It’s been 31 years since a seismic event triggered by the June 12, 1993 election nearly brought Nigeria to its knees. The presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), M.K.O Abiola, was on the cusp of a resounding victory when the military government of General Ibrahim Babangida interrupted and later annulled the election.

That action sparked nationwide protests that ultimately consumed Babangida’s government and his successor, General Sani Abacha. It set the stage for a transition that, over Abiola’s dead body, produced Nigeria’s luckiest former military leader, Olusegun Obasanjo, as civilian president in 1999.

Every May – and later June – since then, Nigeria has marked its successful transition to democratic rule, the most extended 25 years of unbroken civilian administration in its 64-year history.

How far?

But the lingering question remains: how democratic have we truly become? If the martyrs of June 12 could witness the nation’s current state, would they have made the same sacrifices? Is this the Nigeria that the survivors, still bearing the scars of the struggle, fought for? Would some of the beneficiaries, now in their 30s, sometimes question the validity of the struggle? Do they even care or remember? These are complex questions with no easy answers.

This week, I read two significant articles that left no doubt that Nigeria is in a tough place. The point of the articles is that democracy is more than campaign promises, more than periodic elections, and much more than the absence of military rule. It’s a system that is currently under severe strain in our country.

The first, by the New York Times, was entitled, “Nigeria Confronts Its Worst Economic Crisis in a Generation.” Citing the widespread hardship, the newspaper said, “Nigeria is facing its worst economic crisis in decades, with skyrocketing inflation, a national currency in free-fall and millions of people struggling to buy food. Only two years ago, Africa’s biggest economy, Nigeria, is projected to drop to fourth place this year.”

A country adept at coping with misery, the paper said, appears to have reached its wits end.

The second article was by Jonathan Power, one of Europe’s most knowledgeable writers on foreign affairs and a friend of Obasanjo.

In his article this week, “Democracy on the Run?”, Power cited Freedom House and several other reports that indicated a qualitative and quantitative decline of democracy in several countries, including Nigeria, because of “a lack of vigorous policy implementation and good public administration.”

We know what we know

We don’t need foreign newspapers to tell us. The daily lives of most Nigerians today, whether at home, school, work or in the market, tell the story unedited. And folks are beginning to ask, first in whispers and now in louder, angrier tones, what is the point of democracy that does not put food on the table?

China is not a democracy, but it runs a system that has lifted millions out of poverty and has created the largest middle class in the world. Its science, technology and infrastructure investment makes the United States look like a third-world country. Nor was Singapore a Western-type democracy when it leapt from third to first world under Lee Kuan Yew. And Libya’s best years yet were under Moammar Ghaddafi.

Impatience with democracy has also led to a rash of military coups in several African countries – actually seven in three years in West and Central Africa – led by soldiers who seem to be succeeding in dragging the continent back to the era of military demagogues.

They use the same messianic rhetoric, but only this time, they are succeeding far more easily because, as we say, reason flees the head when hunger enters the stomach. Flawed elections are making matters worse.

Matter of framing

But are we framing the question correctly? Is autocratic rule in whatever guise – including the Rwandan variant that extends one-person rule in the middle of the game – superior to democracy simply because of stability and an appearance of material prosperity?

And, in any case, is the problem with democracy, or is it a matter of performance? In other words, isn’t it the quality of governance that makes democracy meaningful?

For all its progress, and it’s a lot, I would still not trade democracy for autocracy – whether it’s of the variety of its poster boy, China; its latter-day nationalistic face, Russia; or its pseudo-domesticated cousin, Rwanda.

Nigeria is far from the promise of 1993 or 1999, but it has produced some of the world’s most insulted presidents who, by and large, we can still call goats and get away scot-free. That’s not a trophy. It’s not a substitute for bread and butter, either. But you never know the value of free speech, association or movement until these rights have been abridged or taken away.

World not smiling

The point is weariness – not necessarily with democracy, but with performance – is not only a Nigerian thing. A Pew Research Center study in December 2022, which covered 19 countries from Sweden and Singapore to Canada and from the UK and South Korea to the US, France and Spain, showed mixed outcomes in satisfaction with democracy and political efficacy.

While only 20 percent were not satisfied in Sweden, and 43 were not in Canada, for example, the figure in the UK was 46 percent, 56 percent in France, 62 percent in the US, and 68 percent in Spain. The 19-country median was 48 percent – a weak pass.

Citizens were generally dissatisfied by polarisation, exclusion, inequality, corruption and lack of trust.

Nigerians are unhappy, not with democracy, but with the failure of performance. For example, an Afrobarometer survey of 2022 showed that while 70 percent of Nigerians prefer democracy, 77 percent of the population are unhappy with the quality of governance. If that same survey were conducted today, the figures would be starker.

But that is understandable. Two significant decisions by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s government – the partial removal of petrol subsidies and the floating exchange rate – have had the unforeseen effect of significantly worsening hardship. On top of that, when the government calls on citizens to tighten their belts, some public officials appear to be living it up with large convoys, personal aides and extravagant foreign trips.

It’s precisely this feeling among citizens of baboon “working” and monkey “chopping” that has given democracy a bad name.

