INTRODUCTION

Few days ago, the Court of Appeal held a capacity building workshop for Justices of the Court of Appeal and members of Election Petition Tribunals nation-wide. No doubt, the Nigerian Judiciary is a major player in holding any credible elections, being the third arm of government that resolves disputes and interprets the law. My Ozekpedia (modeled after Wikipedia, Legalpedia, Encyclopedia, Europedia, Glottopedia, Physiopedia, etc) once described the Judiciary’s recent role in election matters as “Judocracy - form of government where presidents, governors, Senators, House of Representatives members, House of Assembly members, chairmen of local government, Councilors, etc., are incubated, midwifed and delivered in the hallowed courts of law rather than through the ballot box” (See https://www.premiumtimesng.com/opinion/603439-how-buharocracy-put-nigeria-in-throes-by-mike-ozekhome.html?tztc=1, June 9, 2023; https://independent.ng/2023-pept-pronouncement-a-judocracy-against-nigerians-ozekhome/, September 7, 2023).

OBJECTIVES OF THE WORKSHOP

To attain pure and undiluted justice, there is the urgent need to take a second hard look at the Constitution and statutory provisions dealing with elections and electoral disputes in Nigeria. To inquire into building capacity for Judges via training on election-related matters and improve mechanisms for case management, the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC) headed by ace rights activist, Clement Nwankwo (we were in the trenches together in the 80s and 90s), in collaboration with the International Foundation for Electoral System (IFES) and the Court of Appeal, organized the capacity-building programme to support and strengthen the work and role of the Judiciary as it relates to election matters generally. The workshop aimed at promoting judicial excellence, electoral integrity and democratic governance.

At the workshop, the intermediate court’s jurists discussed and made many far-reaching and salutary recommendations that will go a long way in sanitizing and deodorizing our warped electoral process, after INEC had woefully failed in its duty to carry out free, fair, credible and transparent elections. The learned jurists should know better because they constituted the pivot and linchpin of adjudication during the 2023 electoral disputes era. Many judgements were applauded; but some were met with public anger, outcry and ruckus as a result of the perceived injustice and unfairness midwifed by such judgements.

The workshop which targeted Justices of the Court of Appeal and Judges/Members of the Election Petition Tribunal provided an avenue to build their skills on effective resolution of election disputes ahead of the upcoming 2027 General Elections, and to correct past errors. Also considering a new legal framework for elections in place, the Justices/Judges were trained on the application of the new Electoral Act, 2022, as well as on Practice and Procedure in Election Petition Tribunals.

THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MY HUMBLE PERSPECTIVES

I agree with many of the recommendations arrive at during the workshop as they aim to enhance the efficiency, fairness and transparency of the present warped electoral process which I had spoken so often about. (See https://newtelegraph.com/2023-general-elections-and-a-fractionalised-electoral-process-part-4/, July 10, 2022; https://www.tvcnews.tv/2017/03/nba-ozekhome-disagree-on-election-reform/, March 31, 2017). However, I hold a differing opinion on some of the recommendations. For example, the recommendation that the Court of Appeal should be the final arbiter in governorship election disputes cannot be supported having regard to the sensitive nature of the gubernatorial seat. I will explain anon. Following are my humble thoughts on each point of the recommendations:

1. ELECTORAL DISPUTES SHOULD BE DECIDED BEFORE SWEARING-IN

I completely agree with this salutary and commendable recommendation. Ensuring that all post-election disputes are resolved before the winners take office would promote stability and ensure legitimacy in governance. It would also prevent situations where elected officials face multiple legal challenges and hurdles during their embryonic stages in office. These are invariably disruptive and serve as a major distraction to elected persons who bellyache as to whether or not they would eventually sail through. They lose concentration thereby and focus more on their court battles, all to the detriment of governance.

2. ALL PRE- AND POST-ELECTION DISPUTES SHOULD NOT TERMINATE AT THE COURT OF APPEAL:

While expediting the resolution process is important, I humbly suggest that governorship and Senatorial election matters should undergo an additional layer of scrutiny by the Supreme Court, the final court of the land. Given the significant impact of governorship and Senatorial elections on the various States and Senatorial zones in Nigeria, it is crucial for the highest court of the land to provide a final, definitive ruling on such matters, to ensure comprehensive justice and avoid premature stultification of litigation.

