On Friday, the Supreme Court of Nigeria in a split decision voted 6-1 to nullify Executive Order 10 through which the Federal Government of Nigeria had sought in 2019, to give effect to Section 81 (3) and Section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as altered by the 4^th Alteration Act No. 4 of 2017, with regard to the financial autonomy of state judiciary and legislature which had been observed more in the breach by state governments and their Chief Executives. The Governors of the 36 states of the Federation had kicked against the Executive Order as an abbreviation of their rights under the 1999 Constitution. Collectively they elected to go to court, and hence asked the Court (a) to declare the Executive Order 10, unconstitutional and illegal; (b) compel the Federal Government to take up funding of capital projects for State High Courts, Sharia Court of Appeal and Customary Court of Appeal, and (c) refund to the 36 states a sum of N66 billion, being amount which they claimed to have spent on capital projects for the three courts in their respective states.  To resolve the matter, the Supreme Court in addition to its panel of seven Justices invited five Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) as amici curiae (friends of the Court). On Friday, the court ruled 6-1 that the Executive Order 10 is ultra vires, unconstitutional, illegal, and therefore null, void and of no effect whatsoever. Their Lordships also resolved, 4-3 that the 1999 Constitution already expressly spells out the responsibility of the states and the Federal Government concerning the funding of the State High Courts, Sharia Court of Appeal and the Customary Court of Appeal, even if it is silent on capital projects. In sum, the Supreme Court rejected the request of the Attorney General of Abia State and 35 others with regard to the aforementioned (b) and (c) parts of their prayers.

Many commentators have so far tried to be diplomatic in their response to the ruling, but from the outcome as reported, it is not difficult to see that what the Supreme Court has done is to take a technical view of the matter and offer a strict interpretation of the Constitution, the powers of the President, the relationship between the states, and the limits of the Federal Government in the exercise of its powers as spelled out in the 1999 Constitution. Did the President of Nigeria actually act ultra vires? Justice Mohammed Dattijo, delivering the lead judgment declared that “This country is still a Federation and the 1999 Constitution it operates is a federal one. The Constitution provides a clear delineation of powers between the state and the Federal Government. The President has overstepped the limit of his constitutional powers by issuing the Executive Order 10. The country is run on the basis of the rule of law.” Okay. The law is what the judge says it is. The powers of the various tiers of government are defined in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the 1999 Constitution pursuant to the doctrine of the separation of powers.  Executive powers are vested in the President in Sections 5, 130, 132, 148(1), 151 such that in general, the President of Nigeria is one of the most powerful executives in the world invested literally with the status of a constitutional monarch. In Section 130 (2), he is actually described as “the \Head of State, the Chief Executive of the Federation and Commander-in-chief of the Federation.” The strong effect of the ruling by the Supreme Court in A.G. Abia and 35 ors vs. AG Federation is that there are limits to these powers, nonetheless.

By seeking to enforce and extend Section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution, the President, in other words, encroaches on the right of state governments to receive money from the Federation Account on behalf of the state judiciary and legislature and transmit their share to them. Thus, the Federal Executive overreaches itself when it assumes it has the powers to strengthen Section 121(3) through what amounts to additional legislation. It is the duty of the legislative arm of government to make or amend laws under Section 6. EO 10 further amounts to an interpretation of the law by the Federal Government and that Executive arm of government acting as adjudicator. The powers in that regard belong to the judiciary under Section 6. So, while the EO 10 would have protected the judiciary against the rascality of state Governors riding roughshod over the judiciary and the legislature at the sub-national level, and the judiciary would have been a beneficiary of the order, their Lordships looked beyond benefit to the judiciary and took a strictly purist and technocratic view of the law. It would be wrong to assume that the judiciary has ruled against itself. If the Federal Government is allowed to overreach itself and the President permitted to usurp the functions of the legislature and the judiciary, that would be a prescription for anarchy and an endorsement of dictatorship.

The lead judgment emphasizes the rule of law, separation of powers, the limits of powers and the federal principle. I would like to see the state legislatures begin to perform their oversight functions, to call over-bearing Governors to order. The judgment has also been described as victory for the Governors. It is most ironic that these same Governors are benefiting from a principle they themselves do not respect, an emphasis on the rule of law they have no regard for. In various states, Nigerian Governors are worse than tyrants. They seek to control judges, bribe them, humiliate them and violate their independence and integrity. It will be recalled that in one state, Cross Rivers State to be specific, magistrates not too long ago – January 2021- carried placards and organized protests because their salaries had not been paid for 24 months and nothing had been done to provide them good working conditions. State Governors also intervene unnecessarily in the appointment of judges, and seek to compromise them. As for the State legislatures, state Governors preside over them remotely. They behave like messiahs with the control of everything else. State legislatures in Nigeria are in any case pathetic. The members behave like the Governors’ houseboys, especially when the Governor’s party has the majority in the House. I argue that although the 36 State Governors may have secured partial victory in the matter of EO 10 with the Federal Government, but they lack the right to claim any moral high ground.

