Sunday, July 22, 2007

Implications of ex-governors’ trial

Retired Justices Kayode Eso and Mustapha Akanbi have one thing in common. It has nothing to do with being distinguished jurists in the Bench and indeed in the legal profession. Like another legendary jurist, Justice Chukwudifu Oputa, the views of Eso and Akanbi command a great public appeal each time they choose to speak.

Shortly after he became the Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, Akanbi did a critique on corruption in Nigeria and concluded that four main factors were responsible for its being endemic in public life. Then, Nigeria was ingloriously rated the third most corrupt in the world. These he said, include lack of political will to fight graft on the part of successive military leaders and inconsistency in government policies; reluctance by the nation’s law enforcement agencies to arrest and prosecute some “sacred cows.” He said the corrupt few had the effrontery to carry on with impunity and profligacy because nobody challenged their sources of opulence different from what is obtainable in advanced democracies of the world.

In the advanced democracies such as the United States, abuse of public office for personal benefit, constitutes a serious breach of trust. So, any corrupt official, no matter how highly placed, is not treated with kid gloves. Some good examples will suffice. A member of the US Congress, Randy “Duke” Cunningham resigned from Congress after allegedly confessing to evading taxes and being involved in bribes totaling $2.4 million. Another lawmaker, James A. Traficant (D-Ohio) was convicted in 2002 of 10 charges of racketeering, bribery and fraud. There was also the case in the state of Georgia, a former Senate Majority Leader, Charles Walker, was jailed for 10 years for misusing his position as a lawmaker. He was alleged to have stolen about $425,000 from a charity he created.

In Chile, the former leader, Augusto Pinochet was indicted on charges of fraud and corruption, while in Asia, the authorities in Bangladesh, in 2004, established an Independent Anti-Corruption Commission as part of efforts to prove that it meant business in its anti-corruption crusade. It quickly prepared a list of popular persons, including former ministers, legislators, business tycoons and labour leaders. It directed the persons to furnish the ACC with information on their wealth and assets within specific time. Some of those who were considered to be sacred cows because of their awesome influence and contacts were soon rounded up and detained and a few of them were tried and convicted like a former state minister, who was convicted for possessing and earning revenues from illegal assets.

In Nigeria, many blamed section 308 of the 1999 Constitution that protects the president, vice-president, governors and deputy governors against civil or ciminal proceedings while in office. It says, “A person to whom this section applies shall not be arrested during that period either in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise.”

Former governor of Bayelsa State, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, was the first state chief executive to run into trouble with the EFCC over allegations of abuse of office. His counterpart in Plateau State, Chief Joshua Dariye managed to sustain hide-and-seek with operatives of the commission until last week. He and others like the former governor of Jigawa State, Aminu Turaki; Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani of Enugu state and Orji Uzor Kalu of Abia State, are currently facing the crucible of the EFCC over alleged gross abuse of public office ranging from money laundering to diversion of huge public funds.

The ongoing onslaught against the former governors came at the time most people thought that the EFCC was treating these personalities accused of graft like sacred cows. This was because most of them had begun to assume the role of kingmakers in the present dispensation. A couple of them, who had played a leading role in the eventual victory of Yar’Adua at the poll did not only become regular visitors at the Presidential Villa, but gave the impression that they were soon to be appointed as members of the kitchen cabinet of Mr. President.

Critics even saw the initial invitation of the former governors for interrogation by the operatives as diversionary. It was not until one of them was detained by the EFFC and charged to court that it dawned on some of the critics that the battle against them was after all real. And Chief Edwin Ume-Ezeoke, who is the National Chairman of the All Nigeria Peoples Party, is among Nigerian leaders who saw the EFCC action as a confirmation that the government had derived the political will to confront corruption in the country. He was excited that the authorities were following due process in the matter. He said, “The political implication is that if the trials succeed, it will serve as deterrent to future occupants of such office, to commit any criminal offences of that nature. The process of trials itself has been a bit credible. The legal aspects of this shows that the rule of law has come to stay and the judiciary has finally gained its independence and authority.

“What the government had done was a major departure from what was obtainable in the past. And it looks like we might see more of that in the future. EFCC is now being given a free hand to perform its function. I am satisfied with the EFCC especially its pursuit of due process. I was so impressed that even before they arrested them, the EFCC first of all went to court for clearance. It was after the court ordered for their arrest, that they issued arrest warrants. It was after then that they proceeded to arrest the culprits. I think based on that, they need to be commended.”

Senator Abubakar Makarfi from Bauchi State noted: “The whole process will in a way instill some fears and discipline in the serving governors that government purse should not be looted. It will be in their minds while running their respective states. It will help the polity because we will recover those ill gotten wealth from the looters and there will be enough money in the purse to deliver dividends of democracy to the people. But more important is that it will serve as deterrent to serving governors. Because, if nothing is done to punish the former governors who have looted the treasury, it will encourage those coming in to do even worse.”

On the allegations that there are bigger thieves who are allowed to walk freely in the street, he said, “ I don’t want to agree because EFCC has just started and has not concluded. They cannot do everything at once. And the way it is going, if it has to get to the presidency why not? But I think I am truly satisfied. On whether the government possesses the political will to pursue the case; he said, “It is now left to the judiciary. And we must give kudos to the judiciary in this country. It is another arm of government that is handling it and not the executives. Once the EFCC has been able to establish a case against these people and take the case to court, it is left for the judiciary. And I have a very strong confidence in the judiciary.”

A former Chairman of the Onitsha branch of the Nigerian Bar Association, Chief Obele Chika, said, “The EFCC has done well by not engaging in Gestapo-like style in prosecuting suspects. It is commendable that they have taken them to court. On a serious note the EFCC justified the arraignment and we expect it to continue. The political implication is that it has helped the illegitimate government of President Umaru Yar’Adua politically. It is a plus for the government; a government I do not recognise because it was borne out of electoral infamy. It will also serve as warning to intending treasury looters that the anti corruption war is still here with us.”

But another prominent citizen, Dr. Wale Omole believes the action of the EFCC was belated though necessary if the nation must restore its dignity as the leading black nation in the world. He remarked that most Nigerians had hidden under the immunity clause in the 1999 Constitution to pilfer the commonwealth of the people of Nigeria. “Nigeria being severally declared one of the nations with the highest indices of corruption in the world is probably the only nation where the laws permit an incumbent president or governor to keep on committing crimes until expiration of his tenure. The official immunity they enjoy allows them free access to crimes and no EFCC, ICPC, SSS or Police can stop, investigate or harass them even when they steal all the public funds in their care or kill their political opponents. To them all these anti corruption agencies are spectators or noisemakers.”

Omole though, not against the onslaught of the EFCC against the former governors, said the action was coming too late because of the negative consequences of their activities on the society. He blamed the immunity clause in the constitution for the flagrant abuse of office by public officers. He said, “Today, the EFCC is arresting ex-Governors who have been indicted for stealing the state money. Their arrest, detention and prosecution is meaningless. Is this not medicine after death? Is this not similar to a law that prevents a fire fighter from action until after a public property has been fully consumed by fire? People cannot be slaves to their laws. Where is the wisdom in the law of a land that assists and protects a stealing officer while stealing and to keep stealing until official termination of the tenure which may last four or eight years? Can the EFCC recover one quarter of all stolen funds? Look at the huge amount of resources being committed to the arrest and prosecution. All these were preventable. Any law that prescribes deferred justice must be repealed.”

