The Eagle Gate

Tag: West-Idahosa

  • INEC IS RIGHT; IT IS END OF THE ROAD FOR RIVERS APC IN THE 2019 ELECTIONS

    INEC IS RIGHT; IT IS END OF THE ROAD FOR RIVERS APC IN THE 2019 ELECTIONS

    A few days ago, INEC categorically and publicly said that it will not change its decision to exclude Rivers State chapter of APC from participation in the 2019 general elections for the offices of Governor, National and Assembly membership. From the state of existing Court judgments, INEC was on firm ground.

    A good point to start would be the first of the legal fireworks initiated by relevant parties.

    1.     Suit No: BHC/78/2018

            Ibrahim Umah vs. APC & Ords.

    This suit was commenced at the Rivers State High Court, Port Harcourt. The Plaintiffs therein sought several reliefs. They include that Magnus Abe’s group were entitled to participate in the APC primaries, a declaration setting aside the purported primaries by the Ameachi group, injunction restraining APC from conducting any Local Government Congress based on the ward congress election purportedly conducted on May 5, 2018, declaration that the purported ward and Local Government and State congress conducted by APC in Rivers State on May 12th, 19th, 20th and 21st 2018 respectively and anything done there under are entitled to be set aside etc.

    INTERLOCUTORY ORDER

    While this case was pending, the Plaintiffs secured an interlocutory/interim order to restrain APC from proceeding with the scheduled congresses pending the determination of the matter. In spite of this order the APC went ahead with the primaries but appealed against the said interlocutory order in Appeal No: CA/PH/198/2018 to the Court of Appeal. In the cause of prosecuting this Appeal, APC applied through one of its Counsel to withdraw the Appeal by filing a Notice of withdrawal. Another Counsel of APC approached the Court of Appeal to continue with the Appeal. The Counsel to the Magnus Abe group opposed this strongly and argued that the Appeal ought to be dismissed. The Court of Appeal in Port Harcourt allowed and overruled the Abe group and continued with the Appeal. Abe’s group then appealed to the Supreme Court in Appeal No. SC. 1070/2018.

    CONTINUATION OF RIVERS STATE HIGH COURT TRIAL

    While this appeal was pending in the Supreme Court, the Rivers State High Court presided over by Hon. Nwogu delivered judgment on 10th October, 2018 in suit No: BHC/78/2018; Ibrahim Uma &Ords v. APC. The Court decided in favour of Ibrahim Uma & Ords restrained APC from conducting any primaries upon the ward congress which the Court found to have been conducted in contravention of extant laws and party Guidelines. The Court nullified all the nominations for election to the offices of Governor, National and State Assemblies on the ground that they were conducted in breach of extant court order restraining the conduct of same

    It would appear that the only appeal lodged against the Rivers State High Court judgment is the one against the order of interlocutory injunction made by that Court. No appeal was lodged against the substantive judgment itself. For all intents and purposes the Rivers State High Court judgment remains valid and unchallenged.

    SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN SC. 1070/2018

    On 8th February, 2019, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in the Appeal filed by the Abe group against the failure of the Court of Appeal to dismiss the Appeal filed by the Ameachi group, same having been withdrawn by the filing of Notice of withdrawal at the Registry of the Appeal Court. The Supreme Court held as follows at page 19 of its judgment

    It is my considered opinion that this appeal must be given a decent burial. The appeal having been withdrawn is deemed to have been dismissed. This is what the lower Court failed or evaded for reasons stated above.

    The Supreme Court’s judgment therefore strongly protected the interlocutory orders of the Rivers State High Court restraining the conduct of primaries by APC on the basis of a flawed ward congress. In any case, the said High Court gave its final judgment which eventually nullified any purported primaries for contravening valid court orders.