This my humble opinion is particularly relevant in the light of the recent 2023 elections, specifically the Plateau State Election Petitions, where the Court of Appeal invalidated the victories of more than 23 lawmakers from Plateau State, elected under the People's Democratic Party (PDP). I had critiqued this. (See https://independent.ng/ozekhome-enumerates-reasons-acourt-should-have-reviewed-plateau-legislators-judgment/, March 2, 2024; https://dailypost.ng/2024/01/17/ozekhome-supreme-court-judgement-plateau-lawmakers-dilemma-reignites-calls-for-electoral-act-amendment/ , January 17, 2024; https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/01/13/your-judgments-on-kano-plateau-zamfara-perverse-supreme-court-blasts-acourts-election-panels/, January 13, 2024). The nullifications were based on alleged irregularities in the nomination and sponsorship processes of the candidates by their political party (the PDP), which was said to “have no structures” (whatever that meant). These decisions were perceived as unjust and legally untenable by both legal pundits and political observers for several reasons. Firstly, the Court of Appeal's judgements appeared to have arbitrarily overturned settled judicial precedents regarding who has the locus standi to challenge alleged irregularities in a candidate's emergence at a party’s primaries. Secondly, there was significant debate over whether such complaints could be cognized by an Election Petition Tribunal, given its narrow jurisdiction under Sections 285 (1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, especially as they are pre-election matters.

Thirdly and more importantly, these decisions were seen as unjust and unfair because the Court of Appeal served as the final court in these matters, leaving the candidates without the opportunity to further appeal to the Supreme Court in their search for justice. The electors and voters’ preferences were jettisoned and substituted by the Court’s own preference. The votes were counted quite alright and the Legislators won. Oxymoronically, the same votes did not count; so the Legislators lost. It amounted to judicial disenfranchisement. This situation underscores the need for both governorship and senatorial election disputes to reach the Supreme Court, to ensure fairness and uphold democratic principles.

To prevent frivolous appeals and crowding of the apex court’s docket (the understandable fear of many), while maintaining the right to approach the Supreme Court review, a heavy non-refundable pre-filing deposit fee of 10 million Naira should be imposed on the Appellants. This measure would deter and heavily minimize, if not completely halt frivolous appeals and ensure that only serious constitutional cases get to the highest court. This balances the need for thorough judicial scrutiny with the necessity to streamline the legal process.

3. ADR MECHANISM FOR PRE-ELECTION MATTERS

This is a positive and commendable recommendation by the Workshop. Applying Alternative Dispute Resolution for pre-election matters as opposed to adversarial court litigation would help resolve disputes more quickly and amicably, thereby reducing the burden on the courts. This will foster a collaborative approach to resolving electoral conflicts.

4. AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION TO ENSURE DISQUALIFICATION OF A DEPUTY DOES NOT AFFECT THE GOVERNOR:

It is important to ensure that the candidacy of a governor is not unduly affected by issues relating to the deputy governorship candidate. I believe that this amendment would provide clarity and stability in the electoral process. An ugly scenario that played out in the 2019 governorship election in Bayelsa State must be avoided. David Lyon of the APC had been declared governor-elect. He won square. He celebrated. He was live on television practising how to take the salute on a mounted daise for his inauguration the following day when news filtered in that a 5-man panel of the apex court had sacked him. His offence was that his Deputy, Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo, had presented false information to INEC in aid of his qualification as Lyon’s running mate. Thus, Degi’s sin was visited on an innocent Lyon whose own qualification was unquestionable. In my humble opinion, the judgement may have been based on technical law, devoid of justice.

5. INCORPORATING PARAGRAPH 25 (2) OF THE FIRST SCHEDULE TO THE ELECTORAL ACT INTO THE CONSTITUTION:

This ensures continuity in the hearing of election petitions even if the original presiding officer is unable to continue. It is a practical and necessary amendment to prevent delays and future challenges to the validity of judgements emanating from such tribunals.

6. AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 285(7) & (12) REGARDING THE TIMELINE FOR APPEALS:

Clarifying the timeline for when the 60-day period for appeals begins is crucial for ensuring timely justice. I believe that Section 285(7) & (12) of the Constitution should be amended to specify that the countdown starts “from the date an appeal is entered in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court.” This adjustment would streamline the process, providing a clear and unambiguous timeframe. It ensures that all parties involved have adequate time to present their arguments and that the courts can deliver their judgments efficiently and timeously. Remember that the Supreme Court has laid it down in Maku & Anor v. Sule & Ors (2019) LPELR-58513 (SC) that the requirement to file a petition within 21 days, relying on section 285 (5) of the 1999 Constitution, was a constitutional requirement and that the time frame was “just like the Rock of Gibralta or Mount Zion” which cannot be moved. Timeline in electoral matters, come nearer home, are like the Olumo Rock of Abeokuta and Zuma Rock of Abuja that cannot be moved.

7. REVIEWING THE STATE OF THE LAW ON THE TRANSMISSION OF RESULTS:

Revisiting and reviewing the laws on result transmission is crucial to prevent controversies such as we witnessed during the 2023 elections that put Nigerians on tension and tentacles as to whether or not there were “glitches” or breaks in transmission. Ensuring clear, transparent and reliable procedures for transmitting results will enhance the credibility of the electoral process. The difference between “transmit” and “transfer” and how they are exercised should be clearly defined and demarcated.

8. ALLOWING SUBPOENAED WITNESSES TO GIVE EVIDENCE:

This amendment would ensure that relevant testimonies are not excluded simply because they are not frontloaded with the petition itself, thereby supporting a thorough and fair examination of the facts in election disputes. How does a Petitioner frontload documents denied him by INEC even after a court or tribunal had granted permission for inspection and use of such electoral materials? What happens even if INEC releases them? The current position in law is that such evidence, having not been frontloaded, goes to no issue. This ugly spectre should be removed.

9. DELETION OF SECTION 137 OF THE ELECTORAL ACT, 2022:

Section 137 has not effectively altered the burden and standard of proof as defined in Sections 131-136 of the Evidence Act. The Evidence Act remains what it is - the law governing all evidential matters in any proceedings whether criminal, civil or electoral. Consequently, it is sensible to delete section 137 of the Electoral Act, so as to prevent confusion and maintain consistency with the established provisions of the Evidence Act of 2011 (now amended). This would ensure clarity in Electoral proceedings and uphold the integrity of the evidentiary standards already in place.

10. INCREASING THE NUMBER OF JUSTICES IN THE SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEAL:

Increasing the number of Judges on the bench is a necessary step to making justice more accessible, and managing the workload more effectively. This measure would ensure timely resolution of cases by allowing more hands on deck to address the large backlog. By adding more judges, the judiciary can handle the volume of cases more efficiently, reducing delays and improving overall judicial performance. This improvement is crucial for maintaining public confidence in the legal system and ensuring that justice is delivered promptly.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, while I support most of the recommendations arrived at during the Court of Appeal’s workshop, I firmly believe that governorship and senatorial election disputes should ultimately be reviewed by the Supreme Court, to ensure thorough and final adjudication. This would uphold the integrity of the electoral process and enhance public confidence in the judicial system.

Your name says you are a man of strength. Some say you are a strongman. Others call you Nebuchadnezzar. You say you are a man of capacity, character and INTIGRITY. Hon minister, he, who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day. The gods are not amused when men play god. For some mistakes, you must count your losses, lick your wounds and let sleeping dogs lie. The best military commanders understand tactical retreats. You had prophesied the formidability of this young governor who didn’t like talking. The Igbo say it is the small faeces that do the real damage to the anus. Read the handwriting on the wall. That kingdom is lost. This attempt at a third term through the backdoor has failed irredeemably.

Fubara, being Ijaw, is a gnat perched on the scrotum. They must give it tribal interpretations of domination. You can no longer possess and wield a monopoly of the road dogs against their own. Fubara, being your trusted finance director and Accountant General, was your bagman. He knows where the skeletons are buried. Many in the presidency, including your cheerleaders, want you pruned. It’s human nature to seek to deflate pomposity. Many of the president’s men think your loyalty is mercenary. Behind the curtains, they say you are a scheming and treacherous politician who beguiles people with effusive self-congratulatory sermons about loyalty in politics but whose guiding principle is the ruthless supremacy of money. Your hands are full.

Hon Minister, that boy is your first son in politics. He can easily be your nemesis. You can’t win this fight. Can’t you see that he understands the intestines of the courts? The passwords for judicial manipulation appear to have changed. Some of your potent magicians have defected. Your formats for abracadabra have all but expired. He hosts former presidents, governors, and emirs, and he carries himself like a rockstar. Bands play for him as they once did for you. He never seems drunk. Poets have said that people who don’t get drunk should be feared. 