Not a few are still skeptical that the current effort might be a mere smokescreen because of the manner cases of corruption involving some public figures were fraudulently handled in the past. The slogan had always been, ‘It’s a family affair’, each time there was a major scandal involving members of the ruling elite. People are of the belief that the onslaught against the former governors are meant to satisfy certain political interest, which has certain scores to settle with some past leaders. Others say the exercise was merely salutary because it was a case of the bigger thief gaining an upper hand over the smaller ones. The radical lawyer, Chief Gani Fawehinmi (SAN) belongs to this school of thought. Ditto the second republic governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Balarabe Musa.

The position of both men is informed by some unanswered questions about the billions of Naira that were either siphoned through phony deals during the military era or squandered on the Turn-Around-Maintenance of the nation’s oil refineries beginning from 1999. No one has accounted for the huge public fund channeled into the energy sector that has remained epileptic. Some critics also cited the transport sector where the federal Government pumped billions of Naira into railway and federal highway projects. Yet, the transport is still in a despicable condition.

How far can the EFCC nay the government go on the current anti-graft war? Does the government possess the political will to actually prosecute the war? Makarfi, Omole, and others shared different views on the matter. Omole advocated a drastic change of attitude.

Omole, who is the National Coordinator of a non-governmental organisation, Peoples Problems and Solution, said, “ The Senate should strip all serving governors of their immunities. No honest Governor or President needs immunity. This should be a top priority in the proposed constitution amendment. The president of America, Bill Clinton was investigated for sexual harassment while in office. If all are equal before the law, no one should have immunity. This would earn Nigeria a better credibility in the comity of nations and our anti-corruption crusade would become meaningful to the world.”

Obele said, “ And only that , the EFCC should expect that any evidence that is needed to sustain this case are made available. And if they are not yet available they should try and bring out further evidences that are sufficient to secure conviction of these people at all cost. Because theses treasury looters should face the worst punishment that has not been prescribed for any kind.”
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

Thursday, July 19, 2007

DAVID MARK EMERGE NEW SENATE PRESIDENT

Senator David Bonaventure Mark representing Benue South Senatorial district has been elected as the new Senate President of Nigeria.


He polled 68 votes to defeat the second contestant chief George Akume former Governor of Benue State representing Benue North West Senatorial district. Senators Aliyu and Gbemisola Saraki who will also nominated for the position of Senate President stepped down.

Senator David Mark, two time Military Governor and a former Minister of Communication retired from Nigerian Army as a Brigadier General. He has been in the Senate since 1999 and also chaired many Senate Committees.

In the same vein, Senator Ike Ekweremadu representing Enugu West Senatorial district was unanimously returned as deputy Senate President. He is returning to the Senate second time having been elected Senator in 2003.

Subsequently, oaths of office and allegiance were administered on both David Mark and Ike Ekweremadu as President and Deputy Senate President by the clerk of the National Assembly Alhaji Nasiru Arab.

This election of David Mark as new Senate President confirms the earlier decision by the PDP caucus to zone the position to North Central Geo- political Zone of Nigeria and the directive to its members to support the candidature of Mark.
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

CBN Gov: senate now to decide appointment and removal

According to the new CBN Act 2007, signed into law May 25, 2007 by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the appointment of deputy governors and non-executive directors for the apex bank would also go through Senate confirmation.

Also in the Act is a provision that anyone who marches, hawks, mutilates or sprays the nation’s currency, the naira, during social occasions would be deemed to have committed an offense and shall be liable to six months imprisonment and or a fine of N50, 000.
The new Act, was gazetted early this month. It also expressed the autonomy of the CBN, recognising it as an “independent” institution, with full financial independence, as well as in the execution of its mandate.

The Act, which repeals the CBN Act 1991, states in part: “The Governor and Deputy-Governors shall be persons of recognised financial experience and shall be appointed by the President subject to confirmation by the Senate on such terms and conditions as may be set out in their respective letters of appointment. He may, under the circumstances specified in the Act, be removed from office by the President, provided that removal is supported by two-thirds of the Senate”.

“The Governor and Deputy Governors shall be appointed in the first instance for a term of five years and shall each be eligible for re-appointment for another term not exceeding five years. Provided that, of the first Deputy Governors to be so appointed, one shall in the first instance be appointed for three years and two shall in the first instance be appointed for four years,” the Act reads in part.

On the appointment of the five directors of the apex bank, the new Act states that “the five Directors of the Bank shall be appointed by the President subject to confirmation by the Senate and in appointing the five external Directors of the Bank, the President shall have due regard to a fair representation of the financial, agricultural, industrial and commercial interests and the principle of Federal Character.”

The new Act also spelt out punishment for anybody that refuses mutilated or refuses to accept the Naira.
“A person who refuses to accept the Naira as a means of payment is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine of N50, 000 or 6 months imprisonment: Provided that the Bank shall have powers to prescribe the circumstances and conditions under which other currencies may be used as medium of exchange in Nigeria.

“A person shall, who tampers with a coin or note issued by the Bank, be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable to imprisonment for a term not less than six months or to fine not less than N50,000 or both such fine and imprisonment.

“A coin or note shall be deemed to have been tampered with if the coin or note has been impaired, diminished or lightened otherwise than by fair wear and tear or has been defaced by stumping, engraving, mutilating, piercing, stapling, writing, tearing, soiling, squeezing or any other form of deliberate and willful abuse whether the coin or note has not been thereby diminished or lightened.

“For the avoidance of doubt, spraying of, dancing or matching on the Naira or any note issued by the Bank during social occasions or otherwise howsoever shall constitute an abuse and defacing of the Naira or such note, shall be punishable under Sub-section (1) of this section,” the Act also reads.

Commenting on the independence of the CBN, the Act stated that, “In order to facilitate the achievement of its mandate under this Act and the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act, and in line with the objective of promoting stability and continuity in economic management, the Bank shall be an independent body in the discharge of its functions. Subject to the limitations in this Act, the Bank may acquire, hold and dispose of movable and immovable property for the purpose of its functions.”The new Act, which now requires the CBN to furnish the National Assembly with its annual accounts and financial statements, also gives the banking watchdog greater flexibility in the selection of instruments and assets in which to invest the nation’s external reserve.

The new Act also requires the CBN to ensure monetary and price stability and to act as economic and financial adviser to the Federal Government while it raised the apex bank’s authorised capital from N300 million to N100 billion and extended membership of the board to include Accountant-General of the Federation.

Due to the various weaknesses of the CBN Act 1991 (with its various amendments), the Federal Executive Council deliberated on various amendments in three special sessions last year with a view to repealing the existing Act and re-enact a new law that would not only put the Bank in tune with international best practices but also strengthen its capacity to effectively and efficiently deliver on its core mandates.

