BEYOND the protests, there are a number of issues the government should pay attention to:

One, though the protesters might have different motives, they seem all united by alienation from the government and even the state system. Rather than use blackmail and strong-arm tactics, government should use credible opinion polls to articulate and aggregate the various grievances against it and the state – and then evolve sustainable strategies on how to address as many of them as it can.

Boxing shadows or creating enemies where they do not exist will only exacerbate the legitimacy crisis around the government. It will be a mistake for the government to believe that it can successfully stifle speech using intimidation and blackmail. Our history shows that such a strategy has a very short shelf life – as Buhari, in his first coming as a military dictator, and Abacha – can testify to. In his second coming – as a civilian President- a coalition of those Buhari disdained as a dot in a circle and those Femi Adesina called ‘wailing wailers’, fought back in their own ways such that even before Buhari completed his eight-year tenure, he openly complained that he was tired, and would, on leaving office, want to be as far away as possible from Abuja and politics. 

The truth is that citizens, in the face of oppression by those who wield state power, often adopt asymmetric strategies to fight back. This can range from misinformation, caricature and outright fake news. In this age of social media where anyone who owns a mobile phone can be a publisher, citizens are especially empowered to fight back oppression. I believe that for a government which currently has a  low social capital owing to the harsh effects of its economic policies, its policy somersaults, propaganda and non-inclusive style of governance, what it needs is more friends and less enemies. It needs to find a way of winning over the hearts and minds of as many Nigerians as possible.

Two, while it is not unusual for a relatively new government to start on a wobbly note, the government, for now at least, seems confused on what it wants to achieve. For instance, while it said it wanted to implement the Oronsaye Report (which recommended the merging of ministries and departments and abrogation of some) it also runs the largest cabinet of 48 Ministries and recently created another – the Ministry of Livestock Development.

Similarly, while the Tinubu government initially seemed desirous of moving away from the cantankerous mode of public communication of the Buhari era, by appointing the very urbane and affable Mohamed Idris as the Minister of Information and Chief Ajuri Ngelari as the government’s Spokesman, it also contradicted this by appointing the self-confessed ethnic irredentist Bayo Onanuga as Special Adviser on information and strategy.

By so doing, it negated  what would have been a new and courteous approach to public communication  to complement the commendable bridge-building efforts by the wife of the President, Senator Remi Tinubu   and a few others in the government. Similarly, some of the policies of the government raise confusion on whether Tinubu wants to be remembered as a great Nigerian President or simply wants to be more popular than the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo in Yorubaland.

Three, President Tinubu should be mindful of two key features of Nigeria’s democracy since 1999 which has always backfired but which our politicians remain funnily crazily attracted to: these are god-fatherism and clannishness. With the exception of Tinubu in Lagos, nearly all political godfathers invariably fall out with their political godsons, raising questions of why politicians remain fixated on selecting and bankrolling their successors. For clannishness and ethnocentrism which Buhari took to a previously unseen level, and which Tinubu seems eager to match, if not better in the negative, this also usually boomerangs.

For instance, some of the most vicious critics of the Buhari government were Northern Muslims who were supposed to be the beneficiaries of his clannishness. Similarly, even before the protests started on August 1, many Yorubas, openly say the clannishness in Tinubu’s mode of appointments and governance  “does not represent who we are”. In fact, that many of the faces of the protests are from the Yoruba ethnic extraction is enough to warn the government that Yorubanisation of political life will not be enough to buy Yoruba adulation.  If anything, it will likely backfire because there is a spark of the divine in all of us which makes most people to abhor injustice. Besides, clannishness attracts odium to innocent members of an ethnic in-group even when they are opposed to the leader’s nepotism.

Four, the protest has now shown that no part of this country has a monopoly of providing poor leadership to the country. In fact, that the protest was organised under the banner of #EndBadGovernance is instructive. At least for now, there seems to be a consensus that the Tinubu government is grossly underperforming. And since most Nigerians appear to believe that the fundamental problem of the country is “squarely that of leadership” (apologies to Achebe), the use of innuendo to blame the North (which has produced most of the country’s leaders), has now come under critical scrutiny.

In this thinking, there is always the unproven assumption that the leadership problem of the country would be solved when the South, in particular, the “progressives” (a moniker appropriated by South-West politicians when they were in the opposition) come to power. So far it has not happened under the Tinubu presidency. Even the “reforms” embarked by the Tinubu government are mere uncritical rehash of the policies implemented by the Babangida government between 1986 and 1993 when the country adopted the IMF/World Bank supported structural Adjustment Programme, and which only succeeded in further impoverishing the country and emasculating the middle class.

Alan Greenspan, who served for five terms as chairman of the Board of Governors of the US Federal Reserve Bank (August 11 1987 to January 31 2006)   – the equivalent of our Central Bank- was famously quoted as saying that he owed his success during his tenure to the fact that he always did the opposite of the advice he received from the two Bretton Woods institutions (i.e. the IMF and the World Bank). President Tinubu should seriously consider that approach. It may amount to committing class suicide for him. But that would be the surest way of putting himself on the path of being a great Nigerian President.

*Jideofor Adibe is Professor of Political Science at Nasarawa State University, Keffi.

After reading the book, Stepping on Toes: My Odyssey at the Nigerian Ports Authority, written by the former Managing Director of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), Ms Hadiza Bala Usman, I could not help the nudging feeling of triumph at how, finally, sunshine emerges in the horizon of national rejuvenation.

In a country grappling with challenges of declining institutional memory and opaque governance, the book – chronicling her 60-month stewardship at the country’s top blue economy institution – is both an educational resource and timely   exposé with potential to trigger positive revolution in the country’s bureaucratic ecosystem.

Chronicled, step by step, in the seventeen chapters is the meandering path of a trailblazer, who found herself thrown into a world that was not kind to the feminine kind, as the first female Chief of Staff to the governor of Kaduna State, and then as the first MD of the NPA in its first 61 years of existence.

As the chapters unfold, we meet a battle-tested woman who was prepared for the task, especially through her experience at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) when she was wrongfully accused by her former boss, Dr Aliyu Modibbo, then cleared by the Department of State Security (DSS) and eventually posted to the Abuja Enterprise Agency as the Chief Executive Officer – which became the ascending rung of her action-packed career trajectory.

Bala-Usman had one advantage going for her, which is her experience in partisan politics at the earlier years of her career when she contested for the House of Representatives seat representing the Musawa/Matazu Federal Constituency of her home state, Katsina.  Perhaps, this provided her an edge, as the political experience hones one’s instincts, and makes you able to think on your feet and to stand your ground when it mattered the most.

In my estimation, Stepping on Toes is a statement of defiance against a superior force that was intent on herding a zealous reformer into the wrong path. Hence, the takeaway, that as young people struggling to make a change, we must not be pushed to the wrong direction, even when these powers are the ones that gave us the privilege, the platform and the voice in the first place. We must stay true to what we believe is best for our nation despite the pressure from the sharks in the water.

The book documents many reforms and milestones which, ordinarily, would have gained accolades and promotion, for Bala-Usman in (former) President Muhammadu Buhari’s government known for anti-corruption; but which ironically became a thorn in the flesh to some vested interests, and eventually led to her witch-hunt and subsequent ‘sack’.

As she assumed office on July 18, 2016, the MD initiated a collaboration with BudgIT, the open governance technological platform, in order to ensure that key research, industry policies and innovations were effectively communicated, and that critical data was generated and made available to the public. A Revenue Invoice Management System aimed at improving service offering, partner, partner relationships, creating an efficient payment method, maximizing revenue and eradicating loss associated with fraud and revenue leakage was also launched.

She also immediately engaged in resolving a dysfunctional scaling system which resulted in junior officers on higher steps of their grade level earning more than their seniors by grade. “This irregularity meant that staff, especially those in positions considered lucrative, were prepared to do everything possible to stop their own promotion,” it expatiated.