    2.      SUIT NO: FHC/PH/CS/149/2018

            PDP vs. INEC & APC

    Once PDP found out that the Rivers State High Courts had given judgment nullifying any purported primaries, by APC and further restraining the party from conducting any upon the flawed ward congress, PDP quickly approached the Federal High Court and sought several reliefs. They include; a declaration that all primaries conducted in Rivers State by APC, having been set aside by a competent Court, APC was not entitled to nominate or sponsor any candidate for 2019 General Elections. They sought injunction against INEC from according any recognition to purported APC candidates.

    The Federal High Court, in a judgment delivered by Justice J.K Omotosho, found for PDP and granted the reliefs sought. The Court pointed out that it was important to obey Court orders and that the defect of non-compliance was fatal.

    3.      APPEAL NO: CA/PII/38/2019

            PDP vs. INEC & APC  

    APC filed an appeal against the said judgment of the Federal High Court in the Court of Appeal. It also filed an application for stay of execution of the judgment of the Federal High Court. The said application is still pending but has been fixed for hearing same in February, 2019.

    4.      SUIT NO: FHC/PH/CS/144/2018

             Magnus Abe & Ords vs. APC & Ords

    Magnus Abe and Ords instituted the above suit against APC and Ords seeking amongst others an order of Court that they have been duly nominated to contest the various elections in 2019 general election. They also sought an order to nullify the nomination of the candidates of Ameachi’s group and an order for INEC to recognize them as the nominated candidates. In the end, the Federal High Court declared that Magnus Abe’s group were not validly nominated by APC, having failed to prove that the primaries that produced them were validly conducted. The Court held that the primaries that produced them were conducted during the pendency of Suit No BHC/78/2018, between Ibrahim Umah & Ords vs APC. The Court also held that the Magnus Abe’s group failed to show that their primaries were conducted by the national body of APC.

    The Federal High Court went further to restrain INEC from recognizing any candidate of APC contesting for the various offices in the 2019 general elections. The Court nullified the nomination of any candidate by APC for election into the said offices as earlier nullified by Nwogu .J, on 10thOctobetr, 2018 in Suit No: BHC/78/2018, Ibrahim Umah & Ords vs APC.

    5.      APPEAL NO: CA/PH/39/2019

            APC V. SEN. MAGNUS ABE & ORDS

    APC appealed against the said Federal High Court judgment in Suit No: FHC/PH/CS/144/2018. It also filed an application for stay of execution against the judgment of the Federal High Court delivered on 7th January, 2019.

    TWIST IN THE APPLICATION

    In what appears to be a costly mix-up, APC’s counsel in their prayers for stay of execution filed on 5th February, 2019, directed their relief against the judgment of the Federal High Court in Suit No: FHC/PH/149/2018; PDP v. INEC & APC which was not the subject of this appeal. The subject of this appeal was Suit NO: FHC/PH/CS/144/2018, Sen. Magnus Abe & Ords v. APC & Ords. In spite of this costly mix-up which should have led to the striking out of such application, the Court of Appeal granted the application for “Stay of Execution as Prayed”. What the Court of Appeal granted in reality were prayers in connection with another appeal between APC and PDP.

    REACTION TO COURT OF APPEAL’S MIXED-UP ORDERS

    In reaction the mixed up order of the Court of Appeal, PDP filed an application before the Court of Appeal in Appeal NO: CA/PH/38/2019; APC V. PDP & INEC praying that the Hon. Justices should recuse themselves from further hearing the appeal or participate in the hearing and determination of the said Appeal on the basis of the mixed-up order of stay of execution and a previous application made to the president of the Court of Appeal on 30th January, 2019 for the re-constitution of a fresh panel of Appeal. The said application filed on 6th February, 2019 is pending before the Court.

