Nigeria Content Online

Nuhu Ribadu, the
presidential candidate of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), was
reported last week by NEXT to have said: “They have damaged my
candidacy”. He was, among other things, speaking from the pit of his
despair as he imagined that, given his handling of the coalition talks,
some of his followers could have started feeling that he was not the
messiah they had been expecting. Mr Ribadu’s candidacy and indeed his
political career have been dented. But does Mr Ribadu’s expression of
despair suggest that he is looking for repair through a helpful
discourse strategy?

In his rhetoric of
blame, Mr Ribadu does things with pronouns, holding others responsible
for the perceived damage, probably hoping that he could, in the process,
begin to repair the perceived damage. His use of the third person
pronoun “they” in his statement quoted by NEXT suggests avoiding being
specific on those responsible for this damage. Does that translate to
being very clever and cautious? At first consideration, yes, but that
manner of blaming could also backfire.

The pronoun “they”
is exophoric and vague in Ribadu’s assertion cited above: it points
outside the text of his proclamation, unlike its endophoric use which
points to a specific antecedent in the same or preceding statement.
Grammarians tell us that pronouns are deictic elements (and deixis are
those linguistic elements that point to aspects of situation – entities,
time setting, and space – in a discourse). Discourse analysts also take
the significance of pronouns further and draw our attention to the fact
that people use these elements in their encoding of power, negotiations
of solidarity, as well as practices of exclusion and assimilation. The
bad news is that segments of the public that are addressed may not be
aware of the politics that political public speakers sometimes play with
pronouns. Who says that the linguistic side of political education is
not what a politician could be uncomfortable with, given the fact that
it exposes rather than conceals?

The plural third
person pronoun ‘they’ not only suggests that the destroyers of Ribadu’s
candidacy are legion, but also implies a Them-versus-Us imagination
associated with Homo hostilis, the enemy-making mammal. The Homo
hostilis does not take blame or responsibility for the consequences of
its actions. No; it is the bad guys (who are on the other side) that are
responsible for the misfortune. The Homo hostilis is a saint and, in
Ribadu’s travails, has no hand in the damaging of his own political
ambition. So, we are invited to sympathise with this victim who is a
good guy. If we don’t, we become bad guys automatically, and join in the
damaging job.

Of course, in some
cultural contexts in Nigeria, individuals could sometimes reinvent the
pronoun ‘they’ as a device for suggesting politeness in discourse when
the referent is a singular individual that possesses a higher social
status, something similar to the French use of “vous” in encoding
respect for a singular addressee. The pronoun thus might be used as a
way of avoiding being specific in making reference. In other words, one
simply attributes the action or experience to a vague ‘they’ when one is
afraid or cannot defend an attribution to a specific agency.

I am inclined to
look beyond Ribadu’s rhetoric of blame, which the proclamation “They
have damaged my candidacy” entails, to identify him as the one to be
blamed for allowing himself to be outsmarted by lobbyists of the
coalition arrangement. Someone like him who wishes to rule Nigeria
should know that he is entering into an arena where motives do not have
to be placed like cards on the negotiation table. It would be an
exhibition of naivety for Ribadu to be in the midst of political wolves
and be talking of “selflessness” and “truth”. Those words, even if they
are still in the dictionary of modern politics, are only used in this
“new” context in which Ribadu is featuring in totally different senses.
Our presidential candidate needs to know that when his fellow Nigerian
politicians say “come”, he should prepare to take to his heels! If he is
telling us that “they” have damaged his political ambition, then he is
confessing that he is simply immature and needs to take some lessons
from veterans. Ribadu needs to put idealism aside and become a better
fox if he wants to rule Nigeria.

Indeed, by putting the blame on others, he continues the damage to
both his ethos (character) and to his ability to manage how he cognises
and speaks about relationships in political transactions. Nigeria’s
journey to genuine democracy is implicitly a school where Nigerian
politicians can learn how to speak and act in the presence of others,
and about others. It invites them to grow in and with the process.