Interestingly, chapter 6, entitled, “Apapa traffic congestion and Eto”, unveils the issue of an underground economy, reportedly worth over N12b annually, which was built around corrupt practices by officials of task forces around the Apapa ports. This depicts the failure of successive task forces set up by the federal and state governments to tackle the traffic congestion around the ports, especially at the Lagos axis; and a pointer to how people profiteered from the chaos at the ports.

The MD solved this knotty imbroglio with the development and deployment of the Electronic truck call-up software, known as Eto, which reduced human interaction in management of trucks, thereby tying off avenues for graft, and ultimately restored sanity to the ecosystem.

In chapter seven, “Dredging of Calabar channel”, the author revealed how the country was saved from paying $22Million USD to a company that made claims in a job it did not perform. According to the book, “The company claimed it carried out the dredging activities between November 14 and January 2015, but neither the Harbor Master nor the Port Hydrographer was aware of any dredging activity at the time. The company did not at any time communicate with the management of the NPA during these purported dredging activities.”

In chapter eleven, “Dismantling OMSL’s secure anchorage area”, the reader comes face to face with the reality of rent-seeking economy in Nigeria. A private company had set up and was operating a Secure Anchorage Area (SAA) within the Lagos Pilotage District for about four years without any legal relationship with the NPA, generating tens of millions of US dollars without remitting any to the coffers of the NPA or any government agency.

It is instructive to note that, regarding the supposed security the vessels using the SAA were being provided, it is the statutory responsibility of the Nigerian Navy and the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) to provide this service at no cost to vessel owners. When Bala-Usman finally pulled down the sham rentier edifice, she was accosted by hoodlums, who claimed she had “taken away food from them”, threatening to physically harm her.

Curiously, instead of her boss giving her accolades for her most intense efforts at sustaining the spirit of good governance and anti-corruption the Buhari government was known, hers became an albatross. Things came to a head in chapters 14 and 15, when Bala-Usman realized, to her utmost shock and dismay, that her own boss was not happy with her.

Integrated Logistics Limited, otherwise known as Intels, had a contract to monitor and collect revenues of the NPA, in the service boat management operations, since 1997 until 2020 when the contract expired. However, at the expiration of the contract, and as the NPA was about finalizing a tender’s process for a fresh contract tenure, the then Minister of Transportation, Hon. Rotimi Amaechi, directed Bala-Usman to stop, asking for “restoration of suspended contracts between Intels and the NPA”.

The letter from the Director General of the Bureau for Public Procurement, Mr Mamman Ahmadu, as he weighed in, was instructive: “the correct procedure is that contracts should be won through a proper procurement process that complies with the provisions of PPA, 2007. Furthermore, there is need to avoid the kind of monopoly being enjoyed by Messrs. Intels, which has cascaded into the entitlement mentality being demonstrated by the firm.”

Personally, Stepping on Toes inspires me to keep asking questions. Hadiza Bala Usman did not stop, even when the handwriting on the wall was clear. Eventually, she was told to ‘step aside’, a term that is a novelty in Nigeria’s public service rules.

However, even before the investigative panel finally cleared her of the trumped-up charges of non-remittance of $165millionUD into the Consolidated Revenue Fund, the court of public opinion had already set her free, having seen through the entire charade.

My organization, Connected Development (CODE) and its flagship project, Follow The Money, started by asking questions. Then, in 2012 when I first asked for monies voted to save the children of Bagega in Zamfara State, officials at the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Mines and Ministry of Environment, asked, “Who are you? Who sent you? Why are you asking?”

So, because no single kobo that was approved had got to this community, I started the online hashtag campaign #SaveBagega, which finally attracted the attention of the world, and made former President Goodluck Jonathan do the needful.

From that day, we never stopped helping the government to close leakages where the monies could have been wasted. For instance, in 2019 alone, we saved the Nigerian government N50 billion. This is why Stepping on Toes is a timely and indispensable resource for those who want to change the narrative, not only in my beloved country, but in the other twelve African countries where we operate, inspiring citizens to make a change, one community at a time.

Hamzat Lawal (Hamzy!) is a renowned activist and campaigning currently mobilizing, organizing and leading a group of young people in bringing needed changes across African communities using Follow The Money. He is currently the Chief Executive of Connected Development (CODE).

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022, Kenya held its general election during which the President, governors, senators and members of the National Assembly were elected. The results of the elections were announced on August 15, 2022. William Kipchirchir Samoei Arap Ruto (57) had 7,176,141 votes, that is 50.5% of the total votes while Mr. Raila Odinga (79) had 6,942,930 votes, that is 48.8%. The results were announced by Kenya’s Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (1EBC). 

On September 5, 2022, Kenya’s Supreme Court affirmed the election of Mr. William Ruto as President of Kenya. He was sworn in on September 13, 2022 as Kenya’s fifth post-independence President. 

On March 24 this year, Senegal, a country not too far from us with a population of 18million people held its Presidential election. A former tax Inspector, Bassirou Diomaye Diakhar Faye (44), was elected President. His party had 54% of the total votes. He was sworn in on April 2 in Dakar.

On May 29 this year, South Africa had its Presidential election, the ruling party, African National Congress (ANC), won 159 of 400 seats—short of 201 seats needed to have a majority. After winning 40% of the total votes, the African National Congress was forced into coalition with Inkatha Freedom Party and the Democratic Alliance. 

On June 29, the ANC Leader, Mr Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa (71), a billionaire and the 13th richest man in South Africa, was sworn in as the President of the Republic. 

On February 25 last year, Nigeria had its Presidential election. On March 1, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) announced the results. Asiwaju Ahmed Bola Tinubu of APC scored 8,794,726 votes, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar of PDP scored 6,984,520 votes, Mr. Peter Obi of Labour Party had 6,101,533 votes while Alhaji Rabiu Kwankwaso of NNPP scored 1,496,687 votes.

Asiwaju Ahmed Tinubu scored 38.61% of the total votes cast, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar scored 29.07%, Mr. Peter Obi scored 25.4% while Rabiu Kwankwaso scored 6.40%. There were 93.4 million registered voters. The turn out was only 26.71 % in a country that is assumed to be over 200 million.  

Asiwaju Ahmed Bola Tinubu scored 25% of the votes cast in 30 states more than 24 states Constitutionally required. He was sworn in on May 29 last year as President of the Republic.

The election was not confirmed by the Supreme Court until October 26 last year. In short, President Tinubu GCFR waited for over five months as President, in suspense.

Definitely something fundamentally is wrong with our constitution. There are many defects in our 1999 constitution. My worry is that the constitution guarantees winner takes all. The constitution guarantees politics of exclusion. As it is now, unless you are very very close to the executives or you belong to a caucus of the ruling party in the centre or in the states, you can never be given an opportunity to serve however brilliant, competent or patriotic you are. Certainly, Nigeria’s problem did not start with the implementation of the 1999 Constitution but it had made worse our problems. 

Our journey in the Presidential system of government began on October 18, 1975, when the then Head of State, Brigadier General Murtala Mohammed GCFR (8 November 1938 – 13 February 1976), inaugurated the Constitutional Drafting Committee, headed by Chief Frederick Rotimi Alade Williams SAN (16 December 1920 – 26 March 2005) at the Nigeria Institute of International Affairs, Victoria Island, Lagos. Professor Akinwande Bolaji Akinyemi (82) from Ilesha in Osun state, was then the Director General of the Institute. 

He declared the stand of the then Supreme Military Council on that day. 

