Tife Owolabi @tifeowolabi - Tumblr Blog

View this post on Instagram

VIDEO: Special Adviser to President Muhammadu Buhari on Media and Publicity Femi Adesina speaks on the herdsmen attacks in Benue State. Assures of government’s determination to tackle it, while reminding that it’s not a new/recent phenomenon, it predates the Buhari administration. Let the blame game continue. But I know for sure that the primary responsibility of any government is to protect lives and property and any thing short of that is incompetence and failure on the part of the government at any given time either past, present and future. Period !

The Bamboozling Governor! Today in the mosque praying with the muslim faithfuls, tomorrow in the shurch and next tomorrow in the shrine! Gov Fayose reminds me of Game Theory principle ,how people are use as pond . The Game Theory serves the individual concerned to be two-faced and be everyone’s friend until the moment they are not. The person playing will make these friends love them to a point where, even when up against it, they will follow instructions despite it being against their own personal interest and safety. Game theory is described as a cold rational focus on winning, which makes everyone else expensive and a liability. In the game, everyone is a contingency;You meet people and bring them into your life ,you keep them calculating until the moment you manipulate the relationship to your own advantage. Happy Sunday friends and family (at Rivers State)

A little girl stands in the midst of Muslim Faithfuls during Eid El Kabir praying session in yenagoa,capital of Bayelsa state.#muslims #eidmubarak #prayer

#muslims #eidmubarak #prayer

Biafra is not a dirty word For the record, I was born after the Biafra war. Everything I know about it was what I heard or read from different sides to the conflict. Since I was not around to follow the events by myself and make my own call, I have had to rely on other people’s accounts in trying to understand what caused the war. Everybody tells the story to their own advantage. That’s natural. All said and done, though, I have consistently come to one conclusion: we went to war because our leaders were too young and too immature to manage conflict. We played dangerously close to the precipice. With no neutral elders in town and no experience to draw from, we fell headlong into avoidable bloodshed. It’s now 50 years since the first shot was fired and 47 years since the war ended, but many of the issues are still on fire. The Igbo, in particular, believe that they are not receiving a fair deal in the union despite all the talk about reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction. They believe the quota system and federal character are skewed against them, and the entrance requirements into federal schools are tougher for them compared to other parts of the country. The Igbo are also often at the receiving end of ethno-religious violence — although it is not limited to them these days. At some point, they always suffered the heaviest casualty. In the meantime, while every geo-political zone has six states (the north-west has seven), the south-east has only five. That means when you pick a minister per state, they will always have only five. They also have the least number of local governments. Federal infrastructural projects that could boost the south-east economy, such as interstate roads, railway and the second Niger bridge, do not often get priority attention in Abuja. Under the current administration, Igbo influence at the federal level has diminished significantly, compared to the case under Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan when they held important positions, especially under Jonathan. The elephant in the room, of course, is presidency. Will an Igbo ever become president of Nigeria again? Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, an Igbo, was governor-general of Nigeria from 1960 to 1963 and president from 1963 to 1966, but these were ceremonial positions without executive powers. Major-General JTU Aguiyi-Ironsi, an Igbo, accidentally became military head of state in 1966 after the failed Major Kaduna Nzeogwu-led coup. Aguiyi-Ironsi ruled for six months before he was killed in the countercoup. Since then, no Igbo has been president, either civilian or military. However, the other major ethnic groups — Hausa/Fulani and Yoruba — have had their fill. Now let’s face the fact: if I were an Igbo with such a long list of grievances, I would feel unloved and unwanted in the Nigerian federation. It is very easy for an outsider to dismiss these complaints. But the question to ask is: if you are a Fulani or Yoruba or Ijaw and you have a strong feeling that the system is skewed against the hopes, dreams and aspirations of your people, will you keep quiet? Who feels it knows it. I have said this a million times: I do not wish to live in any society where I am convinced there is a conspiracy to keep anyone down. I want to live in a society where there are no glass ceilings — no matter your ethnic origin, religion, beliefs, gender and accent. Despite their misgivings, I still believe the Igbo have made considerable progress since the end of the war. Many of my Igbo brothers never agree with me when I say a lot of reintegration has happened since 1970, but there were indeed efforts by the government to heal the wounds. A little history would be useful here. By 1975, Ndubuisi Kanu and Ebitu Ukiwe, two Igbo naval officers who fought on the side of Biafra just a few years earlier, were appointed members of the Supreme Military Council (SMC), the country’s highest decision-making body. Kanu, and later Ukiwe, were governors of Lagos state between 1977 and 1979. These were positive steps. The integration progressed in the second republic, I would say, as the Igbo produced both the vice-president, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, and speaker of the house of representatives, Chief Edwin Ume-Ezeoke. The No. 2 and No. 4 positions going to the Igbo in 1979, less than 10 years after the war, ought to be viewed as a positive sign of reintegration. In the army, meanwhile, it appeared there was an unwritten policy to prevent the Igbo from holding sensitive positions — perhaps because of the Biafra experience — but Ike Nwachukwu still managed to rise to the rank of major-general in 1987, becoming the first Igbo army two-star general after the war. Under President Obasanjo from 1999 to 2007, Amb. Uche Okeke was DG of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA). That again was significant: key intelligence positions were a “no go” area for the Igbo until then. In 2010, the army jinx, permit me to use that word, was finally broken when President Jonathan appointed Major-General Azubuike Ihejirika as the chief of army staff. Ihejirika was the first army chief of the Igbo stock since 1965 when Aguiyi-Ironsi held the position. I saw that as the end of the “restrictions”. If an Igbo could be army chief again, I told myself, then the “reconciliation” was near complete. Unfortunately, things have changed since 2015 and discontent is rising again. But as we mark 50 years since the Biafra declaration, the final piece in the national jigsaw, for me, is an Igbo man or woman becoming president of Nigeria. There is some resistance, I know. These are the objections I normally hear people raise against the idea: one, the Igbo cannot speak with one voice or present one candidate; two, the Igbo are too ethnocentric and would completely take over federal institutions if one of them is in power; three, the presidency would become unstable in similar ways to senate presidency when it was zoned to the south-east from 1999-2007; four, the Igbo cannot be campaigning for secession and hoping to rule Nigeria at the same time. All these objections are weak as far as I’m concerned. One, who says a zone must present a consensus candidate for president? Did the Yoruba or Hausa/Fulani or Ijaw ever present a consensus candidate? Why should the requirement be different for the Igbo? Two, there is hardly anybody who has ruled Nigeria that has not been accused of sectionalism (before you say “President Obasanjo”, google what northern elders, such as the late Wada Nas, said about this during his tenure); three, there is no basis to compare senate presidency with presidency. You can’t change president every year. I, therefore, dismiss these objections as mere excuses. The real inhibition, I believe, is No. 4: the fear of an Igbo with presidential powers. It’s a question of trust. The memories of 1966 have refused to fade away from both sides: the north is still paranoid and the south-east is still bitter. And when groups like MASSOB and IPOB come up with secession rhetoric, it further pushes away other parts of Nigeria. But then, Nigerians voted for a Yoruba as president in 1999 and 2003 in spite of the OPC threat. Secession threats, therefore, should not be too much of an issue if indeed other Nigerians sincerely desire to support an Igbo for president. Hence, I have not seen any good reason why a Nigerian president cannot come from Igboland. My conclusions. One, to demonstrate that the wounds of the war have truly healed, the time has come for the Igbo to produce the president of Nigeria. Call it symbolism and I won’t argue with you. Symbolism serves its purposes. Two, since no part of Nigeria can do it alone, Igbo leaders must forge the right alliances and partnerships to make this happen. I believe that it was the emergence of the Niger Delta as a political force in 2007 that effectively relegated the Igbo in the nation’s scheme of things, but since virtually every part has held executive powers now, it is only fair for the Igbo to take their place in the political architecture of Nigeria. Above all, Nigerians must stop seeing Biafra as a dirty word. Biafra represented secession in 1967. But today, I see Biafra as an attempt to rethink Nigeria. What gave rise to the Nzeogwu coup? What led to the countercoup? What caused the war? Have those issues been sufficiently addressed? Is Nigeria now a society where the aspirations of every unit are finding expression? Do we need to tinker with the political structure for improved governance? These questions matter because Nigerians are increasingly seeking self-determination in different ways: Sharia, resource control, fiscal federalism, etc. No wonder, Chido Onumah, the writer and activist, says “we are all Biafrans”. AND FOUR OTHER THINGS… MIDTERM BLUES It’s exactly two years that President Muhammadu Buhari assumed office, signaling, as it were, a new dawn for Nigeria. Promises were made during electioneering, hopes were raised after his victory and aspirations were renewed with his inauguration. Two years on and the enthusiasm is dying down. To change Nigeria is never going to be easy, and with Buhari failing to take off on a supersonic note, a bad situation became worse. Many have eagerly concluded that Buhari is a failure, but while I am also not too impressed with what I have seen far, I am conscious of the fact that good things take time. God granting him good health, I believe Buhari will come good. Half-full? NWODO’S WORDS In case you missed this, this is the highlight of what Chief Nnia Nwodo, leader of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, said at the Biafra colloquium on Thursday: “Every part of Nigeria can survive as an independent country. The north with its mineral and agricultural potentials can build a strong nation. The west with its cocoa, oil, indomitable intellectual knowhow and commerce can build another Britain. The south-south with its oil… can transform before oil ceases to be a major FX earner. The east with industry, outstanding innovation and little oil may still emerge as the African wonder. But none of these little enclaves will rival the capacity of a united and reconciled Nigeria.” Brilliant! GUN RUNNERS On Tuesday, Customs told us they seized 100 pieces of black tornado single barrel rifles, 75 pieces of silver magnum single barrel rifles, 50 pieces of altar pump action rifles and 215 pieces of black single barrel rifles illegally imported in Nigeria. They were classified as plaster of Paris by the importer. In January, Customs said they intercepted 49 boxes containing 661 pieces of pump action rifles. What came out of it? They are still investigating? How long does it take to identify an importer, the shipper and the clearing agent? Is it me or does any other person feel there is no use telling us Customs has seized illegally imported arms when nobody ever gets punished? Nigeria! FOR CHUKWUMA Death has paid journalism a morbid visit yet again, taking away one of our brightest. The death of Chukwuma Onuekwusi of Channels TV came as a big shock to some of us who did not know he had been down for a while. We interviewed President Muhammadu Buhari together in London last year and while I felt he did not look particularly healthy, I just thought it was part of the stress that comes with our job. He was one TV journalist I respected and admired so much, and one sad thing for me is that I never paid him that compliment and I will never have that opportunity again. My heart goes out to his family and loved ones. Adieu. Follow us on twitter @thecableng Copyright 2017 TheCable. Permission to use quotations from this article is granted subject to appropriate credit being given to www.thecable.ng as the source.

