."

"Obama is a brand apart from being the U.S. President. His handlers must have advised him that this is not a good time to visit Nigeria. And all those your countrymen and women in the United States are not helping matters. They are always telling the Americans that their country is a useless place."

"You don't even need to blame those ones. The U.S. has an embassy here. They know what is going on. But it is just that I would have loved Obama to visit Nigeria, Nigerians worked very hard for that man's election."

"Una vote for am?"

"But he has more supporters in Nigeria than in Kenya. People bought Obama stickers and pasted on their cars. There is still an Obama billboard in Abuja. Obama photo portraits are being sold on the streets of Lagos. Musicians sang about him. Even market women campaigned for him. Not to talk of the Obama for Africa associations that tried to raise funds for his campaign. I also know many Nigerians in the U.S. who contributed to the Obama fund. I am even sure that if anybody had said Obama lost that election, bare-chested Nigerian women were ready to go onto the streets in protest. Someone said that was part of the calculations."

"You know you are actually talking about Nigerians who were using the Obama name to do business and make quick profit. By the way what happened to your sister's Obama fund campaign? You mean she and other members of the Obama for Africa movement cannot persuade the U.S. President to come to Nigeria first?"

"Not fair. Obama should have visited Nigeria first. If only to come and say thank you to the Nigerian people. The U.S. Embassy will need to explain why we are being snubbed. We may not know how to organize free and fair elections, but we are a great nation."

"Good people too... Tell them make dem hear."

"I feel sad when I see how Ghana is now upstaging Nigeria in every respect."

"Ghana organizes good elections. And its leaders are better organised and more disciplined. Obama's visit to Ghana is to encourage both the people and government of Ghana to remain the shining Black Star of the West African coast. And a way of telling Nigeria to get its acts together"

"I know".

"Besides, Ghana has discovered oil in commercial quantities. Soon, the United States will buy oil from Ghana and ignore Nigeria and its Niger Delta problems. Also, the U.S. has adopted a new four cardinal-point strategy in Africa. It includes South Africa, Kenya, Ghana and Egypt. Nigeria is not quite part of it."

"I hope our leaders are getting the message"

"They won't. Look, let's take a bet. I won't be surprised if in July, Nigerian leaders travel to Ghana to join the Ghanaians in receiving Obama. Can't you see that many Nigerians are now going to Ghana? Nigerian companies are setting up branches in Ghana, there are Nigerian-owned restaurants and shops in Accra, the population of Nigerian students in Ghanaian universities is very high and it keeps increasing. I know Nigerians who have bought homes in Ghana. Every weekend, they just hop across the border. It is 45 minutes by air. Accra is closer to Lagos than Abuja. So really, should we blame the Americans? Even Nigerians prefer to go to Ghana. In fact, I hear that Nigerians in Ghana are lobbying to be part of the Obama reception activities!"

"There will always be shameless Nigerians. But we need to rebuild this country. There were more foreign dignitaries at Jacob Zuma's inauguration than there were at Yar'Adua's inauguration. Countries like Tanzania and Rwanda have better international recognition than Nigeria."

"Don't worry yourself. In fact, if you ask me, I will recommend that President Yar'Adua should ask the Americans and the Ghanaians to invite him to the dinner for President Obama."

"God forbid. We are a sovereign nation."

"I know... I am sure somebody must have told Obama that they kidnap people in Nigeria. And he must have been advised not to put anything past those Niger Delta militants. They could organize and kidnap Obama and his wife. Or throw a shoe at him."

"Kidnap who? Throw a shoe at who?"

"Obama. Didn't somebody throw a shoe at George Bush in Baghdad?"

"Now, I am convinced that you are drunk".

"So why are you disturbing my drink with your sadness about Obama not coming to Nigeria? Okay, let me now play the Devil's advocate. Someone should go and tell that Obama that he does not know what he is missing. He should go and ask President Bill Clinton and President Jimmy Carter. Those are friends of Nigeria. When Clinton visited Nigeria, he enjoyed himself so much. Let Obama go to Ghana. He is free to prefer kenke to nkwobi. We are still the happiest people in the world and we thank God for that."