Tinubu’s luck

Tinubu made his own luck by asking for the job of president at what would always be one the worst times in Nigeria’s history in a generation. Of course, there are broader issues like weak institutions, ineffective governors, election fraud, and a deep feeling among voters that elections are useless to remove bad leaders, not to mention limited faith in the judiciary. These issues require the collective effort of citizens, leaders, and institutions to solve them. But in the end, one man leads.

What Tinubu makes of it – not only through his speeches but, more importantly, through his performance – in the next one or two years will determine what is left of the heavily eroded confidence in democracy. He can’t afford to fail.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has explained why he fell during a Democracy Day parade at the Eagles Square in Abuja.

Naija News reports that President Tinubu, on Wednesday, slipped and fell while boarding the parade vehicle at the venue of the 2024 Democracy Day.

The President had approached the vehicle shortly after he arrived at the Eagles Square, Abuja venue of the programme. The President lost his footing momentarily as he was about to step into the vehicle.

However, despite the slip, the President regained his balance and continued with the proceedings.

The development attracted several reactions from Nigerians on and off social media.

Speaking at a dinner at the Presidential Villa on Wednesday night, Tinubu said he did not fall but prostrated to great in commemoration of the Democracy Day celebration.

He said: “Earlier this morning, I had a swagger and it’s on social media.”

The president suggested that onlookers might have mistaken his misstep for the popular ‘Buga’ dance move or a traditional Yoruba way of prostrating to greet elders – ‘Idobale’ in Yoruba language.

“They were confused whether I was doing buga or babanriga,” Tinubu said.

“But it’s a day to celebrate democracy while doing ‘dobale’ for the day. I am a traditional Yoruba boy, I did my dobale,” the President jocularly said.

Benue State governor Hyacinth Alia has said, for record purposes, his administration has yet to borrow a dime since he became governor on May 29, 2023.

The governor said he would only do so when it becomes extremely necessary, adding that “for now, prudence in governance must know us and call us by name.”

Governor Alia disclosed this during the celebration of Democracy Day at IBB Square, Makurdi. He said he is committed to building formidable systems and institutions premised on fairness, accountability, democratic ethos, equity, and justice systems that are bigger and stronger than individuals.

He said, “Throughout this period, I have earned nothing close to love from those whose selfish interests I step upon to bring you comfort, happiness, and succour. But too high, I place your interest above theirs. Hence, I have no regrets for what I have lost in the course of this journey.

“As a government of popular consent, I am mindful of the honour and trust bestowed on me. For this, I have pushed sleep and comfort to the backseat to ensure that I live up to the expectations and terms of our social contract.”

Giving an account of his stewardship last year, the governor said, “It is no longer news that improved staff welfare, prompt payment of salaries and pensions/gratuities, as well as arrears, is now a mainstay under my watch. And so shall it continue to be.”

“Benue under my watch, has also weeded out thousands of ghost workers, ghost schools, and ghost agencies from our payroll. We have cut off all leakages and conduits of inefficient money-consuming channels obtainable in the past,” he added.

He said as proof of their zeal towards rewriting the narrative of the education sector in Benue, they allocated 15 percent of the 2024 budget to education, surpassing even the percent at the federal level, adding that they have also trained over 150 headteachers and distributed over 100,000 instructional materials across public schools in the state to enhance teaching and learning.

“For instance, as part of palliatives for the removal of fuel subsidy, our administration decided to pay for the 2023/2024 examination fees of all students in government-approved public secondary schools in the state sitting for the West African Examination Council (WAEC), National Examination Council (NECO), and National Business and Technical Examinations Board (NABTEB) examinations, respectively.

“At the Benue State University, we have expanded academic programmes, established new faculties, restored scholarships for medical students, and paid outstanding salary arrears. We have upgraded the ICT facilities, preparing over 10,000 youths for the global market. The idea is to train over 60,000 youths,” he said.

The governor restated his commitment to rewriting the state’s socio-economic narrative and asked for continued support for his administration, which he hopes will put Benue on the global map.

 [Leadership]

Vice President Kashim Shettima has urged Nigerian doctors to remain in the country and work with the current administration to improve the nation’s situation, rather than emigrating for better opportunities abroad.

Speaking during a visit on Wednesday by the National Executive Committee of the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA), led by its president, Prof. Bala Audu, at the Presidential Villa in Abuja, Shettima appealed to the doctors to resist the allure of overseas opportunities amid the ‘Japa’ syndrome.

He assured the doctors that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is committed to their welfare and has deep empathy for those who choose to stay and serve their country.

Shettima praised the significant contributions and sacrifices of Nigerian doctors in advancing healthcare delivery.

He said, “Let us stay back and salvage this nation together. This is our country, the greatest black nation on earth, and a promising nation that we need to invest in.”

He also encouraged the NMA to motivate young doctors to specialise in key medical disciplines and to combat the activities of unqualified practitioners.

[DailyTrust]

The director of the Abuja School of Social and Political Thoughts, Sam Amadi, has said the Supreme Court determined the outcome of the 2023 presidential election.

Amadi blamed the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, for failing to prosecute the 2023 presidential election.

Amadi said the National Assembly should probe INEC’s expenditures during the 2023 general election.