The judex may never at any time go to court to sue the state Executive arm of government,  that would be strange but the abuse of privilege by state Governors actually got so bad, that in 2015, the Judicial Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) went on strike for two weeks. In 2020, they shut down the courts for 64 days. State Governments hurriedly signed a Memorandum of Action (MoA), the National Judicial Council also made an appeal before the strike was suspended. JUSUN asked for financial autonomy for the judiciary. The body insisted on compliance with the Constitutional provision which places the budgets of state judiciary as a first line charge on the Constitution. They have a point.. I would also like to see the state legislatures begin to perform their oversight functions, to call over-bearing Governors to order.

What the Governors do to Local governments is even worse. They rely on the powers of control conferred on the state government under Section 7 to render local councils totally ineffective. Governors decide on whether elections would hold at that level of government or not, and when they frustrate due process they appoint sole administrators or caretaker committees. They hide under the State-Local Government Joint Account and the associated committees to steal money meant for local councils. They get away with blue murder because nobody challenges them.  

To put the matter in perspective, the Federal Government in 2019 introduced Executive Order 10 to correct the wrong being committed by the State Governors. It also introduced through the Nigeria Financial Investigation Unit (NFIU) a set of guidelines to ensure that state Governors would no longer withdraw monies meant for local council operations from the Joint Account (Section 162 (8)). Daylight robbery of local council resources is one of the reasons the local level of government is virtually dead. The big obstacle against the attempt by the Federal Government to enforce the fiscal autonomy of the local councils was again, the law. This is relatable to the minority judgment by Justice Uwani Abba-Aji who maintained that the EO 10 was in order “because of the hanky-panky and subterfuge played by state Governors against the independence and financial autonomy of state judiciary…This is not unconstitutional.” There has been a tendency to play down this minority view.

On Sunday as anchor of ThisDay Live: The Sunday Talk Show, I had tried to bring up the matter with one of my guests, the legendary Chief Robert Clarke, SAN. Chief Clark had admonished me not to even mention the judge’s name not to talk of offering a summary of his position. But Justice Abba-Aji enjoys the support of Professor Itse Sagay, SAN, who deserves to be quoted at some length: “I just read the judgment” he said. “I was out of the country. I just want to say broadly that I agree with Justice Abba-Aji, the minority judgment. The reason is that the constitution makes it clear that the legislative and judicial branches of state government are to get specific sums of money from what goes to the state. And if the state governors are not making them to have it, all that the executive order has done is to facilitate the implementation of the Constitution. And that is what executive orders are supposed to do. So, the Federal Government was right and I agree with the minority judgment entirely.” What are we dealing with here: form vs substance, the law as it is vs. the law as it ought to be? What is the minority opinion based upon? Was Justice Abba-Aji offering an opinion rather than a strict construction of the law as it is? But whatever it is, the Supreme Court is the apex Court of the land, and the majority decision carries the day, more so as it is focused on the very substance of  EO 10.

The Nigerian President is empowered to give orders, and in this regard, there can be a recourse to Section 315(2) of the 1999 Constitution, but this particular section states clearly that the President can only act  “in conformity with the provisions of this Constitution”, certainly not in breach of it. The Buhari administration has adopted Executive Orders, the first administration to do so in Nigeria in a manner that looks like a copy-cat imitation of the American Donald Trump’s Presidency. Within the first five months of his assumption of office in 2017, Trump had signed 37 EOs!  But even in the US, Executive orders are administrative handmaidens to facilitate the execution of policies within the Executive arm of government, commands to Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) as instruments of management  or to prepare a framework for proposals to the legislature, but certainly not an attempt by the Executive to usurp legislative and judicial functions. To date, the Buhari administration has proclaimed more than 10 Executive Orders. A close scrutiny may reveal that most of them would pass the test. These would include EO 1:  on the promotion of transparency and efficiency in the Business Environment; EO 2: On Submission of Annual Budgetary Estimates by all Statutory and non-Statutory Agencies, including Incorporated Companies wholly owned by the Federal Government of Nigeria; EO 3: Support for Local Content in Public Procurement by the Federal Government; EO 4: On the Voluntary Assets and Income Declaration Scheme (VAIDS); EO 5: to promote local content in public procurement with science, engineering and technology components, and to prohibit the Ministry of Interior from issuing visas to foreign nationals whose skills are available in Nigeria; EO 6:  on assets connected with corruption and other related offences; EO 7: On Road Infrastructure Development and Refurbishment Investment Tax Credit Scheme; EO 8: On Voluntary Offshore Assets Regulatory Scheme, EO 9: On Companies Income Tax. The problem with EO 10 as appropriately pointed out by the Supreme Court is its breach of constitutional provisions.

