By ejike e okpa ii
Next Generation Fellow
The American Assembly
The history of Iraq that Ogbuagu posted earlier is an old tale but it may be new to some. I remember that back In high school (in Nigeria), these were taught in our world history classes and BK - Bible Knowledge.
Because the western world uses its media powerhouses to re-write history, some of us that came from background where oral tales and history still dominate story-times, know most of what is contained in this thread.
When we read American history, we often check it against some other sources and quite often, it contradicts.
There are many in USA that decry the Muslim world, and rightly so, but the most money invested in US by sovereign nations come from Muslim countries. Also, a Muslim country - specifically Morocco (in Africa) - was the first nation to accord USA full diplomatic recognition as the US fought for her independence from Great Britain. USA reciprocated and built its first Embassy in Tangier, Morocco.
Thus, while Europe today stakes claim as the closest and most loyal ally of US, it was an African country that accorded her recognition and helped legitimize her existence when she was fighting the same continent!
Sometimes, one needs to live outside the US to appreciate World History, and in turn broaden one's scope and widen the horizon. The attendant benefit leads to escaping the myopia that tends to govern the perception most Americans extend to the world. As the Igbos used to say to a child that wants to impress the parents about a new thing it has discovered: What we tend to see standing over others, some have seen sitting down.
President Nixon and his Secretary of State Kissinger came face-to-face with this axiom as they reached out to China with a kind of diplomacy that never left anyone in doubt about US supremacy and supreme tendencies. The Chinese, not given to display as we do in America, sat quietly as Kissinger railed on them about international relations/diplomacy, and what needs to be done; why and how.
The Chinese summed the meeting up by simply saying: We are a Dynasty and there is nothing a country less than 200 years old [then] can teach or tell us. This was the only answer that the diplomats got in return for their zillion hours of preparation. It shows that when one is confident of one’s history and is deeply rooted, one need not prove anything to anyone. The Chinese are GOOD at that.
Maybe, we can learn something from that demeanor. While China is a 'dynasty', their position is not all entirely true: A young nation can teach an old nation something.
But the Chinese commentary does highlight the resistance to leadership that the world extends to US when it comes to who, when and why of history. If one is not broadened in their knowledge of the world and the chronology of histoty, one is bound by default to think 'westerners' invented the world, sat next to God/Creator and obtained what should happen.
The western attitude is like BASF commercial that says, 'We don't make a lot of the stuff you buy but we make them better'. Lace that with JD Power and Associates; where no one is ever 'Second', and you may think we in America invented the world.
enJOY
Musings of a suitably mystified Nigerian, mystified at the way that the continent of Africa and its peoples manage to often snatch defeats from the jaws of victory.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
History As It Should be Known
Posted by
ejike e okpa ii
Next Generation Fellow
The American Assembly
1. The Garden of Eden was in Iraq
2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization!
3. Noah built the ark in Iraq
4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq
5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!
6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq!
7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq
8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq
9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel
10. Amos cried out in Iraq!
11 Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem
12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!
13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq (Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the Fiery Furnace!)
14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the 'writing on the wall' in Iraq
15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq
16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq ..
17. The wise men were from Iraq
18. Peter preached in Iraq
19. The 'Empire of Man' described in Revelation is called Babylon, which was a city in Iraq!
And you have probably seen this one: Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible.
But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotomia means between two rivers, more exactly Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.
The name Iraq means country with deep roots. Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible. No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated with it than Iraq.
This is something to think about: America is typically represented by an eagle. Saddam should have read up on his Muslim passages. The following Koran verse should been read and understood by Saddam: Koran 9:11 - For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; And there was peace.
ejike e okpa ii
Next Generation Fellow
The American Assembly
1. The Garden of Eden was in Iraq
2. Mesopotamia, which is now Iraq, was the cradle of civilization!
3. Noah built the ark in Iraq
4. The Tower of Babel was in Iraq
5. Abraham was from Ur, which is in Southern Iraq!
6. Isaac's wife Rebekah is from Nahor, which is in Iraq!
7. Jacob met Rachel in Iraq
8. Jonah preached in Nineveh - which is in Iraq
9. Assyria, which is in Iraq, conquered the ten tribes of Israel
10. Amos cried out in Iraq!
11 Babylon, which is in Iraq, destroyed Jerusalem
12. Daniel was in the lion's den in Iraq!
13. The three Hebrew children were in the fire in Iraq (Jesus had been in Iraq also as the fourth person in the Fiery Furnace!)
14. Belshazzar, the King of Babylon saw the 'writing on the wall' in Iraq
15. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, carried the Jews captive into Iraq
16. Ezekiel preached in Iraq ..
17. The wise men were from Iraq
18. Peter preached in Iraq
19. The 'Empire of Man' described in Revelation is called Babylon, which was a city in Iraq!
And you have probably seen this one: Israel is the nation most often mentioned in the Bible.