Consequently, an extensively revised CBN Bill was sent to the National Assembly in late 2006, as well as the Bank and Other Financial Institutions Act (BOFIA). After long delays and scrutiny, the National Assembly finally passed the CBN Act early last Month, and former President Obasanjo assented to it and the Act was gazetted.
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

Yar’adua: Obj Cannot Dictate To Me

The President’s outburst came against the backdrop of strident criticisms that he was being teleguided by the former president who paved the way for his emergence.

Speaking through his Special Adviser on Communications, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, President Yar’Adua, who noted that Obasanjo was not controlled by anybody when he was in power, said he did not see any reason why there should be fears and apprehension about him being controlled by Obasanjo.

Adeniyi said after reading about such fears in the newspapers, the President would laugh over them because he was his own man.

The Special Adviser said President Yar’Adua could not afford to be controlled by anybody, not even former President Obasanjo, and that the President was quite aware of the fact that he was totally responsible to Nigerians whom he swore to serve honestly.

“He (Yar’Adua) will just laugh about it because they (reports) are not true. You yourself know about power. How do you imagine that the President of Nigeria will be controlled by anybody, elsewhere? President Obasanjo himself was president. I don’t know if anybody controlled him.
“So, I wonder why President Yar’Adua will sit down here knowing that he is not only responsible to the Nigerian people but also that he will be held accountable at the end of his stewardship.

Nobody is going to query Obasanjo for whatever happened between May 29, 2007 and May 28 or 29, 2011. Whatever happens in Nigeria, President Umaru Yar’Adua will be held responsible. Adeniyi added that, “all these things, I read them just like he reads them and he just smiles about them.

President Yar’Adua had earlier said in an interview with the Financial Times of London before his inauguration that he was not Obasanjo’s puppet.

That newspaper had insinuated that with the former president stepping into the position of chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Board of Trustees, Obasanjo would be the one ruling.
But President Yar’Adua had said he would be the President of Nigeria ruling by the constitution of the country and not by PDP constitution.

Adeniyi also said the President would unveil his plans for the power sector and the Niger Delta in two to three weeks’ time just as he disclosed that additional names of ministerial nominees would be forwarded to the National Assembly before next week.

The new ministerial nominees are to accommodate names of the choices of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and perhaps Peoples Progressives Alliance (PPA) participating in President Yar’Adua’s Government of National Unity.

Giving an update on how far President Yar’Adua had gone in unfolding his plans for the power sector, he said the President “ has met several times with the PHCN and the BPE and he has met several times with the NNPC. Because when you look at most of these issues, you will discover that there are issues you need to sort out with one agency or the other.

“All these stakeholders within the sector are being brought into the picture. So that by the time we have a comprehensive way forward it is going to be a Programme that takes a holistic picture of the whole power industry.

There will be no excuse for failure after all these issues have been sorted out. I think that is what is going on now, consultations with all the different stakeholders and very soon, within the next two, three weeks, I think he will come up with his plans for the power sector. Same goes for the Niger- Delta,” he added.
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

Yar’Adua Drops Ministerial Nominee

The Presidential Liaison Officer to the Senate, Mrs. Florence Ita-Giwa, early on Thursday, sent an urgent message to Senate President David Mark, requesting to withdraw a name from the list for undisclosed reasons.

She refused to answer specific questions on why Mrs. Ibrahim’s case is different. Newsmen initially learnt the Kebbi nominee might have been dropped because of the security screening which might not have been in her favour. The details were not made available to newsmen; although an official of the National Assembly said the decision was for “security reasons”.

She was dropped because some politicians in the state said she was not a politician and should not have been nominated in the first place.

Newsmen checks revealed that among the three nominees whose names were originally sent from Kebbi, Muhammadu Bello Maieka was picked. But following a barrage of petitions against him, his name was dropped. The President was said to have specifically requested for a woman to be nominated from the North-Western State.

Mrs. Ibrahim, who was a commissioner in the old Sokoto State and a director at the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC), was nominated without any consultations with the state party hierarchy, according to information. She is married to former Director-General of Nigeria Television Authority (NTA), Alhaji Muhammadu Ibrahim, who hails from Kano State.

The last-minute withdrawal reduced the number of ministerial nominees from 35 to 34. The actual nominee whose name was withdrawn was not mentioned as Mark quietly skipped number 18 against which the name was originally listed and proceeded to reel out other names listed against numbers 19 to 35.

By the time he was through with the exercise, four states, namely Benue (where the Senate President comes from), Kaduna, Jigawa and Kebbi did not have nominees in the list.Just as in Benue where disagreements between the former governor, Senator George Akume and the Senate President have stalled the nomination of a minister from the state, a similar scenario is playing out in Kaduna State. The Isaiah Ballat Camp is pitched in a power play with the camp of the former governor, Alhaji Ahmed Mohammed Markafi.

This is delaying the nomination of a candidate from the state.It was not clear on Thursday night why Jigawa did not have a nominee yet, even though early indications were that Ahmed Malamadori had been picked.

Mark announced on Thursday that the screening and confirmation hearing would begin Tuesday, next week, assuring that the Senate would be thorough in the exercise.

The Senate President warned that nominees should not go out of their way to induce Senators to facilitate their clearance. He said any nominee discovered or caught attempting to induce Senators would be disqualified by the Senate.He also cautioned Senators against receiving gratification or gift from any nominee either on behalf of themselves or the Senate.
Admin
uniquemate.com

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Ministerial nominee: Daramola’s widow petitions Yar’Adua

The widow of Ayo Daramola, the murdered former Peoples Democratic Party governorship candidate in Ekiti‘s State, Kehinde, has sent a petition to President Umaru Yar‘Adua to protest the candidature of the Ekiti State ministerial nominee, Mr. Ropo Adesanya.
Skip to next paragraph