"Who is talking about happiness?"

"And tell President Yar'Adua not to worry. In fact, who are the Americans to tell us how to organize elections? We are a free country. We have the right to go to heaven the way we choose. President Yar'Adua should also organise a foreign trip. Let him fly over the United States and go to Canada, and from there let him go to Venezuela and Cuba on state visit. America too dey make yanga. Faure Gyassingbe Eyadema of Togo was here on a presidential visit, the same week they announced Obama's African trip. That was Nigeria's response to America's snobbery. Is Eyadema also not a President?"

"The United States is the most powerful country in the world. Who is Faure Eyadema?"

"Who talk so? Where were you when Maurice Iwu said we are in a position to teach America certain things about elections? Every country has its own strengths. Obama can go anywhere. Na him leg he dey take travel. That will not stop me from eating isi ewu... Baby, do you want another drink. Eh, another bottle for my darling here..."

"What's that?"

"I wasn't talking to you."

"Looks like whatever you are doing there is beginning to get to you. May be we should continue this conversation later."

"No. Don't worry. You think I am drunk? Na only bottle fit get drunk. Me, I am a human being. Anything else?"

"I am just sad. We are failing at home. We are losing international goodwill."

"You have said that before. Stop moaning. It's no big deal."

"Our President even wanted to visit the United States, they said no."

"Look, if it is about this Obama visit, forget it. On second thoughts, may be it is even a blessing in disguise. If the man had chosen to visit Nigeria, that would have been an opportunity for Nigerians to loot the treasury. By the time the man leaves, every state treasury will be near-empty. And we could have an Obama visit scandal on our hands. And come to think of it, you know Obama likes to play basketball. Suppose he invites President Yar'Adua while visiting to a game of basketball, one on one, and the man out of politeness agrees. And you know President Yar'Adua doesn't play basketball, he only plays squash. Me, I thank God o."

"Good for the Ghanaians".

"Don't worry, you can watch the visit on AIT, Channels TV etc live."

World Bank loan for budget deficit?

A CONCESSIONARY World Bank loan for Nigeria aimed at tiding over financing gaps in the 2009 budget featured in the discussions held at this year's World Bank/IMF Spring Congress in Washington, D.C., USA. Finance Minister Mansur Muhtar, who is accountable to the Nigerian people, merely glossed over the talks as exploratory. But World Bank Country Representative Onno Ruhl, assuming the responsibility that ordinarily devolves primarily on the leader of the country team, duly addressed a press conference in Abuja and revealed that negotiations for four projects were successfully completed.

The conclusions are astounding. The first project is an overarch. Having fleeced the country while acting as agents of the Paris and London clubs of creditor countries, the World Bank/IMF seek to perform similar exploits as agents of private international oil companies operating under Nigerian jurisdiction in "getting more enforceable commercial framework about the supply of gas" for local generation of electricity. The multinational oil companies (MOCs) neither relate to their home governments via the auspices of the World Bank/IMF nor have the latter been involved in the supply of gas and crude oil by various oil and gas producers to the world market.

Instructively the same MOCs have been unconventionally lobbying the National Assembly to delay interminably the passing of a number of oil sector reform bills that are meant to spell out the ground rules and the necessary framework for oil sector operations in the country. Plans by World Bank/IMF to accord Nigeria-based MOCs the status of sovereign states subvert and contravene provisions of the 1999 Constitution. Our national interest will be best served by passing the raft of oil sector bills into law to allow any dissatisfied oil company to opt out of the country.

The second negotiated project involves funding to have the way for every Nigerian household to own at least two insecticide-treated mosquito bed nets. The World Bank/IMF even drafted the leader of the Christian Association of Nigeria and the Sultan to Washington, D.C. to prepare them to help popularise the bed nets among the faithful. But it is not the place of World Bank/IMF and least of all Nigerian faith leaders to foist mosquito nets produced by private companies in developed countries upon impoverished Nigerians. Government should instead create the right investment climate to enable Nigerian entrepreneurs to manufacture impregnated bed nets locally so as to boost employment and arrest pervasive poverty.