The following were his declarations (a) unambiguous commitment to a federal system (b) Elimination of “cut-throat political competition based on a system or rule of winner-takes all,” characteristic of Nigeria’s political past. (c) De-emphasising of institutionalized opposition to the ground in power and development of “consensus politics and government” based on a community of all interests. (d) Decentralisation of power e) Evolution of a free fair electoral system to ensure adequate representation at the centre (f) Depoliticisation of the census (g) The formation of “genuine and truly national political parties.” However, because of the “harmful effects of a proliferation of national parties,” criteria were to be evolved whereby their number could be limited. Interestingly but in vain (echoes of Ghana’s “Union Government”, “the Supreme Military Council is of the opinion that if during the course of your deliberations, and having regard to our disillusion with party politics in the past, you should discover some means by which government can be formed without the involvement of political parties, you should feel free to recommend.” But this was to be as much a non-starter as the Constituent Assembly ‘s decision to insert a clause outlawing military coups. 

(H) Establishment of an executive presidential system, in which the President and the Vice-President would be elected and granted clearly defined powers. The method of their assumption of office would have to “reflect the federal character of the country.” So, too, would the choice of members of the Cabinet, who need not in future be drawn from the legislature alone.

(I) Constitutional restriction on the number of new States. 

On January 11, 1976, General Murtala Mohammed attended the Addis Abba extraordinary summit conference of the Organisation of African Unity (O.A.U.) on the liberation struggle in Africa. On that day he gave a speech titled “AFRICA HAS COME OF AGE”. The speech was a denouncement on America’s role in Angola. He declared “Mr. Chairman, Africa has come of age. It is no longer under the orbit of any extra continental power. It should no longer take orders from any country, however, powerful. The fortunes of Africa are in our hands to make or mar. For too long have we been kicked around; for too long we have been treated like adolescents who cannot discern their interests and act accordingly. For too long has it been presumed that the African needs outside “experts” to tell him who are his friends and who are his enemies. The time has come when we should make it clear that we can decide for ourselves; that we know our interests and how to protect those interests; that we are capable of resolving African problems without presumptuous lessons in ideological dangers, which more often than not have no relevance for us, not for the problem at hand.

Nigeria has come to this Assembly determined to co-operate with you, Mr. Chairman, and with all member States to put a stop to foreign interference in our Constitutional matters, As an African nationalist of distinction, I trust you will guide our deliberation to fruitful conclusions of which our people will be proud of. I thank you.”

To me the denouncement of America by General Murtala Mohammed looked contradictory when on October 18 1975 he has just forced on us without a referendum or a plebiscite, the American Presidential system of government. 

Maybe if he has not been assassinated, thirty-two days after his speech in Addis Ababa on February 13, 1976, we would not have adopted or retained the Presidential system of government today. His successor, General Olusegun Obasanjo carried on with that policy, without review.

On September 21, 1978, the then Head of State, General Olusegun Obasanjo GCFR, promulgated Decree Number 25 which proclaimed the 1979 Presidential Constitution. Twenty-four hours earlier, he dissolved the Constituent Assembly. 

In a broadcast to the nation on that day, General Obasanjo declared, “we have accepted the Presidential form of government and the supporting structures and institutions which go with the system. We have accepted the principle of separation of powers between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary and the clauses entrenching the powers, functions and the independence of each of these estates of the realm. We believe that the fundamental principles and directives of state, the provisions of safeguarding the rights and liberties of individual and such other provisions meant to ensure greater sense of accountability and probity in public life, are essential elements in giving a new and fresh sense of direction to our national life. 

In short, the Supreme Military Council saw the constitutional document as a most commendable framework within which party-political activities can be resumed. Indeed, in the light of our experience in government, we went further to make such minor adjustments as we believe necessary to ensure the effective and efficient functioning of government, come October, 1979.

We have also made some other amendments which we believe were necessary to strengthen the continued existence of a disciplined and just society as well as ensure consistency and continuity of national policy. I am sure, you are now all very conversant. Essentially, these amendments concern:

(a) The strengthening of the judiciary by relieving the judicial officers of the responsibility for mundane administrative matters which detracts them from the more important business of efficient and quick dispensation of justice (b) Bringing the conditions of service of judicial officers in line with those of other public officers, while bearing in mind the special nature of the judicial service (c) Consciously using certain institutions such as the Armed Forces, the Federal Courts as-vehicles to stress and promote the indivisible unity of the nation rather than the competitive aspect of a Federalism 

(d) Ensuring consistency and continuity of our national policy on such matters as the development of indigenous languages, the promotion of such notions as equal access to justice and maintaining a non-expansionist foreign policy based on co-operation and peaceful co-existence with our neighbours. 

We are, of course, aware, and I am sure that no member of the Constituent Assembly can claim that the constitution is a perfect document. Neither is the Supreme Military Council claiming that all the necessary adjustments which the general public may consider desirable or necessary have been made. But I believe that the essential thing has been done: that is to have a document which, despite all its imperfections, is capable of launching us in the right direction. 

Of course, the constitution as a living document, can be changed, as and when necessary, in the light of the experience gained in working it. This, I believe, is the most we can hope for, given all the circumstances including the short-time constraint, in which the constitutional issues were debated, discussed and approved.

The coming months would pose testing challenges not only to the participants in the ensuing political activities, but also to the mass media who have responsibility of interpreting and informing the public of the issues, as well as correctly conveying the public mood to those vying for political leadership. 

I am sure you will rise to the occasion and not let the nation down.”

It is left for all to judge whether the hopes of General Murtala Mohammed and General Olusegun Obasanjo had been met with the implementation of the Presidential System of Government. 

That is not to say that the process for the Presidential Constitution went unchallenged, of course it was challenged. I remember that two members of the Constitutional Drafting Committee wrote a minority report disengaging themselves from the Presidential System of Government. They were Dr. Y. Bala Usman, then Senior Lecturer in History at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and Dr. Segun Osoba, then Senior Lecturer in History at the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. Their reports were not considered by the Constituent Assembly. The then Chairman of the Constituent Assembly, Mr. Justice Egbert Udo Udoma (21 June 1917 – 2 February 1998) made sure that their minority report did not see the light of the day. 

I remember three of my colleagues who covered the proceedings of the Constituent Assembly at that time, Femi Ogunsanwo of THE DAILY TIMES, Mohammed Haruna of THE NEW NIGERIA, Tunde Thompson of DAILY SKETCH and myself tried in vain to get a copy of the minority report. 

Since then, till today, there has been a clamour that the Presidential System of Government is not suitable for us. It is getting stronger these days. Let us take an example with the issue of our culture and tradition.

 In the third Schedule of the 1979 Constitution, the following were named as members of the Council of state. They were “the President, who shall be the Chairman; the Vice-President, who shall be the Deputy Chairman; all former Presidents of the federation and all former Heads of the Government of the Federation; all former Chief Justices of Nigeria are citizens of Nigeria; the President of the Senate; the Speaker of the House of Representatives; all the Governors of the States of the Federation; the Attorney-General of the Federation; and one person from each state, who shall as respects that State be appointed by the Council of Chiefs of the State from among themselves”. 

In part II Section 178 of the same 1979 Constitution declares that there shall be a State Council of Chiefs which shall comprise of “a Chairman and such number of persons as may be prescribed by Law of the House of Assembly of the State; the Council shall have power to advise the Governor on any matter relating to customary law or cultural affairs, intercommunal relations and chieftaincy matters; the Council shall also have power to advise the Governor whenever requested to do so on---(a) the maintenance of public order within the State or any part thereof and (b) such other matters as the Governor may direct”.  

If you look at the 1999 Constitution, one will notice the absence of the institution of traditional rulers. No institution represents our culture better than the institution of traditional rulers.

The Russian novelist Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote that "to destroy a people you must sever their roots ". James Baldwin added that " know from whence you came, if you know from whence you came, there are absolutely no limitations to where you can go".

The Wikipedia tells us constantly that people without culture and tradition are a lost people yet our constitution has deleted that vital institution out of existence.