    CONCLUSION

    In conclusion the judgment in suit No: BHC/78/2018; Ibrahim Umah & Ords vs. APC delivered on 10th October, 2018 by the High Court of Rivers State nullifying the nominations by APC for 2019 elections remains valid and unchanged. The judgment of the Federal High Court in Suit No: FHC/CS/149/2018, PDP vs. INEC & APC delivered on 7th January, 2019 restraining INEC from recognizing any APC candidate and also nullifying all APC nominations remain valid as it has not been set aside on appeal. In addition, no valid stay of execution has been granted to warrant INEC to act on it. The judgment in Suit No: FHC/PH/CS/144/2018; Sen. Magnus Abe & Ords vs. APC & Ords which restrained INEC from recognizing any candidate of APC for 2019 elections remains valid. No valid order for stay of execution has been made against it. In any case, for INEC to validly recognize APC candidates for all positions in 2019 elections, all existing judgments must be set aside on Appeal or validly stayed.

    So far, this has not been so. It appears that nothing can be done about the Rivers State High Court judgment in Suit No: BHC/78/2018 Ibrahim Umah & Ords vs. APC which has no appeal against it and there cannot be one anymore having regards to the period allowed by law to appeal against same. It can therefore be safely concluded that the iron curtain has been closed on APC with respect to fielding candidates for 2019 general elections with respect to Rivers State.

    My humble opinion

    Dr. Ehiogie WEST-Idahosa

  • ONNOGHEN’S SUSPENSION; LET THE RULE OF LAW PREVAIL

    ONNOGHEN’S SUSPENSION; LET THE RULE OF LAW PREVAIL


    Is the CJN exempted from the presumption of innocence guaranteed by our laws? Is the CJN’s appointment not clothed with statutory flavor? If you cannot sack a clerk in a Government Department outside the provisions prescribed by his terms of employment/ public service rules, I wonder why the CJN should be removed from office like a feather from a chicken! If it’s that simple, there would have been no need for constitutional provisions in that regard! Why then did Baron Montesquieu and his likes labour to develop the political theory of separation of powers? Why is it now an elementary feature in the constitutional democracy of most countries of the world?

    According to Dylan Matthews in his article dated 5/10/18 and titled; IMPEACHING A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES;

    “Impeachment and removal of a federal judge, including a Supreme Court justice, requires meeting a high political bar. Just as with presidents, a majority of the House must approve an indictment to impeach, and a two-thirds supermajority of the US Senate must convict for the judge or justice to lose their office.”

    I am surprised that a lot of people continue to refer to the allegations against the CJN without considering the procedure prescribed by law to deal with certain category of persons accused of any infraction of the law. I have argued on many occasions that the law itself is a prisoner of procedure. It is illogical to focus on the substantive law which creates, defines and regulates the duties, liabilities and rights of persons while disregarding the procedural law for enforcing civil and criminal law. This does not add up. For example, can you safely convict a man for an offence having not taken his plea before trial? I think not.

    I am still at a loss as to how a court of law or an inferior Tribunal like the Code of Conduct Tribunal can grant an ex-parte order on a date unknown to all parties, following a purported ex-parte application in respect of a subject matter which the same body adjourned to a future date for arguments to be taken from the respective parties as agreed in open court.

    Why would an inferior Tribunal not obey the restraining orders of separate superior court of records which restrained it from continuing with the proceedings before it? Nothing in the Constitution makes CCT a superior court of records and the Supreme Court affirmed this in Saraki vs FRN (2016) 3 NWLR( Pt. 1500) 531.

    Why will the CCT not respect the proceedings pending before the court of appeal to which appeals from CCT lie?

    In the operational system of the rule of law, the courts and judges remain the tonic from which the law itself is nourished. Let me fizzle out any doubt about the power of the courts by referring to the words of the legendary American Supreme Court judge and scholar, Oliver Wendell Holmes, jrn. The learned jurist in his work; The Common Law, (1881) had this to say;

    “The decisions of judges, viewed over time, determined the rules of conduct, the legal duties, by which all were bound.”

    He did not stop there. In his work; The path of the law (1897), he went further to say that;

    “[T]he prophecies of what the courts will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious, are what I mean by the law.”[20]:458.