It is not a
peculiar conundrum – many of my friends and associates are, like me,
yet undecided. To be sure, this pondering is the exclusive preserve of
a band of us who take ourselves way too seriously. Most of the voting
population has made up its mind. Still, my one vote, that one decision,
I insist on prizing highly.

We have a decidedly
uninspired (not necessary uninspiring) field of candidates. Yes, people
are passionate about many of them – but ask for the specifics and you
are likely, like I have found, to draw a blank.

Let’s take the
putative social media favourite – Buhari-Bakare – for instance. Sadly,
I find their campaign standoffish and self-involved. I find that the
two flagbearers make statements that don’t quite pan out with their
reality. I also find it difficult to live with their inability – or
unwillingness – to engage a wider field of interest groups and to
engage the media on anything but their terms. However, a mentor
recently made an eminently fine case for that ticket – it is the one
ticket not beholden to any narrow or special interest. It is the one
most uncomfortable with establishment, does not benefit from it, and is
angry enough to actually restructure our politics so that it begins to
benefit the people. Thus, tomorrow, I might hold my nose and jump on
that radical train.

Then there is the
president, Goodluck Jonathan – whom I had seriously considered voting
for as early as October last year. He has opened up several democratic
spaces in a way that has never been done before – opening up lines to
civil society, youth, entertainment and the arts in a way that no other
government has found important. He has actually brought government
closer to the people without a fear of demystification. I find that
thoroughly exciting. I am also privileged to have interviewed him
recently, and I came off thoroughly impressed with him as a person: he
revealed, in our off-record conversation, a man I would be comfortable
with as a leader. Unfortunately, too many of his actions, from his
refusal to attend the debates to the failure of any considerable power
reform, have created too many doubts in my mind.

In addition, there
is the matter of the PDP. Like I asked him, it does appear that his
party is wired against change. I am as interested in who will be
president as I am in the people around him. And I haven’t seen any
willingness yet to rein those elements in. It worries me, and I will
sleep tonight with that worry.

Three weeks ago,
after his performance at the debates, Ibrahim Shekarau became my
option, in principle. All I had left to convince me was to ask my
friends who know Kano, the state he currently governs. The verdict is
not good at all. The words don’t match the actions. Very sad. Very,
very sad.

On Nuhu Ribadu, one
line will suffice. I have listened to his interviews, his debates, and
his other public statements – and I look forward to seeing Fola Adeola
at the top of the ticket come 2015.

No candidate, of
course, can be perfect. I know that, trust me. But of the four major
candidates (going by polls and news commentary) the imperfections
threaten to swallow their essence.

What is a young man to do come Saturday? I just might vote for Pat
Utomi. He might have willingly taken himself out of the running, but
perhaps I want to be able to sleep with the satisfaction of knowing
that, strong candidate or not, I made the vote for the hand that I
truly, honestly believe is the most capable of understanding the
challenges of our complex nation, and following through with
prescriptions that will set it aright. I still have 24 hours to decide.
So, I suspect, do you.

In a brilliant piece of investigative journalism, 234next
exposed an oil corruption scandal linked to the minister of Oil and Petroleum,
Diezeani Allison-Maduekwe. The nature of
the scam in itself is a Nigerian cliché; collection of bribes for access to
services and resources, in this case, the right to import oil. It plays out like a broken
record.

A bogus company manned by the unassuming Mr. Rufai, is set-up to
collect payments from oil marketers, like Conoil, Oando e.t.c to the tune
of $8 per metric tonne, and then funnel the funds upwards. Perhaps, what’s most shocking about these allegations are rumors that the bribes go
from Mr. Rufai, to Allison-Maduekwe are channeled towards the President,
Goodluck Jonathan’s re-election campaign.
The funds total a haul of about N2.2 billion.

