Nigeria Content Online

In 2003, a relatively unknown assistant
commissioner of police, armed with little more than a letter of
appointment, and an Act of the National Assembly, set out to battle an
enemy that had gone unchallenged for as long as anyone could remember.
The mission to wage war on corruption appeared to be yet another case
of wishful thinking tainted with misguided zeal; a fool rushing in
where angels had refrained from treading.

But Nuhu Ribadu was a serious man. Within three
months of his appointment as head of the newly established Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), no less than four of Nigeria’s
biggest advance fee fraudsters had been arrested.

In no time the heat was turned on where it
mattered the most – the highest reaches of government. One of the most
prominent persons to fall was the nation’s top cop and Mr. Ribadu’s
boss, Inspector General of Police Tafa Balogun, who had spent his
tenure looting police funds and leaving tens of thousands of police
officers penniless and unpaid.

There were several other investigations and
convictions, touching every level of government – local government
chairpersons, state governors, ministers. All of these cases that were
constantly being uncovered and investigated were evidence of the extent
to which Nigeria had succumbed to institutional corruption.

What made matters worse was the absence of any
political will on the part of the country’s law enforcement agencies.
In 2001, Nigeria’s name was included on a list of “Non-Cooperating
Countries or Territories”, issued by the Financial Action Task Force, a
global anti-money laundering organisation.

The EFCC under Mr. Ribadu fought the battle
impressively. In 2006, three years after the commission’s creation,
Nigeria was taken off the blacklist. It was clear to all that, even
though corruption still existed, things had changed, and a culture of
impunity was no longer to be tolerated.

But whatever high hopes Nigerians had were not to
last for much longer. Under the Yar’Adua administration, the
anti-corruption battle took a bizarre turn, so that Mr. Ribadu and the
EFCC now seemed to be the hunted. Today, with the benefit of hindsight,
and with assistance from Wikileaks, we know what happened. Michael
Aondoakaa, the man in charge of the justice ministry, was more adept at
subverting the law than at protecting and enforcing it.

While not trying to argue that Mr. Ribadu was a
flawless man, or that his EFCC always operated above board, we can
still safely argue that the commission’s days of glory belonged to the
Ribadu era.

Farida Waziri, Mr. Ribadu’s successor, has in our
opinion, failed to live up to expectations. A recently released
Wikileaks cable (dated May 2009) hints at the frustration with the EFCC
of the UK’s Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA.) In the cable there
is a reference to SOCA’s determination to “continue its working-level
coordination with Nigeria’s Economic and Finance Crimes Commission
(EFCC) in spite of the EFCC’s refusal to move on high-level political
cases…”

Every now and then there is a show of strength on
the part of the EFCC, as though to remind us that it still exists. In
the past week we have seen another outburst of activity. Lucky
Igbinedion, Governor of Edo State between 1999 and 2007, already
previously convicted of corruption, is now in court again, over fresh
allegations involving N25 billion. Oyuiki Obaseki, the former boss of
the Nigerian Premier League, is also being investigated in a case
involving N3 billion made to magically disappear.

But if the past is anything to go by, it is easy
to predict that all of these exertions will lead nowhere; that we are
merely on the road to yet another dead-end.

Meanwhile, everywhere one turns there is evidence
that corruption is still very much alive and well in our fair land.
Only a few weeks ago a deputy director in the Federal civil service was
arrested by the EFCC, after N800 million was reportedly discovered in
her account. Billions of dollars of oil windfall earnings from the
Excess Crude Account have vanished in the past year.

This is not the time for the EFCC to give anyone doubts about its
commitment to its mandate. Farida Waziri needs to sit up and get her
job done – or resign immediately if she’s not capable. (Oh well. We
admit it; we are eternal optimists.) Mrs Waziri is a product of the
Aondoakaa era. That should ordinarily be enough for realistic people to
conclude that she is a lost case. But hope springs eternal. The
alternative is to regard the fight against corruption as dead, and
awaiting burial.