Traditions are a vital part of how we interact with the world around us. They provide a sense of identity and belonging that helps to shape our culture and our lives. Valuing your traditions is an important part of developing a strong sense of self and understanding the cultures that shape us.

At the core of traditions is a shared set of beliefs, values, customs, and rituals that are passed down from generation to generation. These traditions can be passed down through family, religion, or even communities. They serve as a reminder of who we are and our connection to the past. By valuing traditions, we honor the people who came before us and the struggles they faced in order to make our lives better.

Valuing your traditions also helps to connect you to your cultural roots. It allows us to appreciate and celebrate the unique qualities of our heritage. This can be done through learning about traditional foods, stories, and practices. Learning about these things can help us to understand our identity and how we fit into the larger cultural landscape. This can also help build bridges between generations and foster a sense of unity amongst family members and communities.

Traditions also provide a sense of purpose and can help guide us in making decisions about our future. They can provide us with a framework for making decisions that reflect our values, beliefs, and customs. Valuing our traditions helps us stay true to who we are and reminds us of the importance of preserving our culture for future generations.

Valuing your traditions is an important part of developing a strong sense of self and understanding the cultures that shape us. It allows us to appreciate and celebrate the unique qualities of our heritage, provides us with a framework for making decisions that reflect our values, beliefs, and customs, and helps create bridges between generations and cultures. Taking time to honor your traditions can bring immense joy and fulfillment in life, so don't forget to value them!

Traditions are an important part of our lives. They give us a sense of belonging and identity, provide us with a connection to our past, and help us to better understand our place in the world. In short, they are essential to our lives and the way we live them.

The importance of traditions lies in the fact that they provide continuity in our lives. They give us a sense of roots and belonging, as well as providing structure and stability. They also foster a sense of community, as we join together in celebrating and honoring our shared history. Traditions also provide us with important moral lessons and values, teaching us about respect for others, loyalty, responsibility and other important life skills.

Traditions are also important because they can help to preserve culture. By keeping the same customs, language and rituals alive, we ensure that our culture does not fade away with time. By celebrating holidays, attending special events or participating in traditional activities, we keep our culture alive and thriving.

Traditions also help to create a stronger bond between individuals or groups of people. Participating in traditions gives us an opportunity to come together and celebrate something special while connecting with each other on a deeper level. Many times, these connections can last long after the initial event ends. It is these connections that help to build strong communities and relationships throughout society.

 Traditions are an important part of life that allow us to connect with our past, build strong communities, teach valuable life skills, and help preserve our culture for future generations. It is important to value the positive aspects of our traditions while recognizing when it is time to let go of outdated ones. By doing this, we ensure that our traditions remain alive and relevant for many years to come.

Traditions are an integral part of any culture, providing a sense of identity, continuity, and community. Valuing your traditions is essential to preserve the shared values and practices that are unique to each cultural group. keeping traditions alive is essential for passing on knowledge and history from one generation to the next, helping to shape the future of that culture.

A clamour to change this Constitution today is being championed by so many people because they know that it is unworkable for us. 

Among the many who want this change are Ambassador Tunde Adeniran, Senator Uba Sani, Mr Femi Falana SAN, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, Senator Shehu Sani and many more including my boss, Chief Olusegun Osoba, two-time governor of Ogun state, whom I served as Oyo state Editor, when he was the Managing Director of Kwara state owned NIGERIAN HERALD forty-nine years ago. The name that strikes me most is that of Chief Eleazar Chukwuemeka Anyaoku (91) from Obosi in Anambra state. He married an Egba Princess, Ebunola Olubunmi Solanke in 1962. At ninety-one, the struggle to change our Presidential System of government may turn out to be his last struggle. He led a delegation to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in THE VILLA recently in his crusade for a change of the constitution.

Chief Emeka Anyaoku had his education at the Merchants of Light School, Oba and the University of Ibadan. He attended courses in Cambridge, England, Institute of Public Administration, London, Cavillam Institute, France; management trainee, later regional assistant, Commonwealth Development Corporation, London and Lagos, 1959-1962, joined Nigerian Diplomatic Service, 1962, member, Nigeria Permanent Mission to the UN, New York, 1963-1966, assistant director, International Affairs Division, Commonwealth Secretariat, 1966-1971, director, International Affairs Division, 1971-1975, assistant, secretary-general, Commonwealth Secretariat, London, 1975-1977, deputy secretary-general, Commonwealth Secretariat, London, 1977-1983, Minister of External Affairs, November-December, re-appointed deputy secretary-general , Commonwealth Secretariat, 1989, assumed office July 1990; deputy chairman, later vice-president, Royal Commonwealth Society, London since 1972, member, Committee of Management, Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, 1972, former director and chairman of the African Centre, London, member of the governing councils of the overseas Development Institute (ODI), The International Institute for Strategic Studies, London, and Save the Children Fund; secretary for the committee reviewing Commonwealth inter-governmental organisations, 1966, secretary for the Commonwealth Observers Team covering the Gibraltar Referendum, 1967, and secretary to the Commission to find a resolution to the 1969 Anguilla crisis, lead secretariat team accompanying Commonwealth Eminent Persons Group to Southern Africa, 1986. Dr. Emeka Anyaoku holds the Chieftaincy title of the Obosi of Nnanyelugo.  

When people like Chief Anyaoku talks, I am sure they know what they are talking about. He and his likes should be encouraged in their condemnation of the Presidential Constitution that we are operating.

The Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority (NSIA) has attributed the continuous hike in the prices of fertiliser products in the local market to multiple problems of exchange rate fluctuation, high inflation rate that is currently at 33.4 percent and the cost of transportation of the products from the factory to the end users.

NSIA disclosed this yesterday at the Presidential Fertilizer Initiative (PFI-NPK) stakeholders’ roundtable themed ‘The Presidential Fertilizer Initiative: Imperatives for Food Security’. NSIA’s team lead for the project, Mr Iruwansi Itoandon said the logistics for the movement of fertilisation costs about N60,000 per ton. “That is what you have to add,” he said.

He said the retail price of fertiliser is determined by domestic and external factors, some of which are not controlled by the authority.

President of Fertiliser Producers and Suppliers Association of Nigeria, Sadiq Kassim said the standard price from the factory is between N29,000 and N32,000 depending on the factory’s location and the order’s destination.

According to some stakeholders at the meeting yesterday, the price of 50kg of generic MPK fertiliser (both MPK 20.10.10) sells for between N46,000 and N54,000.

The PFI was conceived to address challenges in Nigeria’s fertiliser sector, which had long been hampered by inefficiencies and an over-reliance on imports.

To date, the initiative has delivered 90 million bags of locally blended high-quality fertilisers to farmers. Notably, despite the disruption of supply chains during global events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine war, the initiative ensured a steady supply of fertilisers across the country. Still, the impact of foreign exchange fluctuations on key imported raw materials persists in exacerbating cost pressures, adding another layer of complexity to the value chain. Recognizing these challenges, the NSIA is actively working with its partners to ensure that the PFI continues to deliver on its mission to support Nigeria’s agricultural sector.

Managing director and CEO of NSIA, Aminu Umar-Sadiq, represented by head, corporate planning, Sybil Etuk said PFI aligns with the authority’s mandate to strengthen the agricultural sector, uphold import substitution as a critical lever for National development and ultimately create shared value for all stakeholders.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Finance Incorporated (MoFI) has said it is planning to convert the PFI into a company with all the structures of a corporate organisation for the greater achievement of its objectives.

“We are planning to make it into a company because noting that it’s an initiative, it will not reach the level we are all now praying or imagining it will be so that is why I initially said corporate governance and what this means is we are going to set a well-fledged company with a strong board consisting of people that know what they are doing in the industry to manage this fertiliser business/production very well that will satisfy all,” executive director, portfolio management at MoFI, Tajudeen Datti Ahmed stated.