Honourable Minister, Fubara plans to start a probe. There is a frenzy. Names of houses, supermarkets and petrol stations have started flying around. He claims to have all the documents involving everything he partook in. Honourable Minister, when a young ebullient lion rises against his ageing father, the father must recognise the times and tides, tuck in its tail and retreat, away from the territory with his dignity. If he chooses to linger and puff, to lust after past glory and pride, he will be cannibalised. Honourable Minister, a probe by Fubara might be truncated by a legal sleight of hand, but no politician waits for his sh-t to hit the fan.   

Hon Minister, before choosing this career in godfatherism, you should have studied your new friend Asiwaju, on whose mandate you are now well seated. After he installed Fashola to actualise his political dynasty and the progress of Lagos, troubles surfaced. Fashola decided to be his own man. It must be in the character of gods to see such independent-mindedness not as maturation but as ingratitude. So, Asiwaju naturally threw fits. But they were quiet fits. He didn’t go about staging media chats, beating his chest and battering the drums of war. He allowed the House of Assembly to start a noisy study of the impeachment manuals. Yet nobody was in doubt about the unseen hands drumming for the dancing legislators. The politics in Lagos, being more civil than the savage politics of Rivers, nobody removed the roof of the House of Assembly after a certain faceless group called the Face of Lagos submitted the script. Though Fashola used the courts creatively, Asiwaju could have taken off his gloves and gone headlong. But he read the situation and noticed that Lagosians were with performing underdog, Fashola. So Asiwaju allowed the elders whose pleas he had rebuffed to beg him again. This time, he ordered a ceasefire and saved himself an internecine war, leaving his twitching face to hint that he would deal with Fasiola at the appropriate time. When 2011 came, he flirted with the idea of stopping Fashola from taking the ticket. But since that could mean jeopardy, he hesitated. If Fashola decamped and Lagos followed him, that would be the end. So, he hesitated for peacemakers to arrive and exhaust themselves. In truth, Asiwaju swallowed the humiliation and allowed Fashola to continue. Today, all that Fashola did in Lagos now belongs to Asiwaju, his political father. 

Hon Minister, it’s on record you bought forms for everybody and prevented other people from buying forms. That’s your style. You don’t fool around, so they think you are a brute. You won’t give the impression there would be primaries only to change the delegate list overnight. No. You could have made them waste their money on forms and still decide the winners. But rather than appreciate your direct approach, some now mischaracterise that gesture as political gluttony. Others call it megalomania. They don’t know how hard you worked to earn money and reputation and build political structures. They begrudge you for pursuing your ambition to be a godfather and have people stand on your mandate. They misunderstand you. Recently, you have seized the two main parties in your state to re-organise them effectively. Some say you are destroying democracy. But how can they understand that you have done it so that people don’t waste their time pursuing ambitions like mirages? They don’t know that whether they like it or not, you will decide the winners and that it’s out of benevolence you have put them out of their misery early by literally confiscating the main parties. 

That is the burden of being unpretentious. That was why you told the Bishop of Portharcourt not to make any politician a knight. Because politics and knighthood don’t go together. But they said you were uncouth. Perhaps you didn’t notice Fubara was a knight. He is now saying that God made him governor, that he can’t worship a man, and that he will use his position to serve the people. You should have found a proper puppet. You made him governor and made others commissioners and legislators and he thinks you overreached yourself. He is now trying to be a knight. He is gathering all the IGR and declaring it all to receive applause like a saint. Does he know how you bought his form and funded his elections?

Perhaps Hon Minister you can try other methods. There are ways to catch a monkey without chasing it around the town relentlessly, falling into ditches and leaving people thinking you are a savage. Give the monkey some bananas. You made Fubara go feral. What you have done is to eat all the bananas to have the energy to chase the monkey. That was not smart. Fubara was a taciturn humble governor. Overnight, he has become almost a Cicero. You could have allowed him to be a governor, to appoint most of the commissioners. Then, you could have appointed the IGR collector and held onto the House of Assembly. But you didn’t read the Lagos manual and wanted to be a godfather. 