    Against this background, can it be said that the CCT was right to have disregarded pending litigation in the courts of our country which have constitutional duties to determine disputes between persons and Government? The answer in my opinion is no.

    No sensible person can be opposed to the lawful trial of anyone, no matter how highly placed if there is an allegation of infringing the law against such a person. The very strong point being made here is very simple; where there is a constitutional method set out for sanctioning a judicial office holder which has over time being recognized by the courts of law, such judicial officer cannot be removed by any other means other than that prescribed by law.

    In the circumstances, the CCT was wrong to have made the ex-parte order under reference. If the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation facilitated this type of order, then it acted infra dig. The President was also wrong to have acted on it. The proper thing to do now is for the aggrieved party to get the court of Appeal to set that unlawful ex-parte order aside forthwith and let the status quo be returned in our national interest. That would not stop the Government from prosecuting the CJN upon the charges brought against him as long as they do so appropriately.

    God bless Nigeria!

    Dr. West-Idahosa.

  • ONNOGHEN’S CASE; PROF. SAGAY GOT IT WRONG:

    ONNOGHEN’S CASE; PROF. SAGAY GOT IT WRONG:

    The views expressed by Prof. Sagay on this matter is in the public domain. In disagreement with those views, the following opinion is herein expressed.

    The CJN is specifically a judicial officer and a public officer in general. If he breaches his oath of office contained in the 7th Schedule, which includes compliance with the 5th Schedule of the Constitution dealing with declaration of assets, he is guilty of misconduct as a judicial officer. No question about that. In which case, he ought to face NJC first before being tried by any other body. By the powers vested in NJC by the 3rd Schedule, it can deal with all matters relating to broad issues of policy and administration. NJC ,has pursuant to its powers, made very elaborate rules to deal with all sorts of misconduct by judicial officers. CJN cannot be an exception to those rules as he is a judicial officer.

    Such matters include compliance with extant laws, code of conduct of judicial officers and matters bothering on administration of justice. However, non-related crime is excluded. A non related crime is one that does not flow from the occupation of office as CJN. For example, murder, arson etc. Unequivocally, the duty to declare asset as CJN flows from occupation of that office. A good question to ask at this stage is whether Hon. Justice Onnoghen would have been ordinarily required to declare his assets, if he did not occupy the office of CJN or that of a Supreme Court judge? The answer in my view is no. The argument that asset declaration is for all public officers and that it is therefore unnecessary for NJC to wade into it, is illogical and ought to be rejected.

    The provisions of the 3rd and 5th Schedules of the Constitution are not in conflict. There is nothing in the 5th Schedule which precludes NJC from lodging a complaint of breach of the code of conduct against a judicial officer to the Code of Conduct Bureau. The provisions of the said two Schedules of the Constitution under reference ought to be read together and not in isolation of each other. This is necessary as a breach of the code of conduct is also a judicial misconduct. Whether the allegation against a judicial officer is one of bribery or failure to abide by the oath of office, it is within the competence of NJC. No rocket science is needed to appreciate this.

    It has been suggested that if NJC were to dismiss a judicial officer for misconduct, the officer ceases to be a public officer and cannot be prosecuted for breach of code of conduct applicable to public officers. This is most misconceived. The material period in the application of statutes for purposes of imposing sanction for such breaches is the period when the infraction occurred. If the offender was in public service when he committed the breach, then subsequent dismissal from service cannot preclude him from facing trial before the code of conduct for such breach. Certain misconduct can attract both a trial for breach of the code of conduct before the Tribunal and dismissal in accordance with due process. Why are the likes of Dasuki and other former officers still standing trial on allegations of corruption? Are they still in public service?

    Prof. Sagay is entitled to his opinion, but on this occasion, the one he rendered appears patronizing and cannot be the correct position of the law in view of existing judicial decisions of courts of superior records in similar matters.