File
Mrs. Daramola

In the petition dated July 16, 2007, which was supported by an affidavit sworn to at the registry of Ikeja High Court on Monday, Mrs. Daramola contended that Adesanya, the PDP Chairman in the state was not ”a fit and proper person” to be appointed as a minister.
Mrs. Daramola based her objection on the alleged involvement of the nominee in the assassination of her husband, who was killed on August 14, 2006 in Ekiti State.
She also accused Adesanya of having invited her late husband to Ijan-Ekiti where Daramola was eventually tracked down and killed by assailants whose identities had remained unknown till date.
She alleged that PDP lost the last election in Ijan-Ekiti because of the ‘action’ of Adesanya.
Copies of the petition were also sent to the Chairman of the PDP‘s Board of Trustees, former President Olusegun Obasanjo; President of the Senate, Senator David Mark; Chairman of the PDP, Dr. Ahmadu Ali; the Acting Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Mike Okiro; and the office of the Director of the State Security Service.
In the four-paragraph petition, Mrs. Daramola, wrote, ”I am Mrs. Kehinde Daramola, the wife of late Dr. Ayo Daramola who was murdered by the Governor Ayo Fayose‘s administration. My husband, a PDP staunch member was Governorship aspirant for PDP.
”It was Mr. Ropo Adesanya who lured my husband to come to Ijan-Ekiti because my husband had earlier cried out that Mr. Ayo Fayose was after his life and was reluctant to go to Ekiti. Mr. Ropo Adesanya is a prime suspect and the matter is still with the Police and the court.
”The whole town is still grieved by the death of my husband. Mr. Ropo Adesanya cannot go to the town much less winning for PDP in that town. His action caused PDP to lose in Ijan-Ekiti.
”For the good of the entire Ekiti people and the PDP, Ropo Adesanya is not a fit and proper person to represent Ekiti State at the federal cabinet. He is not the sort of person PDP should put up”.
Asked to substantiate the allegation against Adesanya, the widow told our correspondent on the phone that the nominee had some discussions with her husband prior to his assasination.
According to her, “He called my husband on Saturday. He denied that he talked to my husband. Why did he deny it? Which means he has something up his sleeves.
“I was there when he was talking to my husband. When he called him, I didn’t know he was the one on the line but at the end of the conversation, my husband told me he just finished talking to Ropo Adesanya. And we don’t have two Ropo Adesanyas that I know of. So, why did he deny it that he talked to my husband?” she queried.
Mrs. Daramola said further, “Let us go to Celtel or MTN or one of the three GSM networks my husband was using. Let them trace the calls my husband made on that Saturday.”
Meanwhile, widespread opposition has greeted Adesanya’s choice as the replacement for the dropped ministerial nominee for the state, Chief Dayo Adeyeye on Monday.
Apart from the petitions that had been dispatched to the Senate President, hundreds of youths mobilised themselves to Abuja on Monday to protest at the Senate, against the impending screening of Adesanya by the upper legislative chamber.
The president of the Ijan-Ekiti Progressive Youth Alliance, Mr. Ojo Olayemi, said Adesanya‘s antecedents and activities made him unqualified to serve in the high profile and untainted Yar’Adua’s administration.
In a related development, the PDP leaders in Ekiti State on Monday made last-minute efforts to restore Adeyeye’s name as the state‘s ministerial nominee.
The elders, comprising Retired Justice Edward Ojuolape, Senator Lawrence Agunbiade and Dr. Ife Arowosoge, wrote the president to reconsider Adeyeye in the spirit of the Unity Government that his administration was trying to nurture.
According to the elders, “Adeyeye emerged after a close scrutiny and and interview of many candidates available for the post.”
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

NNAMANI ARRESTED

A former Governor of Enugu State, Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani, was on Monday arrested on his hospital bed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.

A statement by a former Commissioner for Information in Enugu State, Mr. Igbonekwu Ogazimorah, confirmed the arrest at around 9.10pm on Monday.
The statement reads, “Nnamani, a Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, has just been seized by the operatives of the EFCC, at 5. 42 p.m.

“Nnamani, who had been on admission at the National Hospital, Abuja since last Thursday, was apprehended, taken to an unknown destination, without the benefit of taking his drugs with him.
“In what appears as a sudden twist of schedule, the operatives swiftly told Nnamani that they were to keep him there, ignoring the fact of a bail bond signed for the former governor and whose specific terms had been kept.

“The EFCC neither allowed Nnamani’s friends and staff to come close nor understand what was going on.

“No doubt, Nnamani’s eventual arrest on Monday is the remarkable feat which certain adversaries of the former governor very strenuously sought since July 2, when they went into a media binge to demonise the man as they sought over the years.
“We expect that the former governor would be charged to court in the next forty-eight hours as required by the constitution.

“However, after appeals to the EFCC officials on the state of his health, the former governor was returned to his hospital bed at the National Hospital at around 8.00 pm.”
Reports had it that Nnamani went into hiding on Friday following the arrest of some of his former colleagues by the EFCC.

But another report said he was admitted at the hospital late on Thursday night for an undisclosed ailment.

EFCC operatives had traced him to the hospital and kept a close watch to forestall his escape.
They reportedly barred people, including his family members and friends, from visiting him.
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

Ministerial screening: Shedding the garb of insinuations

The volume and vehemence of criticisms that have trailed the ongoing ministerial screening are enough to drown Aso Rock and the National Assembly. Indeed, such knocks are almost gradually taking the shine off the whole exercise, which is of far-reaching significance for the President Umaru Yar’Adua administration.

Some critics are angered by the non-inclusion of the portfolios in the list of nominees sent for screening. Others are offended by the banal nature of the questions asked by the senators, which they hold cannot bring the best out of the would-be ministers. They reason that at best, the ongoing exercise will be a return to the status quo which, in the words of Chief Gani Fawehinmi SAN, “had produced unsuitable ministers in the past.” It is also the contention of some that the decision of the Senate to sit in the open in the name of transparency is hypocritical. This group holds that the Senate should have referred the matter to the appropriate committee, which, in turn, should report its decisions to the whole House.
The critics’ anger is understandable. Nigerians’ collective experience since independence has shown that Nigeria’s disappointing level of development is mainly a function of the quality of its leadership. Nigerians seem to be resolute for a change this time, after what is believed in many quarters to be 47 years in the wilderness.

Besides, before the Senate are the 34 men and women whose activities will determine what development this nation can experience in the next four years, and indeed, the character of the Yar’Adua administration. And getting it right is not open to question.
But a cursory look at the rules directing the actions of the Presidency and the Senate shows that both institutions are justified under the circumstances. Rule 118 (a & b) of the Senate Standing Orders 2007 (As Amended), which deals with Proceedings on Nominations, says, “When nominations shall be made by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the Senate, the nominations shall: (a) if the responsibilities of the nominees are specified, be referred to the appropriate committee, (b) if the responsibilities are not stated, be referred to the Committee of the Whole Senate.”

Going by the afore-mentioned rule, the President is left with two options: to delay the presentation of the list of nominees till the Senate constitutes its committees, or to send it immediately but without portfolios for consideration by the whole House.

The first option has its constraints. Nigerians are already impatient with the pace of governance since this administration was inaugurated on May 29, 2007. This has earned the President the nickname, ‘Baba go slow.’ So, in keeping with the expectations of Nigerians, the President in his wisdom must have decided to act with dispatch. And in adopting the ‘Do it now’ method, he was left with no option but to send the list without portfolios in consonance with Rule 118 of the Senate since the committees are not yet in place.

In retrospect, the Senate 5th had, on a motion moved by its Majority Leader, Senator Dalhatu Tafida, and supported by majority votes as specified by relevant rule, set aside its Rule 118 (a) during the screening of the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Maurice Iwu for appointment. The House had agreed with Tafida that in view of the importance of the office to the nation, the screening should be handled by the Committee of the Whole House.
On the issue of the decision of the Senate to sit in the open in the name of transparency, the House derives its powers from Rule 119 which states that, “The Senate or Committee shall sit in open session unless the Senate or Committee by a majority vote decides otherwise.”