Rather than share power in the enye-ndi-ebea enye-ndi-ebea fashion with Fubara, you seized everything and made him an errand boy. Now you have sleepless nights. Had you sat in the live-and-let-live position, his success would be your foresight. You would claim him and all his achievements. And if he failed, you would disown him and blame it on his political waywardness or something like that. Now you are fighting your heir.

 What do you lack in Abuja? You have access to the choicest wines that you love. You have the private jet. You have a trillion naira budget under your watch. And you are still fixing your cronies in good places. Doctors advise people to avoid stress because it eats them up. Hon minister, you are not Amalinze, the cat. Stress is written all over you. Fortunately, the EFCC is still sleepwalking. And the president remembers the little magic you performed for him during the elections, so you will remain honourable for a while. Fubara has talked about otapiapa. Fubara has talked about his determination to open the nyash of the fowl. Honourable Minister, a grasshopper that the noisy bird, Okposo, eats dies from deafness.

The decision of the Kano state government to reinstate Emir Sanusi II some four years after he was dethroned has expectedly elicited diverse reactions from many Nigerians. While some looked at the subject from the cultural point of view and argued that it is in order to restore the traditional institution in its unadulterated form, others are unhappy that politicians have turned the royal throne into a chess game. So, the blame game is on.

Some say it is the result of an unending political rift between two former Kano governors, Musa Kwankwaso and Abdullahi Ganduje. There is a third group that loathes the involvement of the Judiciary which engaged in an offshore interference in the controversy. It is however simplistic to make conclusions about the return of Emir Sanusi II without reference to why and how he was deposed in 2020. The deposition of the Emir 4 years ago was heavily criticised by many political analysts who were convinced that the Emir did no wrong.

Any Nigerian including a traditional ruler has the constitutional right to hold and constructively exchange his viewpoints on any subject. Speaking truth to power should thus not be a basis for victimising a citizen especially Sanusi who always did so to any authority. Therefore, to reinstate him to the throne as has just been done reflects justice. As a result, I am unable to support those who think Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf is the party to blame. In addition, I will patiently observe the regularity of the application of technology to our judicial process before commenting on the exparte orders allegedly issued from above in the form of justice to put the controversy on hold. 

The only group whose role I cannot but deprecate is the law-making arm of government whose members permanently position themselves to be manipulated to do wrong. To see many Kano legislators vividly rejoicing today as part of those who ensured that justice was served is annoying because many of them were part of the injustice of the past, they are supposedly correcting now. Were they not the ones who amended the relevant law that gave former Governor Ganduje the power to depose Emir Sanusi in 2020? What was the public good that motivated their controversial amendment which they have now repealed to empower Governor Yusuf to reverse his predecessor?

What step did they take to gauge public feelings either when they amended the law or now that they have recanted? In answering the above questions, many people are free to assume that our lawmakers, as usual, merely prioritised materialistic considerations. Considering the historical assumption that Kano has a highly sophisticated political class,when will legislators in that ancient city take the lead in making themselves and their colleaguesto fully appreciate that they are in office to represent the people? Is it not painful that legislators across the country are often catalysts in any controversy patronised by the executive arm of government?

Put differently, when will our legislators realize that their active connivance has always aided government to hurt many innocent citizens? To attempt to review such cases will be too long for this piece but a few examples will demonstrate the unfortunate negative role of legislators. The story of Simon Achuba former deputy governor of Kogi state is probably the worst. While in office, Achuba drew attention to some irrational expenditures in government. He was immediately blacklisted while the state legislators were mobilized to impeach him.

The number of impeachment processes by which Nigerian legislators have been used to remove deputy governors are quite many but what puts Achuba’s case ahead of all is that at the end of the process, the panel set up to probe him returned a verdict of not guilty. Although the exact type of motivation could not be ascertained; the legislators ignored the positive verdict and went ahead to impeach a proven innocent citizen. But why would any sane person or group punish an innocent person?In later years however, the Judiciary nullified the impeach ment and awarded huge sums to the former deputy governor. If the legislators had appropriately played their assigned role of checking the excesses of the executive, Kogi state would more likely have been better off today. Perhaps Yahaya Bello would have ended up as a friend of the anti-corruption Czar.

In like manner, Taraba State would not have experienced motionless growth some years ago if the state legislators had allowed former Governor Danbaba Suntai who was badly injured in a plane crash to be replaced in line with the constitution. But for whatever reason, they preferred to remain in a match with an injured goalkeeper/captain of the team. Even in matters concerning their own group, personal benefits always prevail. Only last week, Cross River State legislators reportedly removed their speaker,Elvert Ekom Ayambem with a vote of no confidence by17 out of 25 members.