Promises are
dangerous; what if one is unable to fulfil them? Worse still are those
made in the heat of a moment, when one hopes that a final promise will
swing the decision in one’s way! Those were my thoughts after that
promise by Mr. President in far-away Turkey. What was all that about?
Wrong move or what?

A right that is
guaranteed by the Constitution cannot be contrived away by any means
especially if a beneficiary of that right insists on seeking to
exercise it. And therein lies the problem with this promise to not seek
a second term, come 2015. Don’t forget, President Goodluck Jonathan’s
supporters have always justified his contesting on grounds that being
the running mate of the last president, the late Umaru Yar’Adua he is
therefore entitled to utilise the second term that would have been
their due.

So, one could view
this promise from that angle: that being supposedly the second term of
a terminated joint ticket, the 2011 tenure, when it ends in 2015, will
exhaust the Constitutional limit the duo would have been entitled to,
thereby ruling out another term of four years for the good doctor.

But is it? Can you
seriously say that Jonathan 2011-2015 is a second term, of any other
administration, or indeed the first term of his? Stretching logic
further, how can this promise be enforced if he changes his mind by
2015?

We live in a
curious political environment, not completely removed from our
idiosyncrasies’; add to that a dash of that sense of ‘it’s-my-portion’:
our strong belief in the power of miracles especially when we have done
nothing really to earn the miracle; a conviction that we deserve this
unsolicited benefit, because someone up there has just decided to bless
us.

Can you imagine,
anyone, anyone at all, around any president in Nigeria, a president
whose Constitution easily grants two terms, of which he has only served
one, accepting his refusal to go for the second term? God forbid! Every
In-law, spouse-friends-committee, cousin, sister, brother,
friends-in-law, political aides and any living being remotely connected
to the man, will reject his rejection of their own dividend and good
fortune with such vehemence. People will wonder if they are not ‘doing’
the man from back home.

Then ‘the’ groups
would materialise from nowhere and start the laborious process of
convincing the man to ‘use’ his right ‘because God gave it’. Any person
who feels and says anything contrary, such as reminding all concerned
about the promise, will be cursed and bound over to Satan and
recommended for deliverance at a frenzied overnight vigil. Enemies of
progress: if it was their brother, cousin, uncle, nephew, father, son,
Grandfather, friend or any other remotely connected relative nko?

Could this be a
ruse as some say, to sway zones that hope to take the throne in 2015,
so as to garner their votes? Maybe, maybe not! It depends on what value
you are placing on the will-not-run-come-2015-promise, and how you
think you can hold the maker to it. Whether you accept the promise or
not, or believe it or not, know this:

If President
Jonathan wins this April election, he will be entitled to a second
term. See Section 137(1) (b) of the 1999 Constitution on
Disqualification: A person shall not be qualified for election to the
office of President if he has been elected to such office at any two
previous elections. Seeing as April 2011 will be the first election
where he will actually stand for office, if he wins, no promise can
wipe that S137 away! So, please keep this at the back of your mind. I
am telling you now, today, because I don’t want to hear any complaints
when 2015 comes and one man decides to seek his legitimate due.

This Constitution has come out on top every time, even on zoning.
The Constitution will prevail again, and again, and again. It is not
called the Grund Norm for nothing. It supersedes every law, every rule
and regulation contrived to chip at its supremacy. If it can supersede
laws, it will shred promises, trust me!

Fifty-eight years
and 364 days after the “Burning of Cairo” on January 26, 1952 by masses
of Egyptians, January 25, 2011 marked the beginning of the longest and
noisiest mass vigil to bury the Mubarak regime. That burial was
completed on February 11. Day after day, the international media
reports on the streams of Egyptian youth flowing through the big
squares of Cairo. Unlike Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe and former
President Laurent Gbagbo of Cote d’Ivoire, Egyptians have sent Mr.
Mubarak to a seaside retirement. Whither Egypt?