The third project concerned the control of HIV/AIDS, attempts to implement the Gleneagles G-8 summit directive that developing countries commit in advance to purchase products of Western medical research into the various pandemics. However, it is not beneficial for Nigeria to obtain a World Bank loan in order to support Western medical research and drug exports. Any government action in this regard should be geared to fund local research into those diseases.

Apart from not being the priority items in the 2009 budget, both the second and third projects promote current consumption and import-dependency whereas what the country needs are development-enhancing projects that generate self-liquidating streams of income.

The fourth negotiated project curiously relates to funding for secondary school education. A few years after articulate stakeholders offered cogent reasons for rejecting World Bank funding for the universities, government preference for this project leaves much to be desired. Nigeria should independently fund secondary school education.

Further obnoxious implications of the so-called concessionary World Bank loans include the fact that over 50 per cent of their value is routinely expended on technical and consultancy fees (that incorporate kickbacks for recipient country government top shots) paid to foreign experts. The balance is tied to imports of overpriced items from particular developed countries while such projects are so poorly executed that additional WB loans are recommended. Worse still, loan recipient countries lose their independence of action to the World Bank/IMF, which proceed to pursue policies that are injurious to the countries' interests but favour developed nations. Government should shun subtle Western ploys to recolonise Nigeria.

Notwithstanding the country's present low debt service ratio, it is clear from the foregoing that a World Bank loan is a poisonous remedy for the treatment of budget deficit. It is therefore imperative for the country to operate within her means by scaling down the 2009 budget. We had noted last December 16 that the budget was not right, a fact that Mr. President has now confirmed by terming the 2009 budget faulty. Constituency projects and similar extraneous insertions in the budget should be expunged. There is need to plug all areas of wastage such as inflated salaries and duplicated perks for the governing political elite while the MDAs should discountenance any demand by legislators for under-the-table payments in return for less than diligent supervision.

Government should show Nigerians evidence of faithful implementation of the budget by rendering quarterly reports. It is not enough to give the amounts released; there should be detailed statements of expenditure on each project and the completion level attained. There should also be regular and detailed information on current government revenue receipts and other available financial resources.

To finance the revenue gap, government has at its disposal, one, the excess crude account. How much resides in this account and how is it being deployed? Two, the foreign reserves become quite handy as their size in January was thrice the total federal budget initially presented to the National Assembly. Three, there are staggering proceeds of bonds (without requisite legislative backing contrary to financial and accounting best practice) arising from restructured treasury bills or mopped excess liquidity, which average some N1 trillion annually and which today have pushed the domestic national debt above N3.3 trillion.

Unfortunately, unlike inflation and deficit-combating conventional bonds that are made up of the spare resources of subscribers, these byproducts of faulty monetary policy management, on which the country is made to pay 10-17 per cent interest per annum, are hyper-inflationary and are therefore neither reflected in the federal budgets nor ploughed into any tangible investments. Latest CBN data indicate that repatriated proceeds on money market securities such as restructured bonds and treasury bills alone exceed $200 million monthly, a veritable dash to foreign interests while the administration goes a searching for entrapping World Bank bridging loan. To stem this leakage, the CBN should end the illegal practice of printing naira equivalents of dollar receipts in the Federation Account for sharing among the three tiers of government.

As regard loss of revenue occasioned by what the administration has euphemistically termed the situation in the Niger Delta, we hold that urgent reversal of the trend is vital to the national interest and therefore implore government to respect the legitimate demand of the people of that part of the country for a just federation. In general through good management of the available but largely wasting resources, this administration is in a position in 2009 to run the economy at full speed. There is absolutely no need for any rueful budget supplementation from abroad.

Oladipo Diya and the struggle for truth

THE publication in The Guardian edition of Sunday, April 5, 2009, of an interview granted by Oladipo Diya, former Chief of General Staff in the government of Sani Abacha, has raised questions about what Diya knew or did not know about the man he served. In the interview, Diya claimed to be as ignorant as the Nigerian public about the extent to which Abacha dipped his filthy fingers into the public treasury for his personal benefit. It's a view that many Nigerians still find difficult to accept, in light of Diya's closeness to Abacha.