Democracy, Biafra And A Sense Of History By Reuben Abati | Sahara Reporters It is sad that many Nigerians today talk glibly about the possibility of a coup or of military intervention in politics. They make it seem as if this democracy is something we can exchange for something else. We need to be reminded, as we celebrate democracy day 2017, how we got to this very moment, and how precious democracy is to us as a sovereign people. From 1966 to 1999 (with the short break of civilian rule from 1979 – 1983) the military dominated the political landscape in Nigeria. It was eighteen years ago yesterday when our country returned to civilian rule. The military practically overstayed their welcome. The first military coup in Nigeria was in January 1966, followed by the counter-coup of July 1966, and then the civil war of 1967-70 which turned Nigeria into a military theatre more or less as the Federal forces engaged the Biafran secessionists in a fratricidal war that resulted in the loss of more than a million lives, starvation and the tearing apart of the Nigerian fabric. The military would remain in charge of Nigeria and its affairs for more than 30 years in total, and it is worth remembering that virtually every successful coup was welcome by the people. It was thought particularly in the 70s that the military had a role to play in many developing countries in Africa to ensure stability and national discipline. The civilians who took over from the colonialists in Nigeria and Ghana, to cite two close examples, proved worse than their predecessors, and hence the usual argument for military intervention was corruption, and the need to keep the country together and check the excesses of the civilian rulers. Military rule was perhaps closer to what the people had known traditionally and also under the colonialists. Kings or feudalists who did not tolerate any form of opposition, or free expression governed the traditional communities and likewise, the colonial masters were dictators. The military continued in that tradition. In-fighting among the emergent military elite and the competition for power eroded discipline and resulted over the years in more coups. To be fair, military intervention in Nigerian politics yielded some positive dividends and created a leadership cadre, and indeed till date, the influence of the military in Nigerian politics, as seen in the transmutation of many military officers into professional politicians, remains a strong factor in the making and unmaking of Nigeria. But by 1990, with the global wave of democratization, glasnost and perestroika, the collapse of the Berlin wall, and the greater emphasis on human rights, and the rise of civil society, the Nigerian public began to subject the military to greater scrutiny than was hitherto the case. After a fashion, every military government presented itself as a corrective regime, with the promise to hand over power in a short while to civilians. By 1986, the Babangida administration after a year in office had launched a political transition program, beginning with the establishment of a 17-man Political Bureau. In 1989, the ban on political activities was lifted. The military junta would later ban these existing political parties and create its own parties, the Social Democratic Party and the National Republican Convention. This seemingly endless transition program and increased civil society activism merely drew more attention to the military and its record in the public sphere. The people began to demand an inevitable return to civilian rule. They complained about the human rights abuses of the military, the apparent domination of power by the Northern elite, the marginalization of other groups in Nigeria, and the spread of injustice and inequities. When a Presidential election was held on June 12, 1993, and the SDP candidate, Chief MKO Abiola won the election- an election that was adjudged to be free and fair, Nigerians felt that the hour of their liberation from military rule had come. But the Babangida administration refused to announce the final results and subsequently, it annulled the election. It was a disastrous moment for the Nigerian military and the administration. It also marked the beginning of a national crisis that dragged on for six years. The Nigerian people were inconsolable. In the course of the crisis, General Ibrahim Babangida had to “step aside”, handing over power to an Interim National Government (ING), which was soon shoved aside by General Abacha. Between 1993 and 1999, Nigeria had three different leaders: Chief Ernest Shonekan, General Sani Abacha and General Abdusalami Abubakar. The ensuing struggle for democracy was long and momentous. Progressive Nigerians and the civil society turned against the military. The South West declared that it had been robbed. MKO Abiola fought for his mandate. The international community ostracized the Abacha government. Nigeria became a pariah nation. The media was in the forefront of the struggle, and many journalists were jailed, hounded into exile, publishing houses were set ablaze. Anyone who criticized the soldiers was framed for one offense or the other and thrown behind bars. The progressive forces insisted that the military must go. “Never Again”, the people chorused. There had been no other moment like that in contemporary Nigeria. The martyrs of that people’s revolution were the ones that died, including Chief MKO Abiola who died in Abacha’s detention camp, the many innocent persons who were shot by the military, and everyone who suffered one major loss or the other. The heroes were the valiant men and women who stood up for democracy and justice and opposed military tyranny. The villains were the soldiers who trampled upon the people’s rights, and their opportunistic agents in civil society. On May 29, 1999, Nigeria returned to civilian rule. It was the day of our country’s second liberation, liberation from the “years that the locusts ate.” In the month of June, there would be another historic date for Nigerians, that is June 12, a definite milestone in Nigerian democracy even if the Federal Government has been largely in denial since 1999. MKO Abiola deserves to be honoured post-humously not just selectively by states in the South-West but by the Nigerian Government as a kind of restitution, and by this, I mean a formal declaration, for record purposes, that he was indeed the winner of that June 12, 1993 election. This brief excursion to the recent past is important because it is so easy to forget. I have met young Nigerians who have never heard of Chief MKO Abiola. In a country where history is no longer taught in schools, that should not be surprising. The Nigerians who were born in 1993 are today out of university, and many of them may never have experienced military rule. They were still children when their parents fought for this democracy. Whoever makes the mistake of even remotely suggesting any form of return to military rule is an enemy of the Nigerian people. Such persons would be taking this country back to 18 years ago and beyond. Whatever may be the shortcomings of our democracy, this system of government has served the Nigerian people well. We may worry about the form or the shape, or the character of our democracy, the opportunism and imperfections of the professional political class, or the weakness of certain institutions but all told, this is a much better country. The best place for the military is to function under a constitutional order and to discharge its duties as the protector of national sovereignty. Any soldier who is interested in politics should resign his commission, and join a political party, politics being an open field for all categories of persons, including ex-convicts, prostitutes and armed robbers. I find the auto-suggestion of military intervention gross and odious. It is regrettable that those whose duty should never in any shape include scare-mongering were the ones who started that nonsensical discussion in the first place. For the benefit of those who do not know or who may have forgotten, we once lived in a certain country called Nigeria, ruled by the military, where the rights of citizens meant nothing. The soldiers were our rulers. They were above the laws of the land. The people were their subordinates. They called us “bloody civilians.” The media was not free. Your insistence on free speech could land you in jail. Under the guise of enforcing discipline, the military treated the people as if they were slaves. Everything was done “with immediate effect!”, including the suspension of human rights. Today, democracy has given the Nigerian people, voice. There is a greater consciousness of the power of the people, as well as the need to hold persons in power accountable. The electoral process is still imperfect, but the people are now supremely confident of their right to choose. But not all our problems have been solved. For example, exactly 50 years ago today, the late Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, hero of the Biafran Revolution, led the people of the Bight of Biafra on a secession move out of Nigeria. He said: “…you, the people of Eastern Nigeria, Conscious of the Supreme Authority of Almighty God over all mankind, of your duty to yourselves and prosperity; Aware that you can no longer be protected in your lives and in your property by any Government based outside Eastern Nigeria/Believing that you are born free and have certain inalienable rights which can best be protected by yourselves. Unwilling to be unfree partners in any association of a political or economic nature… Now, therefore, I, Lieutenant-Colonel Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, by virtue of the authority and pursuant to the principles recited above, do hereby solemnly proclaim that the territory and region known as and called Eastern Nigeria together with her Continental Shelf and territorial waters shall henceforth be an independent sovereign state of the name and title of The Republic of Biafra…” In other words, the people of Eastern Nigeria no longer felt free or protected or respected inside Nigeria. They opted out. In the Ahiara Declaration of 1969, Ojukwu summed it all up as follows: “When the Nigerians violated our basic human rights and liberties, we decided reluctantly but bravely to found our own state, to exercise our inalienable right to self-determination as our only remaining hope for survival as a people.” The civil war ended on January 12, 1970 but 50 years since the declaration of secession by the people of Eastern Nigeria, Igbos are still protesting about their relationship with the rest of Nigeria. But significantly, they are not the only ones complaining. Farmers are complaining about pastoralists, indigenes about settlers, Christians about Muslims and vice versa, women about men, men about women, youths about the older generation, the people of Southern Kaduna are unhappy, other Northern minorities too, the people of the Niger Delta have been unhappy since the Willink Commission of 1957/58, the other over 400 ethnic nationalities that are not recognized in Section 55 of the 1999 Constitution are also wondering whether they are truly part of this union…Basic human rights and liberties are still being violated. Nigeria remains a yet unanswered question. Democratic rule may have opened up the space, but our country still suffers from a kind of hang-over. The people are free, but they are today everywhere in chains: politically, economically and ethnically. This is the sad part of our democracy, but the best part are the many lessons that the people are learning about the meaning, the nature and the cost of the choices that they make or that they have made. Reuben Abati. Copied