A brief extract of
facts is necessary to provide a context for its current uprising. Egypt
was ranked 98th most corrupt country in the 2010 Corruption Perception
Index of Transparency International. Its score of 3.1 lies slightly
less than halfway between Ghana’s score of 4.1, giving it a rank of 61,
and the score of 2.4 earned by Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Togo, and
Zimbabwe, tied at 134th most corrupt states on earth.

Turning to the
Ease of Doing Business Survey of the World Bank, Egypt is the 94th most
difficult place to do business. Ghana, by contrast, has a rank of 67
and Nigeria has a ranking of 137. In concrete terms, a foreign company
like Zambeef took 9 months to get a business license in Nigeria while
its Ghanaian subsidiary took 2 weeks to get the same license. We can
infer that it could take approximately 4.5 months to get a business
license in Egypt. Egypt has no chance of reducing its 24% unemployment
rate for the 15-24 age group when it takes such a long time to get a
business license to start a formal business.

Teeming unemployed
Egyptian masses also face exploding food prices. Egypt is the largest
wheat importer in the world. Unfortunately, the price of wheat has
doubled over the last year. Yet, expressing one’s frustration about
daily hardships or politics has been a hazardous undertaking for
Egyptians. Presiding over high unemployment and high corruption at a
time of high food prices while suppressing the free expression of
views, President Mubarak was asking for civil uprisings.

It is time to
consider some religious peculiarities. An American foundation called
the Pew Research Centre conducts surveys of people around the world to
elicit their opinions on topics such as the role of religion in
politics. In response to the question whether Islam has a positive role
in national politics, 85% of Egyptian Muslims thought it had a positive
role, compared to 82% of Nigerian Muslims, and 38% of Turkish Muslims.

As a former ruler
of Egypt for centuries and a modern democracy governed by an Islamist
party, Turkey paints one picture of the possible contours of a
democratic Egypt. Finally, Pew Research Centre reports that 82% of
Egypt’s Muslims would like to legalise the stoning of people who commit
adultery, 77% would like to cut off the hands of thieves, and 84%
believe that those who leave the Muslim faith should suffer the death
penalty. 56% of Nigeria’s Muslims support stoning for adultery, 65%
desire hand amputation for theft, and 51% would like Islamic apostates
to die. By contrast, only 16% of Turkish Muslims support stoning, 13%
are for hand amputation, and a minuscule 5% believe that death is the
only suitable punishment for a loss of Islamic faith.

Mao Tse-Tung said
that the guerilla must move among the people as a fish swims in the
sea. The Egyptian sea is likely to be acidic for those guerillas
seeking a secular democratic state.

Whither Egypt?
Hosni Mubarak has been the political face of a military regime. Except
for the 1805 to 1952 period, the army has ruled Egypt since the Mamluk
establishment in 1250. I doubt that the military will surrender power
anytime soon. Maybe, they will settle for a “Turkish” solution in which
secular democracy in law is guaranteed in fact by the military which
checks fundamentalist Islamic legislative impulses.

There will be huge
demonstrations of joy at Mubarak’s resignation. Urban Egypt,
constituting 43% of Egypt’s population, will come to a standstill. Yet,
Egypt is in a vice. Mubarak’s departure has no impact on the price of
bread or jobs and the new military junta is simply the transient
acceptable face of the old order.

Egypt has begun to write another chapter in Islamic democracy. We
shall learn whether that chapter is imbued with religious tolerance for
all! In the meantime, congratulations to the valiant youth of Egypt.

Events have
occurred in the third estate about which it is as difficult to speak,
as it is to remain silent. While the movement of the president of the
Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami, to the Supreme Court may have been
halted by the National Judicial Council, in the fallout from his
rejection of the ‘promotion’, a can of judicial worms has been opened.