But do you know which nation is second? It is Iraq! However, that is not the name that is used in the Bible. The names used in the Bible are Babylon, Land of Shinar, and Mesopotamia. The word Mesopotomia means between two rivers, more exactly Tigris and Euphrates Rivers.
The name Iraq means country with deep roots. Indeed Iraq is a country with deep roots and is a very significant country in the Bible. No other nation, except Israel, has more history and prophecy associated with it than Iraq.
This is something to think about: America is typically represented by an eagle. Saddam should have read up on his Muslim passages. The following Koran verse should been read and understood by Saddam: Koran 9:11 - For it is written that a son of Arabia would awaken a fearsome Eagle. The wrath of the Eagle would be felt throughout the lands of Allah and lo, while some of the people trembled in despair still more rejoiced; for the wrath of the Eagle cleansed the lands of Allah; And there was peace.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
The Wisdom of Father Lazarus (1)
Father Lazarus is my favourite preacher. This was what he told his congregation on New Year’s Day:
One day in Gboko, Benue State, a commercial cyclist (popularly known as Okadaman) picked up a male passenger, who wanted to go ”to the next street.” When they got to the first road junction, his passenger said, “turn left.” The Okadaman did and they proceeded to the next turn where he was directed: “turn right.”
The Okadaman then stopped his bike and told his passenger that if he was going to waste that much time trying to figure out where he wanted to go, he would be charged at an hourly rate (N500 per hour). The passenger agreed, and the cyclist happily followed his passenger’s unending commands: “turn right,” “go straight,” “turn left.”
After an hour and a half, the okadaman was calculating the thousands of Naira he had made from this “aimless” passenger. “He must be a tourist or something,” he said to himself.
Two hours later, the Okadaman stopped because he wanted to “piss.” He was on the side of the road doing his thing whereupon one of his relations appeared on foot, and was surprised to see the “passenger-tourist” perching on the okadaman’s bike.
“My broda, how you dey?” he asked his kinsman. “Fine,” the okadaman replied.
“How family? How children?” “Dem dey fine, replied the impatient okadaman
“A-beg make I ask you sometin”, the relation said, and drew the Okadaman to a safe corner.
“Dat man wey you dey carry, you no’am?”
“No, why you dey ask?”
“Because na mad man ee be!”
Then Father Lazarus gave us the punch line:
“How many passengers (read baggage) did you pick up last year (2008) who took you on a merry-go-round? How come some of the things that you did were aimless and unfocussed, following a path charted by others who may not even be as intelligent as you are? Will there be a change in your life this year, even if it is something as innocuous as changing the way your apartment looks? The things you read, listen to, hear? How creative and productive are you prepared to be this year, or are you going to graze the same useless and charted territory that made you wish for 2009 when, hopefully “tins go beta?”
One day in Gboko, Benue State, a commercial cyclist (popularly known as Okadaman) picked up a male passenger, who wanted to go ”to the next street.” When they got to the first road junction, his passenger said, “turn left.” The Okadaman did and they proceeded to the next turn where he was directed: “turn right.”
The Okadaman then stopped his bike and told his passenger that if he was going to waste that much time trying to figure out where he wanted to go, he would be charged at an hourly rate (N500 per hour). The passenger agreed, and the cyclist happily followed his passenger’s unending commands: “turn right,” “go straight,” “turn left.”
After an hour and a half, the okadaman was calculating the thousands of Naira he had made from this “aimless” passenger. “He must be a tourist or something,” he said to himself.
Two hours later, the Okadaman stopped because he wanted to “piss.” He was on the side of the road doing his thing whereupon one of his relations appeared on foot, and was surprised to see the “passenger-tourist” perching on the okadaman’s bike.
“My broda, how you dey?” he asked his kinsman. “Fine,” the okadaman replied.
“How family? How children?” “Dem dey fine, replied the impatient okadaman
“A-beg make I ask you sometin”, the relation said, and drew the Okadaman to a safe corner.
“Dat man wey you dey carry, you no’am?”
“No, why you dey ask?”
“Because na mad man ee be!”
Then Father Lazarus gave us the punch line:
“How many passengers (read baggage) did you pick up last year (2008) who took you on a merry-go-round? How come some of the things that you did were aimless and unfocussed, following a path charted by others who may not even be as intelligent as you are? Will there be a change in your life this year, even if it is something as innocuous as changing the way your apartment looks? The things you read, listen to, hear? How creative and productive are you prepared to be this year, or are you going to graze the same useless and charted territory that made you wish for 2009 when, hopefully “tins go beta?”
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Not About Ribadu
I have received many personal e-mails, for and against my Ribadu intervention. Please keep the comments coming.
I would like to say that my intervention is not really about Ribadu as such. It is rather about a certain brash tendency that many bright young people in Nigeria bring to the task when they are appointed to high public office. They end up making a mess of it all, and we turn all emotional when they get hit by their mistakes, or their misdeeds. After the emotions, we all forget, and another bright fellow comes to the stage and repeats the exact same mistakes.