He also charged INEC to explain why its server failed during the 2023 presidential election.

The public affairs analyst also noted that the electoral umpire should be able to explain to Nigerians why its results were not collated and declared electronically as provided in the INEC electoral Act as amended.

He spoke at an event organised by the Labour Party to mark this year’s Democracy Day and was contained in a statement by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Obiora Ifoh.

According to Amadi: “Nigerians and indeed the National Assembly should be courageous enough to probe INEC expenditure during the 2023 general elections.

“The failure of the INEC server during the presidential election with all the money given to them. It is appalling that no one spoke about the huge amount of money given Mahmood Yakubu and all the INEC commissioners to prosecute a failed election, failed because the Supreme Court has to step in to determine the result of elections.”

He noted that the ongoing electoral reform must reject the inconsistency of allowing the presidency to appoint the INEC chairman.

Amadi stressed that this gives room for election rigging before the votes are cast.

[DailyPost]

Each time a country goes through minimum wage negotiation, you can take it for granted that the argument to put politicians on that same salary scale will come up. It is a common argument, one that the Victorian Socialists Party in Australia included in their campaign promises. Granted, they were an upcoming party—the equivalent of the many political parties in Nigeria that exist through their press releases until elections are around the corner—and were unlikely to win anyway. Still, asking politicians to feel what they dish out is a universally resonant sentiment. In 1816, when the United States Congressmen voted to increase their salaries to $1500 a year (from the cumulative $900), a significant number of them were promptly voted out! Such reactions show how much people have always resented their delegates living above the majority of the people they are supposed to represent.

In Nigeria, we have repeatedly heard versions of the argument as the Nigeria Labour Congress slugs it out with the Federal Government on calibrating the pay scale. The NLC started out with N615,000, a rather outrageous sum even for a negotiation starting point. They revised their offer to 495,000 and are now down to N250,000. The Federal Government, meanwhile, is offering them N62,000. In bargaining, the union leaders justify their figures by comparing the sum with politicians’ income. To enhance the moral legitimacy of their stance, the breakdown of lawmakers’ income has been circulated in the media along with the payslip of a prominent media aide. If they could earn that much, the workers too should be able to up their demands. While we know it is highly improbable that our politicians would ever legalise such a proposal, it is a discussion still worth having. The Nigerian political class earns a high income. If placed on a minimum wage, will it make a difference?

Arguments in favour of the proposal assert that politicians are public representatives and their realities should not be distant from the society they purportedly administer. Besides, politics is not a profession one should embark on for the salaries but for the prospect of making a social impact. This line of argument is not entirely without provenance. Until the 20th century, lawmakers in Britain (the country that colonised/modernised half of the world) were unpaid. In those times, it was not a full-time job but a partial vocation for propertied men who could afford to take some time off to deliberate for society.

Several analysts suggest a correlation between the income we pay politicians and the quality of governance. They argue that better salaries induce better people into politics, which is good for the system. The standard reference point for those who take this position is Singapore. Their lawmakers are officially the highest paid in the world earning about $900,000 per year (for comparison, US congressmen earn about $178,000). Singaporean ministers earn around $1.1m, while their president earns about $1.7m (the US president earns $400,000). Other countries, especially in the Middle East (like Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Kuwait) and Europe (Monaco, Norway, and Sweden), also have leaders earning humongous salaries. What do these countries have in common? Good governance, high quality of life, minimal corruption, and leaders who demonstrate public accountability.

Now, as even an elementary analyst knows, correlation is not causation. The fact that higher salaries have something to do with better governance elsewhere does not necessarily make it the defining reason those countries enjoy good leadership. Nigeria is a fantastic example of higher salaries not making any difference in leadership quality. In fact, all the arguments advanced for paying politicians higher salaries fall apart in Nigeria. They say politics is an elite enterprise and if you want to draw the best minds in your society, you must pay them well above—or at least the equivalent of—what they would have earned if they worked for wealthy private corporations. People who get into power should enjoy a high quality of life to free them from pursuing other enterprises that will expectedly bring them money. That idea does not quite hold up here because the meritocracy that selects people in those societies is still largely alien to us. People frequently get into power in spite of—not because of—merit.

That explains why, except for a handful, Nigerian politics is mostly populated by a category that does not even represent the quality of minds that freely litter its landscape. Looking at those who represent us in power, you would never quite know that Nigerians are brilliant people who excel in parts of the world where they are allowed to thrive. Our politics is skewed in such a way that the worst of us mostly tends to represent the best of us. Ironically, some analysts use African countries such as Nigeria as an exemplar of the low-quality governance you get when you underpay your public administrators.

Nigerian lawmakers earn as much as their US counterparts, but they do not compare favourably. Listen to our lawmakers debate an issue, and you will understand that they themselves are a problem that higher salaries simply cannot fix. For instance, the quality of their “debate” over the re-introduced national anthem was beneath the level of what you will get at a newspaper stand where the Free Readers Association members converge to argue everything from world politics to sports. The discussants did not come across as if they did any homework on the subject; their contributions were mostly extempore and hardly insightful. I have witnessed agboolé meetings where the old men who mediate conflicts demonstrate far better rhetorical and oratorical skills. So where exactly is the elitism that is supposed to distinguish them from the rest of us and justify their pay?