It seems to me therefore that Executive Orders are not necessarily in themselves bad; they are good only to the extent that they are in conformity with the basic law,  that is the Constitution. Every affirmation of the supremacy of the rule of law is a good sign, but all parties concerned, including the apex court must be seen to be consistent accordingly, and prepared to embark on judicial activism, beyond narrow technicality, for public good, when required to do so. The ruling under review thus throws up more questions than answers: how do we truly ensure the independence of the co-equal parts of government? How do we prevent cynical elements from violating the laws of the land because it is expedient to do so? There are many Nigerians who believe that the 1999 Constitution is the biggest problem of Nigeria and that the Constitution needs to be replaced with a people’s Constitution forged and agreed upon under a democratic dispensation. They also think that for as long as Nigeria is unable to find the political will and the right political  leaders to promote unity and national loyalty, so long would the lawmakers and the judex continue to talk about the rule of law in vacuo. In that sense, the Supreme Court ruling under review has not solved any problem. It is instead, a strong reminder, of the inchoateness of the Nigerian essence.         

As the race toward 2023 polls hots up, a veteran journalist and columnist, Donu Kogbara, has said Southeast is capable of producing a quality candidate that can compete with candidates from other zones in the country.

Kogbara, who revealed this on Saturday while featuring as guest on a zoom meeting on CityFM programme, “City Talks with Reuben Abati”, said better candidates could emerge from the zone.

The journalist, who said she is disturbed by the injustice being meted out to the Southeast, stated: “I’m not saying Igbos must have presidency in 2023, what I’m saying is that they should be as political viable as anybody else.

“The country is complicated; No one zone is going to rescue this country.

“Anyone who feel the Igbos are not marginalized, is delusional. It is obvious the Igbos have a problem in this country, they feel it, I see it.

“Talking about IPOB, 95 percent of Igbos I know want nothing to do with IPOB and do not wish to leave the Nigeria republic.”

Persecondnews reports that in the build-up to 2023, about six aspirants from the region have indicated interest and expressed readiness to run.

They are Sam Ohuabunwa, Anyim Pius Anyim, David Umahi, Kingsley Moghalu, Rochas Okorocha and Orji Uzor Kalu.

Also speaking on her preferred presidential candidate from the zone, Kogbara said she is waiting for better candidates to come forward.

“I have no regards for Rochas Okorocha and Orji Uzor Kalu. I am waiting for better candidates from the South-East to come forward.

“When I say I don’t have regard for someone, it doesn’t mean I dislike the person, it might just be a belief that politically and in terms of governance capabilities, they do not impress me,” she said.

[Persecondnews]

Nigerian columnist, Donu Kogbara, has said It is unfair to speak ill of the Igbos and deny them the opportunity of being president of the Nigeria because of their entrepreneurial mindset.

While appearing on the City Talks With Reuben Abati on Saturday, Kogbara said she always got negative remarks whenever she discussed with non-Igbos about the possibility of an Igbo presidency in 2023.

Speaking on the topic “2023 elections and other matters arising”, the former BBC employee opined that Igbos are engaged in productive economic activity that Nigerians should embrace.

She said, “I think that its good that there are drivers of the economy , they are good at making and importing stuffs and that is productive economic activities.

“The comments I hear during conversations with people of other ethnic groups makes me disturbed about the injustice being inflected on the south east.”

According to her the fact that Igbos are good at making money and are willing to go to any part of the country with such objective should not be a reason to dislike them.

“Igbos are traders , business people and more likely to be interested in the bottom line than people from other groups, that doesn’t mean you won’t find business people from other groups but Igbos are more on the whole oriented that way.

“So why will you hate Igbos who are more financially independent than the northerners who are solely dependent on the government except for Dangote and one or two others.

“I don’t want to be rude about northerners but they are not productive as a whole and people never say, you are very unproductive you can never be the president of Nigeria. But Igbos ae chastised for generating wealth,” she stated.

Laying emphasis on how the Igbos have been marginalized, the Niger Delta born questioned why people have never raised same hatred towards the Fulanis, even after the issues arising from herdsmen attacks in the country.

“Despite the ill-feelings over the issue of herdsmen , you never hear people say no Fulani should be president of Nigeria again.

“What I find extraordinary about this whole Igbo issue is that people seize on any excuse just to make them not entitled for presidency.

“I’m not saying Igbos must be president in 2023 but I’m saying everyone should be politically viable like others.

[thewhistler]

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 11:45am

Guest: Donu Kogbara (Newspaper Columnist)

Topic: 2023 Elections and Other Matters Arising

Date: February 12, 2022

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732
Passcode: 600206

The politics of zoning is likely to make or mar the 2023 Presidential election, with implications for the stability of the country. It is one of the most contentious issues in Nigeria at the moment particularly in the two major political parties: the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC), which both represent most of the contending stakeholders in Nigeria. It is often argued that zoning is not expressly stated in either the 1999 Constitution or the Electoral Act, but it is a convenient measure adopted by the Peoples Democratic Party in 1999, with the return to civilian rule, in order to ensure equity, justice and a sense of ownership in the political representation process. Even though the word zoning is not used in the 1999 Constitution, it is nonetheless in line with the ideals of Federal Character as stated in Sections 14(3), 147(3) and 171(5) and the establishment of a Federal Character Commission in Section 153 (1c) and Part 1(C) of the Third Schedule.