THE NIGERIAN JOURNALIST! By Abdullahi Yunusa An average Nigerian journalist is a stickler for hardwork. He does his job with passion, panache and enviable zest. He strives hard to be ahead of his colleagues. He has the nose, eyes and mind for big stories. He does all of these most times without little or no commendation from his employer. If he brings in big exclusive stories, his employer takes the credit. If he runs into trouble waters, they leave him in the cold. But he never gives up. Regardless of certain unbecoming conducts of a few, most Nigerian journalists display rare passion, commitment and professionalism in their daily reportorial assignments. It is only in Nigeria that journalists work from January to December without salaries, no leave and hardly go on refresher courses. A Nigerian journalist is seen as a magician. Both his employer and Nigerians all expect him to meet their daily information needs even when he is indisposed. We feel less concerned about the plight of our newsmen. Journalists in this clime are treated like orphans. They swim in shark-infested waters to report issues. They step on mighty and very influential toes to expose graft in high and low places. They abandon families to travel to unsafe territories to amplify the voices of the oppressed. Some even get killed, maimed or kidnapped at times. We are told it’s a thankless job, but they have bills to pick up. His kids hardly see him at home. His take home, if at all he gets it, finishes on arrival. We hardly cut them some slack. We see them as all-knowing, infallible and magicians. But we often make haste to call them unprintable names each time their articles fail to align with our biases or narrow considerations. Sadly, they go through all these hassles without any form of support or encouragement from their employers. I know a TV station in Nigeria where reporters are owed salaries for three years running. I learnt top management staff of this news platform still breathdown on unpaid staffers anytime they report late to work or fail to come at all! Reporters defy doctors’ warning to be ‘on top’ of their beats. They work round the clock to monitor and report happenings in the society. They don’t have the luxury of time to attend to pressing personal issues, including their health. Some of them cannot even afford to pay medical bills, yet they work for billionaires. Just yesterday, Nigeria’s broadcast media lost one of its finest, Channels TV’s State House Correspondent, Mr. Chukwuma Onuekwusi at a private hospital in Abuja. Not long ago, Daily Trust Joseph Hir, AIT’s Nengi Finecountry among others died mysteriously. We equally have a number of unreported deaths involving journalists across the country. While media owners and publishers live in opulence, drive posh cars, send their kids abroad for school and holiday, these very guys who step on landmines to promote their businesses live in squalor and demeaning conditions. Some reporters can hardly afford nice clothes, shoes or even cars to move around. I know a number of journalists who regularly trek to event venues for lack of transport fare. They get to event venues in sweaty, smelly, oozing shirts! Sad. It is high time practising journalists called the bluff of greedy, self-serving employers who see reporters as mere working tools and not the professionals they are. Dear journalist, take out time to relax and attend to personal issues. Your platform can go on smoothly with or without you. That news item can fail, but not your health.

EFCC Docks Whistle Blowers Over False Information The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Tuesday, May 16, 2017 arraigned the duo of Buhari. Fannami and Ba-Kura Abdullahi on two separate one count charge before Justice M. T Salihu of the Federal High Court Maiduguri, for allegedly giving false information to the agency under the whistle blowing policy. Fannamit had misled the EFCC with the information about illegally acquired monies purportedly buried at the residence of one Ba’a Lawan but the information turned out to be false after the execution of a search warrant. The charge reads, “That you, Buhari Fannami on or about the 8th day of May, 2017 at Maiduguri, Borno State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did make statement to Officers of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission under the Whistle Blowing policy to the effect that large sums of money being the proceeds of crime were buried in the residence Ba’a Lawan at Pompomari Layout along Pompomari Bypass, Maiduguri which information/statement you knew to be false and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under sections 39 (2) (a) and 39 (2) (b) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment) Act 2004 respectively”. The accused person pleaded not guilty to the charge. Counsel to the prosecution Alkassim Ja’afar asked for a trial date and prayed the court to remand the accused person in the prison custody pending trial. Justice Salihu adjourned the matter to June 7 and 8, 2017 for hearing and ordered the accused to be remanded in the prison custody. On his part, Ba-Kura Abdullahi also gave false information to the effect that large sum of money in naira and foreign currencies were buried in the residence of Ba’a Lawan. Justice Salihu adjourned his case to June 7 and 8, 2017 for commencement of trial and ordered the accused to be remanded in the prison custody