FEPSAN president proposed that the PFI, with FEPSAN, establish a fertiliser institute to build the technical and financial capacity of players within the ecosystem.

“As we celebrate the PFI’s achievements in improving agricultural productivity and bolstering food security, greater inter-agency collaboration is envisioned to direct the initiative into full private sector control for its continued success and the sustained development of our country Nigeria,” he said.

[Leadership]

The Federal Government says it is working on introducing a training scheme equivalent to the National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, for graduates of the Nigeria Certificate in Education, NCE.

The Minister of State for Youth Development, Mr Olawande Wisdom, made this revelation during the opening of the BEMORE OYO 2024 Summer Bootcamp in Ibadan on Monday.

Wisdom said the ministry would partner with the Ministry of Education to introduce new training reforms, one of which is the equivalent of NYSC training for NCE holders and others.

According to him, social vices had been around for long but the training of youths by organisations such as the Boys’ Brigade, Girl Guides and others had kept many away from them.

“The major priority of the ministry is citizenship and training, and we are bringing them back.

“We have NYSC for those who finished from universities, but what of those who finished from NCE and others?

“So, we want to set up training such that you don’t need to go to other states to have it – you can have it in your state and the camp.

“A lot of reforms are going on and we are trying as much as possible to bring a renewed hope to people; to the girls and boys,” he said.

[DailyPost]

So this is what ‘’E mi lokan’’ is all about? Splurging billions of public money to indulge President Tinubu’s penchant for over-the-odds luxury while millions of Nigerians wallow in abject hardship which he brought upon them?

Last week amid embarrassing reports of Chinese companies seizing our valuable national assets abroad over defaults in contract agreement with some states and worsening conditions of living in the country, an Airbus 330 aircraft costing 150 million US dollars reported to be the new presidential jet made an in-your-face landing at Zik airport Abuja.. The week before, it was also reported that the presidency had taken delivery of a full option presidential car, a Cadillac Escalade worth about 500 thousand US dollars. When you throw in the presidential Yacht which was purchased sometime last year at the cost of some 6 billion naira you get a sense that President Tinubu who had repeatedly called on Nigerians to bear his harsh economic measures will not by any stretch of the imagination lower down his indulgence as he had preached to Nigerians. His answer to Nigerians who questioned the need for such profligate indulgence by this is that whether on air, land and sea he will not be denied one bit, his desire to live it up maximally at the expense of Nigerians because that is what the ‘’E mi lokan’’ which he bought by his own money during the elections as he told us, was all about. If Nigerians cannot comprehend that this is what his presidency was about we can go take a running jump off a cliff for all he cares.

But while President Tinubu’s brutal, in-your-face candour on this issue is appreciated, the part that galls most is the rather clumsy, pathetic, unsophisticated and ignorance shown by some of the president’s aides in trying to explain or justify the purchases. The most common of such explanations is that just because we are in a situation of dire economic straits, our president should not be denied the means of decent and safe air travels befitting the country’s status in Africa and the world. In effect that means the planes in the presidential fleet are not worthy of the president’s use and should rather be mothballed.

Harping on this line of thought one presidential aide displayed his preposterous ignorance by stating that the purchase of the A 330 presidential jet will save the country money in terms of maintenance costs being a relatively newer one than the others in the fleet who have been gulping a lot of money in that regard due to their age. If that aide had checked deeply, he would have realised that a plane is as good as its maintenance not necessarily its age. And whatever its age, a plane must go through mandatory calendar checks like the C and D when the times are up for it whether it has been put to use or not. And this entails costs depending on the aircraft type and the maintenance service agreements. What is more if the A330 will be run by a foreign crew then the costs will not be significantly less if at all. Long and short of it is that to say that the new presidential A330 will entail lesser costs in maintenance as the presidential aide said is a display of either ignorance or deception, or even both because in addition to the cost of purchasing the plane, the cost of mandatory maintenance and associated costs that come along with running the aircraft is also included.

Another influencer who is on retainership with the administration even went beyond the pale of his characteristic unreasonableness in defending this purchase by comparing Nigeria’s situation with that of the United States of America. He claimed that the cost of buying a new plane for the US president was around 4 billion dollars and so Nigerians should not gripe over the 150 million dollars cost of buying the A330 presidential jet for President Tinubu. Many Nigerians consider that as comparing apples with oranges for the simple reason that Nigeria and America are not in the same bracket by any parameter of comparison.

In all if we add up the billions budgeted for the renovation/refurbishment of Dodan barracks in Lagos turning it into a nest of opulence and luxury as well as the residence of the Vice-President both in Lagos and Abuja, it is hard not to arrive at the conclusion that the Tinubu administration is engaged in a contradictory and wicked deception over its call on Nigerians to bear the prevailing harsh economic policies in the country.

What is patently clear from all this and which Nigerians have to come to terms with, is that President Tinubu came to power with a mission of building and consolidating a personal economic and political monopoly in which Nigerians of whatever status will be beholden to him. This is in tandem with the E mi lokan proclamation that he made to Nigerians which is clearly unfolding as we go along. Nigerians should therefore not be surprised or expect that President Tinubu would inconvenience and deny himself the full range of available luxuries and perks of the presidency he laboured for so long one way or the other to get to.

And by the same token Nigerians should not expect a let up in the prevailing harsh conditions because the resources embedded in the system that are needed to build education, health and other essentials of life are needed more to build the economic and political empire President Tinubu had be angling for all this while. Thus Nigerians must not just bear it, they must come to accept it as fait accompli because it is President Tinubu’s time to fulfil his manifest destiny and he will pursue it with minded ruthlessness whether Nigerians like it or not. The only form of succour and benevolence that Nigerians can expect are the puny ‘’palliatives’’ thrown at them periodically when they cry out.

(Being a Distinguished Public Lecture Delivered by Prof. Tunji Olaopa, professor of public administration and Chairman, Federal Civil Service Commission, at the Maiden Annual Association of Retired Heads of Service and Permanent Secretaries of Oyo and Osun State – ARHESPSOOS - held at the International Conference Centre, University of Ibadan, on Wednesday, 21st of August, 2024)

The recently concluded maiden annual distinguished public lecture of the Association of Retired Heads of Service and Permanent Secretaries of Oyo and Osun State (ARHESPSOOS) held at the International Conference Centre, University of Ibadan, provided another opportunity to brainstorm on the present challenges and future possibilities of the civil service system in Nigeria. The occasion is a significant one for the fundamental reason that it pools the administrative experiences of retired heads of service and permanent secretaries who in their own rights constitute a legitimate institutional memory that ought to be harness in all the conversations that reflect on and rethink the capability of the civil service in Nigeria.

For those familiar with my public commentaries on the civil service and its institutional reform, my preferred methodological approach is to deploy a mix of historical and analytical methodology to outline a trajectory of administrative development, philosophies, and management design thinking to interrogate the current state of the civil service in Nigeria, as basis for our reflection on the future of public administration in Nigeria. This method not only allows us to make critical deductions from the narrative about administrative history and praxis in Nigeria and how they have influenced and affected the series of reform strategies and programmes that have been put in place to redirect the civil service system. Further than this, these deductions allow us to explore extrapolations and scenarios for future reform possibilities, with the objective of excavating a number of recommendations that could possibly feed into the policy intelligence of the political and administrative leadership in Nigeria in their spirited efforts to transform the institutional capability requirements of the civil service necessary for achieving democratic service delivery, infrastructural development and ultimately, national socio-economic transformation.