If I must link it to the Ribadu case, we need to stress the point that the ex-EFCC boss failed to focus on the big political picture as he went about the little details of his job. I stressed this point in the article: “if the man who appoints you pays lip service to anti-corruption and you chose to go out on a limb, you end up in the cold as well.”
The second mistake he made was not accepting the position of Deputy Commissioner, which would have placed him above most of his course mates in the Police anyway. By rejecting it, he certainly would have played into the hands of the same people that everybody wants me to believe were instrumental to his sack. It was a tactical blunder.
My position has always been that our anti-corruption war is not likely to be prosecuted by our current politicians - even if they deploy 1000 Ribadu's to the battle. Why? Because it is basically a war against themselves and no one wants to fight a war of attrition!
Therefore, until better strategies and tactics are marshaled out and executed by the people who elect politicians, we would all be wasting our time, and weeping endlessly when someone who looks like a "messiah" comes to the stage and is rubbished. Think back to Kalu Idika Kalu. It was so with late Tai Solarin in Peoples Bank. It was so with Kongi in Road Safety. It will continue thus, as long as we have the present crop of politicians with their "C" mindset.
This intervention is actually for those who, tomorrow, may find themselves appointed to sensitive positions in government. They need to learn the politics of doing their jobs, and retaining those jobs. They need to learn how to watch their backs and not leave their flanks open. They need to understand their bosses and march in tandem with their political steps, as far as their jobs are concerned. We have witnessed many recent examples of people who marched out of step. More recently, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala had her baptism of fire, but was saved because she had people like Paul Nwabuikwu, and a reputation management strategy behind her. Nasiru El Rufa’i will certainly get his, sooner or later; so would Oby Ezekwesili, if she ever decides to come home to “meddle”.
For emphasis, what this means is NOT that you sit on the job. What it means is that you do the job with common sense and decency, and maintain a certain dignity and affableness that the people need to shower you with good wishes and prayers. For instance, is it not common knowledge that religious congregations (Christian and Muslim alike) were praying against Nasiru el-Rufa’i? It was not because his objective was not noble; it was because his methods were unconscionable – shocking and sometimes morally unacceptable.
Every first class brain in the Obasanjo regime was not like this. We can point to the example of the one person who, in my view, has been exceptional (and very, very effective) in his approach: Charles Chukwuma Soludo.
Public office should not be turned into a rabblerousing exercise that plays to the emotions of the not very perceptive minds.
Last Line
So that I will not become a mere armchair critic, I shall focus next on how we can effectively wage the anti-corruption battle in Nigeria and win.
I would like to say that my intervention is not really about Ribadu as such. It is rather about a certain brash tendency that many bright young people in Nigeria bring to the task when they are appointed to high public office. They end up making a mess of it all, and we turn all emotional when they get hit by their mistakes, or their misdeeds. After the emotions, we all forget, and another bright fellow comes to the stage and repeats the exact same mistakes.
If I must link it to the Ribadu case, we need to stress the point that the ex-EFCC boss failed to focus on the big political picture as he went about the little details of his job. I stressed this point in the article: “if the man who appoints you pays lip service to anti-corruption and you chose to go out on a limb, you end up in the cold as well.”
The second mistake he made was not accepting the position of Deputy Commissioner, which would have placed him above most of his course mates in the Police anyway. By rejecting it, he certainly would have played into the hands of the same people that everybody wants me to believe were instrumental to his sack. It was a tactical blunder.
My position has always been that our anti-corruption war is not likely to be prosecuted by our current politicians - even if they deploy 1000 Ribadu's to the battle. Why? Because it is basically a war against themselves and no one wants to fight a war of attrition!
Therefore, until better strategies and tactics are marshaled out and executed by the people who elect politicians, we would all be wasting our time, and weeping endlessly when someone who looks like a "messiah" comes to the stage and is rubbished. Think back to Kalu Idika Kalu. It was so with late Tai Solarin in Peoples Bank. It was so with Kongi in Road Safety. It will continue thus, as long as we have the present crop of politicians with their "C" mindset.
This intervention is actually for those who, tomorrow, may find themselves appointed to sensitive positions in government. They need to learn the politics of doing their jobs, and retaining those jobs. They need to learn how to watch their backs and not leave their flanks open. They need to understand their bosses and march in tandem with their political steps, as far as their jobs are concerned. We have witnessed many recent examples of people who marched out of step. More recently, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala had her baptism of fire, but was saved because she had people like Paul Nwabuikwu, and a reputation management strategy behind her. Nasiru El Rufa’i will certainly get his, sooner or later; so would Oby Ezekwesili, if she ever decides to come home to “meddle”.