I continue to be alarmed at the impunity with which these
scams are conducted. To me, it shows one of two things; firstly,
that our lawmakers live above the law. One would think in light of recent
EFCC activities, and in a democratic government, such thinking would have
ebbed. The second, and perhaps more dangerous scenario, is that our
lawmakers are so incompetent, they cannot do the due diligence necessary
to plan and execute a proper scam. This is most evident is how easily
accessible to Mr. Rufai was to reporters, and the close degree of
separation between the bogus company and the oil ministry. In reality, if these
allegations are true, then it will probably prove to be a combination of
the above two points- of a blatant disregard for the justice system and
managerial incompetence.

We have had similar exposes air out the dirty laundry of
leaders in the past. How many times have we seen the initial public
outcry for justice and accountability become muffled by an ineffective
justice system. Enter exhibit-A: video evidence that captures the face of
corruption. Certainly even our justice system cannot botch this case with
evidence of corruption so glaring. Having said that, there is still work to be
done to prove a solid link between Rufai and Allison-Maduekwe and perhaps
Aso Rock.

If Allison-Maduekwe is indeed innocent, she must react
swiftly to investigate this scam and aid that the perpetuators are
brought to justice. The credibility of the most lucrative ministry
in Nigeria and indeed the presidency is being called into question. For
the president, this news comes out at an unfortunate time, with the
elections barely two weeks away and PDP suffering humbling losses at the
parliamentary elections. If the uproar catches on among voters, then
maybe there’s a bit of bad luck for Mr. Goodluck in the horizon.

Nigeria will vote a president into
power over the next few days and the key determinant of people’s
choices will be based on the analysis of the fundamental challenge of
this greatly loved and often vilified country. For many who believe her
problem is corruption and indiscipline, they will choose Muhammadu
Buhari, a retired general, an honest and strict man who oversaw the
worst drop in the country’s economic history and ran one of its most
authoritarian dictatorships. For those who see the key challenge as
generational, they are most likely to cast their vote for Nuhu Ribadu,
a post-independence poster child who ran one of the most successful
interventions against corruption even though many saw him as just a
political attack dog. For those who want to end the irrational and
badly engineered hegemony of tribal as well as sectional majorities,
well, the current president is their choice. Then you have the
articulate Ibrahim Shekarau who seems to have captured those who want
someone with the presidential command of an audience or subject.

As we look at the rest of the world
days before this election, however, what lessons do the challenges and
standards raised and flying across the Middle East teach the Nigerian
voter? What lessons are emerging at the beginning of the second decade
of the 21st century? What is clear is that the 21st century abhors
hierarchy. It is also not impressed about the size and range of your
hardware. The 21st century is power ‘with’; rather than power ‘over’.
The transformation of Nigeria will not be done in Aso Rock or even in
the respective state houses, but in the shacks, face me-I face yous,
bungalows and duplexes of the 28 million Nigerian families. So how do
our presidential candidates fare as 21st century leaders who can enable
Nigerians to transform their country?

On economy

The Buhari/CPC
manifesto is the most specific and detailed on the economy, and has key
highlights especially integrating the informal economy as well as
reform of the Land Use Act, both of which can be transformational. The
Ribadu principle of creating macroeconomic discipline is similar to the
Jonathan approach, both are broad brushed and appear transactional,
however, therein lies the challenge. The Buhari principle assumes that
government has power over the economy rather than creating the climate
to enable the private sector. On the other hand, the Ribadu and
Jonathan principles are more focused on the enabling environment.

On corruption

The Ribadu
manifesto is the most transformative, recognising implicitly the issue
of equality of opportunity and the need for a system of creating value
over a concentration on the efficient and transparent distribution that
underpins both the Jonathan and Buhari outlooks. The Ribadu manifesto
looks at corruption as a challenge, not just in government but in all
sectors of society, and commits to enabling a value creation culture
that will open up responsibility. Of the three, Ribadu has the track
record for the best intervention against corruption in Nigeria.

On power

The Ribadu
manifesto is by far the clearest statement, setting out an agenda for
capacity improvement and the increase in energy sources. It
specifically engages the longer term and sustainable needs of Nigeria.
The Jonathan manifesto is short on facts but maybe relies on the energy
policy of the government which recognises the role of the private
sector as does the Ribadu position. The Buhari manifesto is focused
solely on increased capacity with a broad statement on alternative
energies.