They also confound the idea that if politicians earned enough, they would look away from bribes. Nigeria serially defies abstract postulations in this respect. Someone like Orji Uzor Kalu was not a pauper before he got into politics, yet he once went to jail on allegations of corruption. His story is not even unique. Governors steal and steal while they are in office, and when they are leaving, they will still get the lawmakers to sign them unconscionably fat pensions. Then they will go to the Senate where they will continue to steal. Nothing is ever enough for them, no matter how much they manage to amass.

To be fair to them, the nature of public office in Nigeria induces stealing, especially if you already lack a strong moral core. The average politician is always hustled by the mass of beggars who throng their abode in search of kobo tokens of survival. Such demands on public leaders push them to steal to augment their earnings. Still, that does not change the argument that in our society, our politicians are the same breed of hustlers whether rich or poor. There are hardly any distinctions between them when it comes to corruption. Paying people who have no such self-awareness higher salaries will not raise their standards. It will only widen their already wide mouths.

If more money has not allowed them to create the space necessary to develop themselves intellectually and ideologically, paying them less (by putting them on a minimum wage) will not make much difference either. No reasonable person thinks there is any path to that proposal ever getting actualised, but we bring it up because it is a good argument that at least reminds our out-of-touch politicians to stay level-headed. In the ongoing context of wage negotiation in Nigeria, it is funny seeing people pointlessly arguing against the idea. There is no path to ever paying politicians minimum wage, but bringing it up is also not an entirely futile exercise. Leaders who determine our lives need such occasional reminders to be—hopefully—empathic.

• MOSOP: it’s time to immortalise Saro-Wiwa

The family of the Founder of Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC), Dr. Frederick Isiotan Fasehun, has protested the omission of their late patriarch from the list of June 12 heroes contained in yesterday’s Democracy Day broadcast by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The Movement for The Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP) also said the late environmentalist and writer Ken Sar-Wiwa ought to have been immortalised the way Chief MKO Abiola has been honoured.

In a statement in Lagos by the late OPC Founder’s son, Mr. Remi Fasehun, the family described the omission of Dr. Fasehun as uncharitable, ungrateful, and unpardonable.

“The President was a direct beneficiary of our father’s activism and sacrifice for democracy.

“Not only were they in the trenches together, (the late) Fasehun helped Tinubu to escape into exile.

“Several people, who escaped from the country into exile and joined NADECO-Abroad, including Pa Anthony Enahoro, were personally taken by boat and bush paths, through the NADECO Route, by Dr. Fasehun. He was at a point the link between Pa Enahoro-NADECO and NUPENG, the union that played a pivotal role in that struggle.

“He was thrown into prison several times by the General Sani Abacha junta, in Kirikiri, Ilorin, and Kuje. At the infamous Inter-Centre in Ikoyi Cemetery, he was held incommunicado for several months, an experience that inflicted immense damage on him, physically and psychologically, to the extent of leaving his vision impaired for life,” the family said.

In a statement in Port Harcourt by its Publicity Secretary, Saviour Oscar, MOSOP said the President did not recognise the sacrifices of the late Saro-Wiwa and other Ogoni patriots who fought for democracy while recognising the late winner of June 12, 1993 presidential election, Basorun Moshood Abiola.

The statement reads: “We thank Mr. President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, for addressing Nigerians on her 25th Democracy Day. However, it is very sad that Mr. President did not recognise or make mention of the struggle of the Ogoni heroes, led by Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight others, who laid down their lives for the rights of the indigenous people.

“We, the Ogoni, have been very much supportive and have contributed so much to the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP); so, it’s unfortunate that Mr. President recognised the struggle of MKO Abiola while failing to acknowledge that of Ken Saro-Wiwa and other Ogonis who paid the supreme sacrifice for what we enjoy today as a nation.

“It is still a painful experience for the people of Ogoni that we lost a generation of industrious sons who contributed immensely to the development of Rivers State and Nigeria at large and today, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, just like former President Muhammadu Buhari, recognised Abiola and the incident that led to his election bid and death while ignoring Ken Saro-Wiwa and others. It is painful and very worrisome…”

[TheNation]

The Federal Government on Wednesday admonished organised Labour to consider the broader economic implications of its push for an unrealistic higher national minimum wage.

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, who handed down the admonition, hinted that the N250,000 minimum wage demanded by labour could undermine the economy, lead to mass retrenchment of workers and jeopardise the welfare of Nigerians.

However, the labour unions refuted President Bola Tinubu’s claims during his Democracy Day broadcast on Wednesday that an agreement had been reached on the new national minimum wage.

Acting President of the Nigeria Labour Congress, Prince Adewale Adeyanju, said as of the time negotiations ended on June 7,  no agreement had been reached by the Tripartite Committee on the National Minimum Wage.

Adeyanju is acting on behalf of the NLC president, Joe Ajaero,  who is attending an International Labour Organisation conference in Geneva, Switzerland.

Tinubu drew the ire of the unions after stating that his administration would soon submit an executive bill to the National Assembly to codify the agreements reached in the minimum wage negotiations between Labour, the private sector, the states and the Federal Government.