For emphasis, what this means is NOT that you sit on the job. What it means is that you do the job with common sense and decency, and maintain a certain dignity and affableness that the people need to shower you with good wishes and prayers. For instance, is it not common knowledge that religious congregations (Christian and Muslim alike) were praying against Nasiru el-Rufa’i? It was not because his objective was not noble; it was because his methods were unconscionable – shocking and sometimes morally unacceptable.
Every first class brain in the Obasanjo regime was not like this. We can point to the example of the one person who, in my view, has been exceptional (and very, very effective) in his approach: Charles Chukwuma Soludo.
Public office should not be turned into a rabblerousing exercise that plays to the emotions of the not very perceptive minds.
Last Line
So that I will not become a mere armchair critic, I shall focus next on how we can effectively wage the anti-corruption battle in Nigeria and win.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
The Trouble With Nuhu Ribadu
However you consider the matter, one must feel for Nuhu Ribadu, erstwhile boss of the anti-corruption agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). But has anyone stopped to wonder that this committed, patriotic officer may have been the architect of his current misfortune?
Ribadu faced six major hurdles that he failed to clear, which, in my view, cost him his primary job with the Nigeria Police. He forgot that his was a political slot that lasts for between four and eight years - and no more. He did not appreciate the limits of enforcement powers given to the Commission. He did not do his homework with the Nigerian bench; he thrust himself onto the public stage as the man fighting corruption; he trusted in his ability as an effective spokesman, and; he may not have acted on well-meaning advice.
We proceed to examine each of these. But, please note that what you are about to read has nothing to do with how effective or ineffective Malam Nuhu Ribadu has been in the discharge of his anti-corruption mandate at the EFCC. It is also not an attempt to diminish the fight against corruption – a very worthy war that must be successfully waged and won. They rather concern Ribadu’s personal failings, which impacted negatively on his attempt to return to the Police at the rank awarded him on the eve of OBJ’s departure from power.
First, the Chairmanship of EFCC is reserved for serving or retired security officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police. At the time he was appointed in 2003, Ribadu was below this rank, and had to be elevated to comply with the law. By 2007 when he was reappointed for his second and final tenure, some of Ribadu’s peers had reached the same rank of Assistant Commissioner, but he was, once again, leapfrogged three whopping steps to Asst. Inspector General. Born in 1960, Ribadu would have been 51 in 2011 when his second and final tenure was supposed to end. Which means that he would still have nine whole years to spend with the Police if he chose to return.
He probably planned to retire in 2011 and not return to the Police – and this would explain why he did not factor in how his rapid promotions would play if he returned to the Police, a conservative, disciplined body.
Second Point: The law setting up the EFCC worked against Ribadu, by giving the EFCC Chairman both executive and accounting authority. Anyone appointed Chairman could run the Agency as a personal property. Ribadu did not understand that doing so would work to the advantage of the wily Army General-turned politician who was his boss. Ex-President Obasanjo stayed in the background and passed dirty political jobs for Ribadu to execute and Ribadu trotted the stage, making a show of letting people believe that it was not the hand of Esau at work in a few political persecution cases.
Third Point: This has to do with legal processes that must begin with accusation and investigation, and end with prosecution. Ribadu did not want to accept that the process ended with prosecution, whether successful or not. Under Ribadu’s EFCC, corruption prosecutions became more of a political than a legal process. We witnessed the spectacle of boastful threats, gangster-like arrests, and verbal assaults on judges from a security boss who was trained on how to adopt a cool, calm, calculated, and less noisy approach to investigations and prosecutions.
Fourth Point: It was tragic watching his performance with the Nigerian Bench. In every situation where an agency of government takes the trouble to sensitize the Nigerian Bench, the results have always been heartwarming. Judges are appointed from the pool of Nigerian lawyers with at least 10 years of legal practice. They are not experts on anything other than law, and they require specialist training in any area where their input is required in our attempt to construct a Nigeria of our dreams. Nuhu Ribadu apparently did not properly do his homework with the Nigerian bench, and the result was evident. He made a habit of predetermining accused persons guilty and became frustrated with judges who thought otherwise. Many judges that approached the EFCC cases in ways that Ribadu did not like were placed under suspicion. More tragically, he went about selecting “EFCC” justices from Kaduna, Abuja, and Lagos, and added to his burden a spate of legal summersaults, as defence counsels easily slowed down prosecutions by contesting jurisdiction at every turn. The result was a disproportionate ratio between arrests and concluded prosecutions. It was an administrative disaster.
Fifth Point: Ribadu did not understand that the war against corruption is a war that should be fought by the highest levels of government. The anti-corruption policy is made by a head of state, whether he is elected or shot himself to power. The tempo of this war, as well as updates about the war is best left for the politicians, thus making it easy for the people to gauge when the political will has waned.