The real trouble with the ongoing screening
The National Assembly was constituted on June 5, 2007 and its principal officers were elected the same day. With about 20 per cent returning Senators, analysts say that the Senate should have been proactive by constituting its committees promptly, so as to enable it to respond to the exigency of screening in view of its importance to national life. If the committees were to be in place, for instance, the President would have possibly attached the portfolios of ministerial nominees and the type of screening Nigerians yearn for would have been done.

Another trouble with the ongoing screening with regard to the mode and manner of the exercise is essentially information management, chief among which is a communication gap between the Senate and the Presidency. The two should have met to discuss the problem and how to go about it. There is the possibility that the President would have been advised to wait for the Senate to constitute its committees before presenting the list, in the interest of the nation.
‘Take a bow’: Another look

The Senate, as a rule, does not screen one of its own. When a member of the Senate, former or serving, is presented for screening, courtesy is the word; they are asked to “take a bow and go.” While conceding this tradition and the fact that the position of a Senator of the Federal Republic is a distinguished and respectable one, one must nevertheless state that most Nigerians are of the opinion that the bow should not exclude necessary grilling on how the ‘distinguished nominee’ will deliver, if appointed. The skills and competences needed to excel as a minister are far different from those needed for lawmaking.

Such thoroughness is advisable, furthermore, because a poor performance by a distinguished ex-senator will be a dent on the image of the whole House.
Senate Rule 120 and former public office-holders
President Yar’Adua stole the hearts of most Nigerians last month when he declared his assets publicly. Having tasted this spring of transparency, Nigerians will want to know if the Senate respects Rule 120 (a) which compels it to scrutinise the assets declaration forms of nominees who had held public offices prior to their nomination. The Rule says, “The Senate shall not consider the nomination of any person who has held any public office as contained in Part II of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution prior to his nomination unless there is written evidence that he has declared his assets and liabilities as required by Section 11 (1) of Part 1 of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Such declaration shall be required for scrutiny by the Senators.”

The way forward
In view of the experiences with general screening in the past and the shortcoming already identified in the ongoing general screening, there is the need for Mr. President to put appropriate measures in place to break way from the past and put round pegs in round holes. It is obvious that the ongoing screening cannot produce the kind of ministers that will take the nation to the next level.

Since there is no provision for re-screening of nominees, the onus is on the President to cause the nominees to submit a blueprint on how to move the ministries forward, in line with the vision and seven-point agenda of his administration.

The Senate President, David Mark, came close to this in his parting remarks to the first screened nominee, Dr. Abbah Sayyd Ruma. He said, “I think we have had enough lectures on education. What I would want you (Dr. Ruma) to do is to do a short paper on the Education Task Fund, with regard to the autonomy of universities that the Academic Staff Union of Univesities is asking for and a few other similar topics. These are the areas where we need to work on.”
The nominees’ presentations should address their areas of competencies. In other words, they should be competency based and the nominees should demonstrate a deep knowledge of the issues and challenges in their proposed ministries, provide measurable strategies toward addressing them and assign time frames to their targets to enable the President and Nigerians to assess their performances.

Besides, the President should have progressive performance assessment indexes – e.g. quarterly, annually, biennially – for measuring his ministers’ performance. Besides the fact that this will put them on their toes, it will control unnecessary pressure from politicians and sponsors each time the President wants to remove a minister on the grounds of non-performance.

There is also the need for leaders to be more forthcoming in the area of information management. Silence on issues of critical national importance creates room for innuendoes and insinuations. The battering that the President and the Senate have been receiving would have been avoidable if the public had been informed about the relevant portions of the Senate rules that prompted the procedure of the ongoing screening
Admin
www.uniquemate.com