The parties had engaged in prolonged talks for weeks with the unions insisting on N250,000 minimum wage while the Federal Government and the Organised Private Sector offered N62,000.

However, the state governors said they would not be able to sustain any minimum wage higher than N60,000.

Dismissing the offers made by the Federal Government and the OPS, the labour unions said they would not negotiate what they described as ‘starvation wage.’

N62,000 not acceptable

The Assistant General Secretary of the NLC, Chris Onyeka, said Labour would not accept the latest offer of N62,000 and the N100,000 proposal made by some individuals and economists.

This was as the NLC President, Joe Ajaero, said the unionists were waiting on the President to consider Labour’s proposal.

But speaking at the opening of the 2024 Synod of the Charismatic Bishops Conference of Nigeria in Abuja on Wednesday, the information minister emphasised the imperative of a realistic wage system that safeguards against mass retrenchment while addressing workers’ needs.

Idris restated the government’s dedication to reassessing the minimum wage but cautioned against demands that could disrupt the economy.

 He stated, “As I have repeatedly said, the Federal Government is not opposed to the increase of wages for Nigerian workers but we keep on advocating for a realistic and sustainable wage system for the workers – a wage system that will not undermine the economy, lead to mass retrenchment of workers and jeopardise the welfare of about 200 million Nigerians.

“We want the labour unions to understand that the relief that Nigerians are expecting, and that they fully deserve, will not come only in the form of an increase in wages.”

 He highlighted the ongoing efforts to alleviate the cost of living, citing initiatives like the Presidential Compressed Natural Gas programme aimed at reducing transportation expenses by 50 per cent.

 While advocating wage increases, Idris stressed the importance of holistic relief measures beyond salary adjustments, urging Labour to recognise the significance of programmes like the CNG initiative in enhancing citizens’ purchasing power.

 “It will also come as an effort to reduce the cost of living and to ensure that more money stays in the pockets of Nigerians. And this is where programmes like the Presidential CNG initiative come in.

“By replacing or complementing petrol usage with CNG, that programme alone will cut transportation costs by as much as 50 per cent,” he claimed.

 The minister called on religious leaders to assist in raising public awareness about government initiatives and efforts.

Religious leaders

He stressed the crucial role of the clergy in disseminating information about available opportunities and the government’s ongoing efforts.

 “As a government, we need your support, advice, and feedback,” Idris stated.

“Very importantly, we need you to be aware of the efforts being made and the challenges being faced so that you can help us communicate these to your congregations and the general public,” he added.

The minister highlighted the influential platforms of religious leaders, noting their potential to enlighten Nigerians on their rights, responsibilities, and the economic opportunities provided by the policies under the President’s Renewed Hope Agenda.

The agenda, he noted, aimed to promote economic rebirth, strengthen national security, boost agriculture and food security, and transform infrastructure and transportation.

“Information and awareness are critical, and this is where our religious leaders come in. You have very influential platforms that can enlighten Nigerians on their rights, responsibilities, and the abundance of economic opportunities being thrown up by the policies and programmes being implemented under the Renewed Hope Agenda of President Bola Tinubu,” he explained.

 In his remarks, the National President of the Charismatic Bishop Conference, Archbishop Leonard Kawas, reaffirmed the organisation’s unwavering support for Tinubu’s administration, emphasising their commitment to collaborative efforts to realise the nation’s collective aspirations.

‘No agreement yet’

In their reaction to the President’s national broadcast, Adeyanju disagreed with Tinubu’s statement that his administration negotiated in good faith and with open arms with Organised Labour on the new national minimum wage.

Tinubu during his broadcast stated, “In this spirit, we have negotiated in good faith and with open arms with organised Labour on a new national minimum wage. We shall soon send an executive bill to the National Assembly to enshrine what has been agreed upon as part of our law for the next five years or less.

“In the face of labour’s call for a national strike, we did not seek to oppress or crack down on the workers as a dictatorial government would have done. We chose the path of cooperation over conflict.

 “No one was arrested or threatened. Instead, the labour leadership was invited to break bread and negotiate toward a good-faith resolution.

“Reasoned discussion and principled compromise are hallmarks of democracy. These themes shall continue to animate my policies and interaction with the constituent parts of our political economy.”

But Adeyanju in a statement dismissed the President’s assertion, insisting that he might have been misled by his advisers, noting that two figures- N250,000 from Organised Labour and N62,000 from the government and the OPS- were arrived at and ought to have been submitted to Tinubu.

According to the NLC official, anything to the contrary is not only doctored but won’t be accepted by Labour.

The congress maintained its stance on the N250,000 minimum wage, rejecting the government’s offer of N62,000 as grossly inadequate.

The statement read in part, “The NLC would have expected that the advisers of the President would have told him that we neither reached any agreement with the Federal Government and the employers on the base figure for a National Minimum Wage nor on its other components.

“Our demand still remains N250,000 only and we have not been given any compelling reasons to change this position which we consider a great concession by Nigerian workers during the tripartite negotiation process.

 “We are therefore surprised at the submission of Mr President over a supposed agreement. We believe that he may have been misled into believing that there was an agreement with the NLC and TUC.