All the manifestos
ignore the most sustained and profound trend in the Nigerian landscape
— the issue of urban migration or urbanisation and its implications for
the future. It currently grows at about twice the rate of population
growth, i.e. 2.8 percent per annum population growth and 5.8 percent
urban population growth. They also ignore the unsustainable nature of
the population growth and its effect on the ability to provide quality
life.

On women

Far more revealing
is their position on women’s development. Jonathan’s plan is totally
silent on women’s issues or their special role in transforming the
country. In the Buhari manifesto, it appears women are an afterthought.
It essentially guarantees that women have their constitutional rights
and representation. The Ribadu manifesto puts the women’s agenda at the
top of their list, setting out the implementation of all international
commitments to the development and transformation of the lives of
women. It is also the only manifesto that gives specific focus to the
majority of the Nigerians — the young people.

The presidency of
the Federal Republic of Nigeria is not a place for temper tantrums. It
is a sacred role to enable the dreams of nearly 150 million Nigerians
for a society in which they can pursue prosperity. The challenge is to
find the leader who recognises we need authoritative engagement, not
authoritarian pronouncements; that inspires ownership not encouraging
dependency; one that understands that it is ultimately to share in our
power, not have power over us.

Adewale Ajadi writes from Ibadan.

Libya, a sprawling
country of sand and oil on the edge of the Mediterranean, has always
held out some lessons for the African continent. One of the richest
countries on the continent, it was also one of the most stable;
although its leader, Muammar Gaddafi, has always been drawn to
intervene in several countries on the continent. Now, the country has
become another in a long list of African countries pulled apart by
internal conflict and primordial allegiances.

Mr Gaddafi, in turns an Arab or African nationalist, is a maverick leader that has ruled his country unchallenged for upwards of 40 years. The man who survived the Cold War battles with the West would have continued to enjoy his job but for the sudden outbreak of a wave of antiauthoritarian protests that has rocked the Arab world since January.

Although the protesters were able to sweep away long-ruling leaders in Egypt and Tunisia, they ran into difficulties in Libya, Algeria, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain. Somehow, the Libyan unrest degenerated
into a civil war — largely on the back of the singleminded
crackdown on the protesters by the Libyan government, and the decision of the opposition to seek an armed response to their yearning to remove Mr Gaddafi from power.

Displacing the Libyan regime was a hard task for the rebel fighters, and on the back of reports of possible massacre of rebel forces and civilians in the towns they controlled, and tough-sounding words from Mr Gaddafi and his sons about the fate that would befall unrepentant rebels, the West put together an armed intervention in the country to, as the United Nations Security Council puts it, “protect the civilian population” of Libya.

The international military force,deployed despite protests from the African Union, has indeed dropped a lot of bombs to degrade the military capacity of the Libyan defence forces. It has also bolstered the cause of the rebels who are now being feted in several European and Arab capitals as the authentic leaders of the Libyan people although they have been constantly beaten down by the more professional Libyan army which has largely stayed loyal to the Gaddafi regime.

The situation in Libya is, therefore, one of an unsustainable stalemate. On one side is the Libyan government — still strong
despite international isolation and attacks by foreign forces; on the other side are the rebels, weak and rancorous, but enjoying
international support and acclaim. No wonder the group has been the most rigid in its demands regarding the best solution
to the impasse.
Several meetings had, indeed been held in Europe and the Middle East —another one is ongoing in Qatar — to resolve the crisis.
But unless the east-west division in the country is allowed to gradually become defacto, it is hard to see any meeting of minds unless a massive military force is brought to bear on either of the two sides. And even that, as NATO leaders have warned, might not be enough to unify the country around
another leader.

The African Union, after widespread condemnation over its slow response to the crisis, has tentatively made efforts to bring back peace to Libya. Early in the
week, a group of African leaders led by the president of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, were in the country to meet with Libyan government officials in Tripoli and the rebel leadership in Benghazi. They had more success during the Tripoli meeting. Mr Gaddafi accepted to abide by the road map prepared by the African
Union to assist Libya towards lasting peace and democracy.