Nuhu Ribadu thrust himself onto the public arena as the man fighting corruption, rather than leave the job to the owner of this war – ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo. Even when he recognized that there was an element of hypocrisy surrounding the war, Ribadu could not bring himself to admit this to the public, because it was Ribadu’s war – although it was not. The best way to understand this is to look at the Buhari-Idigbon regime and what it did on the anti-corruption front. Buhari did not need to create a special agency to fight the war (although there was an enforcement decree). He used existing judicial, police and SSS structures, complemented by the army, and was as successful, if not more successful, that Ribadu’s EFCC. The person who was not doing the arrests but was recognized as the force behind the war was Tunde Idiagbon, Buhari’s chief of staff, who was political head of government at the time.
Ribadu could have made better progress if he discharged his responsibilities in investigations and prosecutions, and left Obasanjo’s spokesmen to let us know how the government’s war was faring. Today, the owner of the war is relaxed at Otta while Ribadu is on the hot seat, paying the price for not being circumspect.
Not to put too fine a point to it, if Ribadu wanted to effectively play the role that he assumed, he should have first contested and won a presidential election, from where, like Buhari, he would have been able to do what he wanted, and professionally lived to tell the tale. If the man who appoints you pays lip service to anti-corruption and you decide to go out on a limb, you end up in the cold as well.
Sixth Point: I watched a few public speeches of Ribadu, on television and live on stage. Each time I witnessed it, I got irritated and asked myself why the man does not articulate his thoughts very well. He passes by with a lot of bluster and what looks like Marxist rhetoric. He, however, manages to pass across his one and only message: people of Nigeria, you are all corrupt but watch out, for I am coming after you! You can count the number of public speeches that Ribadu did not make extempore. In other words, he did not trust that he could communicate better by disciplining himself to deep reflections of the written speech. It was almost as if his EFCC position got into his head, to the extent that he trusted himself as his own spokesman, and thought he could successfully manage his reputation by using his position as boss of an intimidating agency.
Late in the day when he faced his personal crisis, and needed to bring that personal touch which he thought he had to his defence, he realized what should have been apparent to him from the beginning: he needed people to sit down and work out a personal reputation management strategy that could have served him over time. But by that time, he had already done the harm to himself. I believe that if Ribadu had any idea that he would not return to the Police as the Inspector-General, he would have been more circumspect and less prone to react with contempt and arrogance to almost everyone but President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Seventh and Final Point: I find it hard to believe that Nuhu Ribadu may not have sought the advice and counsel of active and retired superior police and security officers when he was given the EFCC position. What is more likely is that he may have decided to ignore their advice. In his current travails, the public testimonies of a few retired police officers indicate that Ribadu may have paid deaf ears to early advice on how to handle his EFCC job, as well as to more recent advice on how to deal with the administrative problem bordering on what to do about the super rank that he was awarded by General Obasanjo, on the eve of his departure as President.
Unfortunately, it would appear that the former EFCC boss was more inclined to follow the advice of the opportunists – who are always close at hand to profit from the never-ending Nigerian political controversies.
Ribadu faced six major hurdles that he failed to clear, which, in my view, cost him his primary job with the Nigeria Police. He forgot that his was a political slot that lasts for between four and eight years - and no more. He did not appreciate the limits of enforcement powers given to the Commission. He did not do his homework with the Nigerian bench; he thrust himself onto the public stage as the man fighting corruption; he trusted in his ability as an effective spokesman, and; he may not have acted on well-meaning advice.
We proceed to examine each of these. But, please note that what you are about to read has nothing to do with how effective or ineffective Malam Nuhu Ribadu has been in the discharge of his anti-corruption mandate at the EFCC. It is also not an attempt to diminish the fight against corruption – a very worthy war that must be successfully waged and won. They rather concern Ribadu’s personal failings, which impacted negatively on his attempt to return to the Police at the rank awarded him on the eve of OBJ’s departure from power.
First, the Chairmanship of EFCC is reserved for serving or retired security officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police. At the time he was appointed in 2003, Ribadu was below this rank, and had to be elevated to comply with the law. By 2007 when he was reappointed for his second and final tenure, some of Ribadu’s peers had reached the same rank of Assistant Commissioner, but he was, once again, leapfrogged three whopping steps to Asst. Inspector General. Born in 1960, Ribadu would have been 51 in 2011 when his second and final tenure was supposed to end. Which means that he would still have nine whole years to spend with the Police if he chose to return.
He probably planned to retire in 2011 and not return to the Police – and this would explain why he did not factor in how his rapid promotions would play if he returned to the Police, a conservative, disciplined body.
Second Point: The law setting up the EFCC worked against Ribadu, by giving the EFCC Chairman both executive and accounting authority. Anyone appointed Chairman could run the Agency as a personal property. Ribadu did not understand that doing so would work to the advantage of the wily Army General-turned politician who was his boss. Ex-President Obasanjo stayed in the background and passed dirty political jobs for Ribadu to execute and Ribadu trotted the stage, making a show of letting people believe that it was not the hand of Esau at work in a few political persecution cases.