The decision might look reasonable until the real reason for the action is known. As they always did everywhere in Nigeria, the legislators said their speak er was not only incompetent but corrupt having allegedly embezzled huge fundsbelonging to the Assembly. Annoyingly, the legislators said the motion to remove Ayambem was handled as a matter of national public importance without telling us which public project, the missing amount was meant for. It is also interesting to note that, as usual, the only punishment for Ayambem is removal from office as speaker. But then who determined that the accused was guilty of the crime? In addition, is removal the prescribed punishment for stealing?

It is important to interrogate the subject properly because to only remove the speaker leaves the Assembly with a known rogue-member. It is suggested that the Assembly should get the anti-corruption agencies to prosecute the speaker. Otherwise, the 17 accusers may find themselves functioning as accuser, prosecutor and judge. However,history teaches us that the accusations may have been reversed and the speaker hailed by his accusers if he had allowed the money to be shared.

The point to be made is that activities of legislators like impeachment of deputy governors or the removal of speakers are usually influenced by two factors. The first is where the governor is the initiator of the impeachment. The second is where legislators remove their speaker because they find him unable to get the executive to increase their level of comfort. There are also occasions where a speaker is removed because the executive is uncomfortable with him. In all the scenarios, the legislators are never able to rationalize their conduct; they do what the executive desires and leave him to take charge of the damage control.

A good example presented itself some years ago when the Niger State House of Assembly was motivated to remove their speaker some 48 hours after he was elected by them. The explanation the Assembly gave for the removal was poor performance without thinking about when he was to perform. Inevery interaction between the legislature and the executive, the same disposition is what one sees. It is the reason legislators at all levels never scrutinize or ask relevant questions each time the executive is desirous of a loan.

During the second tenure of the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, the National Assembly’s argument was its commitment to cooperate with the executive and depart from a so-called antagonistic posture of its predecessor. In due course, many Nigerians observed that the posture was designed to gain huge favours including scandalous funding of bogus constituency projects beyond federal concerns. Can someone tell our legislators that the several failed projects they are setting up panels to probe were destinedto fail because the legislature never functioned as a check during budgeting for the projects?

The legislature is not the only arm of government to be blamed for all the challenges in our nation today; other arms no doubt played poor roles too but as the direct representatives of the people, the roles of our legislators expose them as persons more interested in personal gains. This seems to explain the rate at which many of them jump at executive positions where contracts are awarded. We are however constrained to appeal to them that nothing is more honourable, humane and fulfilling than to work for the people.

One year ago, Citizen Bola Ahmed Tinubu became Nigeria’s president. In the run-up to the elections, a lot of hate was brewed on all sides of the political divide. That, I dare say, is the nature of politics all over the world. Contestation for the minds and votes of the people is revved up to trigger the basest of instincts. Just like in the First Republic, every election cycle shears the fragile fabric of national cohesion to such an extent that we are much more divided today than we were at the onset of the current democratic relay race in 1999.

Take a trip on the superhighway of social media and see how we advertise our mutual hatred and call other ethnic nationalities by names that our dogs— even the common Bingos used for dog meat pepper-soup— would find discourteous. 

One year into the Tinubu administration, we are yet to start the healing process of pulling ourselves together so that our forward march can be as one people, even as we have— and jealously guard— our different political perspectives. There is nothing wrong with political disagreements. There is everything disagreeable with establishing a dynasty of implacable warriors in the name of political followers whose sole duty is sustaining the E-wars on the internet or the thinly veiled TV diatribes where we de-market each other.

This retrogression shall not be televised. We shall keep it hushed in whispers among our various clusters. What we had hoped would be a centripetal pull has rent us asunder and made us, not just perpetual opponents, but infernal foes to each other. The simple matter of electing our leaders has morphed into an unprecedented political chasm destined to consume the atavistic forces it has unleashed. 

Yet, this was the same country in which, nine years after the civil war, Dr. Alex Ekwueme from Anambra State in Southeastern Nigeria was voted as Vice President to Alhaji Shehu Shagari. Augustus Meredith Akinloye (Always Mentally Alert) was the all powerful chairman of the ruling party. The president deferred to him at all party functions. The calibre of the opposition was high: the redoubtable Chief Obafemi Awolowo of the UPN; Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe of the NPP; Alhaji Aminu Kano of the PRP; and Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim of the GNPP. 