Saturday, July 14, 2007

SENATE COMMITTES;MARK THIS SENATORS

Senate Leader, Senator Teslim Kolawole Folarin (Oyo Central) sounded very confident that the Senate leadership would announce the composition of the standing committees before the end of last week. He said that he would be surprised if that was not done. Surprisingly, the Senate President, Senator David Mark did not unveil the committees. Yet that has not diminished the personal and credibility of Folarin. He is an influential member of the body of principal officers and the Selection Committee charged with the responsibility of constituting the committees.
But the decision by the Senate leadership not to announce the committees made Folarin to be short on precision. He must have by now appreciated the political inexpediency that could always produce a review strategy: the sort that led to the postponement by the Senate President. Still, there is understandable pressure on the Senate leadership to end the anxiety that the matter has generated. The submission of the list of ministerial nominees to the Senate by President Umar Yar' Adua mid last week and the announcement of the names of the nominees on the floor penultimate Thursday effectively diverted attention from the issue of standing committees.
Last week, three important motions suffered a set-back on account of the non-existence of the standing committees, most especially the Committee on Rules and Business. The motions- on the agonies of depositors of failed banks and financial institutions; poor state of safety in our airports; and, collapse of the road infrastructure in Nigeria- were not taken thus forcing the Senate to adjourn in the absence of other business on the order paper. But before the Senate adjourned at 11.25 a.m. the Senate President had ruled that the motions be converted to notices for discussion the next legislative day.
The stage for the abrupt adjournment of the house was set when Senator Isiaka Adeleke (Osun West) raised Order 47 (3 and 4) of the Senate Standing Rules shortly after Senator Folarin moved a motion on the agonies of depositors of Failed Banks and Financial Institutions, which had Senator Sylvester Anyanwu (Imo North) and Senator Ayogu Eze (Enugu North) as co-sponsors. Adeleke said that many of the Senators did not want discussions on the motion because the right procedure had not been followed. He said that order 47 (3 and 4) indicated that any notices of motions should be given through the Senate President to the Rules and Business Committee of the Senate, which within seven days get to Senators. He had argued: "We do not just go in a day, present a motion and the motion is taken, debated on and agreed on. No, we have to give some time to the senators to be able to understand those motions so that we will be able to contribute tremendously the following day." But he said that the Committee to warehouse the notices of motions and motions was not in place yet as contemplated by Order 47 (3) of the Senate Standing Rules. Specifically, Order 47 (3) states: "The President of the Senate shall forward such notice(s) of motions to the Rules and Business Committee, which shall schedule it on the order paper." Order 47 (4) states: "The Rules and Business Committee shall examine the substance of all motions referred to it and if approved to be scheduled on the order paper for deliberations within seven (7) days after the publication of the schedule." Speaking with reporters after plenary, Senator Adeleke had stated that the Senate was acting in breach of its procedure. According to him, "Section 36 states that the Rules and Business Committee of the Senate should be constituted within 14 legislative days of the first sitting of the Senate. That yet has not been done. We may be putting something on nothing with all the motions and rules that have been passed. So, we adhere strictly to the rules of the Senate."He said that there were certain committees that should have been set up such as Selection Committee and Rules and Business, stressing, "They are supposed to be set up within certain legislative days." It was against the backdrop of Adeleke's position that the Senate Leader, senator Folarin said that the Senate was going to announce the committees last week. He explained that the Senate was trying to put square pegs in square holes, adding, "We are also trying to carry all senators along and forestall a repeat of the last exercise in the fifth Senate when Southwest Senators protested the committees given to them." The Senate Leader had also admitted that he was aware that the issue of delay in composing the standing committees was responsible for the manner in which senators shot down the three important motions. He had declared: "I will be surprised if the list of standing committees does not come out this week (last week)." There are indications that the Senate leadership has made up its mind to deal with the issue once and for all this week. The screening of ministerial nominees, important as it is, may not alter the planned announcement by the Senate President. The Senate may devote two days-Tuesday and Wednesday- for the screening and confirmation hearing. The arrangement would still leave Thursday for the purpose of unfolding the committees. The occasion, going by the tradition in the Senate, is always tension-soaked. The presiding officer is kept on the edge, waiting to weigh in on the possible reactions from disenchanted Senators. Some of Mark's predecessors suffered embarrassment on the floor on the day they announced the composition of committees. When Senator Evan Enwerem announced the composition of the standing committees in 1999, his arch rival to the stool of the Senate President, Senator Chuba Okadigbo (now late) rejected on the floor his appointment as Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. He later accepted it after weeks of pressure on him from the Southeast zone and the zonal caucus in the Senate to accept the position. Under the Senate Presidency of Anyim Pius Anyim, Senator Arthur Nzeribe rejected on the floor his appointment as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Power and Steel. He had wanted the chairmanship of the Committee on Defence. The Senate leadership had called off the bluff of the then political enigma and given the position to his kinsman, Senator Ifeanyi Araraume. The possibility of a similar thing happening was not ruled out by the Mark leadership; which was why it had taken time to handle the composition in such a way that the harmony in the Senate would not be fractured in the aftermath of the exercise. THISDAY gathered that after the initial feelers that Mark might accommodate his supporters and those who voted for him in strategic committees, the Senate leadership has, on account of the potential flashpoint that the mater of committee represents, decided to tread cautiously. It has been working round the clock to strike a balance between the interests that dot the two divides in the Senate: those who voted for him and those who voted for Senator George Akume. With 57 standing committees to fill, the Senate leadership has enough positions to reward his loyalists and supporters. But notwithstanding that he had already, as learnt, determined those he would put in strategic committees as chairmen, vice chairmen and members, the Selection Committee still distributed forms to senators to indicate committees into which they would prefer to be appointed. It was gathered that the some of the preferences of many of the Senators would be respected and given to them. This would entail a whole lot of distribution and redistribution which the Selection Committee, according to reports, has already concluded. But very minimal adjustments cannot be ruled out until the announcement on the floor. But there are Senators that Mark and his Selection Committee may have to necessarily accommodate to demonstrate that he has put behind the events of June 5 which saw 39 senators vote against him; otherwise, his leadership may be accused of furthering division and animosity in the Senate. These senators, according to a senator who spoke with THISDAY in confidence, are the influential leaders who ensured some members to get to the Senate. Although, the Senator who voted against Mark and was already agitated that the Senate leadership might have sent him to Siberia in the composition of the committees did not mention names, yet there are fears that peace may develop wings and fly out of he Senate if the former governors are not appointed as chairmen of committees, whether strategic or not, at least as a first step in the demonstration of good faith. Apart from the former Governor of Zamfara State, Senator Ahmed Sani, who has already emerged as Minority Whip and by which virtue he is a member of the body of principal officers and the Selection Committee, eyes are on former Governor of Kaduna State, Senator Ahmed Makarfi, former Governor of Benue State, Senator Akume, former Governor of Kebbi State, Senator Adamu Aliero, former Governor of Yobe State, Senator Bukar Abba Ibrahim, former Governor of Enugu State, Senator Chimaroke Ogbonnia Nnamani and former Governor of Jigawa State, Senator Saminu Turaki. These are influential Senators that analysts contend the Senate leadership should mark with chairmanship of committees. There are other senators who have the "rebellious" streak running through them like Senator Suleiman Nazif (AC, Bauchi North), Caleb Zagi (PDP, Kaduna South), Odion Ugbesia (Edo Central), Bala Abdulkadir Mohamed (ANPP, Bauchi South), Gogwin Satti (AC, Plateau Central) and John Shagaya (PDP, Plateau South), among others. The Mark leadership has the instrumentality of the committees to either mark them in or mark them out. Both options have potential far-reaching implications. The path or option taken by the Mark leadership would be evident this week as he unveils the standing committees.

ANOTHER 3 YEAR OLD BOY KIDNAPPED

Five days after three-year-old Margaret Hill was freed by unidentified gunmen who had kidnapped her, a three-year-old son of a traditional ruler, Prince Samuel Ovunda Amadi, was yesterday morning kidnapped on his way to school in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
This is the fourth case of abduction of 3-year-olds in the last two months. Before Hill, two kids had been kidnapped although with less media coverage.
The prince was being taken to Princess International School in the city when a red Volvo 244 blocked the Mercedes Benz Jeep bearing him, forced the driver to take the East-West road before they stopped at a lonely spot. They ordered the driver to go back and disappeared with the boy.
They later called the father, Eze Francis Amadi, the paramount ruler of Iriebe, Rivers State, to demand N50 million ransom.
They threatened to kill the boy if the father failed to pay the ransom.The kidnappers directed the royal father to pay the money into Dyke Otuonye’s account with a bank in Port Harcourt with account number 301450821807.T
he Eze became agitated when one Isaac Owode, who claimed he was from Lagos State and a student of University of Science and Technology Port Harcourt, said he recognised the voice of the people asking for the ransom. Owode allegedly said it was the voice of one Kelvin who lives at 298 Ikwerre Road.
Amadi said he became suspicious because the Isaac had not come to his place for over six months after he had told the king that some people had hired him to kill the Eze and demanded for money.
Also, the driver of the car, Mr. Kenneth Akubueze, was alleged by the royal father to have constantly contradicted himself on how the boy was kidnapped. “He first told me that the kidnappers used a gun to break the side glass of the jeep before he stated that they used a stick to break it,” Eze Amadi said.
Because of these contradictions, he called in the police from Oyigbo police station. The two men were immediately arrested and taken to the police station. Before then, both Isaac and Akubueze had pleaded their innocence before pressmen.
“The same Isaac had threatened that some people said they were going to kill me and that unless I gave them money, they would kidnap my son. Now they have done it. My driver has been working with me for five years but how come he is unable to say how the incident happened? He first said they used stick to break the glass and now he is saying they shot at the glass.
“Immediately I sent some of my chiefs to go back and ask people around where the thing happened and immediately they were driving out of the compound, the people called to ask me to leave the driver alone that he does not know what happened.“Again, when the police arrested the two of them, you are witnesses; they are calling me again to say that I should leave two of them because they do not know about the kidnap. So what I feel is that these two people (pointing at Isaac and Akubueze) know where my son is, they should go and bring him,” he said.