When the interviewer tried to tease out how much Diya knew about the gravity of Abacha's corruption, Diya's answer was neither insightful nor reassuring. He said: "I didn't know that Abacha was stealing money. I read about it on the pages of newspapers. I found it difficult to believe that Abacha was stealing money." Many people would be staggered by this comment by a man who is viewed widely as the architect of most of Abacha's devious decisions.

When the interviewer asked, in bewilderment, how Diya, as Abacha's deputy, could possibly say that he did not know that Abacha was raiding the national treasury, Diya again insisted that he knew nothing about what Abacha did. His words: "These things (looted funds) being put (published) on the pages of newspapers were not taken from the budget. People said it was being taken from the Reserve Account...And up till now, I don't know how money was spent or taken from the Reserve Account and it's not something that was discussed or debated at the level of the Ruling Council. So, how would I have known?"

If you thought that Diya would by now have reflected sufficiently over his ignoble role during the years he served as Abacha's number two man, or that Diya would be contrite for what he did, you've got it wrong. Diya insisted in the interview that he had no reason to apologise to the nation. When he was asked if he could think of anything he would do differently if he found himself in a similar position today, Diya replied emphatically: "Nothing, nothing! I was second-in-command; I wasn't the head of state. So, I don't think there is much I would have done differently. My main function or duty was to advise the head of state and to carry out his instructions as detailed by him."

Diya's refusal to accept responsibility for the iniquitous conduct of the government he served in a high position, his consistent habit of shifting blame to Abacha, depicts him as a coward and a thick-skinned apostle of Abacha, at least prior to the emergence of the coup allegation in 1997. When Diya insists that he performed his job effectively and efficiently for Abacha, a dreaded dictator, you have to wonder whether many families who suffered terribly when Abacha and Diya ruled the nation will ever find the spirit to forgive Diya or Abacha or both men.

Perhaps the most arrogant and callous words that Diya uttered during the interview emerged in his answer to the question: "Do you have any regrets?" Diya replied in a coldhearted manner: "I would say no regrets because I did everything that I should have done. If it didn't go well, it's a different thing entirely. That the Almighty God saved me is enough. Maybe it could have been a different thing entirely. I am happy, and I thank God."

For those who do not know, Diya's reference to being saved by God has to do with the humiliation Diya suffered when Abacha accused him of plotting to unseat the government. On that allegation, Diya was arrested, tried by a military tribunal, convicted and sentenced to death.

For all the sordid things that Abacha's government did with the full endorsement of Diya, it came as a huge surprise to many Nigerians that Diya was one of the men who lined up at Nigeria's Human Rights Violations Investigation Commission to complain that their human rights were grossly abused by Abacha. Many Nigerians viewed this as a case of a brutish senior officer who suddenly turns around to accuse a junior officer of abusing him. In fact, when Diya rushed to complain to the human rights commission about the injustice he suffered during the period of his arrest, trial and incarceration, he seemed to under-estimate public anger against him.

When Diya told that commission that his arrest and that of his kinsman Major-General Abdulkarim Adisa was a part of a larger plot by Abacha to eliminate senior officers from the southwest from Abacha's government, he found that the ethnic card he played did not quite produce the result he wanted.

In the end, Diya did not get the "justice" he sought from the commission. As Sola Odunfa reported for the BBC on 18 December 2000, "General Diya came to the commission riding on the crest of public sympathy but he left the venue to boos and jeers from the spectators... He cut a sorry figure in the former Senate chamber as witness upon witness from the military painted a picture of the former number two man as a liar and a cowardly person." The point is that Diya was never loved by many people in the southwest, his natural constituency.


Eleven years after he left Abacha's government, Diya is still viewed as the chief collaborator (some people called him a traitor) in Abacha's grand design to imprison Moshood Abiola and to dilute Abiola's growing political influence. Keep in mind that although Abiola was widely believed to have won the presidential election of June 12, 1993, he was never allowed to claim that mandate because military dictator Ibrahim Babangida nullified the results of that election. Forget the charade that occurred last year when Humphrey Nwosu, the chief electoral officer in 1993, emerged from 15 years of hiding to declare Abiola the winner of the 1993 election.