Public administration has come a long way in historical reckoning. From the ancient pharaonic society to the height of Roman sociopolitical requirement, public administration was a phenomenon whose necessity has increased in complexity today. The ancient Pharaohs needed to dam the River Nile and build the mathematically complex pyramids. The ancient Romans needed to efficiently win many complex wars and ingeniously build many engineering feats. From the scribal authority of the ancient pharaohs to the tenured and salaried profession that public administration demanded in the Roman Empire, public administration eventually evolved into a noble vocation that mirrored the Levitical spiritual order of the Hebrews. With Max Weber, the bureaucracy was modelled into a legal-rational command-and-control structure that reflects the Prussian military governance system.

This is the origin of the “I-am-directed” Weberian administrative tradition that Nigeria, as well as most countries of the world, inherited. This tradition conceives of the bureaucracy as a neutral, hierarchically organised, efficient organisation, which demands precision, continuity, discipline, strictness and reliability. The framework of the legal-rational authority privileges written rules and procedures. Each position in the bureaucracy has its duties and rights, which are clearly defined; rules and procedures are laid down to determine how the given authority is to be exercised. Bureaucracy therefore promises a stable organisation, despite the fact that its incumbents come and go. How did the bureaucracy then earn its bad reputation? A better question is: What is it about the bureaucratic system that makes it so powerful as to threaten its very own essence as well as the service it is supposed to carry out on behalf of government? The short answer is that as the locus of governmental power, the bureaucracy is saddled with the coordination of complex administrative that raises the possibility that street-level and front-line bureaucrats follow rules for their own sake.

This is the origin of the bureau-pathologies of the civil service system, a pathological predicament that is aggravated in a postcolonial context like Nigeria. Douglas McGregor characterized that tradition as Theory X, a transactional model that conceive of the administrator as a thermostat regulating an organization founded on a bleak picture of employees. Theory X is undergirded by the perception of human nature as indolent, lacking motivation, naturally egoistic and resistant to change. This is why it became necessary to impose a legal-rational framework. The General Order (GO) represents the codified operating standard for this administrative model.

By 1968, the Fulton Report had already been submitted as Britain’s concession to the new managerial revolution of that time, and the urgency of reforming the British civil service that had become a great rock in the tideline. By 1974, the Udoji Commission Report had taken the challenge of reorienting Nigeria’s civil service system away from the Weberian tradition towards managerialism. The Report’s assessment of the system is its administrative inflexibility which makes it difficult to anticipate and respond to governance and administrative challenges and positive institutional transformation. This particularly concerned, for example, the generalist-professionals rivalry, and the need to inject the system with new blood working within a result-oriented performance management model. Since this Report, and the failure to ground its fundamental recommendation that would have strategically transformed the civil service system, Nigeria has been swinging between moving away from the Weberian tradition (as in the Dotun Phillip Report of 1984 that would have managerialism as the foundation of the civil service) and the Allison Ayida administrative revisionism that reconstituted the system along the Weberian order based on the conception-reality gap it detected in the Philip Report.

And yet, since the 1999 commencement of Nigeria’s democratic experiment, the civil service system has witnessed a series of institutional reforms that keep pushing the system towards the goal of being a world class institution. These reforms include the Integrated Payroll and Personnel Information System (IPPIS), SERVICOM, pension and pay reforms, the professionalisation of the FOS/NBS, FIRS/NEITI, the price intelligence and procurement reform, fiscal responsibility plus MTSS/MTEF, to name just a few. But these achievements are too small and far in-between to short-circuit the already distorted trajectory of organizational development through the five-stage life-cycle: birth-adolescence-maturity-institutionalisation-reformulation. We have majorly the military intervention in Nigeria’s political development to ‘thank’ for this.

An engineering metaphor helps make the point of reform very clearly: Whereas the Nigerian state urgently needs an administrative backend that is efficiently propelled by a jet engine, what the many years of administrative hiccups, institutional disruptions, reform misconceptions and fortuitous breakthroughs have equipped the bureaucracy with is the capacity inherent in the engine of a Beatle car. Essentially, the service workforce structure can be characterized by a situation where there are too many doing nothing, too many doing too little, and too few people doing too much. It is not surprising therefore that a key part of diagnosis of the system’s dysfunction is the execution trap derivable from the system’s inability to achieve capability readiness for democratic service delivery. And so, in a 2005 study, a World Bank review reported the finding that: 29% of development programmes ever got completed, 45% of on-going projects are rated satisfactory, and 26% of such projects usually get cancelled.

How then can we move from institutional debilitation to bureaucratic reform? Institutional reforms underscore the possibility of creatively evolving a developmental democratic state in Nigeria. Such a state, in global discourse, is backstopped by a functional, effective, efficient and optimal civil service system. And so, the reform of the public service is the first condition towards such objective. This means that the ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs)—the engine rooms of the public service system and therefore of governance—must be adequately capacitated to become effective and efficient as the formidable institutional framework that would be ready at all times to meet the challenge of nation building, good governance and national development. This requires a change management framework that is anchored around three critical frameworks of significantly reprofiling:

a. the quality of bureaucratic efficiency;

b. the quality of service delivery and performance accountability within a democracy; and

c. the professionalism of the public servants

These critical frameworks focus the objective of institutional reform: the public bureaucracies must be transformed to become:

 Fast moving, intelligent, professional, information-rich, flexible, adaptable and entrepreneurial;

 Less employee-focused and rule-driven, deliver quality service;

 Performance-focused, accountable and productive—defined y objectives and measurable results, outputs and outcomes;

 Capable of creating the policy climate that will unlock the energy of the private sector and other sectors and to install a new productivity paradigm in the national economy;

 Operated by multidisciplinary team of new generation public managers and project teams signed on to performance agreements or contracts within carefully crafted ministerial scorecards to which everyone is held accountable;

 Bound within a framework of social compact stewardship that sees citizens as clients deserving of effective and efficient services

To achieve such a new public service demands several systemic and structural imperatives in change management that go straight to the heart of the old Weberian administrative tradition, and its business model and procedures. The first is that a developmental state demands neo-Weberian administrative framework. The idea of the neo-Weberian is useful for two reasons. One, the managerial revolution in most Western countries was not an attempt to entirely jettison the Weberian model. Rather, the reform efforts were an incremental attempt to recalibrate its efficiency and effectiveness. Two, the Weberian bureaucratic framework has not outlived its utility, especially when considering the African context. The implication of this is that the new public management has to be brought into conversation with the Weberian tradition to be able to achieve the effectiveness and efficiency of the new public service envisioned in Nigeria.

The second imperative is the urgency of rethinking the intellectual foundations of public administration as the vehicle for the administrative reconstruction of the Nigerian state and the quest for good governance. This will involve several developments. There is first the need to reflect on a non-adversarial and cooperative relationship between politicians and administrators. Secondly, the system demands a firm and meritocratic gatekeeping measure that is founded on the principles of public-spiritedness and professionalism. And thirdly, the necessity of keying into global and regional best practices in terms of competency and human resource framework for doing government business and articulating efficiency in the workplace.

The next imperative is correlative. The new foundation on which the public service must be based needs a new generation and cohort of public managers who are capacitated with the requisite values and competences to manage the demands of the new public service that the developmental state in Nigeria needs to make an appearance in the fourth industrial revolution. This will necessarily serve as the first condition for the possibility of instituting a new performance management system and HRM framework that could transform the workplace efficiency and productivity, especially in the face of the new normal that COVID-19 has imposed on the world, and the flexibility demanded by the Gen Z. This is the move that transforms the service IQ in the form of a strategic leadership intelligence through the creation of a multidisciplinary talents-reinforced senior executive service (SES) guided by a new ethical professionalism.

Next, the new public service must deal with the demand of facilitating public-private partnership dynamics, and moving them to a higher level that allows good corporate governance principles to drive the frameworks for democratic governance. This enables, as part of the HR function transformation, the possibility of incorporating commercial skills as part of the HRM capacitation of the public managers. Lastly, none of these reform imperatives would make any sense if the public service does not facilitate a paradigmatic shift away from an adversarial to developmental industrial relations that makes it possible for the workplace to generate the level of performance and productivity commensurate with the reform inputs.