Akubueze said that he was driving when the Volvo blocked him and two of the people, who took away the child, jumped into his vehicle. He said they were armed but did not fire.
“They commanded me to drive along East-West road until we got to a lonely spot on Uniport [University of Port Harcourt] road and they asked me to turn back and they took the boy away. I could not shout because there was nobody around there,” he said.Asked if he did not lock the car from inside when the incident took place, he said he did but that one of the doors was open from where the gunmen accessed the inside to take the child from him
.Isaac said he recognised the voice of Kelvin when he heard it as they called the king to demand for the ransom and he called his number which he answered but said he was in Lagos and not Port Harcourt. He however said the same voice which called the Eze was the one he heard on his phone.
The royal father was further rattled when some people assured him that since the militants used a bank account to demand for the ransom, they would be caught but it did not take a minute before they called back asking for cash and instead of the initial N50 million, they asked for N5 million.
“Chief, how much will you pay? I said you should bring N5 million cash in crisp N1,000 notes and make sure you will not involve the police or we will kill your boy,” the voice reportedly said. When the king asked him where he would personally bring the money to and take his child, the voice warned him to return the driver and Isaac from the police station and that he would get back to him to tell him where he would deliver the ransom.
Later on, they called the royal father again to demand for “a minimum” of N8 million before releasing the boy. This prompted the father to exclaim that he no longer knew who to trust as those giving information on what was happening were obviously “within”.
All through the phone discussions, the suspected militants used mobile phone number 07035255667 to discuss while the person who made the demands stammered a bit. In all the discussions, he showed knowledge of all actions taken in the palace.

Admin
Free Dating Site

Friday, July 13, 2007

EFCC guns for Nnamani, Dariye, Nyame, Haruna * Yar'Adua backs ex-Govs' arrest

THE Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is expanding its latest crackdown on former governors, according to indications yesterday.At least four more ex-governors may be arrested soon in addition to the two — Chief Orji Kalu (Abia) and Alhaji Saminu Turaki (Jigawa)— who were taken in by the commission on Wednesday.
Those that may be picked up next, Vanguard gathered last night, are Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani (Enugu), The Reverend Jolly Nyame (Taraba), Mr. Boni Haruna (Adamawa) and Chief Joshua Dariye (Plateau).
In fact, a report last night said two of these had been arrested, but there was no confirmation. But Vanguard gathered that Chief Dariye was at the EFCC headquarters in Abuja yesterday to keep an appointment with the Commission. He was back home in Jos last night.
Vanguard gathered yesterday that the EFCC action was with the nod of President Umaru Yar’Adua who thought the fight against corruption should be given a fresh impetus.
Chief Kalu and Alhaji Turaki, according to sources last night, may be arraigned in court today for alleged corruption and money laundering.Sources said Chief Kalu returned home early Wednesday to keep an appointment with President Yar’Adua for a meeting on the much talked about Unity Government.
One source at a party in London attended by Chief Kalu early in the week said he spoke of returning to Nigeria for an appointment with the president on the unity government. He was arrested at the Nnamdi Azikiwe Airport, Abuja on his arrival.
Sources at the Commission said yesterday it (EFCC) had discovered that former Governor Turaki allegedly floated four companies through which he executed state government projects in the state.
The companies, Gethel Gansus Construction and Engineering Ltd, Wallong Canco Nigerian Ltd, Wild Cat Construction Ltd and Arch Construction Company Ltd. were allegedly awarded contracts estimated at about N5 billion.
Governor Sule Lamido had, on assumption of office on May 29 this year, set up a committee to probe the contracts awarded the four companies by his predecessor in office.
One Bashir Saminu Turaki, younger brother of the ex-governor had taken the state government to court, seeking to stop the verification and review of all contracts awarded by the former government.
The Federal High court in Kano ordered the suspension of all inquiries contained in the terms of reference of the committee especially with particular reference to the four companies.
Sources said when the attention of President Umaru Yar’Adua was drawn to the sleaze, efforts to get the former governor to co-operate with his successor failed.Consequently, it was learnt that the EFCC was asked to carry out its statutory duties by arresting and prosecuting the former governor in line with the EFCC ActIt was learnt that the former governor and his Abia State counterpart had been evading attempts by the EFCC to get them to enter a plea bargain with the Commission as agreed by the President and the former governors.
EFCC sources said the two former governors are likely to be docked as soon as possible while the option of negotiations are being pursued in line with the general agreement between the ex-governors and President Yar’Adua.
We are set to probe Nnamani, others —Task force
Meanwhile, the Joint Task Force on Anti-Corruption set up by the presidency says it has concluded plan to probe former Governor Chimaroke Nnamani and other ex-governors accused of corruption and other misconduct while in office.
Executive Secretary of the Code of Conduct Bureau, Mr. Sam Saba, speaking in Enugu yesterday, said the immediate past governor of Enugu State had a case to answer before the Joint Task force on Anti-Corruption.
Saba, who spoke with reporters shortly after presenting a paper at a public forum organised by the Code of Conduct Bureau in collaboration with UNDP for the South-East Zone, said the Bureau had concluded plans to reopen cases of corruption against former governors who earlier went to court to get injunctions restraining them from carrying out their duties effectively.
According to him, the Bureau would not relent in its fight against corruption, warning public office holders who have not declared their assets to do so in their own interests.
“We will reopen cases against ex-governors who went to court to get injunctions that restrained us from carrying out our duties. They are not free yet. We call on the public to supply us with vital information on the affected persons,” he said.
Saba said the task force was set up by former President Obasanjo to continue the fight against corruption.The CCB Secretary said members of the joint task force were drawn from the Police, State Security Service, ICPC, Code of Conduct Bureau and EFCC, adding that each of the organisations contributed five of its staff to the joint task force.
No ill feelings on Turaki's arrest —ex-SSG
However, former Secretary to the Jigawa State Government, Alhaji Lawan Ya’u Roni, said yesterday that supporters of the ex-governor harboured no ill-feeling against anyone following his arrest and detention by the EFCC.
Alhaji Roni told journalists that the arrest was simply an act of God, stressing that effort was being intensified to secure his release.“The arrest of Senator Turaki is simply an act of destiny and something from God. Millions of his loyalists and admirers harbour no grudge against anyone, nor are we blaming anyone for it. It is just something from God,” he said.
The former SSG said they had embarked on prayers seeking divine intervention that might see him through the travail, pointing out that the “Almighty God has His reason for making it to happen that way.”

Admin
totally free online dating site

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Ministerial screening: Senate in another shadow boxing?