The principle is that in a multi-plural, diverse country like Nigeria, with over 400 ethnic nationalities, it is important that every group is given a sense of belonging, and participation, to promote national unity and loyalty, and to prevent the overt domination of some sections of the country, lording it over others in appointments and the sharing of power and access. It is in this sense that zoning or the concept of rotational presidency is a derivative of the Federal Character principle. Since independence, this principle has been a source of tension and conflict among the various ethnic nationalities, regions and zones that make up Nigeria, with minority groups protesting about their marginalization by majorities, and great discontent over the distribution of power and positions by leaders who assume office and resort to the politics of hegemony, nepotism and favouritism to the advantage of their own ethnic stock. This was an issue during the military era, under Lt. General Aguiyi-Ironsi - Igbos were accused of dominating other groups. Then, there was the civil war, and the North seized power. Over the years, other Nigerians complained of marginalization, and the Northernization of power in Nigeria. The return to civilian rule in 1999 and the exit of the military were both meant in part, to address this volatile issue and ensure true, participatory democracy sitting on a tripod of equity, justice and good conscience.

It is therefore most unfortunate that as Nigeria moves closer to the 2023 general elections, there is so much disquiet about zoning and rotational Presidency. The kernel of it is the insistence by certain Northern interest groups that there is nothing wrong in a Northerner becoming President after eight years of the Buhari Presidency. These groups including the Northern Leaders of Thought, Northern Elders Forum, Coalition of Northern Groups and the Arewa Consultative Forum and their spokespersons have at one time or the other in the last few months argued that the North has as much right as any other zone in the country to run for the Presidency in 2023, and that there is no such thing as a consensus or an agreement to zone the Presidency of Nigeria to either the South or to the South East. Most Northern commentators on the subject indeed sound irritated by the idea of Igbo Presidency or the thought that Ndigbo is the only major ethnic group that has not been allowed to lead Nigeria since the return to civilian rule in 1999. There are however exceptions from the North: the Arewa Consensus Assembly for example, has called for a Southern Presidency in 2023.  

The main argument of the naysayers is as articulated by former Governor of Kano State, Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso who argued in a Television Interview: “If you look at it from 1999 to date, or even after 2023, we have 16 years for PDP, eight years for APC. Now in the 16 years of PDP, we had a situation where the Presidency has been in the South for 14 years and only in the North for two years during the Umaru Musa Yar’Adua of blessed memory.”  Similarly, the Governor of Bauchi State, Bala Muhammed has  argued as follows: “I want to let all Nigerians, especially those clamouring  for the 2023 Presidency to go to the South, that it is the turn of the North to produce the next President.. We are aware of the agitations of the Southern part of the country because the leader of the country today, President Muhammadu Buhari who is from the North will finish his tenure in 2023, so power could rotate to the South. But I want to say that I am in PDP. I am not in APC that has this burden of zoning the Presidency to the South….my party was at the centre for 16 years; 14 of those years were led by people from the South, so where is the justice and the justification. Therefore, it is the turn of the North to produce the next President…”

Both Kwankwaso and Muhammad may be defending the reported plan by the PDP to throw the race for the Presidency open within its ranks, but at the heart of their argument is the suggestion that the South has spent more time in power at the centre than the North. It is a specious argument that has been taken up by some youth groups in the North and they are wrong. Nigeria did not begin in 1999. In the 61 years of the country’s independence, under both the military and civilians, the North has controlled power at the centre, for more than 41 years! So there is a case to be made for equity and justice and it is in part why many Nigerians from the Middle Belt to the South are calling for restructuring. This is also at the root of calls for self-determination and/or secession by ethnic nationalist groups in the East and the West.

For the benefit of those arguing that nobody should come to power based on sentiments, they may need to be reminded of a bit of history, which they seem to be conveniently ignoring.  After the annulment of the 1993 Presidential election won by Social Democratic Party (SDP) candidate, Bashorun MKO Abiola and the turmoil that enveloped the country, the military junta in setting up the Interim National Government (ING) had to choose as its head, a Yoruba man, and not just a Yoruba man, but someone from the same town as Chief Abiola, that is Chief Ernest Adegunle Shonekan. It doesn’t take much commonsense to see that there was an attempt here to assuage the feelings of the Yoruba and the Egba even if that didn’t last for too long.  Again in 1999, with the tension over the 1993 debacle yet to settle, the two major political parties at the time: the PDP and the SDP, both chose Yorubas as Presidential candidates: Chief Olusegun Obasanjo (PDP) and Chief Olu Falae (SDP).  The plan obviously was to appease the South West over the injustice that had been done to Chief MKO Abiola in 1993, and perhaps to show that Abiola’s party, the SDP still stood a chance of winning Nigeria’s Presidential election Again, for the benefit of those opposing the idea of a Nigerian President of Southern extraction in 2023, they should remember the dust that was thrown up by the North in 2010, after the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. The 1999 Constitution is very clear on succession to power in the event of the death of a sitting President: the Vice President is immediately sworn in. But Northern groups opposed the idea of then Vice President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan assuming office in accordance with Constitutional provisions (see section 146).