    Dr. Ehiogie West-Idahosa.

  • FORMER HOUSE OF REPS MEMBER DRAGS SAN TO COURT FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE

    FORMER HOUSE OF REPS MEMBER DRAGS SAN TO COURT FOR PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE

    Hon. Austin Nwachukwu, a former member of the House of Reps from Imo State has sued Chief Chukwuma Ekomaru, SAN in the High Court of FCT for gross professional negligence in failing to sign the Writ of Summons with which the said SAN instituted an action against ARIK AIR in Abuja High Court on behalf of Hon. Nwachukwu.

    In suit no CV/073/18 filed for the plaintiff by the Law Firm of West-Idahosa & Co, the plaintiff is claiming against the Defendant several reliefs, including a declaration that the Defendant breached his duty of care to him by not exercising reasonable care in failing to sign the Writ of Summons filed in court on plaintiff’s behalf and for which reason the Court of Appeal set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in suit no FHC/ABJ/273/10 awarding the plaintiff the sum of five million naira as damages against ARIK AIR who refused to airlift the plaintiff when he presented himself for that purpose after buying a Business class ticket.

    The plaintiff is also seeking to be refunded the professional fees paid to the Defendant in addition to the payment of millions of naira as exemplary damages for professional misconduct and negligence.

    In the suit the plaintiff accused the Defendant of dishonesty by abandoning his case after being paid a substantial part of the agreed professional fees which led plaintiff to engage the services of another lawyer. In the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff alleged that after making documents available to the Defendant in a bid to brief him to handle another election petition for him, the Defendant rushed to his opponent in the said petition and accepted the brief to defend the petition against plaintiff.

    Plaintiff pleaded, that on each day his case in court against ARIK conflicted with the election petition hearing, Defendant would abandon his case against ARIk in which he represented Plaintiff as counsel to defend the election petition in which he subsequently represented plaintiff’s opponent having been originally briefed by the plaintiff to represent him in prosecuting the election petition . No date has been fixed for hearing.

    @ I-Judicial Reporters.

  • PROF. IWU’S DAUGHTER SUES PDP & INEC OVER FLAWED PRIMARIES FOR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SEAT IN IMO STATE:

    PROF. IWU’S DAUGHTER SUES PDP & INEC OVER FLAWED PRIMARIES FOR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SEAT IN IMO STATE:

    Prof. Iwu’s daughter, Mrs. Ijeoma Ann Nwafor has instituted a law suit against PDP, INEC and Hon. Nwawuba over what she described as a contravention of the PDP Constitution and Guidelines for Primaries during the conduct of the primaries of PDP for Mbaitoli/ Ikeduru Federal Constituency Seat on 6th October, 2018 at Owerri. In Suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/1160/18 filed on her behalf at the Federal High Court, Abuja, by the Lawfirm of West-Idahosa & Co, the plaintiff in an Originating Summons is asking the Court to nullify the primary election for the said Federal Constituency. In addition, the plaintiff is also seeking an order of court to restrain INEC from recognizing Hon. Nwawuba as the candidate of PDP for 2019 general elections for the said constituency.

    Also contained in the reliefs sought by the plaintiff is an order to compel PDP to order fresh primaries as well as an order to compel INEC to extend the time within which PDP can conduct fresh primaries for the said constituency. The matter has been fixed for hearing on October 31st, 2018, before Hon. Justice A. Chikere.

  • MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO; COURT TELLS EDO STATE GOVERNMENT

    MAINTAIN THE STATUS QUO; COURT TELLS EDO STATE GOVERNMENT

    The National Industrial Court sitting at Akure has ordered all the parties in the suit to maintain the status quo in the case filed by Helen Osasuyi and 9 others vs Edo State Government and others. In Suit no NICN/BEN/08/2018, the plaintiffs are seeking several Declaratory orders and injunctive reliefs to reopen the College of Agriculture, Iguoriakhi and pay the staff therein in accordance with the terms of their employment. The claimants also want the Defendants to refrain from abrogating the establishment law of the college.