Transforming the civil service system is not an issue to be politicized. And the simple but fundamental reason is that it is the fulcrum for achieving sustainable development that constitutes the most significant objective of the developmental state. That, in overall analysis, is where the Nigerian state should be headed.

The Federal Government has stated that only eight universities have been accredited to award degrees to Nigerians in Togo and Benin Republic.

The Minister of Education, Tahir Mamman, made this known on Sunday night while speaking on Channels Television’s Sunday Politics programme.

Mamman, during a press conference last Friday to mark his one year in office, disclosed that over 22,500 Nigerians obtained fake degree certificates from the two countries, and such certificates would be cancelled.

The minister said the revelation was part of a report submitted to the Federal Executive Council by a committee with a mandate to probe degree certificate racketeering by foreign and local universities in Nigeria.

He added that the development follows the undercover investigation report in which a Nigerian journalist acquired a degree from a university in Benin Republic in under two months and used it to get deployed for the National Youth Service Corps.

Speaking during the programme, the minister said the federal government only recognised three institutions in Togo and five in Benin Republic while identifying others as illegal institutions.

Mamman listed the public universities below as the federal government-approved institutions to offer degree programs in Togo for students from Nigeria.

1. Universite De Lome

2. Universite De Kara

3. Catholic University of West Africa

The minister also listed five accredited universities authorized to provide degree programs in Benin Republic of Benin for students from Nigeria.

1. Universite D’abomey-Calavi

2. Universite De Parakou

3. Universite Nationale Des Sciences, Technologis Ingenierie Et Mathematiques

4. Universite Nationale D’ Agriculture

5. Universite Africaine De Devlopment Cooperatif

The minister also insisted that there is no going back on the decision of the federal government to cancel about 22,700 certificates awarded to Nigerians by some “fake” universities in neighbouring Togo and Benin Republic.

Mamman maintained that the decision to invalidate the certificates was not harsh as Nigerians who obtained degree certificates from such “illegal” tertiary institutions dent the country’s image.

He said, “Most of those parading the fake certificates didn’t even leave the shores of Nigeria but got their certificates through racketeering in collaboration with government officials at home and abroad.

“The “fake universities” capitalised on the “gullibility” of Nigerians patronising such fake schools.

“The federal government, through the offices of the Head of Civil Service and the Secretary of the Federation, would fish out those in the government’s employment with such fake certificates. I also urge the private sector to follow suit.”

[Punch]

I MET a former Member of the House of Representatives about five weeks ago. He had established a huge institution with sprawling structures. He said as an Honourable he found himself receiving N7 million monthly. He quickly decided to establish the institution. So, monthly, he went to his home town and poured the funds into the project. By the time his tenure came to an end, he had all that was necessary in place.

The Honourable’s revelation was a well guarded secret as Nigerians are not supposed to know the income of their representatives in the National Assembly, NASS. This may be so because the figures are subversive of good governance.

However, his narration fitted into the revelation in March 2018 by Senator Shehu Sani that each Senator was being paid a monthly salary of N750,000 with allowances totalling N13.5 million. It meant that the then monthly package of each Distinguished Senator of the Federal Republic was N14.25 million monthly.

That was about $40,000 monthly or some $480,000 per annum. In comparison, Senators of the United States, the richest and most powerful country on earth, were each earning $174,000 per annum.

There was an uproar. Senator Sani was criticised by his colleagues not because he told a lie against them. Rather, the issue was that he revealed a tightly guarded secret that could lead to incitement.

This revelation led to three suits being filed. Justice Chuka Obiozor of the Federal High Court in consolidating the suits, on June 4, 2021 ruled that the remuneration was illegal as the NASS has no power whatsoever to fix its salaries and allowances. He ordered a downward review of the legislators income.

It was assumed that the law makers would obey the Constitution, the laws of the land and the court judgement.

However, in the last one month, former President Olusegun Obasanjo revealed that the NASS was still fixing its own emoluments and paying itself bogus allowances.

The Senate came after Obasanjo, guns blazing. It characterised his accusation as “uncharitable and satanic”.

The Red Chamber Spokesman, Senator Yemi Adaramodu, Ekiti South, accused the former President of attempting to “crucify the legislature by the centurions of political hypocrisy”. I am still in search of the Distinguished to explain if this is English language, a literary translation of Ekiti dialect, or parliamentary privilege that grants him immunity to fire nuclear-guided grammatical missiles from the sanctuary of the hallowed chambers.

Then Senator Sani threw a bombshell; rather than reduce their emoluments as ordered by the courts three years ago, the Distinguished Senators of the Federal Republic had actually ballooned them from N14.5 million to N21 million monthly!

He was presented as a blatant liar by no less a dignitary than the Chairman of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, RMAFC, Mohammed .B. Shehu, a recipient of the Order of the Federal Republic, OFR, the third highest national honour in the country. He is, indeed, the highest authority in the land on the salaries and emoluments of public office holders as he presides over the agency responsible for the revenues accruing to and disbursement of such funds from the Federal Account.

The Chairman claimed that “each Senator collects a monthly salary and allowances of the sum of N1,063,860:00…” He then mumbled that “some allowances are regular while others are non-regular”. That is not the issue, rather, it is what are the monthly emoluments paid a Nigerian Senator?

So, do we believe this RMAFC Chairman or serving Senator Sumaila Kawu, Kano South, who on August 14, 2024 responded on BBC radio: “My monthly salary is less than N1 million (but) in the Senate, each Senator gets N21 million every month as running cost.”

Does the Commission Chairman expect anybody to believe him that the total monthly entitlement which accrues to a Senator is N1,063,860 when we are all witnesses to the fact that each legislator was allocated a Toyota SUV with a minimum N130 million price tag?

If all a Senator takes is a monthly N22 million, the cries from the public might not have been so strident. But the truth is that the legislators take far more than that from the national purse. For instance, the NASS annually pads the national budget.

Then President Muhammadu Buhari accused the National Assembly of padding the 2018 Budget by introducing 6,403 projects of their own, amounting to N578 billion. He also claimed legislators smuggled 6,576 new projects into the 2022 Budget.

When Senator Abdul Ningi of PDP Bauchi, claimed the NASS padded the 2024 Budget by N3.7 trillion or over 10 per cent of the N28.78 trillion budget, he was hounded out of the Senate and suspended on March 12, 2024. He was recalled after ten weeks based on pleadings that he had learnt his lessons.

Also, legislators were allocated constituency projects with some individuals netting billions of Naira. The process is so opaque that, until now, the precise amount allocated each constituency has not been made public.

The question is: must democracy be so costly that we virtually have to empty the Central Bank to pay the emoluments of political office holders?

If the basic duties of the NASS are law making, representation and oversight, is that arm of government not overpriced? Doubtlessly, if we scrap either the Senate or the House of Representatives, the quality of legislation we are getting will not reduce.

But does high cost translate to quality service? A comparison between the Cuban Senate and the Nigerian Senate puts a lie to this. Senators in the former do not get paid for their legislative work which is considered as patriotic service to the country. If a Cuban Senator wants to research a matter, he asks a university to do it for him. Yet, the quality of legislative work by the Cubans is not inferior to that of the Nigerians.

So, while the Cuban is freely voted for, the Nigerian Senator virtually pays the electorate to vote for him. The amount of funds available to the Nigerian parliamentarian is so much that in many cases, mini wars are waged to get elected.

The legal and ‘cornered’ funds flowing freely in the NASS may also be why governors find it one of the best places to retire after their tenure in office.

We cannot continue like this without endangering the democratic project and instigating the populace to insurrection.