Papa Reno Omokri, A Child Of Watery Pentecostalism, By Ugoji Egbujo Reno Omokri is a Pentecostal pastor. He is the founder of a certain Mind of Christ Christian Centre. Keep that name in mind. He flaunts his knowledge of the Bible. He dispenses nuggets. He has written a book on Godly wisdom. And another, interestingly, on “short cut to God.” He has taught Jesus on television. He was once a spokesman for a country’s president. Yet, he is, obviously, a flippant man. Reno Omokri is a Pentecostal pastor. He is the founder of a certain Mind of Christ Christian Centre. Keep that name in mind. He flaunts his knowledge of the Bible. He dispenses nuggets. He has written a book on Godly wisdom. And another, interestingly, on “short cut to God.” He has taught Jesus on television. He was once a spokesman for a country’s president. Yet, he is, obviously, a flippant man. He is, evidently, a political attack dog. He is, seemingly, incapable of sobriety. And apparently, he has no use for self-restraint. But this is not about a 43-year-old Papa Reno Omokri. It is about the watery Pentecostalism that has birthed many of his kind. It is about a pattern of dissonance, a habitual lack of harmony between what is preached in words and what is preached indeed. It’s about naked hypocrisy that is rampant in our politics, that has seized the church by the scruff of the neck. It is about the lust for titles, and for oversized names of worship centers. It’s about shameless charlatanism. It isn’t just the empty spirituality that rankles. It is the obtrusiveness of it, that getting into people’s faces, that is unbearable. The 1970s Pentecostal Christians weren’t saints, but they were visibly different. Had Omokri met the Pentecostalism of the 70s, he could have been a more temperate man. Now, there is a Reno Omokri who clings to the reputation of a pastor but who engages in political diatribes like a motor park tout. When he likes, he masquerades as Wendell Simlin. When he is not dishing nuggets, he is splashing insults. The modern Pentecostal duplicity. Pastors ought to be conscious of the moral burden and expectations priesthood places on them. We know anger can detonate bombs. But how can anyone explain a pastor deliberately making a career out of being a political attack dog? Yes, pastors aren’t saints. But pastors are supposed to be seen striving, struggling, to be moral examples. They can’t relapse into chronic self-indulgence, they can’t run brothels and they can’t live as pimps. They simply can’t be resident in sin. Where, in the chaotic soul of a political attack dog can the Holy Spirit find rest? Pentecostalism is now all talk, no action. Intemperate glib talkers are all pastors. Pastor Reno Omokri is the founder of Mind of Christ. So he is a papa too. But there is no link between the name of his church and many of his public utterances. Some other pastors are less dissembling. A pastor named his church “Now Now Miracle Centre.” Nigeria lives in the present, and everybody wants quick fixes. The pastor, with an eye on earthly acquisitions, preaches materialism in the name of prosperity. It makes sense, there is congruity. An irascible attack dog can shepherd anything but not a ‘Mind of Christ Centre.’ He should have cobbled something with—fire, spirit and sword, something menacing. He is perhaps no different from a garrulous friend of mine. A very miserly man, who loves and brandishes the title ‘Ochiriozua.’ By that title he lays claim to exceptional philanthropy-he pretends to be he, who feeds and trains his community. Like Reno Omokri, who preaches generosity of the spirit and practices political bitterness, my friend is only renown for theoretical philanthropy. This new watery Pentecostalism is not built on the fear of God. It lets ‘Area boys’(urchins) who haven’t completed drug rehabilitation programs become pastors. Those capable of sobriety are reluctant to be ordained. Yes, they are fainthearted. But they are honest. The burdens and the expectations of genuine priesthood are scary. Charlatans make an easy leap for the title and fame, for recognition, for status. They don’t need attitudinal changes, they can just put on the mask. Then with jollity, throw themselves forward as worthy of communal respect. Their courage comes from knowing, from the outset, that they won’t have to live their sermons, and nuggets. Many Nigerians have regrettably kept away from politics for similar reasons. What has Christ to do with acrimony and vindictiveness? Christ’s mind can’t look at a sick old man and mock him. It cannot sit with fools and churn out conspiracy theories. Christ’s mind has no room for the ‘yab me, I yab you’ mentality Reno Omokri has patented in Nigeria. Yet Omokri is not a truck pusher in Ochanja market, he is not an Obalende danfo driver. He is a Pentecostal pastor. Pentecostal Christians have been at the forefront of Christian evangelism in Nigeria in the last 40 years. They have been aggressive. But what they have succeeded in spreading, of late, is a form of flaky Christianity. A Christianity remarkable for being extravagant and superficial. They like to preach on T.V and in buses. They like to build big churches with loud microphones and musical equipment. What they don’t do, is preach with their lives. When they serve in public offices, their works don’t recommend Jesus. They lead double lives. One rolls on the floor in churches. And the other takes over in the office shaming Christ, propagating evil. Reno Omokri is the founder of Mind of Christ Centre, but you can catch him yelling publicly at a minister “your mother! It’s possible. He once looked at Rotimi Amaechi and called him” a pot-bellied mad man.” He fights for President Jonathan. President Jonathan is not a pastor, but he has never been uncouth in public. I can’t understand this perpetual wallowing in and splashing of, mud by any pastor. Nominal Christians experience bouts of sobriety in between sinfulness. They come back to their senses, call victims and apologize, make confessions and seek forgiveness. Pastor Omokri can quarrel, every day, for 365 days. Omokri is a manifestation of faulty Pentecostalism. “You are a waste, you should be thrown away by Lagos Waste Management Authority,” he once told Gov Amaechi. He publicly referred to Rev Fr Mbaka and Pastor Bakare as blooming hypocrites. They disagreed with him on Buhari and Jonathan. He has uttered childish insults like: “You are as useless as ‘P’ in psychology.” He has never tendered any public apologies. I tried to imagine some of these vileness dropping from Pastor Adeboye’s lips and I was struck by vertigo. Modern Pentecostal pastors always look too well fed. But from their fruits, you know that many are spiritually malnourished. Pastor Omokri bakes nuggets. Yet he exhibits all the signs and symptoms of spiritual malnutrition. Perhaps he needs nuggets of humility from Femi Adesina. Adesina is a presidential spokesman. He is not a pastor. But he carries himself with the dignity of a bishop. He needs nuggets from Prof Osinbajo. Osinbajo is a pastor and comports himself like a cardinal.

#Renoomokri Nigeria Pentecostal

STOP THIS SCARE MONGERING, NATIONAL LEAGUE OF VETERAN JOURNALISTS SPEAK ON PRESIDENT BUHARI'S HEALTH We are compelled to intervene to check the despair being desperately spread by agents of destabilization using the so-called ill health of President Muhammadu Buhari as their ploy. This scare mongering is being fanned by those who want the old order to subsist so that they could feast on the national till unchallenged. The President did not hide his case when he took ill and sought medical assistance in Britain. It is no hidden fact that the 16 years of profligacy by the three civilian governments he succeeded destroyed all the structures that existed before 1999, hospitals, farms, schools, roads, sports, power and industry included. President Buhari has been convalescing. What is this deliberately crafted fear being spread by people who should be in the vanguard to tame unfounded rumours that lead to instability? The President has made public appearances. The Nigerian constitution does not provide for a President to resign if he is sick because only God can guarantee good health. Buhari is not a shopkeeper or trader. There is no medical evidence that Buhari has lost his faculties and as such is unable to discharge the oath he swore to uphold. There is no provision in our constitution for the President to obtain sick leave. Why then the present hu ha? Those who love Nigeria and wish our country to recover from the wreckage left behind by the preceding civilian governments should mobilise to stop this propaganda of fear and despair being spun by treasury looters, with their long purses are unsettling the national recovery war of Buhari. We appeal to all self-respecting public figures to weigh the words they utter in the interest of Nigeria. The President, as Chief Executive, could hold his cabinet meetings even in his living room. Many members of our league have more than half-a-century experience of reporting Nigeria and the world. Past Nigerian heads of government from Sir Abubakar Tafawa-Balewa to President Goodluck Jonathan, had different methods of running their cabinet. There is no provision in the constitution specifically stating that cabinet meetings be held at a particular place on a specific time on a day of the week. We appreciate the present administration’s policy which has reduced expenditure on importation of foods, specifically rice. We also back Buhari’s herculean fight against corruption and the efforts at recovering our patrimony stolen by heartless politicians and public officers. The league is alarmed that most state and local governments cannot pay their workers’ salaries, yet their governors and legislators wallow in affluence and culpable ostentation expecting the federal government to pick the bill. And some media houses decorate these incompetent governors with awards. In a healthy federation, states and local authorities should bear the burden of the people and not the centre. All these are unwarrantedly blamed on Buhari who has been bending over to allay the consequences of the actions of these reckless state governors. We call on people in states where those errant governors preside to hold them responsible for not delivering on so-called “democracy dividends” as it were in the First Republic and other recognised nations of the world. The league wants the building of modular refineries to be sped up to save our foreign exchange and avail local industries of the multiple derivatives from crude oil. We are disappointed at the kid gloves being applied in fighting electric power supply in Nigeria and request a complete restructuring of the unwieldy contrivance of the past government to bring it under state control. Ben Lawrence Ajibade Fashina-Thomas Secretary General Past President Signed Signed