    Ruling on the Motion for Interlocutory injunction filed by the Law firm of West-Idahosa & Co, on 10th October, 2018, the trial Judge, Hon. Justice O.O. Oyewumi, held that the parties should maintain the status quo and ordered accelerated hearing of the case. The case is fixed for 12th & 13th of November, 2018. By this order, Edo State Government is restrained from purporting to sack the workers of the college or expelling any student thereof for any reason whatsoever pending the determination of the substantive suit before the court.

  • WHERE IS LOIUS ODION FROM?

    WHERE IS LOIUS ODION FROM?

    My attention has been drawn to the write up of one Loius Odion. I understand that he is a columnist with the Nation, but chose to use his privilege to vilify my person on the pretext of responding to my clarion call for the restablishment of the Benin political class. He accused me of ethnicization of the contest between Oyegun and Oshomhole for the post of the National Chairman. For God sake, we all belong to one ethnic group or the order and I have a duty to defend my tribe of origin against the overbearing influence of fortune seeking strangers tending to treat my ethnic group as a conquered territory. The points I raised in my said article were never really dealt with in his response.

    The bad news for Loius Odion is that my article was well received by the target audience and the renaissance has begun with various Benin groups gearing up to change the political narratives of the Benin people.

    Louis Odion tried hard to deride my person for no reason. Beyond the invective language used in his piece, he gave the impression that my write up was founded on imaginary malice against Oshomhole for failing to support my senatorial bid when I approached him for help in APC. Odion was dead wrong. I never sought a senatorial seat on the platform of APC. I did on the platform of PDP. In any case, Odion’s story confirms my call for Benin political renaissance. If indeed Oshomhole can influence how a senate seat is occupied in Benin province from Iyamoh, a village in Edo North Senatorial District, it is enough reason to justify the views I expressed publicly.

    The most shocking of what Odion wrote about is that he is a “conscientious Bini”. How is he a Benin man? It is true that the Benin heritage is proudly attractive and many, including Odion applaud this. That does not make Odion a Benin man. Those who knew him when he ran media errands for Chief Tony Anenih maintain that Odion claimed to have hailed from Ewu in Ishan land. Some of his professional colleagues have also revealed that Odion confided in them that his ancestral home is in Ondo State and they are prepared to bet on this.

    However, when he was to serve as a Commissioner midway into Oshomhole’s regime, he was transferred to a village called Odiguetue, a trading outlet between Edo and Ondo States. Odiguetue is a village in Ovia North East LGA , within Benin province in Edo State. This was after his rejection by Edo Central ACN leaders on the ground that he was not from Ozallah in Esan West LGA as he claimed. This development made it clear to all that his ancestry was difficult to trace. By this time, Hon. Orobosa Omo-Ojo had already been given the slot of Commissioner from the same LGA. In the end, that LGA had two Commissioners within the said period. One, a son of the soil and the other, a complete stranger. How then is Odion a Benin man? No blue blooded Benin man would have written what Odion wrote on his column against Chief Oyegun, irrespective of what drips into his mouth from the honey pot of his puppeteer.

    I may not be as educated as Odion, but I challenge him to a television debate on any topic of his choice in order to refute his innuendo about the composition of a stark illiterate or whatever he meant by that. I admire Odion’s hard work and how he developed himself from an office typist to what he is now. That is not a reason to disrespect others. Like Odion, I worked very hard for my Ph.D.

    I am a responsible family man with a wife and children and do not move around pepper-souping as Odion has insinuated. Above all, I am a serious minded person and not passion boy for any fellow man. I run a complete and disciplined home as a true Benin man. I do not lack the strength of character to publicly hold my views on contemporary political issues and those who know me can attest to this. Odion must learn to be humble with the pen and work hard to acquire the values that traditional African men are known for.