Third Point: This has to do with legal processes that must begin with accusation and investigation, and end with prosecution. Ribadu did not want to accept that the process ended with prosecution, whether successful or not. Under Ribadu’s EFCC, corruption prosecutions became more of a political than a legal process. We witnessed the spectacle of boastful threats, gangster-like arrests, and verbal assaults on judges from a security boss who was trained on how to adopt a cool, calm, calculated, and less noisy approach to investigations and prosecutions.
Fourth Point: It was tragic watching his performance with the Nigerian Bench. In every situation where an agency of government takes the trouble to sensitize the Nigerian Bench, the results have always been heartwarming. Judges are appointed from the pool of Nigerian lawyers with at least 10 years of legal practice. They are not experts on anything other than law, and they require specialist training in any area where their input is required in our attempt to construct a Nigeria of our dreams. Nuhu Ribadu apparently did not properly do his homework with the Nigerian bench, and the result was evident. He made a habit of predetermining accused persons guilty and became frustrated with judges who thought otherwise. Many judges that approached the EFCC cases in ways that Ribadu did not like were placed under suspicion. More tragically, he went about selecting “EFCC” justices from Kaduna, Abuja, and Lagos, and added to his burden a spate of legal summersaults, as defence counsels easily slowed down prosecutions by contesting jurisdiction at every turn. The result was a disproportionate ratio between arrests and concluded prosecutions. It was an administrative disaster.
Fifth Point: Ribadu did not understand that the war against corruption is a war that should be fought by the highest levels of government. The anti-corruption policy is made by a head of state, whether he is elected or shot himself to power. The tempo of this war, as well as updates about the war is best left for the politicians, thus making it easy for the people to gauge when the political will has waned.
Nuhu Ribadu thrust himself onto the public arena as the man fighting corruption, rather than leave the job to the owner of this war – ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo. Even when he recognized that there was an element of hypocrisy surrounding the war, Ribadu could not bring himself to admit this to the public, because it was Ribadu’s war – although it was not. The best way to understand this is to look at the Buhari-Idigbon regime and what it did on the anti-corruption front. Buhari did not need to create a special agency to fight the war (although there was an enforcement decree). He used existing judicial, police and SSS structures, complemented by the army, and was as successful, if not more successful, that Ribadu’s EFCC. The person who was not doing the arrests but was recognized as the force behind the war was Tunde Idiagbon, Buhari’s chief of staff, who was political head of government at the time.
Ribadu could have made better progress if he discharged his responsibilities in investigations and prosecutions, and left Obasanjo’s spokesmen to let us know how the government’s war was faring. Today, the owner of the war is relaxed at Otta while Ribadu is on the hot seat, paying the price for not being circumspect.
Not to put too fine a point to it, if Ribadu wanted to effectively play the role that he assumed, he should have first contested and won a presidential election, from where, like Buhari, he would have been able to do what he wanted, and professionally lived to tell the tale. If the man who appoints you pays lip service to anti-corruption and you decide to go out on a limb, you end up in the cold as well.
Sixth Point: I watched a few public speeches of Ribadu, on television and live on stage. Each time I witnessed it, I got irritated and asked myself why the man does not articulate his thoughts very well. He passes by with a lot of bluster and what looks like Marxist rhetoric. He, however, manages to pass across his one and only message: people of Nigeria, you are all corrupt but watch out, for I am coming after you! You can count the number of public speeches that Ribadu did not make extempore. In other words, he did not trust that he could communicate better by disciplining himself to deep reflections of the written speech. It was almost as if his EFCC position got into his head, to the extent that he trusted himself as his own spokesman, and thought he could successfully manage his reputation by using his position as boss of an intimidating agency.
Late in the day when he faced his personal crisis, and needed to bring that personal touch which he thought he had to his defence, he realized what should have been apparent to him from the beginning: he needed people to sit down and work out a personal reputation management strategy that could have served him over time. But by that time, he had already done the harm to himself. I believe that if Ribadu had any idea that he would not return to the Police as the Inspector-General, he would have been more circumspect and less prone to react with contempt and arrogance to almost everyone but President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Seventh and Final Point: I find it hard to believe that Nuhu Ribadu may not have sought the advice and counsel of active and retired superior police and security officers when he was given the EFCC position. What is more likely is that he may have decided to ignore their advice. In his current travails, the public testimonies of a few retired police officers indicate that Ribadu may have paid deaf ears to early advice on how to handle his EFCC job, as well as to more recent advice on how to deal with the administrative problem bordering on what to do about the super rank that he was awarded by General Obasanjo, on the eve of his departure as President.
Unfortunately, it would appear that the former EFCC boss was more inclined to follow the advice of the opportunists – who are always close at hand to profit from the never-ending Nigerian political controversies.
Beyond Lukman’s Appointment
The uproar over the recent appointment of Rilwanu Lukman as petroleum minister is, in my view, diversionary.