As Senators began confirmation of President Umaru Yar’Adua’s ministerial nominees, political observers doubt whether the Upper House can do a thorough job of ascertaining the competence of persons appearing before it without portfolios attached to their names. Vanguard politics looks at the merits of this arguement.
Yesterday the Senate began to examine the backgrounds and qualifications of persons forwarded to it by President Umaru Yar’Adua to occupy positions of ministers, in line with section 147 of 1999 Constitution, which empowers the Upper House to screen ministers forwarded to it. Coming 43 days after the inauguration of the present government, a lot of people had dubbed the process of forwarding these names to the Upper House as slow and an indication of poor preparation by the government to tackle very quickly the challenges of governing the country effectively. Those who hold this view see Yar’Adua’s style as exposing his insufficient grasps and understanding of the country, bequeathed to him by his predecessor.
Organising a government is seen in many quarters as the first true test of the character and complexion of any leader. And to those who hold this opinion, the quicker a government is able to settle down, the more confidence it elicits from the people. So far, there are not many people who think President Yar’Adua has shown strength in this regard. In a way, the slowness of President Yar’Adua in forming his government is not altogether surprising considering the manner he emerged. He was until last November a dark horse, who was picked by erstwhile President Obasanjo as his successor out of the blues. Yar’Adua before then had little contact with the rest of the country outside Katsina. With limited political contact and knowledge of the country, President Yar’Adua had to take his time before appointing people into offices.
On the converse, the speed and firmness with which Obasanjo constituted his government in 1999 did a lot to stabilise his government on coming to office. However, this comparison might not tell that much considering that Obasanjo was elected President on February 28th and he took over formerly on May 29th. Meaning he had three months to cross check the background of those he was appointing into offices. Yar’Adua had his election announced on April 23st and inauguration a little over a month later. Thus, in terms of time, Obasanjo had an advantage over Yar’Adua, a fact many people might gloss over in evaluating the settling down for business of these two administrations. Still, there are those who think that if Yar’Adua had averted his mind sufficiently on how he would compose his administration, he would not have delayed this long.
Nevertheless, having crossed the rubicon by naming his nominees, a new round of debate has emerged, and that is the quality of persons he has forwarded to the Upper House. It has been a combination of notable persons, some of whom has image baggage and a collection of unknown persons without antecedents; in other words, dark horses. Names like John Akpanudoudehe, from Akwa Ibom; Halima Alao, from Kwara; Akinlabi Olasunkanmi, from Osun etc do not ring a bell of any sort. Some others on the list are known PDP stalwarts, who have held public offices and have achieved national visibility over the years, and these are: Charles Ugwu, from Imo State; Ojo Maduekwe from Abia; John Odey from Cross River State.
Following the unveiling of this list last Thursday, the reaction to it has been mixed. Some opinion feel that its composition did not rise to the level that would impose a definite character on the Yar’Adua government other than that it is a party’s cabinet. The nay sayers doubt whether the persons on the list have the pedigree to cope with the challenge of rapid transformation of the economy, which Yar’Adua says he wants to see as one of 20th largest economy by year 2020. They fear that there are too many politicians among them, men whose pedigree are commonly known and whose track record does not generate much confidence. In some people’s mind, an Ojo Maduekwe, General Godwin Abbe, Adamu Waziri Maina, Charles Ugwu despite their individual accomplishments have not over the years shown the stellar character that makes them the most sought after talents the country can muster to move it forward. The way it stands at the moment, the collateral effect of having these number of persons in Yar'Adua’s cabinet is that they define the way the public responds to the administration. A combination of Yar’Adua’s dour personality and this mixed bag of ministerial appointees, is any ones guess how the government would fare in the next four years.
For instance, what is there to write about Halima Alao. By the same token as some people have argued - what was there to say about Dora Akunyili, before she became a national icon. Still, there are those who recall without much enthusiasm Maduekwe’s proposal to the country to adopt a bicycle policy as transport minister, coupled with his belligerent rhetoric as PDP’s national secretary. Nor is Waziri Maina smelling of roses after the PTDF affair. His blame game with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar over the corruption scandal that trailed his tenure, left many questions unanswered over the motive for his nomination, after his failed bid to become governor of Yobe State. CharlesUgwu achieved political fame after he converted his position as President of Manufacturers Association (MAN) as a platform to campaign for the tenure elongation of President Obasanjo. His posture so embarrassed his colleagues that a few months after he was forced to stepped down on the grounds that his tenure had expired.
His attempt to become governor of Imo State was thwarted by the Supreme Court, which ruled that his nomination was tardy and violated the 2003 electoral act. In all these three examples, what is remarkable is that the list before the Senate may well be composed of Obasanjo’s hench men angling for compensation. The image baggage which these men are bringing to the Yar’Adua cabinet, which already has legitimacy question, would definitely make it hard for the Federal Government to win public confidence.
The other strand of the question that bothers a great deal of people is why President Yar’Adua did not attach portfolios to the names of his nominees so that the Senate and the general public can be able to bench mark these people against the background of what they plan to do if they assume office. Under President Shehu Shagari in the second republic, nominees to offices had their portfolios known such that it was easy during screening for the Senators to ask specific questions regarding the ministries they would be heading, and for the general public to be properly informed on what to expect from the nominees. Under President Obasanjo, who viewed the process of screening as a Constitutional intrusion into his powers to appoint whoever he wanted without question, made sure the Upper House became lame duck by declining to attach portfolios to his nominees. Thus making it difficult for anyone to ask tough questions, which might expose certain inadequacies and be read as a reflection on the President’s judgement in nominating such a person in the first place.
By refusing to include such crucial information in his letter to the Upper House for confirmation, Obasanjo, effectively short circuited the work of the legislature. Attempts to draw the former President’s attention to this deliberate oversight was rebuffed. He maintained that there was no law demanding that he should do so, and would therefore not bow to legislative order. President Obasanjo’s penchant for legalism on this matter rendered the screening a routine affair, which the Upper House themselves did little to reverse when they turned it into a circus by asking some ministerial nominees who appeared before it to take a bow and leave because they had sterling reputation and, thus, demanding any further explanation as to what they would be doing in government was unnecessary. Or sometimes banal questions that elicited laughter if the responses were adjudged good. A confirmation process that should be a heavy and difficult affair, lost its potency under the previous dispensation. The failure to grill nominees on their understanding of the assignment they were about to handle did not help this country in the past.
Indeed, a particular example of Late Chief Bola Ige, who bowed before the Senate and left, and eventually was saddled with the tasks of running ministry of mines and power, which proved problematic to the extent that by the time President Obasanjo removed him unceremoniously, he was adjudged to have failed. Ige’s case would have been different had he been interrogated by the legislature and was pressed to outline his vision such that if there were missing gaps in his thinking, the exchanges would have enriched him. In any event, it can be assumed that if any nominee knew the particular portfolio he was going to handle ahead of time, he would make independent effort to investigate the challenges and prepare himself mentality for what he would be facing not just when he appears before the Senators, but also how best he would acquit himself, on assuming office.
With President Yar’Adua aping Obasanjo’s style unlikely to enrich the process of evaluating his ministerial nominees, the Upper House should do itself the favour of asking the President to attach the portfolio to the names of the nominees. Senate President David Mark’s promise before adjourning the House last Thursday to do a thorough job can only be meaningful if he is able to get the presidency to include these additional information. Otherwise, the Upper House is unlikely to improve on the record of his predecessors, who for want of what to ask, restored to finding from such nominees whether they can recite the national anthem or what is the full meaning of such acronyms like NEEDS or SEEDS. As important as it is to find out the general knowledge of these people, it is a far cry from investigating their grasps of policies and challenges they would likely face when they assume office. Because, ultimately, Nigerians are not going to be impressed nor judge them based on whether they were able to recite the national anthem.

Admin
www.uniquemate.com