Even with all the warts of Second Republic politics, we still look back at those days as comparatively glorious. The urgent task before us all is to reset to brotherhood mode. Waziri Ibrahim called it “Politics without bitterness”. Could that be the dream that fired Senator Opeyemi Bamidele to sponsor the bill seeking to restore our former national anthem (Though tribe and tongue may differ in brotherhood we stand…)? I would rather we use our magic wand to return the Naira to its value in 1980 (98 kobo=$1) instead of re-echoing the colonialists’ colourful words such as ‘native’ and ‘tribe’.

I think the more desirable thing for us right now is to look ahead and change gear. It is one year of the Tinubu administration. Last week, the ministers rendered an account of their stewardship on national television. If I was the president, I would by now have done my own assessment to compare with the lies that some of them openly told. But, thank God for little mercies, the Tinubu administration’s perform-or-be-fired mantra is several miles better than Buhari’s style of leaving appointees in office even when they start becoming rancid.

So, let the president rejig his cabinet. There’s no point allowing passengers to continue occupying the driver’s seat. And let’s have a closure on the suspended Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Dr. Edu. 

I am rather interested in deliverables for the next one year. What should we expect the Tinubu administration to have achieved (wholly or partially) by this time next year?

Food Inflation

The Nigerian Bureau of Statistics has disclosed that the average annual rate of food inflation for the twelve months ending February 2024 over the previous twelve-month average was 30.07 percent. For the year ending in April 2024, the average annual rate of food inflation stood at 32.74%, representing an increase of 9.52 percentage points over the 23.22% average annual rate recorded in April 2023. The Tinubu administration will be judged by how far its policies encourage a downward trend of these distressing figures in the coming year.

State Police

There appears to be a consensus now that the existing federal police structure is inadequate to handle the current security challenges in the country. President Tinubu ought to trigger an expeditious constitutional amendment and legal framework for the setting up of a new state police structure to run side by side with the existing federal force. 

Value Of Naira

I have heard top government officials boast that the goal of the current policies rolled out by the government in the financial sector is to eventually achieve a fair exchange rate of about N700 to the USD. Amen! It will be interesting to see where we are in the next 12 months.

Tax Harmonisation

Nigerians expect that the next one year will not witness any kind of tax ambush as was attempted many times in the last one year. There is a limit to which a pauperised person can be taxed even as everyone knows that the immediate past administration had mismanaged the economy. You can’t restore a malnourished child to normal body weight in one day.

Alternative Sources

Nigerians are expecting that in the next one year, the other sources of revenue touted as potential money spinners would at least come to their own. The club of potential champions include: Steel Development, Marine and Blue Economy, Solid Minerals Development, Tourism and Digital Economy, 

Electricity

After the failure of the attempt by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission in conspiracy with the discos and the Minister of Power to increase electricity tariff arbitrarily, there is need to restore confidence in consumers through a more predictable supply without which all the expectations of increased productivity will come to nought.

Transition To CNG

By this time next year, most Nigerian cities ought to have benefitted from the presidential CNG initiative to reduce the dependence on petrol in favour of Compressed Natural Gas. If that does not happen, the government would be judged to have failed.

Federal Roads

All over the country, federal roads have become death traps. The poor state of most roads make commuters sitting ducks for armed robbers and kidnappers who have been having a field day all over the country. In the next one year, this is one area where Nigerians will definitely assess the government and judge it harshly if it defaults.

Political Solution

In line with my persistent call for national healing and reconciliation, I think we should take advantage of President Tinubu’s political experience and pan-Nigerian outreach to request him to find a political solution to the ongoing trial of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB).

It is within the powers of the president to constitute a team to advise him on possible details and conditions for achieving a political solution to the case. If that is achieved in the next one year, the political temperature in the Southeast will drop as the ground will be swept from the feet of pretenders to the IPOB cause who have constituted themselves to terror gangs in the forests of that region. I can visualise a collective sigh of relief being heaved by his kinsmen and other goodwill ambassadors of other ethnic nationalities who have been calling for a political solution to get this matter behind us once and for all.

As Shakespeare says, The quality of mercy is not strain’d. It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest: It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.