Before I go into the substantive issues that I believe should engage us Nigerians at this moment, let me say, by the way, that I see nothing wrong with this appointment: We should allow President Umaru Yar’Adua choose whomsoever he believes will help him deliver on his campaign promises. We need to pull back a little from constantly second-guessing Mr. Yar’Adua, as if he is some kind of nincompoop.
Why do I see nothing wrong with Lukman’s appointment? Despite everything done to move Nigeria away from its sole dependence on oil, our country has unfortunately not developed alternative source of income for her development. Therefore we continue to watch closely not only the security of mining and selling crude, but also the politics of negotiating sufficient quantity to sell at the international market.
No petroleum minister is going to re-invent the wheel on how to produce and market crude oil. Where the challenges are, for Nigeria, are how to ensure that the Niger Delta is secure and peaceful, oil companies meet their full tax obligations, continue to deal honestly with Nigeria on joint ventures and production sharing contracts, and our country gets her due from OPEC quota negotiations. The first two – Niger Delta and Tax – are not primary responsibilities of a petroleum minister. On the last two, Nigeria needs a steady, old, experienced hand to keep an eagle eye on our JVs and PSCs, as well as continue to negotiate the vital quotas at OPEC conferences, a ritual that has become the cornerstone of our mono-crop economic development.
On the relevant issues, no other Nigerian comes close to the local and international experiences that Dr. Lukman brings forward – as former OPEC Secretary General (and president of OPEC Conference for eight consecutive terms), Federal Minister with experience spanning three portfolios (Mines, Power and Steel, Petroleum Resources, and Foreign Affairs), Presidential Adviser on Petroleum and Energy, Chief Executive of Nigerian Mining Corporation, chairman Boards of old NNPC and old NEPA, and current chairman of a leading independent exploration and production company. He is also academically qualified, with degrees in mining engineering, mining economics, a doctoral degree in chemical engineering.
It is hard to find another Nigerian with this breath of professional experience in the industry! Therefore, if a Nigerian President does not appoint Rilwanu Lukman as a minister or special adviser, such a president would nevertheless seek his private counsel on critical issues in that sector. It is therefore up to incoming presidents to decide how Lukman can best serve the nation.
The controversy over the current appointment of Lukman as petroleum minister is, in my view, unnecessary. My position is that we should rather look beyond petroleum, and begin to ponder what will happen to Nigeria after the last drop of oil is lifted and sold.
I identify three issues that the country needs to urgently discuss and take action on within the two to six years that is left for President Yar’Adua at Aso Rock.
First, we need to reposition our domestic production priorities, taking a cue from what western world leaders are saying about their “addiction” to our oil. The world faces its current energy challenge from the development of other sources of energy, and from protection of the environment. From Downing Street to Pennsylvania Avenue, the new policy talk is about developing alternative energy sources through solar power, biofuel, wind energy, and clean coal.If these leaders jumpstart the development of alternative energy sources, the struggles of the Niger Delta and the desperation of Nigerian politicians to come to power would suddenly be in vain – because the value of the black gold would plummet.
We need to move towards renewable energy sources. I am therefore not concerned about the current portfolio of Rilwanu Lukman. I am intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on New Energy.
Is this the schedule that Diezani Allison-Madueke is also handling, or shall we wait for another?
Second, we need to seriously consider developing our industry and technology to boost local wealth. The world has moved towards the creation of new wealth through Information and Communication Technology (ICT), and we are not making much progress in this direction either. The richest nations and individuals in the world today come from countries that research, develop, produce and sell ICT.
Therefore I am not concerned about Rilwanu Lukman at the Petroleum Ministry. I am rather intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on ICT.
Is this the schedule that Dora Akunyili is also handling, or shall we wait for another?
Third, most countries depend the most on taxation of their citizens (individual and corporate) to fund infrastructure and socio-economic development. Thus far, we have failed to use tax as an alternative and sustainable source of public financing. Despite the frenzy of reforms at the federal level, Nigerian citizens and businesses are yet to experience relief from an oppressive tax regime empowered by law to tax business capital and impose arbitrary assessments. The reforms offer a vista through which Nigeria could join progressive nations to develop this important revenue source. But even these reforms and the laws they spun have not succeeded in extricating the tax authority from the Ministry of Finance.
I am not concerned about Rilwanu Lukman as such. I am intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on Taxation.
Does Dr. Mansur Mukhtar bring to the position, the relevant academic, professional, and political experience to make taxation serve the socio-economic development needs of the nation, even as it encourages citizens to vote for voluntary compliance?
These are vital issues of the moment which go beyond petroleum, and beyond who was appointed as minister of petroleum.
I would suggest that, if we must heckle the president, we push him to privatize the industry, abolish NNPC and the Ministry, pull out of OPEC, and put in their place a new Ministry that conceives and creates the required energy matrix that stimulates industrial and technological development, even as it renews our environment.