The roadmap basically calls for the immediate cessation of all hostilities;
cooperation of the competent Libyan authorities to facilitate the timely delivery of humanitarian assistance to the needy populations; protection of foreign nationals, including the African migrants living in Libya; and the adoption and implementation of the political reforms necessary for the elimination of the causes of the current crisis.
The rebels, possibly thinking that the AU does not really have much clout,
rejected the roadmap, insisting that Mr Gaddafi must first leave before any discussion could take place with the rump of his administration. Their position tallies with that of France and Britain. But unless these countries are willing to commit troops to actualise their wish, it is hard to see how that will happen.

Meanwhile, the war attrition continues killing people, ruining lives, destroying
the country’s infrastructure and hardening emotions on both sides of the conflict. Since negotiations are about give and take, it would not do to set hard rules about the outcome before they get started. Ironically, the European Union has significant experience in this line of work. Its officials might
share this with their military counterparts in NATO.

All schools were
closed down. No form of teaching or learning took place for the
duration. When it was discovered that the private school the
president’s children attend did not close down along with others,
public outcry forced it to close down also. After the initial two
weeks, an extension was sought and granted. So for an entire month, all
primary and secondary schools in the whole country were shut. Even in
tertiary institutions, not much activity took place.

In that one-month
period, every Nigerian aged 18 and above was practically drafted to put
down their names and fingerprints at various centres. Government said
it was a civic duty. Preachers harangued citizens on the need to
perform this divinely ordained responsibility. Parties tried every
trick known and unknown to get people to these centres. Civil society
groups made sure they were not left out and they shouted loudly on the
need for citizens to participate in the noble exercise. Public holidays
were declared in several states to ensure that the details of all
eligible citizens were captured. Sophisticated digital equipment, worth
over USD 500 million, were imported. At the end of one month of frantic
activity, including a week’s extension, over 73 million gallant
Nigerians had voluntarily participated in the noble cause.

D-Day

The nation’s land,
air and sea borders are closed. All flights are grounded. Movement
within cities and towns is restricted. Interstate travel is forbidden.
An explosion in the outskirts of the capital leaves about 20 people
dead and many more injured. Another explosion in a far north-east city
leaves about five people dead and several injured. There is sporadic
gunfire in many towns. Gunfights break out, leaving many people dead.
The whole country is awash with firearms. There is fear of violence in
the air.

There is palpable
tension everywhere. International monitoring groups and other observers
are moving about from one location to another trying to ascertain the
state of things. There are roadblocks manned by fierce-looking
policemen every few streets. The military is out in force. Armoured
personnel carriers can be seen at strategic locations. It seems that
everybody that ever wore any form of uniform, albeit decades ago, is
wearing the uniform and strutting about. The economy shuts down
completely; hardly anything can be bought or sold and most services are
severely curtailed.

The currency is
under tremendous strain. Some $22 billion from the Excess Crude Account
set up as a stabilisation fund is said to have been withdrawn. A major
newspaper reports this story: “In a move targeted at meeting dealers’
rising appetite for forex as … draws nearer, the Central Bank of
Nigeria (CBN) has increased its supply of dollar at the bi-weekly
Wholesale Dutch Auction System (WDAS) to $600 million. The regulator
had raised its supply to $400 million at its March 14 auction, from
between $200 and $300 million, which it had offered at various auctions
in the preceding month. Dealers attributed the trend to panic over the
outcome of the forthcoming….” In every nook and corner, people are
gathered together in groups whispering all sorts of news and looking
anxiously over their shoulders. No one is sure of what is really
happening, so the rumour mill begins work overtime. This group will
conquer the southwest and make inroads into the north central. That
group will march into the government houses of this and that state. No,
it has a splinter group that has vowed not to rest until they drive
their ‘enemies’ out of town.