#nigeria #journalism #politics

Political Candidacy Lies Beyond Candidates By Chude Jideonwo | Sahara Reporters Why did supposedly serious-minded Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Paul Ryan support the disturbing candidacy of Donald Trump, a man who stands against the orthodoxy of his Republican Party as much as he is incoherent on ideologies towards small government, the economy and social issues? There are many guesses that can be made; including the obvious fact politicians that politicians will do anything to get power. But what Ryan said himself is very useful as a frame through which to understand his decision. “I’m tired of divided government,” he said in September of 2016 at the Washington Ideas Forum. “It doesn’t work very well. We’re just at loggerheads. We’ve gotten some good things done. But the big things — poverty, the debt crisis, the economy, health care — these things are stuck in divided government, and that’s why we think a unified Republican government’s the way to go.” In essence, he was making it clear that he wasn’t a fan of the man he once called the “textbook definition of racism”, but his decision in the election went beyond the person and character of the candidate himself. It went to the root of his candidacy. To this extent, he was focused on the collectively of ideas that Trump’s candidacy spoke to, and the possibilities for action that it presented to those of a particular persuasion. It occurred to me a few months ago as I contended, myself, with some criticism over political choice: that the way I view political candidates has solid parallels with Ryan’s thoughts, and thus is opposed to how some, especially in my country, see political candidates. The way people see a candidate is understandably simple: a man or woman runs for office, and he/she is the person we are voting for when we step at the polling booth. It all rises and falls on the candidate. And with human narratives, a candidate can be a simple matter of bad or good, black and white. But, far from this uncomplicated assumption, there is a difference between a candidate and a candidacy, and it is an important one. This distinction is especially important for primitive (what some will call developing) democracies such as ours where our political choices are essentially deformed, and the very brightest of us are not yet in play for the highest political offices. In this context, citizens, especially elite citizens with circles of influence, will have to make sophisticated decisions about their electoral choices - and that’s the point of this piece. A candidate is a man or woman running for office, and that person’s character and personality; as well as legacy and record. A candidacy, however, is the collectivity of what that person stands for and represents, and the convergence of people, ideas, and institutions that power his or her run. This includes the political party (especially), the donors, political action committees, labor unions, civil society and ideological counterparts. When people wonder why sworn American Evangelical Christians would elect a man who appeared antithetical to all the values their bible teaches, it is important to understand that, for that conservative voter, the person who would be president is not just one person, but stands as a symbol of a myriad of legislative, cultural and judicial priorities including the appointment of anti-abortion, anti-sexual revolution Supreme Court justices. They were on to something. After all, he fulfilled their dreams and appointed the conservative Neil Gorsuch. And Ryan was also clearly on to something, as we have seen from Donald Trump, who has morphed from a flame-throwing protégé of Stephen Bannon to a conventional Republican president keen for consensus, flipping his positions all the way down – on NATO, on China’s alleged currency manipulation, on Syria, on the federal reserves, and on the Export-Import Bank. Ryan made a bet that in choosing Trump over Hillary, he was ensuring the resurgence of conservative politics, the ability to enact conservative policy and a common conservative legacy. For him, that goes beyond the person and character of Donald Trump. It means holding his nose and taking a jump. That’s the nature of democracies – they are a composite matter of choice. Elections rest on candidacies, but candidacies go beyond people Candidacies are about collectives; a collective aspiration and a collective goal. In this situation, the question to ask is not just, ‘Do I like this woman?’ but, ‘between the choices I have, which of them is better for me?’ and ‘based on all I know about what this person stands for, the people who stand around the person, and the things that are likely to happen around those people, is this the right person for me?’ In 2016, I voted Akinwunmi Ambode for governor of Lagos State. But, like I have often said, I didn’t go to the polls to vote for Ambode. I actually went to the polls to vote for the Bola Ahmed Tinubu legacy. I didn’t even know who Ambode was, wasn’t absolutely sure of what he stood for as a person, but I was crystal clear about what he represented: the continuation of the attractive governance legacy that Lagos state has had from its 1999 governor through Babatunde Fashola. Both of them were part of a well-oiled machine, and both had served in the administrations of their predecessors, understanding the imperatives of the government and the long-term vision for recreating the state. When Tinubu and Fashola spoke of the savings they claimed Ambode as accountant-general had made for the government through his genius, it wasn’t difficult for me to believe without proof. Tinubu had vouched for Fashola’s character and he had been right. Both were vouching for Ambode’s character and both had to be right. (Indeed, while we are on the subject, events have proven that decision judicious. After my initial irritation with Ambode’s first few months, he has won over many Lagosians – for me, the over-aching design behind Lagos’s road networks, and investments in healthcare have been a net-positive) This was a remarkable decision because I actually was enamored of the People’s Democratic Party candidate, Jimi Agbaje, who had been in private unfailingly gracious to me, and in public a remarkable, outstanding man. In the absence of a Tinubu legacy, he would easily have been my choice. But in this case, it made sense to continue what worked, as opposed to an experiment that was aligned to a national ruling party I intensely distrusted. This was not even a vote for the All Progressives Congress (APC), a party that, in effect, has no coordinated set of ideologies, as one can see from the vast difference between the quality of governance Lagos and many other APC states. If both Tinubu and Ambode had belonged to a party called the ‘Shenanigans People’s Party’, my vote would have gone along with them still. This was a vote especially tied to a set of expectations behind his candidacy, not just the candidate. Again, the reason for this kind of calculation is simple. In a country so badly governed, there is very little room for error. The search for saints will often end in futility, and citizens must routinely make the best out of bad options. Democracy, at the end of the day, is a matter of choice between available options. But in addition to this is the matter of parties. Our parties are not like America’s Republican and Democratic Parties, not like China’s Communist Party, not even like South Africa’s African National Congress; they don’t run on a strong, cohesive, consistent ideology. They are mostly vehicles for the achievement of political power. In advanced democracies, the kind of trust that informed my electoral choice in Lagos would on the political party, as the structure that mostly consists of the important influences behind a candidate. So when American Democratic voters come out for a John Kerry, they come out for a set of coherent ideas including pro-choice politics, universal healthcare, progressive judges, raising taxes to fund social programs and open borders. In spaces such as ours, parties do not command such sophistication; political operations do, mostly mobile in search of host organizations. To make solid choices in these elections, we must approach our peculiar context with wisdom, understanding the need to make certain choices at certain times to achieve certain outcomes. In 2011, that Nigerians made that choice for Goodluck Jonathan, to enable him to break the stranglehold of a particular hegemony, and its cabal, over the destiny of our nation. In 2015, Nigerians made that choice for Muhammadu Buhari, to break the monopoly and arrogance of a particular ruling party that had wasted more than a decade of opportunity to make a marked difference. Each of those two choices signified substantial nation-building progress. In 2019, a new set of questions will be asked of citizens. In this case, I suspect the question will turn on who is most capable of handling of handling a modern economy, and finally begin to create and expand wealth in a time of exciting global opportunity. Hopefully, before that time comes, our evolving political parties are inspired to present to us choices that are actually worth the time of an increasingly weary electorate. But even if they don’t rise to the challenge, beyond the candidates, we would be wise again to make a choice about the candidacy. Because people alone don’t change countries; the systems that people build and represent are the organs that truly change nations. What candidacy is most likely to answer the big question Nigeria will need to answer in 2019? Whoever answers that question is the candidate who can help us consolidate on the vast (even if slow) progress Nigeria has made in the 17 years since democracy returned. Complicated questions often demand complicated answers. -*Jideonwo is co-founder and managing partner of RED (www.redafrica.xyz), which brands including Y!/YNaija.com and governance consulting firm, StateCraft Inc (www.statecraftinc.com). Office of the Citizen (OOTC) is his latest essay series. #copied