    Upon the completion of my tenure in the House, I returned to manage my law firm. I have a second address and therefore not a crass opportunist. I stand by my publicly expressed views on the need for the Benin People to resist Oshomhole’s over bearing political influence on the Benin majority in Edo State. I am confident that this would be achieved soon.

    I will not be deterred by the likes of Odion who think that a newspaper column is their preserve and they must use it at will to lampoon others for expressing rationale and pragmatic views that they do not agree with. Great columnists make their points without needlessly being scornful of the authors whose work, may have attracted their commentaries.

     

    Dr. Ehiogie West-Idahosa.

  • IN SUPPORT OF TY DANJUMA; A NATIONAL STATESMAN

    IN SUPPORT OF TY DANJUMA; A NATIONAL STATESMAN

    TY has benefited from Nigeria and he has a duty to keep it one. He said what we all know. The problem with most of his critics is partisan epilepsy which puts them in momentary fit whenever they are confronted with the truth. That is not patriotism. It is patrimolianism. Some of us were very critical of PDP misbehavior even as Members of the House of Representatives. It may have cost us principal officership, but we are alive by the grace of God to continue to speak truth to power. Party membership or affiliation is not a reason to endanger humanity with indecisiveness on security of lives and properties. Some of us have never witnessed what is now going on in this country in our adult lives.

     

    We heard of Tafawa Balewa. We saw Usman Shagari. We worked with Umaru Yaradua. They were northerners and Muslim. They may have had Fulani blood in them but their sense of national duty was exemplary. None of them would have tolerated this menace of some irresponsible heardsmen spreading terror to the ancestral land of others in a jet age. Rather than restrain them with decent and globally tested policies, the Government is overwhelmed with nepotic constraints and thereby preventing the avoidable deaths of thousands of innocent citizens.

     

    More than any government in our republican history, this government has been the slowest to act on matters that require urgent government attention. It cannot continue like this merely because a few privileged people have formed a vanguard of blame-him-not around President Buhari. They are definitely not helping Nigeria but themselves. Let me remind all such persons of the proverb that those who ride on the back of the tiger, end up in its stomach.

     

    Obasanjo wrote his 20 page letter of caution to the President. He was called names by the holier-than thou supporters of the President. Gen. Babaginda issued a press statement on the way forward. He was lampooned by the same band of economic and tribal clappers.

     

    Gen. TY Danjuma, more than these hallelujah brigade, contributed enormous personal resources to the campaign process of President Buhari over the years. He was the chairman of the President’s advisory group when the President assumed office. He mobilized support for the president across the length and breadth of the country. How would a man who made these contributions to the emergence of Buhari as president standby and watch the ship of State sink deeply without qualms? Danjuma is made of sterner stuff. He was a full blooded General in the Army and knows the difference between the Army they belonged to and today’s Army.

     

    Those casting aspersions on the eminent citizen have done nothing to help our country. They do not want anyone to stand up for Nigeria. They like the country as it is. They are fanning the embers of inefficiency, nepotism and insecurity in order to profit from the situation. How many of these champions drive on Nigerian roads form one part of the country to another? How many of them sleep in their houses without surrounding themselves with armed Police guards?

    The truth is that we are now more unsafe than we have ever been in Nigeria in Peace time. I give kudos to the Northern Elders who recently called a spade a spade by telling the nation that they would not vote anyone from their region who has not lived up to expectations. They know that all is not well with our country and are themselves worried about the state of affairs. We cannot say that the professional clappers love President Buhari more than Prof Ango Abdulahi, Hakeem Baba-Ahmed and their group of northern elders. The same group joined others to mobilize the country to vote against President Jonathan and usher in President Buhari in 2015.

     

    The simple message to Mr. President by all those who have cautioned him is that he is performing far below the expectations of most of our country men and women. Let the President listen to them and ignore the Buhari-does-no-wrong group. They would be the first to jump ship if the President doesn’t make it back to Aso Rock in 2019. I wish the President all the best.