Before all this, at the peak of his power in government, Diya projected himself as the philosophical pillar of the Abacha government. While Abacha was ridiculed publicly as unintelligent military officer, Diya was viewed as the public voice of that military junta. Diya, as the second-in-command, represented Abacha at most official ceremonies which Abacha could not attend owing to Abacha's fascination for doing business in the dark. When you see a man who spots dark sunglasses in broad daylight and in the night for purposes unrelated to his health condition, the man must be up to something.

The relationship between Abacha and Diya lasted for just four years - from late 1993 to mid 1998. Prior to the collapse of their friendship, things had been going on so smoothly between the two men that when cracks began to appear in the relationship, no one noticed. This was the context in which Nigerians were confounded one day in 1997 by the extraordinary allegation that Diya had plotted to unseat the very government in which he was a leading light. It was during the alleged coup plot that Abacha demonstrated to everyone that he was much smarter than the nation would credit him.

To prove Diya's complicity in the alleged coup, Abacha's agents and loyal officers produced a video film as evidence that Diya was guilty as charged. The video showed Diya, the no-nonsense soldier prostrating and crying before Abacha, as he pleaded for forgiveness. There were speculations that the video might have been doctored by Abacha's officers who did not like Diya. When Diya was hurled before the military tribunal for allegedly plotting with some officers to overthrow the state, many people argued that Diya was na•ve while others contended that nemesis had caught up with Diya. Whether he was a sinner or whether he was sinned against, Diya remains a divisive subject.

Diya must remain grateful to Abdulsalami Abubakar, the military dictator who took over government following the sudden death of Abacha in 1998 and pardoned Diya. Some people prefer to view Diya as Nigeria's equivalent of Niccolo Marchiavelli, the great Italian philosopher and politician who was more known for his outstanding ability to scheme, plot and outmanoeuvre other men. Eleven years after the demise of Abacha, Diya is still wrestling with his inner self about the truth, about what he knows about Abacha, and about how much he is willing to reveal to the nation.

Yar'Adua and the militants

ONGOING military operations by units of Nigeria's Armed Forces to crush so-called Niger Delta militants in their established enclaves of crime must be viewed dispassionately. The legitimacy and inevitability of a military response to the challenge they pose to state authority, which in its true form and purpose embodies the core of a festering sore afflicting our national psyche, cannot be questioned. We remain a people trying to invent a contemporary state and nation. Yet, without creating a national society, this goal we have set for ourselves will not be attained. The process of national society formation is long, hard and difficult. Without discipline, security and the willingness by all to live within the bounds of law, our quest will not begin.

The comments of a number of well-respected individuals, associations, groups and political parties on President Yar'Adua's decision to deploy soldiers to the Niger Delta to enforce national laws are disturbing. 'Back to the basics', do these commentators understand the essence of the philosophical category; the "state" and the concept "statehood?" It goes against reason that in a state, any state, there should be more than one arm bearing institution. It goes against common sense and value that there should be more than one army in any society. It is largely irrelevant, "if" or "whether" the militants in the Niger Delta attacked or did not attack anyone. The very fact that they possess such lethal weapons as automatic rifles, grenades, grenade launchers, GPMGs, anti-aircraft weapons, assault boats (etc), necessitates and legitimises a full blown military offensive against them.

Beyond this, by owning up to various acts of sabotage, kidnap and holding of hostages, wanton and deliberate killing of policemen, soldiers and other agents of the state, the so-called militants invited war upon themselves. To deny this, is to deny the obvious. You either live in a state or outside it. As a matter of first principle, once you live inside the national territory of a state, you must be bound by its laws. There cannot be criminal safe havens in the national territory of any state inhabited by battalions of armed killers and fugitives of justice, which agents of the state are barred from entering. On this, the statutes are explicitly clear. Outside the Armed Forces, any armed group resident in Nigeria is not only criminal, but may be said to be harbouring intentions to cause harm to, sabotage, wage war on, or overthrow the state. Or by some spatio-time miracle, have we been webbed in some 17th century fiction work of Robert Louis Stevenson?