#saharareporters #nigeria

NIGERIAN AIR FORCE SUCCESSFULLY NEUTRALISES A GATHERING OF BOKO HARAM TERRORISTS

#war on terror #nigeria military

Jonathan’s pathetic apologetics Published April 28, 2017 Punch Editorial Board Former President Goodluck Jonathan, reflecting on his electoral defeat two years ago, shunned deep introspection and remorse for his five-year reign of impunity. What comes out from him from excerpts of a new book is a potpourri of falsehoods, hypocrisy, lame excuses and blame for everyone but himself. But before Nigerians fall once more for his favourite tactic of playing the victim, they would do well to remember the devastating impact of his bad government. Words attributed to him in a book, Against the Run of Play, by Olusegun Adeniyi, a well-known journalist, and billed for public presentation in Lagos on Friday, were vintage Jonathan. Posing yet again as the perpetual victim, he blamed former world leaders − Barack Obama of the United States, Britain’s David Cameron, and French president, Francois Hollande − for desperately wanting a change of government in Nigeria. He blamed Attahiru Jega, the former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, for allegedly working with the Americans by insisting on the initial February 2015 date set for the presidential election; he blamed his own former party chairman, Adamu Mu’azu, whom he accused of working against him, and he carpeted the press and civil society for highlighting the pervasive corruption that flourished on his watch. First, the context: As he left a limping economy and widescale corruption behind, Jonathan’s five years at the helm were an unmitigated disaster for Nigeria, the effects of which 170 million Nigerians are experiencing today. He ran the economy aground, failing like his predecessors to diversify effectively and entrenching what The Economist of London labelled “a rentier state.” His government despoiled all fiscal buffers − foreign reserves hardly rose despite persistently high oil prices until August 2014. In its defence, his finance minister claimed that it was $43.13 billion that was inherited, yet, despite oil prices averaging $90-$103 per barrel up till mid-2014, reserves moved barely perceptively, while the Excess Crude Account had crashed from $22 billion to only $2.2 billion when Muhammadu Buhari took over by mid-2015. Jonathan left no major new signature infrastructure project; only inflated repair projects which are mired in controversy. Arguably his greatest disservice that ought to have been his major triumph was the badly managed privatisation of power assets that transferred most of the generation and distribution companies to untested, incompetent domestic consortia that have saddled Nigeria with a legal quagmire. But it is in the areas of corruption and security that Nigerians were mostly badly done in by that terrible government. Jonathan’s denial that he dismissed corruption allegations as “mere stealing” is false. He declared this on local and international TV. Corruption ran riot on his watch, as attested to by the latest scandals involving his wife, the suspended spy chief who stashed away $43 million in a Lagos apartment, the missing oil receipts being probed in parliament, as well as the $2.1 billion arms purchase fund that ended up in private hands. While he is whining that Obama and other world leaders, civil society, the media and the opposition alleged corruption “without proof,” the world is still aghast at a sprawling corruption scandal centred on the abuse of N2.53 trillion petrol subsidy in 2011 when only N248 billion was approved in the budget. His government also signed away N603 billion in less than a year for dubious import duty waivers, exemptions and concessions, according to Customs. The fraud associated with oil swap agreements is still unfolding. Hypocritically, he claimed to have dropped Stella Oduah as Aviation minister when evidence emerged, but said he retained Diezani Alison-Madueke as oil minister “because there was no foolproof evidence.” This same ex-minister is alleged to have withdrawn millions of dollars to finance his re-election bid for which she and many others, including electoral officials, are being tried. He disingenuously discredited the Nuhu Ribadu panel report on the grounds of disagreement among some members, but failed to say that he had appointed Steve Oronsaye and Bernard Otti to the board of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation in an obvious move of brinksmanship. It is not too late for Jonathan to grow up. He may think Nigerians have forgotten and that it is time to move on. This is fantasy. All the colossal scandals that defined his time in government will live on in the minds of the people who bear the burdens of his misrule. Former president Olusegun Obasanjo, who broke all party rules to make him deputy to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, is quoted in the same book as admitting that from his first days in office, “…he showed that he was too small for the office.” He demonstrated this in his mishandling of the Boko Haram terrorist insurgency. Boko Haram has killed over 25,000 people, displaced over two million and once held 27 local government areas as its “caliphate.” Rather than take full charge, he allowed his generals to turn it into a gold mine for corrupt enrichment, an ATM, according to Obasanjo, for taking money from the treasury. The influential The Economist once declared that Jonathan ran the most corrupt, most clueless government in Nigeria’s history. We can’t agree more. Indeed, we hold him and his corrupt generals responsible for the failure to rescue the 276 Chibok girls in 2014. His false narrative that he did try to rescue them contradicts reports that he failed to act when initially informed, continuing to view terrorism as a personal conspiracy against him. Surprisingly, Jonathan has not changed, falsely asserting and boorishly claiming that Boko Haram is being defeated because Buhari is a Muslim, not viewed as an “infidel’’ like he was. But salafist militants view all existing governments as infidels to be violently overthrown. They target the Muslim leaders of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Chechnya, Algeria and Bahrain. Boko Haram has killed emirs and has vowed to kill Buhari, the Emir of Kano and the Sultan of Sokoto, the nominal head of Nigerian Muslims. Jonathan incorrigibly blamed the media for his electoral defeat. We insist he lost the election because he was a total failure. He cites high figures of votes for Buhari in Kano, but was silent on equally suspicious figures for him from the South-South states, from Rivers or from Akwa Ibom and Delta states where votes recorded for him doubled the number of accredited voters. But we hold President Muhammadu Buhari and the Nigerian people culpable for providing the leeway for Jonathan to trample on our collective memory. While the Buhari government has demonstrated lack of courage to bring Jonathan to justice, many Nigerians celebrate, instead of rising against corruption. Across the world, people of conscience are marching in their thousands to protest against corruption; in broken, dysfunctional Nigeria, hundreds are, for a few wads of naira, marching, vandalising property, and preaching hate in defence of the corrupt. The officials on trial who have claimed to have been obeying Jonathan’s orders by collecting and distributing public funds provide enough grounds to put him also on trial. The anti-corruption war cannot go far unless Jonathan is confronted in court with his misdeeds. Past rulers who break the law are put in the dock. South Korea, Guatemala, Brazil, Peru, Zambia, Italy, France are ready examples. No one should be above the law. Buhari should save his reputation by pulling out all the stops in the war on graft. Far too many ex-Presidents have demonstrated this belief that they are above the law. Jonathan failed to bring corrupt past leaders to justice, but Buhari must bust the myth. Nigerians should realise that corruption has ruined their present and rendered the future gloomy for their children and rise up against corrupt leaders − past and present. As for Jonathan, he should be reminded that the history of his administration is already being written and it is neither flattering nor can he remodel it with falsehood and whining hypocrisy. Copyright PUNCH. All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.

#punch newspaper Nigeria

GOC SALUTES TROOPS DEVASTIN G DEEP PUNCH ON BOKO HARAM ....as soldiers capture large quantity of terrorists weapons The Acting General Officer Commanding (GOC) 7 Division Nigerian Army, Brigadier General Victor Ezugwu has commended troops of 21 Brigade of the Division for delivering a devastating deep punch to Boko Haram terrorists leading to the capture of large quantities of terrorists' equipment. The commendation came on the heels of troops display of bravery that led to successful and decisive repelling Boko Haram terrorists attempted incursion into their location in Sambisa forest, Borno State early morning today, Thursday, 27th April 2017. The troops resilence paid off with heavy battering of Boko Haram terrorists leading to the terrorist sustaining huge casualties in fighters and equipment. The terrorists paid dearly as the troops neutralized 15 of them and wounded several others. In addition, the gallant troops made heavy seizures with the destruction of 1 vehicle bound Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) belonging to the terrorists and capture of 1 Buffalo Gun truck mounted with Long Barrel Shilka Gun, 2 General Purpose Machine Gun, 1 PKM Gun, mortar tubes, 3 AK-47 rifles, 2 FN rifles, 1 G3 rifle. Others are 5 pieces of 60mm mortar Bombs, various GSM handsets, 36 Hand Grenade, 12 rifle magazines, Shilka fill tray, 750 rounds of 7.62mm (NATO) ammunition, 106 rounds of 32mm ammunition, a 12 volt battery, 3 Automatic Grenade Launcher bombs and 5 mortar charges, among others. The GOC enjoined troops to remain resolute in the fight against the Boko Haram terrorists and insurgents in the North East in order to ensure total compliance with the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Tukur Yusufu Buratai's directive that remnants of Boko Haram terrorists are flushed out of Nigerian territory. KINGSLEY SAMUEL Lieutenant Colonel Deputy Director Army Public Relations 7 Division

#northeast #war on terror #terrorism #nigeria military

Not Against The Run Of Play By Azu Ishiekwene Adeniyi’s book, entitled, Against the Run of Play, is the most eloquent single contemporary repository of why former President Goodluck Jonathan had to go. If, like me, you supported a change of government in 2015 and have been asking yourself why, then you should read the new book by leading columnist and Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Olusegun Adeniyi. Adeniyi’s book, entitled, Against the Run of Play, is the most eloquent single contemporary repository of why former President Goodluck Jonathan had to go. Until I read Adeniyi’s book, I was beginning to ask myself whether voting against Jonathan was the right thing to do. The book settled the matter. It is true that for a period, the pace and direction of President Muhammadu Buhari’s government was a matter of concern. The economy was adrift with no alignment between monetary and fiscal policy and no direction for recovery; herdsmen became the new face of terror; and the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress, turned on itself. Except when it came to blaming past administrations, it appeared that the president had lost control. With mounting criticisms over Buhari’s performance, Jonathan was beginning to look like a star. Against the Run of Play is, however, a poignant reminder that almost from his first day in office, Jonathan was determined not to succeed. Even though forces beyond him may have also conspired to remove him – the same way they conspired to install him – Adeniyi’s book shows that the man was the single greatest contributor to his own downfall. I find this whole business of fishing for a red herring for Jonathan’s defeat childish and amusing; blaming Barack Obama and the US, blaming a wing of the Northern political elite, blaming the Palestinians, etc. The man in the mirror is blaming everyone else but himself. A copy of Against the Run of Play would help Jonathan see how he wrote the script of his own defeat. His graceful and historic concession of power was against the run of play, true. But the events that led to his fall were not against the run of play; he brought them on himself. The book is an eye-opener on the fickleness of politics. Those who worked the hardest to install Jonathan were among the first and earliest casualties of the power play in his government. From Okwesilieze Nwodo, who gave the most stirring speech at the PDP caucus meeting at which it was agreed that he could contest for 2011 to Mahmud Yayale Ahmed, whose intervention calmed frayed Northern nerves to former President Olusegun Obasanjo, who “foisted” him on Nigeria, Jonathan burned all his bridges before he was even half way through his first term in office. And now he is blaming who? He was a good man by nature but was obviously overwhelmed by the burden of office. It didn’t help that he surrounded himself with a few who thought they were on a mission to avenge the Ijaw. To make matters worse for Jonathan, his wife, Dame Patience, seemed to have a talent for courting controversies and behaved, almost from the beginning, as if she and her husband were on a joint ticket. According to Adeniyi, the President was hardly one year in office when the First Lady had an explosive encounter with the Speaker at the time, Aminu Waziri Tambuwal. Adeniyi wrote that Tambuwal was driving when Patience called: “The woman at the other end of the line from the caller ID was very well known to him so he had no hesitation picking the call…"You this Hausa boy", Dame Patience Jonathan began, “you want to bring down the government of my husband; you want to disgrace him out of power? Una no fit! God no go allow you.” That siege mentality governed Jonathan’s presidency most of the time. The first nine of the 12-chapter book carefully documents Jonathan laying his bed. He alienated Northern leaders who were already suspicious that he will break his promise not to run in 2015; the mishandling of the kidnap of the Chibok girls was callous and unpardonable; and Boko Haram was allowed to grow from a small wound into a festering sore. We’ve almost forgotten what it was like now. The lunatics, led by Abu Shekau, seized two thirds of the North Eastern part of the country, almost the land size of Northern Ireland, confined Jonathan to Aso Rock and the rest of us to fearful lives behind stone boulders, metal detectors and iron bars. The dead, the wounded and the displaced were in their hundreds and mounting. Adeniyi’s book reminds us that on Jonathan’s watch, our soldiers became a laughing stock in Yaoundé and N’djamena and we could not even secure the lives of our children in Chibok, Bunu Yadi or Yola. The PDP was already collapsing under the weight of years of impunity and misrule, but Jonathan was the undertaker. The funeral of the party in 2015 was not against the run of play. Jonathan had burned his bridges both in his home base in Bayelsa and in Rivers State. The dustbin at the party’s national secretariat was littered with the remains of its fallen chairmen, who were removed almost as quickly as they were appointed. Whether among the governors or in the National Assembly, the two bastions of political support for any president, Jonathan and the leaders of these forums never seemed to agree on anything. Adeniyi quoted former Niger State governor, Babangida Aliyu as saying, “In August 2013, at the PDP Convention, the delegates from Rivers State were changed at the instance of the President because of his fight with Amaechi, while delegates from Adamawa State were also changed by Bamanga Tukur. We did everything to make the President see reason but he refused to listen to us. That was the beginning of the problem that led to the five governors leaving the PDP.” As for Jonathan’s attitude to corruption, that was another matter. Whenever anyone complained about it, the government simply responded by giving corruption a rocking chair. Is the book a vindication of the Buhari government? I don’t think so. I think it’s a useful reminder that in the quicksand of politics, leaders must seize the momentum while they can. And for a government like Buhari’s, which came on a tidal wave of change, it won’t have a second chance to campaign about change. What happens in 2019 has started already and will not be against the run of play. Ishiekwene is the MD/Editor-In-Chief of The Interview magazine and board member of the Global Editors Network. Olusegun Adeniyi's "Against the Run of Play: How an incumbent President was defeated in Nigeria" Twitter