Certainly the
explanation given by PCA Salami for the lack of love between himself
and the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Aloysius Katsina-Alu, namely that he
resisted the CJN’s attempt to influence the composition of the panel to
hear the Sokoto gubernatorial appeal and/or its outcome cannot be swept
under the carpet. The reported decision of the NJC mandating former
PCA, Justice Umaru Abdullahi, to intervene in the matter may settle the
personal difficulties which have arisen between the two protagonists,
but it is not only personal feelings that have been injured.

PCA Salami’s
assertion that CJN Katsina-Alu (who allegedly ascribed his desire to
influence the Sokoto decision to the concerns of the Sultan of Sokoto)
eventually had his own way by dint of simply hijacking the case to the
Supreme Court and having the matter decided as he wished there, raises
frightening implications for the administration of justice in general
and any adjudication arising from the coming elections in particular.

It is too late
now, to protest that the judiciary should not wash its dirty linen in
public for fear of losing the people’s confidence or, as the NJC put
it, undermining the integrity of the judiciary. The truth is that
public confidence is already shot to pieces, and when the stench of
unwashed linen is strong enough to reach public nostrils, secret
laundering may not be enough to convince nose-holding citizens that any
cleansing has really taken place.

What is more, the
constitutional amendment, which made the Supreme Court the final court
for gubernatorial election petitions, was already a slap on the face of
judicial integrity. It can hardly be denied that the move to prevent
the Court of Appeal having the last say in non-presidential election
petitions arose directly from of lack of confidence in the quality of
decisions emanating from that court at a time when the Supreme Court
was riding high in public estimation because of its decision which
allowed Atiku Abubakar to contest the 2007 presidential elections, and
Rotimi Amaechi’s case over the Peoples Democratic Party gubernatorial
primaries in Rivers State among others.

Now it is the
Court of Appeal that is riding high with the fickle public because the
INEC-declared winners of the governorship elections in Edo, Ondo, Ekiti
and Osun States have all been removed by its decisions.

The stock, clichéd
response to such developments are platitudes about how ‘the judiciary
is the last hope of the common man’, as though the gubernatorial
gladiators were indeed ‘common men’, or as though – even if they truly
represented the hopes and aspirations of the common people as expressed
in votes cast – the judiciary could do anything to realise the common
people’s hopes without the costly mobilisation needed to bring those
aspirations to judicial notice.

What this chopping
and changing from preferring one court to the other really says is that
our judicial institutions have dwindled into personal fiefdoms in which
the public can have confidence (or not) only on the basis of whichever
personality is in charge. This is as unfair to the majority of men and
women who make up those institutions as it is to the Nigerian people
who – not having their judges selected on the basis of their political
views, or their position on hot-button issues as for example in the
United States of America – are entitled to repose confidence in any
judge before whom matters are brought for adjudication, expecting that
appellate courts will intervene only to correct lower courts’ errors of
law or fact, not because they want to achieve political goals or serve
the interests of persons – no matter how highly placed – who are
outside the judiciary.

Even if the
elections were conducted perfectly (and we are far from certain that
they will be perfect) litigation is likely to ensue. When that happens,
Nigerians will expect Attahiru Jega’s Independent National Electoral
Commission not to play the same role that Maurice Iwu’s INEC played in
regard to election petitions that arose from the 2007 elections, where,
instead of remaining an impartial umpire, INEC descended as a combatant
into the arena of contest, defending results that were not just false,
but ridiculously so in situations where even political parties would
blush to defend them.

Uprightness and
transparency by INEC in declaring results and its response to any
post-election litigation may limit the scope for any impure judicial
actions, yet Nigerians are entitled to feel aggrieved that we must now
suspect that there might be such impurity. However, against a
background of such suspicions, the ‘common man’ had better think on. He
may put a modicum (or huge great dollops) of hope in INEC or the
judiciary. But divine intervention apart, his last hope is, and has
always been, his strong right arm.