There is talk of
multifaceted campaigns, strategies and conquests. Popular language on
the streets is “no retreat, no surrender until we capture that zone”.
“We will defeat them, bring them to Abuja and lock them up” is what I
heard some people whispering. Other people are told “the outcome of
this struggle will determine what happens to your life and that of your
children; you must be vigilant”. “We will protect our mandates and
fight to the finish to ensure that we break the chains of injustice and
oppression that must not be allowed….” Prayers are offered in mosques
and churches. Some groups embark on fervent fasting. The president
attends midnight prayer sessions and seeks prayers for victory. Prayer
warriors of all faiths are engaged in frantic appeal to the Almighty to
ensure that victory is certain….

This setting is not
in Côte d’Ivoire. The scene is not from Libya. And, no, the country is
neither being invaded nor has it declared war.

It is election time in Nigeria.

Afghanistan.
Bosnia. Haiti. Liberia. Rwanda. Sierra Leone. Southern Sudan, Timor
Leste. Iraq. Although each is different, they have all struggled to
move beyond conflict and fragility to secure development. Paul
Collier’s book The Bottom Billion highlighted their recurrent cycles of
dangers. Not one low income country coping with fragility or conflict
has yet achieved a single Millennium Development Goal.

These countries
stir our shared interests and values. They have called on soldiers and
monies from countries that have then struggled to counter violence that
overflows the borders of fragile states, because conflicts feed on
narcotics, piracy, and gender violence, and leave refugees and broken
infrastructure in their wake. Their territories can become breeding
grounds for far-reaching networks of violent radicals and organized
crime.

Yet as we are now
seeing again in the Middle East and North Africa, violence in the 21st
Century differs from 20th Century patterns of interstate conflict and
methods of addressing them. Stove-piped government agencies have been
ill-suited to cope, even when national interests or values prompt
political leaders to act. To offer some ideas and practical
recommendations, the World Bank Group is releasing a World Development
Report, “Conflict, Security, and Development” that looks across
disciplines and experiences drawn from around the world.

As the Report makes
clear, the old ways won’t work. The overriding objective is to build
legitimate institutions that can provide a sustained level of citizen
security, justice, and jobs. Progress in these core areas, and
coordination among the activities, build a foundation for broader and
better change. At the earliest stages, countries need to restore public
confidence in basic collective action before even rudimentary
institutions can be built or transformed.

A fragile state
cannot restore confidence through government alone. It needs to build
cooperative, “inclusive-enough” coalitions drawing on groups that bring
political legitimacy, financial and technical resources, and which will
continue to press for deeper institutional transformation. These may
include business, labor, women’s or other civil society groups. The
push for inclusion need not include every group. And inclusion needs to
be balanced with efficiency, results, and – where it is important to
signal a break with the past — justice and legitimacy.

Early wins –
actions that can generate quick, tangible results – are critical to
building confidence that will enable the extension of national capacity
over time. In Kosovo, highway security paved the way to increased trade
and consequently jobs. In Liberia, basic improvements in security and
electricity, along with steps against corruption, were central. These
quick successes must be compatible with, rather than undermine,
longer-term efforts to strengthen institutions. If services and public
works are delivered only through well-meaning international partners or
top-down national programs, the country will not build the local
institutions or support that are key to sustaining recovery through
inevitable challenges and changing conditions.

Early wins also
need to be pragmatic “best-fit” reforms that allow for flexibility and
innovation; they need to adapt to local conditions rather than being
technically perfect. In some cases, “best-fit” may entail “second best”
implications. A good example is Lebanon’s decision to rely on small
private sector networks of providers to restore electricity following
the civil war – a tradeoff between using a non-governmental capacity
with high unit costs but getting fast results.

International
agencies and partners from other countries must adapt procedures so
that assistance can be swift enough to provide for early wins and
pragmatic enough to allow for best-fit reforms. Integrated assistance,
especially through multi-donor trust funds, enables countries with weak
capacity to connect help to priorities, reinforce mutual gains across
topics, and build national ownership. Coordinated international help is
vital to counter external stresses that can fuel fragility and
violence, such as trafficking and illicit financial flows, food
insecurity and resource shocks.