     

    God bless Nigeria.

     

    Dr. Ehiogie West-Idahosa.

  • IS PLATFORM MOBILITY THE REASON FOR POOR GOVERNANCE?

    IS PLATFORM MOBILITY THE REASON FOR POOR GOVERNANCE?

    By Dr. West-Idahosa

     

    Nigeria’s independence was not the product of any tough or ideological struggle. It came as a result of Britain’s political decision to let a number of countries off the hook following the popular crave for independence at that time. Nigeria happened to be one of them. There were no strong ideologies like the type that existed in some former colonies that got their political emancipation through ” blood and iron”.

    The early set of political elites probably founded their political parties on some sort of development theories. NPC was anchored on a catch-up- the south development prototype. Action Group was predicated on populist welfarism and NCNC on nationalism. Even then, the advent of decamping gained prominence in the then western region, when Action Group is believed to have instigated indigenes of the region to leave other parties for ethnic reasons. Nationalists like Azikiwe who had won elections in the west were left in bewilderment.

    Subsequent generations of politicians diminished in character and preparedness for real governance. The decline of the political environment led to the militarization of governance with the Babaginda era signposting the final fall of official morality. The post Babangida era politicians came in with an inherent settlement culture that commercialized the electorate at a time when everyone was expectant of a share of the national cake. The public became less interested in the quality of governance as long as their votes were procured.

    The political parties became zonked in patrimonialism and side effects like godfatherism, impunity, imposition, purchase of party tickets etc became characteristic of the partisan political system. Those who were lucky to occupy the positions of power and influence schemed to exclude rivals from the centre of control. Dominant elites squeezed life out of challenging elites.

    The survival struggles promoted platform mobility which enabled politicians to search for platforms of convenience. It must be remembered that the 4th Republic which has been the longest, started with the likes of Bola Ige preparing the manifesto of PDP, APP and AD in the same spirit but different semantics. There was no real difference. Ige and his co-travelers left PDP on the excuse that there were unwanted elements in their midst. They formed APP. They again left for the same reason and formed AD.

    The seed of platform mobility which they sowed germinated into a home grown acceptable political behavior. Innumerable number of politicians have benefited from this over the years. It can no longer be regarded as an aberration or can it be credited for the failure of any elected public officer in office. This practice existed before 1999 and has remained thereafter. There are very few real political operatives in our country who may not have changed their platforms. The likely reason for that may be that they are members of the clique that manipulate the party’s control apparatus. Once they lose it, they too may be on the move.

    The public is aware of this behavior and seem to have endorsed it over the years by continually voting for politicians without any regard for his platform history. This is clearly a ratification of such practice, which by evolution is now part of the political culture of our country.

    Can this be the reason why some public officers let the electorate down after being elected to office? Certainly not. Public officers fail for for many reasons. Some have no capacity to cope with the large demands from the office they occupy. Others are too neck deep in their plan to enrich themselves and nothing else matters to them than their plot to steal the nation dry. A category of elected officials are slaves to nepotism. They think corruption is all about stealing money and turn government appointments and contracts into a theater of mediocrity. Of course, they end up failing.

    Most elected executives end up larger than the political parties that sponsored them. They fail to consult with the parties or even glance at the manifestos of such parties. They maintain an olympian aloofness from their political parties. What a pity! The parties may have created their own irrelevance in the political system that we operate. When party leaders and delegates are paid to fly their parties’ tickets and sometimes by all manner of people, what really do they expect from such commercial contractual mandate? Can you eat your political cake and have same? I am sure you cannot.

    Platform mobility is not the problem with Nigeria’s political system. It is a mere symptom of other underlining political problems. We must look deeply into the causes of such mobility in order to proffer pragmatic solutions to the real problems with our political system in the hope that we can achieve our dream of an egalitarian society.