Before I go into the substantive issues that I believe should engage us Nigerians at this moment, let me say, by the way, that I see nothing wrong with this appointment: We should allow President Umaru Yar’Adua choose whomsoever he believes will help him deliver on his campaign promises. We need to pull back a little from constantly second-guessing Mr. Yar’Adua, as if he is some kind of nincompoop.
Why do I see nothing wrong with Lukman’s appointment? Despite everything done to move Nigeria away from its sole dependence on oil, our country has unfortunately not developed alternative source of income for her development. Therefore we continue to watch closely not only the security of mining and selling crude, but also the politics of negotiating sufficient quantity to sell at the international market.
No petroleum minister is going to re-invent the wheel on how to produce and market crude oil. Where the challenges are, for Nigeria, are how to ensure that the Niger Delta is secure and peaceful, oil companies meet their full tax obligations, continue to deal honestly with Nigeria on joint ventures and production sharing contracts, and our country gets her due from OPEC quota negotiations. The first two – Niger Delta and Tax – are not primary responsibilities of a petroleum minister. On the last two, Nigeria needs a steady, old, experienced hand to keep an eagle eye on our JVs and PSCs, as well as continue to negotiate the vital quotas at OPEC conferences, a ritual that has become the cornerstone of our mono-crop economic development.
On the relevant issues, no other Nigerian comes close to the local and international experiences that Dr. Lukman brings forward – as former OPEC Secretary General (and president of OPEC Conference for eight consecutive terms), Federal Minister with experience spanning three portfolios (Mines, Power and Steel, Petroleum Resources, and Foreign Affairs), Presidential Adviser on Petroleum and Energy, Chief Executive of Nigerian Mining Corporation, chairman Boards of old NNPC and old NEPA, and current chairman of a leading independent exploration and production company. He is also academically qualified, with degrees in mining engineering, mining economics, a doctoral degree in chemical engineering.
It is hard to find another Nigerian with this breath of professional experience in the industry! Therefore, if a Nigerian President does not appoint Rilwanu Lukman as a minister or special adviser, such a president would nevertheless seek his private counsel on critical issues in that sector. It is therefore up to incoming presidents to decide how Lukman can best serve the nation.
The controversy over the current appointment of Lukman as petroleum minister is, in my view, unnecessary. My position is that we should rather look beyond petroleum, and begin to ponder what will happen to Nigeria after the last drop of oil is lifted and sold.
I identify three issues that the country needs to urgently discuss and take action on within the two to six years that is left for President Yar’Adua at Aso Rock.
First, we need to reposition our domestic production priorities, taking a cue from what western world leaders are saying about their “addiction” to our oil. The world faces its current energy challenge from the development of other sources of energy, and from protection of the environment. From Downing Street to Pennsylvania Avenue, the new policy talk is about developing alternative energy sources through solar power, biofuel, wind energy, and clean coal.If these leaders jumpstart the development of alternative energy sources, the struggles of the Niger Delta and the desperation of Nigerian politicians to come to power would suddenly be in vain – because the value of the black gold would plummet.
We need to move towards renewable energy sources. I am therefore not concerned about the current portfolio of Rilwanu Lukman. I am intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on New Energy.
Is this the schedule that Diezani Allison-Madueke is also handling, or shall we wait for another?
Second, we need to seriously consider developing our industry and technology to boost local wealth. The world has moved towards the creation of new wealth through Information and Communication Technology (ICT), and we are not making much progress in this direction either. The richest nations and individuals in the world today come from countries that research, develop, produce and sell ICT.
Therefore I am not concerned about Rilwanu Lukman at the Petroleum Ministry. I am rather intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on ICT.
Is this the schedule that Dora Akunyili is also handling, or shall we wait for another?
Third, most countries depend the most on taxation of their citizens (individual and corporate) to fund infrastructure and socio-economic development. Thus far, we have failed to use tax as an alternative and sustainable source of public financing. Despite the frenzy of reforms at the federal level, Nigerian citizens and businesses are yet to experience relief from an oppressive tax regime empowered by law to tax business capital and impose arbitrary assessments. The reforms offer a vista through which Nigeria could join progressive nations to develop this important revenue source. But even these reforms and the laws they spun have not succeeded in extricating the tax authority from the Ministry of Finance.
I am not concerned about Rilwanu Lukman as such. I am intrigued as to who the President is appointing to advisory or ministerial position on Taxation.
Does Dr. Mansur Mukhtar bring to the position, the relevant academic, professional, and political experience to make taxation serve the socio-economic development needs of the nation, even as it encourages citizens to vote for voluntary compliance?
These are vital issues of the moment which go beyond petroleum, and beyond who was appointed as minister of petroleum.
I would suggest that, if we must heckle the president, we push him to privatize the industry, abolish NNPC and the Ministry, pull out of OPEC, and put in their place a new Ministry that conceives and creates the required energy matrix that stimulates industrial and technological development, even as it renews our environment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)