Nigeria almost broke up because some Northerners argued that only a Northerner could complete President Yar’Adua’s remaining one year in office. It took the National Assembly coming with a “doctrine of necessity”, something unknown to the Constitution before reason prevailed. The people behind the planned subterfuge never forgave President Jonathan. They took their pound of flesh in 2015, when they began yet another drama about how President Jonathan had promised to do only one term in office, and it was the turn of the North to produce the next President. Even Northern members of the PDP, some of whom are now opposed to power-shift to the South, engaged in anti-party activities just to get power back to the North. As a worst case scenario for 2023, across the aisle, some other power brokers, including Emirs, are now suggesting that the same Jonathan that they opposed in 2015, should be allowed to return to office, and it is not certain that they want him back for altruistic reasons or out of love. So, should political parties and their leaders be allowed to always take decisions based on expediency?

It seems to me however that the APC seems to be handling the politics of zoning for the 2023 Presidential race much better than the PDP. With perhaps the exception of Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State, the other APC members that have publicly shown interest in the Presidential race are from the South: Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, former Governor of Lagos State, Senator Orji Uzor Kalu, former Governor of Abia State, Senator Rochas Okorocha (former Governor of Imo State), Governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State and by proxy – Vice President Yemi Osinbajo and Governor Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti. So far, the APC seems to be tilting towards the South as most of its Northern members seem to be more interested in vying for the Chairmanship of the party – 12 so far in the APC Chairmanship race. APC insiders also claim that President Buhari believes that it is immoral and inequitable for a Northerner to succeed him. What is not clear is which Southerner from the South, East or South West the President is interested in, but in any case that is left for party delegates to decide. What is clear is that the APC has problems of its own, the party has been somewhat riotous as a constitutional, legitimate body in managing its own affairs, and that may be seen when and if the party is able to hold its National Convention scheduled for Feb. 26. Is there a Third Force within the APC? So it seems. Already, some members of the party are challenging the legitimacy of the Extra-ordinary Convention Planning Committee led by the Governor of Yobe State, Mai Mala Buni. Even if the Convention holds, there is still the possibility of some aggrieved members of the party going to Court to challenge the legitimacy of the Buni committee as in the Ondo State case: Jegede vs. Akeredolu. The technical point raised by Jegede’s counsel at the time, was determined narrowly by the Supreme Court 4-3. The res in the matter, can still be revisited.

The PDP is likely to find itself in the eye of the storm if it zones its choice of Presidential candidate to the North. Except the PDP is playing some kind of game or a curious strategy, those who are pushing for a Northern PDP Presidential candidate must know that it amounts to political arrogance for anyone from the North to think he or she can win the Presidential election by jettisoning zoning or without the support of the South. The Constitutional provision on the character and spread of votes for a person to be elected Nigerian President is a bit cumbersome (see Section 133). The country is also fragile from many perspectives. We need to manage people’s expectations in the best interest of national stability. Why would the Northern PDP leaders say that they have not had their chance within the party? Do those of them who engaged in anti-party activities in 2015 have the moral right to talk about the Northern interest in 2022/23? Those pushing for a Northern Presidential candidate in the PDP apparently under-estimate the resolve of the Southern Governors Forum comprising the Governors from PDP, APC, APGA and the position as well of the various ethnic socio-political organizations - Ohanaeze Ndigbo, the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum, PANDEF and Afenifere.  Southern leaders are unyielding in their determination that the next President of Nigeria must come from the South.  Both PANDEF and Ohanaeze have warned about the possible break up of Nigeria if power at the centre remains in the North. Afenifere leader, Chief Ayo Adebanjo wants a President of South East extraction                 

Unlike the APC, the PDP has a long list of Presidential hopefuls from the North: former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, former Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, Governor of Sokoto State, Hon. Aminu Tambuwal, Bauchi State Governor, Bala Muhammad, former Kano State Governor, Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso. If the PDP goes ahead with its proposed no-zoning policy, these Northern aspirants, would confront, for now, from the South – former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, former Governor of Ekiti State, Ayo Fayose, Governor of Rivers State, Nyesom Wike, Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Udom Emmanuel, former Senate President Anyim Pius Anyim, former President of the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN) Mazi Sam Ohuabunwa,  veteran journalist, Dele Momodu and others within the party who may also have their eyes on the ticket. The politics of zoning is bound to widen the gulf within the party with grave consequences in the 2023 elections. In 2014/2015, the PDP lost woefully and imploded, basically because of this same division, with many of the party foot-soldiers at the grassroots level, scattering like pigeons. The standard explanation that is offered by PDP leaders is that consultations are ongoing and that many of the aspirants are also still busy with consultations. Whatever it is, the uncertainty within the party serves only the purpose of giving an advantage to other political parties at all levels.

It remains to add that while the concept of Federal Character has been grossly abused in its application, the zoning principle in politics has helped to ensure a sense of balance, rotation and inclusion, but to jettison it for purposes of expediency would be counter-productive and costly. In an ideal situation, every aspect of national life should be driven by merit, but there is nothing ideal about Nigeria, and that is why we run a turn-by-turn democracy, with emphasis on how access to power amounts to access to the proverbial national cake. The logic is simple: every group wants their own share of the cake before anyone begins to talk about merit, as if any single group in the country has a monopoly of talent.  This is the Nigerian dilemma.     