The immediate step the NASS can take is to reduce parliamentarian emoluments and allowances to legal and constitutional levels. The second, is to stop corruption-inducing programmes like ‘constituency projects’ and the tradition of budget padding which, to me, is a crime. By the way, who says parliament should not be part-time as it is in practice? The ‘Ayes’ have it!

Nigerians’ profound interest in US elections is no mere coincidence. The roots of this fascination lie deep in the historical and structural connections between the two countries’ political systems. Nigeria’s democracy, modelled closely after the US presidential-style system, naturally invites comparisons and draws parallels with American political practices. This connection is further deepened by the increasingly globalised nature of our world, where political developments in one nation can reverberate across continents, influencing governance, policies, and even public opinion in far-flung regions. In Nigeria, this is particularly evident as US political dynamics, especially in the current digital age where social media amplifies voices and ideas, significantly impact the local political landscape. 

The strong economic and diplomatic ties that bind Nigeria and the United States further underscore the importance of closely observing events like the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and its counterpart, the Republican National Convention (RNC). These events are not just spectacles of democracy; they are pivotal in shaping US foreign policy, which invariably has significant implications for Nigeria. As the US navigates its complex political terrain, the decisions and policies that emerge from these conventions often ripple through its foreign relations, including with nations like Nigeria. In this context, the lessons that Nigerian political parties can draw from the DNC are not just valuable, but they are essential for the maturation and evolution of Nigeria’s democratic processes. These lessons have the potential to reshape the political landscape and inspire positive change in Nigeria.

Political parties are the cornerstone of any functioning democracy. They serve as the vital platforms through which individual political aspirations are translated into collective action. This process is not just about enhancing electoral competitiveness, but also about ensuring that diverse interests within the society are represented and fostering a culture of political engagement among the populace. These functions are the bedrock upon which accountability and responsiveness in governance are built. For a developing democracy like Nigeria, where democratic institutions are still in the process of solidification, the institutionalisation of party structures is not just important—it is crucial.

However, Nigeria faces significant challenges in this regard. The political landscape is often marred by a lack of effective party structures, which hinder parties’ ability to stimulate meaningful public dialogue or empower citizens to participate actively in the political process. This shortfall weakens the democratic fabric of the nation, leading to a disconnection between the government and the governed and often resulting in unresponsive governance to the populace’s needs and aspirations. It is urgent that these challenges are addressed, and it is the responsibility of all stakeholders in Nigerian politics to work towards a more inclusive and responsive system.

Many Nigerians find themselves drawn to the Democratic Party of the United States for various reasons. These reasons range from the party’s historic nomination of a woman of colour, which resonates deeply in a country like Nigeria with its complex tapestry of ethnic and gender dynamics, to a general scepticism towards figures like Donald Trump, whose policies and rhetoric have often been perceived as divisive. There are also religious sentiments at play and an alignment with the broader policies and values that the Democratic Party espouses, particularly in areas such as social justice, healthcare, and immigration. This connection to the Democratic Party underscores why the DNC  is relevant to Nigeria’s political evolution. The convention is not merely a gathering of like-minded individuals; it is a platform where the party’s ideals, strategies, and future directions are showcased to the world. For Nigerian political parties, observing and learning from the DNC offers a unique opportunity to glean insights that can be adapted to strengthen their democratic processes.

One of the most remarkable moments of the DNC  was President Joe Biden’s decision to step aside in the 2024 race, passing the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris. This decision was not just a political manoeuvre but a powerful statement about leadership and prioritising national interest over personal ambition. This act of selflessness and commitment to the greater good starkly contrasts the behaviour of much of Nigeria’s political elite, where prioritising personal and group interests over national ones is often the norm.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has been vocal in his criticism of Nigeria’s leadership, describing it as plagued by self-centeredness—a significant impediment to the nation’s development. In Nigeria, political elites often wield power through political patronage and economic dominance, manipulating public opinion to align their interests with those of the country. This manipulation creates a dangerous dynamic where policies reflect the interests of the elite rather than the nation’s true priorities, leading to a disconnect between the government and the people. In this context, few Nigerian political leaders are willing to sacrifice their ambitions, even when they conflict with the common good. Biden’s decision to step aside offers a powerful example of what it means to lead with integrity and a focus on the nation’s collective well-being.

The DNC  also highlighted the importance of unity and inclusivity in the political sphere. Despite internal differences and varying perspectives, all significant DNC members rallied behind Kamala Harris, presenting a united front. This unity was notable not just for its existence but for the way it transcended the divisions that often characterise political gatherings. There was no emphasis on Harris’s gender or race, no factionalism between “technocrats” and “professional” politicians, and no divisive rhetoric around religious affiliations. This starkly contrasts Nigeria’s political elite, who frequently exploit the country’s rich diversity; ethnic, religious, gender,  and social status—to advance their agendas. This exploitation often leads to feelings of exclusion and marginalisation among various groups, weakening the social fabric and undermining the potential for a unified nation.

Another critical lesson from the DNC convention is the importance of consistency in policy positions. Vice President Kamala , in her address, clearly articulated her stance on a range of issues, including healthcare, housing, abortion rights, foreign policy, and the economy. The Party’s leading figures maintained a consistent and coordinated stance on these issues, united by a shared vision and policy goals. This consistency is crucial in a functioning democracy, as it provides voters with a clear understanding of what the party stands for and what they can expect if it comes into power.

In stark contrast, Nigerian political parties often lack well-defined ideological beliefs and are instead defined by the personalities that dominate them. This absence of a coherent philosophy leads to frequent shifts in party allegiance, resulting in internal conflicts and inefficiencies in governance. Rather than focusing on meaningful policy dialogue, Nigerian political parties often operate within a patron-client framework, where loyalty is bought and sold and where policies are shaped not by the needs of the people but by the whims of influential individuals. This system stifles democratic processes and undermines effective governance, making it difficult for the country to move forward in a cohesive and coordinated manner.

The DNC and RNC conventions also underscored the importance of respecting past leaders and celebrating the nation’s history and heroes. Both conventions paid homage to past presidents, civil rights leaders, and other figures who have shaped American history. This respect for tradition and the achievements of those who came before is a hallmark of a mature democracy. It reflects a commitment to continuity and recognition that the past provides a foundation for the future.

In Nigeria, however, the narrative is often quite different. Successive leaders frequently seek to undermine their predecessors, showing little respect for the accomplishments of those who came before them. This attitude weakens the nation’s institutional memory and hampers efforts to build on previous successes. Current Nigerian political leaders often want to be seen and treated as demigods, believing their contributions are unparalleled and their legacies should overshadow those of their predecessors. This mindset stifles political progress and continuity, as each new administration needs to start from scratch rather than build on previous governments’ work.

Finally, the DNC convention showcased a strong commitment to the peaceful power transfer to a new and younger generation of leaders. This was not just a rhetorical commitment; it was evident in how the convention provided a platform for young leaders to speak, presenting themselves as the party’s future. This is reminiscent of Obama’s 2004 DNC speech, which propelled him to national prominence and made his candidacy viable. The DNC’s approach to leadership transition reflects an understanding that the nation’s future depends on empowering the next generation and providing them with the tools and opportunities they need to lead.

In Nigeria, however, the situation is quite different. Despite a youthful electorate, older politicians continue to dominate the major political parties. Patronage systems, which fuel entrenched interests, control these parties, preventing young people from playing significant roles beyond being tools for violence during elections. The failure to meaningfully involve young people in the political process deprives the country of fresh ideas and energy and perpetuates a cycle of stagnation and underdevelopment.

Ultimately , the DNC offers a wealth of lessons that Nigerian political parties would do well to heed. These lessons are not merely theoretical; they are practical steps that, if implemented, could lead to a more vibrant, responsive, and effective political system in Nigeria. By adopting these practices, Nigerian political parties can play a pivotal role in the consolidation of democracy, ensuring that the nation’s political system is not only resilient but also reflective of the will and aspirations of its people.