“There was none and it is important that we let the President, Nigerians and other national stakeholders understand this immediately to avoid a mix-up in the ongoing conversation around the national minimum wage.”

Adeyanju alleged that the labour leaders were intimidated by security agencies during the minimum wage talks.

“Fully armed soldiers surrounded us while we were in a negotiation with the government and despite denials; recent statements by senior officials of the government reaffirmed our fears contrary to the assurances by the government.

“However, we remain assured that the President’s democratic credentials will come to the fore in favour of Nigerian workers and masses,’’ he expressed optimism.

According to the union, the Democracy Day celebration was an opportunity for the President to demonstrate his love for Nigerian workers and the masses by shunning the advice that may be coming from ‘’those whose intentions were continuously focused on hurting Nigeria’s poor and struggling workers.’’

He appealed,  “Mr President should not allow these individuals and groups to sabotage his promise of lifting Nigerian workers out of poverty.

“The President’s advisers obviously did not tell him the truth that the leaders of the trade unions were intimidated and harassed. It is therefore important that Mr President understands that we were threatened severally by his operatives perhaps without his consent.

“Series of media propaganda calculated to intimidate and harass us were, and, are still being waged against the trade unions by senior officials of this government."

The NLC noted that there was no agreement as regards the duration of the Minimum Wage Act.

“It is also important that Mr President should know that most of his officers are working round-the-clock to set up the leadership of congress and the trade unions.

“We never agreed on a five-year duration of the Minimum Wage Act, though we acknowledge that the President mentioned five years or less.

“We also agreed that inflation should be pegged at a level for a certain amount to be agreed as minimum wage. This is to bring clarity to what the report should contain.

“Once again, we reiterate that it will be extremely difficult for Nigerian workers to accept any national minimum wage figure that approximates a starvation wage. We cannot be working and yet remain in abject poverty.

“We seek justice, equity, and fairness for all Nigerians, and this we hope would also drive the actions of Mr President who promised a Living Wage to Nigerian workers. This is an opportunity to show that he listens to Nigerians as he promised,” the labour movement said.

OPS speaks

Also commenting on the presidential broadcast, the Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines, and Agriculture, stated that no consensus had been reached on the national minimum wage.

The NACCIMA President, Dele Oye, who is part of the 37-member tripartite committee, said the panel was still in the middle of negotiation, faulting the contradictory statements being made on the talks.

“No agreement has been reached with Labour; however, it is wrong to make a press statement in the middle of negotiations apart from appealing to all parties involved to work harder to resolve outstanding issues, as the impasse is already creating uncertainty in the ability of businesses to make decisions,” he admonished.

In January, the government inaugurated the tripartite committee on the national minimum wage.

The committee was tasked with the responsibility of recommending a new national minimum wage for Nigerian workers.

Over the past few months, the federal and state governments, organised labour, and representatives of the private sector have been deliberating on a new minimum wage for workers.

However, the demand by organised labour regarding the minimum wage has yet to be met.

On June 3, the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress embarked on an indefinite nationwide strike to protest against the government’s inability to meet their minimum wage demand.

Twenty-four hours later, the labour unions “relaxed” the strike by one week.

[Punch]

THE Organised Labour has rejected President Bola Tinubu’s claims that an agreement had been reached on new national minimum wages in his nationwide broadcast to mark Democracy Day.

According to labour, as at the time negotiations ended on June 7, there was no agreement reached by the Tripartite Committee on the National Minimum Wage.

Rather, two figures such as N250, 000 from labour and N62,000 from government and Organised Private Sector, OPS, were arrived at and ought to have been submitted to the President.
Meanwhile, the Federal Government has urged labour, to be realistic in their demand for a new minimum wage for workers, saying that the relief Nigerians were expecting would not come only in the form of an increase in wages but from other packages lined up by the government.

In a statement by Nigeria Labour Congress, NLC, acting President, Prince Adewale Adeyanju, labour noted that anything to the contrary was not only doctored but won’t be accepted by labour.

Reacting to the President’s speech, Adeyanju, said: “The NLC attentively listened to the Democracy Day presidential address delivered by Senator Bola Tinubu, especially concerning the ongoing National Minimum Wage negotiations. While the President may have accurately recounted parts of our democratic journey’s history, it is evident that he has been misinformed regarding the outcome of the wage negotiation process.

“We appreciate the President’s commitment to those fine democratic ideals, which allowed the work of the Tripartite National Minimum Wage Negotiation Committee to proceed unhindered despite some hiccups. However, we had expected Mr President to have used this understanding as one of those who were in the vanguard of the struggle with us around the nation to rescue Nigeria from the hands of the military to harmonise the two figures submitted to him by the Tripartite Committee in favour of workers and masses. It would have been a fitting Democracy Day gift.

“The NLC would have expected that the advisers of the President would have told him that we neither reached any agreement with the Federal Government and the employers on the base figure for a National Minimum Wage nor on its other components. Our demand remains N250,000 and we have not been given any compelling reasons to change this position, which we consider a great concession by Nigerian workers during the tripartite negotiation process.