We also need to
fill in major structural gaps. There are places where fragile states
can seek help to build an army, but not police forces or corrections
systems (although the UN has had an initial trial). The World Bank
could help by doing more to build civilian justice systems. We also
need to place more emphasis on early projects to create jobs,
especially through the private sector. We need a better “handoff”
between humanitarian and development agencies, too. All these projects
involve risks. If legislatures and inspectors expect only the upside,
and just pillory the failures, institutions will steer away from the
most difficult problems or strangle themselves with procedures and
committees to avoid responsibility.

Lastly, we need to
be realistic: historically, even the fastest transformations have taken
a generation. New technologies may accelerate the timeline, either
through improved service delivery options (such as using cell phones to
deliver payments) or greater transparency and access to information
through social networking (as we have seen most recently in the Middle
East). But we still need to measure progress in terms of decades rather
than years. Even at this pace, the results can make a huge difference.

Robert B. Zoellick is the president of the World Bank Group

Along with the
power and the rail systems, there is little disagreement among
Nigerians that the education sector is in the doldrums and needs an
urgent and sustained heavy government rescue intervention. Most
employers or office managers are daily confronted with this reality in
their dealings with barely literate subordinates. For those who don’t,
the yearly ritual of wailing whenever any of the nation’s three post
secondary examination bodies release the results of their exams should
be no less educating.

Government
officials have also always made the right noises. In early 1998, during
the 45th meeting of the National Education Council (NEC) held in
Kastina, the minister of education at the time exhorted participants to
find a solution to the parlous state of the sector.

Talking about the
extent of the rot in the sector, he listed some of the symptoms to
include, among others, decline in standards, deterioration of
facilities, examination malpractices, mass promotion syndrome and the
poor results churned out year in, year out.

The figures are
sobering. In 2010, for instance, the West African Examination Council
(WAEC) results showed that only 24.9 percent of the candidates that sat
for the exam obtained five credits, including Mathematics and English
Language. In 2009, the figure was 25.99 percent. The results had
fluctuated from 23 percent pass in 2008; 21 percent in 2009 and 20
percent in 2010.

Many factors have
been posited as responsible. Examination malpractices, along with poor
preparation of students for an examination, is seen by experts as both
an outcome and a cause of the problems in the nation’s education
sector. This is cumulative in effect and often, it takes years for the
malaise to become obvious.

Aside from these
factors, the problem posed by the poor management of educational
institutions in the country, both public and private, is also
disturbing. A close assessment of activities in schools has revealed
that students are made to suffer undue amounts of exploitation by
school heads in the name of enrolment fees and assurance of success in
their examinations. This is in spite of the fact that most of the
schools lack basic learning facilities and a complete set of teachers.
In some cases, a school with the services of an English Language
teacher will lack that of a Mathematics teacher. In the end, the school
engages in mass promotion of students as a way out. The effect of all
this on students is staggering.

These various
challenges confronting the nation’s education sector lead to the poor
results and consequently a low skilled workforce in every sphere of
national life. Much needs to be done in the sector, but most
initiatives are hardly carried out. The incumbent federal
administration has also launched its own. The minister of education,
Ruqayyatu Ahmed Rufa’I, is currently working on a policy of
inclusiveness – a variant of the “No child left behind” policy of the
American government.

It is early days
yet. But the disposition of the president, Goodluck Jonathan to this
issue gives some glimmer of hope that things might be different this
time – especially if the president gets the affirmation of Nigerians to
continue in office.

Mr Jonathan
admitted recently that many of the challenges confronting this nation
were because there is a lack of will on the part of those in power to
do the right thing. One of the three Es which he said his
administration would focus on is education. The other two are
electricity and electoral reforms. Education, he says, should be
promoted “as a potent instrument for the transformation of our country”.