The Economist and Chief Executive Officer of CFG Advisory, Tilewa Adebajo stated that the issue of Census before an election year is very volatile.

Mr. Adebajo said this in an interview on CityTalks with Reuben Abati on City105.1 on Saturday.

The subject of Population Census has been a discourse since the last population and housing census in Nigeria took place in 2006.

When there was a clamour by some groups for Census to be conducted in 2018, the Speak of the 8^th National Assembly, Hon Yakubu Dogara, stated categorically that Census close to an election year, would make some politicians hijack the process that would determine the outcome of the results, rather than the actual figures.

In a recent development, Mr. Adebajo argues that the Population Census process in Nigeria has been politized and a lot of people has lost confidence in the system.

According to him, “If you try to do a census now, everybody is going to scream bloody murder, because they will feel that you are going to use the census result to try to influence the elections next year.”

He said, “the National Population Commission will tell you that they are ready to conduct a census, but there is no political will to go ahead to conduct the census because some people feel that it might not favour them.

With references from the amount of mobile telephone penetration, voter register, and National Identity Management system, mentioned by Mr. Adebanjo to give an overview of Nigeria population estimate; he said, “the amount of mobile telephone penetration could give an idea of what the population in Nigeria looks like.

“The National Identity Management System, again a lot of people do not have confidence in that system.

“The voter register; but over the last 15 years you will see a situation whereby the vote register has shifted from the large population from the Southwest to the North, which is currently the largest within the last 10 years.

“People are concerned about how this has been manipulated and if you don’t know your population, you can’t plan all the social infrastructure that a teaming population requires, you need to know the numbers so that you understand your demography, so that you can plan properly.

When fielded with questions concerning the launch by the President Muhammadu Buhari on Thursday, 3^rd February, 2022, on the Revised National Policy on Population for Sustainable Development, stressing the need for urgent measures to address Nigeria’s high fertility rate, through expanding access to modern contraceptive methods across the country and  the National Council on Population Management inaugurated by President Buhari, chaired by Mr. President, and the Vice President as the deputy chairman with Heads of relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies as members.

Mr. Adebajo replied: “The Nigeria population has become a liability.

“They have recognized those issues, they have brought it up, so it’s now a situation where we talk about policy flip-flops, and consistency in government.

“It is important that we do not only set up these policies, but it’s important that we are consistent with the policies. If we need to enact a legislation to back those policies let’s do but we can borrow some from the Chinese model and the Indian model.

“It’s not only important that we plan, but it is also important that we move ourselves from western conspiracies on Population control,” he said.

Mr. Adebajo further speaking, said that “The first step to put in place population control, we need to put in place a credible census for Nigeria.

“The strategy for one part of the country is different from another part of the country.

“You cannot manage what you cannot measure.”

Feedback during the interview via WhatsApp by Abdul Kayode from Ajangbadi in Lagos, he said, “a country without database of its citizens, should not bother to consider population control measures.

“For God’s sake, we don’t have a record of the numbers of people going and coming into the country through our land borders. How do you preach to a Hausa man who has four wives, not to produce kids?

Femi Gbajabiamila, Speaker of Nigeria’s House of Representatives was the Guest Speaker at the 52nd Convocation Ceremony of the University of Lagos, his alma mater, on Monday, January 17, 2022. The theme of the lecture was: “Building Back Better: Creating a New Framework for Tertiary Education in Nigeria in the 21^st Century.” The Speaker had a lot to speak about but what has caught public attention is his declaration that the time has come to increase the academic qualification for persons seeking to lead Nigeria either as President or at other levels within the political space: in other words, the President, Governors, and members of the National Assembly. He argues at page 16, of his 22-page published presentation, that just as the National Assembly reduced the minimum age of eligibility for public office, in response to the “Not Too Young To Run Campaign”, there would be a need to also review the mandatory academic qualification for persons aspiring to high offices, in order to enhance the quality of candidates who elect to lead Nigeria. I agree with the Speaker of the House of Representatives. My only concern is that in the face of a yet to be concluded amendment of Nigeria’s Electoral Act, he as Speaker of the Blue Chamber, has not yet raised it on the floor of the Assembly or cause it to be raised, in line with parliamentary procedures. He has chosen the platform of a public speech, and even more surprising is the fact that since he raised the subject, there has been very little attempt to amplify his viewpoint which I think is very relevant to current attempts to deepen Nigeria’s electoral system. My own take is that Gbajabiamila has raised a very fundamental question about Nigeria’s leadership recruitment process. Who should lead Nigeria? Who is best qualified to do so? The Speaker said that current provisions in Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution are no longer relevant in the 21^st Century, and that the limits set therein are too low.

Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution simply says that “a person shall be qualified for election to the office of President if: (a) he is a citizen of Nigerian by birth; (b) he has attained the age of forty years; (c) he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by that political party; and (d) he has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.” Section 142 states the same provisions with regard to the office of the Vice President. The same provisions apply to other elected positions except with regard to the age of qualification as indicated in Section 65 (2(a) for candidates seeking election into the National Assembly, Section 106 (c) for the State House of Assembly and Section 187(2) for Governors and Deputy Governors. In section 137, the Constitution outlines the grounds for disqualification. But Gbajabiamila’s concern is about Section 131(d) and the insistence on “School Certificate and its equivalent” in the 21^st century. What does this mean exactly, in today’s Nigeria? The answer is provided in Section 318 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, which is the Interpretation Section. Here it is expressly stated that in fact a Primary Six School Leaving Certificate is enough for anybody to aspire to any political office in Nigeria. Even the equivalent of a Primary School Leaving Certificate would be considered good enough. Section 318 defines “school certificate and its equivalent” as (a) secondary school certificate or Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guild’s Certificate or (c)Primary School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent and -(i) service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for a minimum of ten years, and (ii) attendance at courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to the Independent Electoral Commission for periods totaling up to a minimum of one year, and (iii) the ability to read v, write and understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of the Independent Electoral Commission, and (d) any other qualification acceptable by the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Thus, the Nigerian Constitution has created a liberal and accommodating situation whereby anybody at all can occupy important political positions in the country, and lead a country where the youths and others are some of the most vertically and horizontally educated persons in the world. Nigeria’s educated elite has no problems with education, the problem is that the educated ones run away from politics, when they attempt to be part of it, they are labeled and stigmatized, and so we have a country where the uneducated, the ignorant who have cash in their pockets, influential Godfathers, and the courage to hire social media noisemakers, who are even doubly ignorant, are the ones dictating the country’s pace. Within the purview of the extant law, no Nigerian political aspirant is required to show proof of having passed the School Certificate Examination or its equivalent. An F9 parallel in all subjects is considered perfect, even a concocted testimonial from a primary school or a secondary can take any Nigerian to the highest levels of government. That is even going too far. Some dubious proof of attendance at one or two seminars is enough, once the Electoral Commission says it is okay. In fact a certificate is not even required as we have seen in the case law on the subject. So why should anyone be surprised that half of the people who get elected to the National Assembly simply go there to sleep or that Governor behave like tyrants and that some State Houses of Assembly rarely meet except when money is to be shared?

Gbajabiamila thinks this is not good enough. So, why has he not raised it where it matters? Why is minimum qualification for elective office not one of the issues in the ongoing debate about the Electoral Act Amendment? Going to UNILAG to run his mouth sanctimoniously is hypocritical. Indeed, as he pointed out, and let us help him deodorize the point, Nigeria cannot continue to recruit the uneducated, the ignorant, the sleepy, rambling wing of society to lead it into the future. This of course is not new. Once upon a time in this country, a matter  was taken all the way to the Supreme Court over qualifications and the apex Court ruled that the Constitution recognizes something called RSM (whatever that is) as the equivalent of a School Certificate as long as it is acceptable to the Electoral Commission. In another case, when the issues of qualification came up, the Court ruled that a candidate for an election does not even need a certificate. That is how this country has been elevating persons in ishiagu, Babariga and flowing agbada to go and make laws and design policies that they know nothing about. Gbajabiamila as Speaker of the House of Representatives must have seen the danger up close. He presides over a House of Representatives where at least one member has paraded his four wives as an illustration of his male virility and has also had the effrontery of announcing the birth of his 28^th child as a major contribution to national progress. Hon. Al Hassan Ado Doguwa, House Majority Leader, is threatening to produce up to 30 children before the next general elections and he wants the Nigerian Government to classify his home as a polling unit if he achieves the feat. Gbajabiamila presided over that session. He turned it all into a joke.

And that is precisely our problem. We think leadership is a Nollywood episode. When the President’s qualification became an issue in the 2019 election, the Nigerian Army showed up in court to make the claim that the Army does not keep the certificates of its recruits. In other parts of the world, former soldiers who have made sacrifice for the country are treated with respect and exemptions may be made for them, but the risk we run which the House of Representatives Speaker may be alluding to is that in the 21^st Century, Nigeria may end up electing into high offices persons who may know next to nothing about climate change, global trade, artificial intelligence and the internet of things and they will go abroad and sit with better educated persons and end up disgracing all of us. It is a problem also with the country’s value system. Wealth, no matter how ill-gotten, has become more important than everything else. With the way the aforementioned sections of the Nigerian Constitution are constructed, we may one day elect into office, touts and all kinds of characters who would not be fit enough to represent the country internationally. We elect holders of “school cert or its equivalents” and yet we still worry about the poor attention that is paid to education in Nigeria, the rank anti-intellectualism that pervades the land, and the perpetual conflict between the educated and the monied elite in our land? To be a big man in Nigeria, you only need to attend a seminar and communicate in English, and the English you speak may not even be good enough for you to get an exemption for IETLS from the UK Home Office or for TOEFL from US Education Authorities.  