“We are, therefore, surprised at the submission of Mr. President over a supposed agreement. We believe that he may have been misled into believing that there was an agreement with the NLC and the Trade Union Congress, TUC. There was none and we must let the President, Nigerians and other national stakeholders understand this immediately to avoid a mix-up in the ongoing conversation around the national minimum wage. We have also not seen a copy of the document submitted to him and will not accept any doctored document.

“However, we want to reaffirm our belief that the President on whose table the Tripartite Committee’s report presently resides would prepare an Executive Bill, which content will reflect the true demand of Nigerian workers. We think that this is an opportunity for him to demonstrate his love for Nigerian workers and the masses by shunning the pieces of advice that may be coming from those whose intentions are continuously focused on hurting the poor and struggling workers of Nigeria. Mr President should not allow these individuals and groups to sabotage his promise of lifting Nigerian workers out of poverty.

“President’s advisers did not tell him the truth that the leaders of the trade unions were intimidated and harassed. It is, therefore, important that Mr President understands that we were threatened severally by his operatives perhaps without his consent.

“Series of media propaganda calculated to intimidate and harass us were, and, are still being waged against the trade unions by senior officials of this government. Fully armed soldiers surrounded us while we were in a negotiation with the government and despite denials, recent statements by senior officials of the government reaffirmed our fears contrary to the assurances by the government. “However, we remain assured that the President’s democratic credentials will come to the fore in favour of Nigerian workers and masses.

“It is also important that Mr. President should know that most of his officers are working round the clock to set up the leadership of Congress and the trade unions. We never agreed on a 5-year duration of the minimum wage Act though we acknowledge that the President mentioned 5 years or less.

“We also agreed that inflation should be pegged at a level for a certain amount to be agreed as minimum wage. This is to bring clarity to what the report should contain.”

FG to labour: Relief will not come only from an increase in wages

Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, who spoke at the opening of the 2024 Synod of the Charismatic Bishops Conference of Nigeria held in Abuja, said: “On the matter of the new minimum wage, which the FG is very committed to reviewing, realistically and sustainably.

“As I have repeatedly said, FG is not opposed to the increase of wages for Nigerian workers but we keep on advocating a realistic and sustainable wage system for the workers a wage system that
will not undermine the economy, lead to mass retrenchment of workers and jeopardize the welfare of about 200 million Nigerians.

“We want labour to understand that the relief that Nigerians are expecting, and that they fully deserve, will not come only in the form of an increase in wages.

“It will also come as efforts to reduce the cost of living and to ensure that more money stays in the pockets of Nigerians. And this is where programmes like the Presidential CNG initiative come in,” adding that the CNG programme alone, by replacing or complementing petrol usage with CNG, will cut transportation costs by as much as 50 per cent.

 [Vanguard]

Back in 2005 or thereabouts, a good friend of mine shared with me the challenge his wife was encountering in her place of work in one of the uniform-wearing security services. His wife, he informed me, was being harassed by one of her bosses. According to him, the more senior officer was in the habit of extending invitations to his wife requesting that they meet in the “officers’ mess” of the organisation, or some hotel.

The lady in question resorted to making jokes about every invite by her potential predator. She would diplomatically retort by reminding the officer that his faith allowed him the latitude to take four wives. In her case, however, her husband had only her as wife and was stuck with her. I would later be told that a signal was spontaneously generated from the headquarters of the organisation where she worked, kicking her to Keffi in Nasarawa state.

This was a nursing mother happily resident in Abuja with her family, who had responsibility for getting her children set for school every day, dropping them off before heading to work. She had to redesign her routine which included waking up much earlier to get the kids set. Her husband hired a driver who took the young ones to school every day and brought them back, while his wife headed to Keffi every day, returning in the evening. As if that was not enough, the oga at the top in question ensured she was officially queried for “misconduct” and the document filed in her records at the headquarters. She subsequently lost seniority in her place of work, a development which can be most harrowing for workers in the uniform-donning services.

Banks, investment concerns and financial institutions have been known to impose unattainable credit targets on their employees, particularly females, as part of their official responsibilities. They are compelled to cultivate plastic relationships with their customers, typically of the masculine gender. They are prodded to don provocative attires, and see-through clothing which leaves nothing to the imagination, in their officially demanded seduction plot. Elsewhere, statutory entitlements are denied to subordinates, typically the ladies, by their superiors. Promotions are clamped upon, and training opportunities for professional enhancement are denied. Except of course if such employees subscribe to being part of the luggage of the guys in the “VIP” cubicle on their local and foreign binges and rendezvous.

Sexual harassment has been particularly prevalent in our tertiary institutions over time. Pluri-dimensional instances have been recorded in our colleges of education, schools of nursing and midwifery, polytechnics, monotechnics and universities. It seems to feature more in public institutions than in private citadels; many of which are physically overseen by their proprietors. The trend of solicitation for sex in exchange for good grades has been most worryingly dominant over time. It has provoked as much puzzlement as it has indeed triggered academic inquisitions, intent on unearthing the root causes of the affliction, especially within our context. The media in recent weeks has highlighted multiple incidents of sexual harassment. You would imagine that with the advent of telephony and its infinite potential, this trend would be on the downward slide. But no. Indeed, it seems to be on the ascendancy. Universities have been specifically notorious for perpetrating this unwholesome trend.