At this point in
our nation, it is obvious that there is nowhere else a transformation
needs to take place more than in the education sector. Our political
leaders, as they win our votes to either hold on to the posts they are
occupying or assume new ones, must realise that nothing can change this
country better than the proper education of its citizens. Mr Jonathan
asked Nigerians to insist “that the right thing should be done”.
Nigerians should push for this political statement to be applied to the
nation’s education.

Joe Ikhazaboh writes from Port Harcourt

Excuse the dirt on
the floor, it’s hard to get brooms to buy in Lagos these days. No, you
don’t have to thank me for meeting with you. It was long overdue,
anyway. You are busy and I am busy, but this meeting was necessary so
we both understand one another some more. I also want you to know where
I stand because when you are peeling roasted yam for a blind man, you
have to whistle so he knows you are not eating his yam. We have
misunderstood each other so much lately, but you know how this game is
– very slippery. What can I offer you, sir? Ah no, you have to take
something. Don’t be in a big hurry. I have tuwo and fresh fish pepper
soup. I know you don’t drink, sir, but just in case, I have ogogoro and
burukutu – great stuff. I call it Merger Brew. Be careful, too much of
the drink can be a bit disruptive.

Yes, the matter at
hand. Are you in a rush? That is what I thought – it is raining
outside, so no hurry because I don’t have any umbrella in the house. I
should, right? Anyway, that is not important now; let’s get to business.

You are sweating
badly, sir; sorry, my generator cannot carry the air-conditioner. I
understand, but you need to relax. You have put up a good fight. But
wait, let me be sure my door is properly secured before we start; this
side of town is a bit seedy. You are right, there are serious security
issues in the country and people are edgy these days. So what did you
say your plans were on that? I read your manifesto quite alright, but
it was not so clear to me. What we need are not promises; we need
assurances. Okay, that is good if that is one of the reasons we are
meeting tonight. But we have many expectations and by “we”, I mean a
collective of Nigerians that have decided to take a chance on you. Save
the appreciations; we just want to make sure you do your job when you
win or else there will be consequences. You can’t even begin to imagine
what it takes us to stick out our necks for you.

Here is our list of
expectations from you. Please, we want you to give us your word that
every single one of them will be actualized. No excuses. Say that
again, sir – what do you mean you don’t understand the sentences and
the grammar of the list? Well, what you have in your hands was written
by one of the young graduates from our university. Sorry, I can’t
explain that to you – it should remind you of the dire need to
resurrect our comatose educational system as soon as you settled down.
There is nothing as volatile as a half-baked graduate.

What? You can
barely hear me? Oh, you mean the noise? Sorry, sir, it is a combination
of the multiple generators from my neighbours’ compound. No, we have
not had electricity in days. Sometimes, we go for weeks without a
flash. We generate our own light and water. You know that, right? I am
sure that is no news to you. Yeah, a state of emergency on power will
be more like it. Thank you for the promise of more megawatts but do you
know what the blind wife of a hunter said? Not until I taste my
husband’s elephant meat, I refuse to believe the villagers’ hype. Hold
on, let me put some petrol in the generator. I won’t be long. Take it
easy on my Merger Brew, sir.

Sorry about that. I
am sure you did not find the darkness funny. That is what we have to
deal with almost every night, so we are really depending on you to
change things quick. If we vote for you and we are still left in the
dark – let’s just say it won’t be business as usual because thunder can
break. So let your guys know, sir. No, I am not threatening you, sir.
We are having a civil conversation under one umbrella to figure out how
we can sweep away corruption in the power sector, right?

I am not angry. I
already told you we have decided to vote for you because we have
weighed our options and we would like to give you a shot. And if you
don’t deliver within a short period of time, we will be having this
conversation again the way my mother used to discuss with me when I did
something wrong. And I still have memories of fiery, whistling leather
belts, sir.

We are done, sir. I wish you the very best. Do you have any message
for Nigerians heading to the polls tomorrow? Say that again. You make
me laugh, sir. Some people might misinterpret that o. Okay, if those
are the only words you have for them, I have no choice, sir. I will
tell them you wish every single one of them “Good luck!”