#nigeria #goodluck jonathan #politics

STATE HOUSE PRESS RELEASE PRESIDENT BUHARI SUSPENDS SGF AND DG, NIA President Muhammadu Buhari has ordered an investigation into the allegations of violations of law and due process made against the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Mr David Babachir Lawal, in the award of contracts under the Presidential Initiative on the North East (PINE). The President has also directed the suspension of the SGF from office pending the outcome of the investigations. In a related development, the President has ordered a full scale investigation into the discovery of large amounts of foreign and local currencies by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in a residential apartment at Osborne Towers, Ikoyi, Lagos, over which the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) has made a claim. The investigation is also to enquire into the circumstances in which the NIA came into possession of the funds, how and by whose or which authority the funds were made available to the NIA, and to establish whether or not there has been a breach of the law or security procedure in obtaining custody and use of the funds. The President has also directed the suspension of the Director General of the NIA, Ambassador Ayo Oke, pending the outcome of the investigation. A three-man Committee comprising the Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and the National Security Adviser, headed by the Vice President, is to conduct both investigations. The Committee is to submit its report to the President within 14 days. The most senior Permanent Secretary in the SGF's office, and the most senior officer in the NIA, are to act, respectively, during the period of investigation. FEMI ADESINA Special Adviser to the President (Media and Publicity) April 19, 2017

This is worth reading Memories of midnight By Simon Kolawole It was midnight, not so long ago, when I woke up, used the toilet and returned to my bed to continue from where I stopped. For almost an hour, I closed my eyes in vain. I could neither induce nor seduce sleep. I was rolling from one end of the bed to the other, like a footballer faking injury. I decided to go into my study, to prove to sleep that I could use the time for something else. My study is a junkyard. I tip-toed through the wreckage of books, old newspapers and all sort, and aimed for a particular Ghana-must-go housing old magazines. I randomly picked three editions of Newswatch magazine and went back to bed. The first was the March 12, 1990 edition, “Cult of Deaths”, on the growing horror of secret cults in Nigerian universities. I flipped through within one minute. I took the second. It was the February 20, 1989 edition. The cover story was “IBB’s Surprise Move: The Sacking of AFRC”. The all-powerful Armed Forces Ruling Council was the three arms of government rolled into one: executive, legislature and judiciary (it could overrule the Supreme Court). Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, the military president, had shocked the whole world by dissolving the body. I flashed back to the controversy that followed, particularly fears that IBB was about to become a full-blown dictator. I leafed through the magazine again and shook my head on seeing the pictures of some of Nigeria’s most powerful military men at the time. David Mark, Nura Imam, Ndubuisi Kanu, John Shagaya, Gado Nasko, Larry Koinyan, Paul Omu, Yohanna Kure, Oladipo Diya, etc. Newswatch speculated that most of them would be dropped from the reconstituted AFRC. I looked at their 40-something-year-old faces and shook my head again. “Nothing lasts forever,” I muttered to myself. Kingdoms rise and kingdoms fall. Fact of life. So whenever I see the “men of power” today chasing us off the road with their siren, I imagine where their convoy would be heading in 2027 or 2037. On page 19 of the same edition, I saw a story on the arrest of Chief Chris Okolie, publisher of Newbreed. His magazine had written a story, “A Harvest of Generals”, following a spate of promotions in the army. The military authorities did not like the story. Punishment? He was detained without a word. That was the fate of journalists under military rule. A little story considered to be an irritation was met with excessive deployment of state power. Today’s publishers of fake news would not have survived under a military regime. You didn’t need to publish fake news to be jailed. Just publish anything considered nauseating or “radical” and SSS or DMI would snatch you. Flipping to page 31, I saw a short story in which Chief Ernest Shonekan, then chairman of UAC, warned that “there is little prospect for a return to the petroleum price which we enjoyed five years ago”. He was referring to the 1984 price of $28, comparing it to the $18 in 1989. He was wrong. Oil would later sell for $147 in 2008. Nigerians did not “enjoy” it, though. So maybe he was right. He also said the 20-fold increase in oil revenue in the 1970s killed productivity and only encouraged local assembly and packaging industries which “rather than become locally self-sufficient, depended on imported raw materials”. He was very right. And we are still saying the same thing in 2017. I threw the magazine aside. I then made the mistake of my life: I picked the May 30, 1988 edition. I wish I hadn’t. I still believe it was the work of the devil. The cover design was completely black, but for the two big eyeballs in darkness as well as a slender white outline and a thick red border. It screamed: “NEPA — A Nation in Darkness.” It was a special focus on Nigeria’s power problems. This edition could have been reproduced 29 years after — I mean this year — with just little changes: the principal characters and the anecdotes. At the risk of exaggeration, I would say things were even better in those days than today, especially comparing the expenditure with the results. Ray Ekpu, the editor-in-chief, started his weekly note thus: “Sometime in 1981, the then president of Nigeria, Shehu Shagari, was poised to make a budget speech to the National Assembly… Everyone was seated and as the president began to make a speech, the brightly lit hall turned into pitch darkness. For 15 minutes the hall was enveloped in darkness and it remained so.” He also wrote about the embarrassment Babangida faced in Kano on April 16, 1988 when he was entertaining Flt. Lt. JJ Rawlings, Ghana’s head of state, to a state dinner. There were three power cuts during the event. Everybody was embarrassed, but Rawlings managed to make a joke of it. Ghana also had power problems at the time. Today, Accra, its political and economic capital, enjoys uninterrupted electricity. Nigeria? Now don’t get me started. According to Newswatch, NEPA’s installed generation capacity as at 1988 was 4,000 megawatts. It wrote: “This is expected to increase to between 10,000 and 12,000 megawatts by the year 2000.” I’m not joking. A few days ago, some 29 years after, the ministry of power happily informed Nigerians that power generation has now hit 3,000-4,000mw again. I’m not joking. Between 1988 and 2017, we have spent at least $30 billion on the power sector to generate uninterrupted darkness. Let me amuse you a bit. In 2001, my landlord had promised to buy a generator big enough to power his flat and mine. Someone was relocating to the US and wanted to “fling” his generator. Suddenly, my landlord changed his mind. “If you noticed,” he lectured me, “power has improved in recent times. President Obasanjo has finally fixed the problem. There is no need to waste money on generator.” I nodded stupidly. According to official statistics, power generation had hit 3,000mw by 2001. It was time to roll out the drums. And so, 16 years after, we are still rolling out the drums to celebrate 3,000mw. Can you believe that? When Obasanjo came up with Vision 20-2020, we were promised power generation would hit 10,000 megawatts by 2007 and 35,000mw by 2020, when Nigeria was expected to be among the 20 biggest economies in the world. The projections were brought in dead. When Obasanjo was leaving office in 2007, we were still celebrating 3,000mw of power supply. The plan, reviewed and re-presented by his successor, President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, projected that installed capacity would grow from 6,000mw in 2009 to 20,000mw by 2015. Ladies and gentlemen, this is 2017 and we are still so glad to announce that we have hit 3,000mw again. A round of applause. The excuses, or let me say the reasons, for epileptic power supply in 1988 are virtually the same excuses, I mean reasons, in 2017. Mr. David Oyeleye, then NEPA’s general manager, told Newswatch that “we cannot run many of the machines at Egbin because gas is not there yet… the amount of high pour fuel oil, HPFO, which is needed is not even produced in the country in sufficient quantity”. There was also the regular excuse, I mean reason: “Low level of water at Kainji and Jebba dams.” There were less than 80 million Nigerians in 1988; we are now well over 170 million. And we’re still celebrating 3,000mw. Another round of applause please. After allowing the devil to torment me for 30 minutes, I said “No Más”, like Roberto Duran, and moved to the next story: “Why Food Prices Are Up”. An Agege housewife said she used to feed her family of six with a weekly budget of N20. “A mudu of garri now sells for N16 [so] where does that leave my N20?” she asked. At that stage, I told myself I had had enough. Get thee behind me Satan! I flung the magazine far away like Christmas banger, switched off my bedside lamp and cuddled my pillow, muttering: “But where do I get this reckless confidence from — that Nigeria will change someday?” God so good, I lapsed into unconsciousness, snoring away my midnight sorrows. Zzzzzz.