In March this year, a professor of law at the University of Calabar (Unical) Cyril Ndifon, was arraigned at the Federal High Court in Abuja. There were complaints of sexual harassment against him by students of his institution. He reportedly requested a diploma student in his class to send pornographic images of herself to his telephone. The case was brought against Ndifon by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). Last April, Mfonobong David Udoudum, a lecturer in the general studies department of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, (UNN), was captured in a video clip, allegedly harassing a female student. In this specific instance, Udoudom was videotaped in his underwear, implying that he was most probably on the cusp of amorous entanglement with the said student. Ndifon and Udoudom have been summarily suspended by their employers who restated their total abhorrence for sexual misconduct.

Back in 2018, a female student of philosophy at the University of Benin (Uniben), alleged that one of her lecturers, Anthony Asekhauno, raped her. In her narrative, Asekhauno reportedly ensured she failed a course he taught, Logic. three times. He allegedly took advantage of her on one of her visits to his office to discuss her serial failure of Asekhauno’s course. Three years later in the same university, a final-year student accused a senior lecturer in the department of English of raping her. She posited that she went to submit her final year essay when the lecturer locked his office and ran through her severally. A 2022 survey suggested that 14 very senior academics including four professors, were fired by the Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU) and the University of Abuja (UniAbuja). Such is the grand and global scale sexual carnivores prey upon the innocent in the university system.

A correspondence dated May 27, 2024, and signed by Yusuf Mallama Tuggar, Nigeria’s foreign affairs minister has been trending for a few days now. I’ve had cause in the past to interrogate the naivety and carelessness of the post-2015 leadership of Nigeria in managing official documents. Beginning from the Muhammadu Buhari era in 2015, before a sneeze exits the nostrils, its sound would be reverberating the streets. The Olusegun Obasanjo administration which I served, had much more tighter control of official communications which could not be found on the trays of Akara sellers.

Tuggar’s letter is addressed to the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, (HCSF), Folashade Yemi-Esan. It is headed: Re: Official Complaint Regarding Sexual Harassment of Mrs Simisola Fajemirokun-Ajayi by Ambassador Ibrahim Adamu Lamuwa, Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The one-page, three-paragraph mail conveys the official letter forwarded to him by Mrs Ajayi, alleging she is being hunted by Lamuwa, a very senior government official and diplomat to wit. Tuggar notes in his letter that given the gravity of the allegation, he is constrained to request the intervention of the HCSF in the matter. The foreign minister assures that he will be available to assist the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation in the processing of the complaint if his attention is required.

Tuggar wrote in response to a letter from Falana and Falana’s Chambers, which has the renowned attorney, Femi Falana, as principal partner. The correspondence from Falana’s chambers was signed by Adebayo Oniyelu and it detailed and dated several instances when Lamuwa attempted to take advantage of Fajemirokun-Ajayi. Specifically, she cited October 7, 2023, and November 10, 2023, as occasions Lamuwa made lurid overtures to her. In the course of the second incident, Fajemirokun-Ajayi stated that the foreign affairs permanent secretary baited her with a “life-changing getaway with him to Hong Kong.” Lamuwa it is alleged, had previously threatened, harassed and intimidated female officers in the foreign affairs system, dropping the names of “stubborn” people from trips and postings. Falana and Falana Chambers prayed Tuggar to investigate Lamuwa for serial unethical conduct inconsistent with the expectations of a bureaucrat at his level.

There has not been, in my view, an incident of sexual indiscretion in the supposedly hallowed corridors of political authority so publicly and embarrassingly ventilated in recent times. That this is coming from the foreign ministry, Nigeria’s primary mirror to the whole wide world makes it all the more disturbing. Lamuwa’s profile presents him as a well-heeled diplomat. He studied economics at the University of Maiduguri (UniMaid) and joined the foreign service in 1993. He has had broad-based diplomatic training and experience through a 31-year career traversing Senegal, India, Hong Kong, Canada, Saudi Arabia and Mauritania, among others. On paper, the diplomat who hails from Gombe State, is a gentleman. By some coincidence, he comes from a state which is next door to Tuggar’s in Bauchi State.

Minister Tuggar has followed due process in escalating Mrs Ajayi’s complaint to the Head of Service, the Numero Uno civil servant. It is worth remarking that Tuggar has not played a parapo or na mu, na mu tune here by shielding his “countryman” from the northeast from the investigation. One is hoping here that there are no undercurrents in the relationship between the minister and the permanent secretary. Nigerians expect a very dispassionate and forensically thorough inquisition into this incident. This is very critical to ascertaining the crux of the matter.

It is too early to be judgemental at this point while the incident is being examined. The system, however, must develop safeguards for our women across the board. The molestation of our mothers, wives, daughters, sisters, and nieces must be reined in. Bloodhounds must be themselves bloodied to protect the innocent. We look forward to the airing of findings into the Ibrahim Adamu Lamuwa’s inquest hoping that this begins a new era in the manner our women are treated.

Olusunle (PhD), is a Fellow of the Association of Nigerian Authors (FANA).