Our argument: as 2023 approaches, is that we cannot afford to elect into positions, persons with “school certificate or its equivalent”. That has to change. Gbajabiamila, even if he has been negligent on the subject is right. We cannot afford to send to international platforms, persons who do not know the difference between foreign exchange and interest rate, or what is called diaspora remittances. The kind of avoidable leadership recruitment crisis that this country has faced so far must come to an end.  I am not asking for a collection of certificates. A graduate degree would be enough. The assumption is that a Nigerian graduate would at least have enough sense to read up on what he or she may not know, and ask the relevant questions. But it is not enough to be a graduate also. That graduate must have necessary cognate experience in either the public or private sector. I recommend a minimum of 10 years. A Nigerian university graduate who has been sitting at home doing nothing significant, should not be allowed to suddenly show up to seek high office. That is not what we are talking about. This is not about paper qualification, but a kind of training that guarantees the ability to think. Mexico once insisted on educated economists, Ph. D holders running its system. The 60^th President of Mexico (1988 – 1994), Carlos Sarlina de Gortari had a Ph.D from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.  He was an economist and an apostle of free market ideas.  Ernesto Zedillo was Mexican President from December 1994 to 30 November 2000.  He had a Ph.D in Economics too, but the economy failed under his watch. There was also Enrique Pena Nieto (EPN), the 64^th President of Mexico (2012 – 2018) who was sometime down the line accused of plagiarism in his academic thesis. It must also be noted that between 1958 and 1988, every President of Mexico was a law graduate.  Their successors were similarly well educated. The eggheads of Mexico did not make much difference. In other words, strong academic qualifications may not make up for such other factors as emotional intelligence, maturity, integrity and character that may be central to the making of a political leader. That notwithstanding, it is certainly not the same when you compare the group of incompetents and strange bedfellows that occupy the policy heights of the Nigerian economy.

We need a new orientation. We need to pay attention to how we recruit leaders in Nigeria. The National Assembly must take a second look, or should have taken another look at Section 131(d) of the 1999 Constitution. Touts speak English. Yes. Thugs have access to school headmasters who can prepare testimonials and affidavits. In Nigeria - yes.  The country’s Electoral Commission will accept any “equivalent”. Oh, yes. It is just too easy in Nigeria for anyone to become a major political stakeholder. The bar for legitimate political ascendancy is too low!  We are already witnessing that in the traditional institutions where all sorts can wear beaded crowns. Within the larger arena, there must be due respect for minimum standards. The irony is written larger as follows: Under Nigeria’s Public Service Rules, nobody can be recruited as an Administrative Officer (AO) without a university degree or its equivalent, and yet, in the same country, the Constitution says a Primary School Certificate holder is good enough for the highest positions available in politics! Gbajabiamila failed the test when he took his opinion to the 52^nd Convocation anniversary of the University of Lagos. He probably did not want to offend his colleagues in the National Assembly whose qualifications he knows cannot be vouched for, many of them don’t have the School Certificate that is the minimum. They can’t even provide the equivalent! And yet these are the same people making laws and taking decisions on behalf of the millions of well-read and capable Nigerians who stay away from Nigerians politics because they don’t want to mix and mingle with a certain Nigerian type with whom you can’t even have a simple conversation on anything. Why are we like this? Is it still possible to save Nigeria’s 2023 from the charlatans?

Is it too late? Nobody knows. The National Assembly has transmitted the re-amended Electoral Act Amendment Bill to President Muhammadu Buhari for his second consideration in accordance with Section 58 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. There are issues about mode of primaries, but there is this other big issue about a political system that recruits persons with “equivalents” in the 21^st Century. The persons with “secondary school and its equivalents” are part of the problem with Nigeria.

Prince Wale Gomez, a Chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in Lagos State opined that nothing is working in Lagos State.

The bigtime player in facility management made this assertion in an interview on CityTalks with Reuben Abati on City 105.1 on Saturday.

His protestation on the state of Lagos was based on his assessment of different administrations since 1999 dominated by the defunct  Alliance for Democracy (AD) and  Action Congress (AC), now merged into the All Progressives Congress (APC).

According to Prince Gomez, “Babajide Olusola Sanwo-Olu, the Lagos state governor, has not done a fantastic job. He has been maintaining Lagos.

“We want a developmental program for Lagos and not maintenance!”

A permanent secretary in Lagos state Government rebutted Prince Gomez’s view on the facts and figures of Babajide’s administration.

In Prince Gomez’s reaction, he poised a rhetoric: “anybody can rule out figure, but has it been independently audited?

He added, “What has the Lagos state government done and let is put it on an investigative independent audit.”

When fielded with the question about his blueprint for the development of Lagos state, He said, “I have my blueprint and it is in my manifesto that I cannot release yet.”

Prince Gomez only mentioned a snippet of his plan for Lagos state.

According to him, “I will ensure that in every local government there will be a clinic, where all artisans and everybody in any industry will all sit down and talk about the problem in Lagos state.

“We are going to change Lagos state from the ward level.

“When I come into government, I will ensure that every Ward is given a face lift.

“Under my party, I will ensure that Lagos is different.”

Prince Gomez stated that he will use his resources to support anyone who gets the PDP ticket, if he didn’t get it.

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 11:45am

Guest: Prince Wale Gomez- Lagos state PDP Gubernatorial Aspirant

Topic: Lagos State PDP & 2023 General Elections

Date: 15 January 2022

Join Zoom Meeting

https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732
Passcode: 600206