#Thecable #Simon Kolawole #nigeria economy

The Nigerian Presidency as a Foster Parent of Crimes By Pius Adesanmi Those who are confounded or surprised that the stash of cash found in Ikoyi – we have at least, hopefully, gone beyond the point of denying that cash was found – is now gradually snaking its way from the realms of crime and corruption to the less seedy atmosphere of a legitimate stash owned by the National Intelligence Agency. Once that cover of legitimacy and purpose is given to the stash, a certain mission is accomplished and I will return to that mission presently. All that is left is a little bit more of national whining – NIA was a bit careless in handling her money, EFCC as usual was not up to par, and the Lagos State Government tori Olorun! You don’t know who owns properties and flats within the properties. No records? No taxes? Even Oba Ado, who ruled Lagos from 1630 – 1669 as the first Oba of Lagos, kept better records. But, thank God sha, the money is legit. No crime was really committed. Just incompetence by NIA, EFCC, Lagos State Government, etc. Those who are surprised that things appear to be moving along these lines ignore the long history of the Nigerian state – embodied by the Presidency – in serving as the foster parent of high crimes committed by Nigerians who operate above the state, above the constitution, above all mechanisms and apparatuses of the Nigerian state- Generals, powerful political dynasties, powerful economic dynasties, old money, etc. Once in a while, some new money is allowed into this hallowed circle of the owners of Nigeria. Some very powerful prosperity Pentecostal mega-Pastors are also members of the club. There is no high stakes, global-level crime in Nigeria that occurs beyond the orbit of this powerful confederacy of illicit interests. Yet, they must not be touched for they are sacred cows. A Nigerian president serves at their pleasure, holds the Presidency in trust for them. It is in this sense that the Nigerian state has repeatedly had to serve as a foster parent of high stakes crimes for much of our post-colonial history, providing cover, providing rationalization, providing a coherent narrative for such crimes, and, where necessary, providing prosecutable fall guys who face heavily mediatized trials. Forget the Ikoyi billions for a while and come down memory lane with me. Nothing much. Just recent memory. In 2004, Nigeria recorded another first in her long history of high stakes criminality when two mega oil tankers, MT African Pride and MT Jimoh, vanished into thin air after having been arrested for oil bunkering by the Nigerian authorities. Yes, two oil tankers, containing millions of barrels of crude oil just simply vanished in broad daylight from Nigerian custody. The international embarrassment was great for Nigeria. How can two mega oil tankers just vanish? Eventually sha, they found MT Jimoh. Eventually sha, some naval officers (fall guys) faced a court martial and were dismissed from the Navy. Had my five-year-old daughter followed this story, even she would have understood that the crime we are talking about was way beyond the pay grade of the naval officers arrested and convicted by the Nigerian state. She would have understood that the Nigerian state – the Presidency – became the foster parent of that crime to protect very powerful people – the sacred cows in the confederacy of illicit interests. The Nigerian state provided a cover, a coherent narrative for an extensive crime. Some naval officers were arrested, tried, a jailed. End. Of. Story. Siemens and Halliburton are other examples of high stakes crimes in the foster care of the Nigerian presidency. All the individuals involved are Generals and old money – members plenipotentiary of the confederacy of illicit interests in charge of Nigeria, hence their crimes must be owned and given cover by the Nigerian Presidency. Malabu, the latest entrant into the firmament of high stakes crimes, boasts Don Fortunato as protagonist, just as Siemens and Halliburton boasted Obasanjo, Abdulsalam Abubakar, and other Generals as protagonists. There were threats of trials and rumbles of prosecution for Siemens and Halliburton but only the unweary did not know that the Nigerian Presidency was on its way to adopting the two crimes into its foster care. There are threats of trials and rumbles of prosecution for Malabu but Don Fortunato is also a member of the family – the confederacy of illicit interests. In time, Malabu will disappear into the archives of crimes owned by the Nigerian state to protect individuals. A jet was caught ferrying illicit cash to South Africa. The narrative involved a jet owned or leased by Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, de facto Pastor-General of the Federation and spiritual leader of the Nigerian President at the time. The Nigerian state moved in to own that crime as its foster parent. Even more intriguing and less known to the public was the high-level involvement of the Nigerian state in protecting Pastor T.B. Joshua by literally owning and foster parenting his crime. Pastor T.B. Joshua violated extant building codes in Lagos state, his building collapsed, making him criminally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people, especially South Africans. The South African state went into shock. It was the largest loss of South African lives outside of South Africa in their history. Anger gave way to a determination by the South African state to go after T.B. Joshua. First, the South African media wanted to send investigation teams to Lagos. Suddenly and somehow, South African journalists couldn’t obtain visas to Nigeria. Abuja had given the message to its mission in South Africa: we don’t want SA journalists to come and disturb Pastor. Then came high-media public visits by President Jonathan and Governor Raji Falola to T.B. Joshua. Nigerians saw condolence visits on TV but that was not what was going on. What was going on was a clear message to the South Africans: we got this one. We got the Pastor’s back. He is one of ours. Back off! Till date, T.B. Joshua has never answered for his crime. The Government of Lagos state made some noise about building codes and there were rumours and rumbles of trial and prosecution before that episode settled into the archives of crimes owned by the Nigerian state as a foster parent. Enter the Ikoyi billions and the same pattern is emerging. I am writing this piece so that President Buhari will not be deceived by his supporters and praise singers that any Nigerian is prepared to buy the silly story that the Ikoyi billions belong to NIA. I would not even insult my five-year-old daughter with such a stupid narrative. This is a familiar pattern by which yet another high-stakes crime will be owned and normalized by the Nigerian state. It would be a shame if President Buhari allows this to happen on his watch. It would be yet another nail in the coffin of his mortally wounded anti-corruption war, another tear in the tattered rags of change. My own suspicion is that the Ikoyi funds are owned by individuals and interests spanning PDP and APC, Christians and Muslims, and a multiplicity of ethnicities. For when members of the confederacy of illicit interests who own Nigeria commit crimes at this level, they go by a scrupulous respect for Federal character as we witnessed in the spread of Dasuki’s largesse. Among them, there is no APC, no PDP, no Christians, no Muslims, no Hausa, Yoruba, and Igbo. Only a national cake on the table. It is only among their mostly diseducated followers that you find such divisions. The only reason that the identities of the owners of the Ikoyi billion cannot be revealed and an institution of the Nigerian state – NIA – must be given marching orders to own the crime is that there is unity of purpose in the confederacy of illicit interests. They are always wiser than their followers. The long search continues for the President who will discontinue the role of the Nigerian Presidency as a foster parent of crimes. #copied

#nigeria anti corruption #efcc

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Tife Owolabi