It seems not a little surprising that the appropriate response of Nigeria's President and Armed forces Commander-in-Chief to the dangerous and unwholesome situation we have found ourselves is being cynically interpreted. If anything at all, his response should have come earlier. It ought to be stronger. Gangrene is not cured by lavender water. Yes, in its supervision of military operations to rid the Niger Delta of criminal elements, the military High Command must be told in no uncertain terms to act professionally and avoid the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

Yet, greater responsibility rests on community leaders and law-abiding citizens living in Niger Delta communities to prevent themselves from being used as human shields by criminal cults and groups, intent on avoiding being smashed by the long arm of justice. They must ask the criminals to stay away from their communities. If they feel sufficiently threatened by the criminals, community leaders in the Delta region must report the activities of these criminals to security agents. The state must protect such well-meaning community leaders and their communities. Only on the basis of an understanding that accelerated socio-economic development can and will occur in the Niger Delta if responsibilities are collectively shared, can security be guaranteed for all stakeholders in the region.

President Umaru Yar'Adua, the hour has come for you to show strength. You must not rescind your decision, no matter the pressure on you to do so. The Armed Forces must not be prevented from accomplishing its set tasks. If you hit the criminals in the creeks hard enough, those in the cities will understand that when they make you roll up your sleeve, they will find an iron fist.

The Commonwealth at 60

On a landmark day, 60 years ago, the Commonwealth officially came into existence. It was the outcome of an intense deliberation in London which lasted for six days. In attendance at that august meeting were the Heads of Government of Australia, Britain, Ceylon, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, South Africa, and Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs.

The communiqué issued on April 29, 1949 became known as the London Declaration. It was innovative, bold and pivotal in many respects. The London Declaration marked the beginning of modern Commonwealth. It meant freedom, equality and justice for all its member states.

This was not only in relationship to the titular head of the Commonwealth, but in their pursuit of peace, liberty and progress. Consequently, when George VI died and Queen Elizabeth II took over as the Head of the Commonwealth, the colonial vestiges were no more.

Instead came a partnership based on equality, choice and consensus. That momentous occasion of 60 years ago came full circle last month. It was a celebration marked with pomp and circumstance. But it also provided a platform for sober reflection.

We consider the theme of the celebration, “Serving a new generation” as apt and timely. It is our view that the Commonwealth has come of age. It calls for both retrospection and intropection on how the association has been, and how it can refocus itself for the challenges ahead.

Looking back, from the initial number of eight members, the Commonwealth has grown to a remarkable 53 member states. It is fair to say that the organisation remains more of an intergovernmental body than a political union. It has done well in advocating democratic government among its fold. In this respect, it has done creditably well in suspending recalcitrant member nations for serious and persistent violations. This is in line with the Harare Declaration.

Nigeria once tasted this “bitter pill” under the regime of the late Sani Abacha. Currently, Zimbabwe is on suspension. Better relationship has also been fostered through cooperation in many areas among member states through the Commonwealth Games and regular meetings among Heads of Government within the fold.

However, it is indisputable that much more needs to be done to make the Commonwealth continually relevant and ‘serve a new generation.’ Therefore, it is time for a self-appraisal, in line with the exigencies of the times. Areas that need closer attention include integration and economic cooperation, exchange programmes, technical and educational aids, infrastructural development, science and technology, among others. In recent years, these areas have suffered serious setback particularly due to problems brought about by economic challenges.

The times demand that an organisation such as the Commonwealth should re-invent itself. It is a leadership challenge that it needs to rise up to while keeping in mind its tripod principle of freedom, equality and justice. At the moment, these noble ideals are in dire need of good faith. Nigeria’s President Umaru Yar’Adua recently urged the leadership of the Commonwealth to show more clarity of purpose. It is a valid concern, because any organisation that cannot operate in an atmosphere of goodwill and understanding cannot stand the test of time. Certainly, present times need dynamic and focused leadership.

Today, it is estimated that two billion people live in the Commonwealth, and half of them are under 25 years of age. It then follows that to meaningfully serve this new generation of people, the Commonwealth must change its old ways and design strategies that will meet the yearnings of these people without neglecting the needs of the others. Overall, now is the time for a more forward-looking Commonwealth.