For The Record
The Tide Has Survived The Tyranny Of Politics-Ray Ekpu
The Print Media: The Way Forward, being a lecture delivered by Ray Ekpu at the 40th Anniversary of The Tide in Port Parcourt on Friday December2, 2011.
Protocols
A few years ago, I wouldn’t have been here without wearing a bullet proof vest.
But Port Harcourt has changed. The guns have fallen silent. The militants have dropped their weapons and picked up their work tools or school bags. White men and women can move about freely without fear of being kidnapped and millions of dollars demanded as ransom.
The city itself which at some point was dubbed garbage city has regained its proper nickname Garden City or as we used to call it when we were young and rascally, Port Highlife.
There is a tremendous effort in urban renewal. Flyovers are springing up ready to tame the demon of traffic gridlock; men and machines are working in partnership to change the landscape and make it a personable city to come to for a vacation.
To make my visit sheer joy, The Tide, one of the state government owned newspapers that was launched in the early 70s is marking its 40th birthday, signaling that it had weathered the storms of the past; it has defied infant mortality and it has become a full grown adult. I look back at the past and I see the corpses of virtually all the state owned newspapers including the Nigerian Chronicle in Calabar where I cut my journalism teeth. Most of those papers have since been buried in shallow graves and because of the way they died they have even been denied the favour of yearly in memoriams in which Nigerians love to flatter the dead by saying they are “gone but not forgotten.”
It is my pleasure, therefore, to salute the board, management and staff of The Tide for being able to survive the tyranny of our politics and economics, especially the politics and economics of publishing, I congratulate you and wish you many more years of service to journalism and Nigeria.
As you do know, the first known newspaper in Nigeria, Iwe lrohin, was set up in Abeokuta, Ogun State, on December 3, 1859 by Reverend Henry Townsend, an Anglican missionary. The paper’s main mission was to evangelise the natives through western education, champion the cause of improving the welfare of the Egbas, and to start a campaign for the extirpation of colonialism. The colonial government did not like the tone of the paper and caused Townsend’s recall to Britain in 1862. Apparently to please the colonial authorities in Lagos, the paper started making a shift in its editorial policy which did not go down well with the Egbas and barely eight years after its establishment, some Egbas went and burnt down the premises of the paper.
The Anglo African, edited and published by Robert Campbell, was the immediate
successor of Iwe Irohin but because of its pro-government stance, the Anglo- African survived for only two years, 1863-1 865.
However, from 1880, the scene witnessed a rash of publications established by nationalists dedicated to the extirpation of colonialism and the enthronement of self rule.
The colonial government responded like a wasp to this upsurge and the trenchant attacks on the government.
It rolled out the 1903 Newspaper Act that sought to regulate the setting up of newspapers.
In 1909, the government enacted the sedition law to curb the excesses of the fire eating editors of the time. The first person to be tried under the sedition law was James Bright Davies, the 68 year old editor of the Nigerian Times, who had written an editorial condemning government policies of Negrophobism and other policies that threatened the prosperity of Lagos. Horatio Jackson, son of the Liberian trader and printer, who founded the Lagos weekly Record, was also tried and jailed for sedition when he was editor of the paper. In 1917, the government decided to give more teeth to the 1903 Newspaper Act by including several stiff clauses including one that imposed a fine of £100 for failure to submit editorial materials for censorship.
Three things were noticeable during this period within the press community
(a) The newspapers were privately owned
(b) The journalists were either politicians who turned journalists or journalists who became politicians
(c) The papers were trenchant, fearless and independent having been burnished on the field of battle.
According to Prof Fred Omu, a well known journalism historian, the appearance on November 22, 1937 of Nnamdi Azikiwe’s West African Pilot whose motto was “show the light and the people will find the way” marked the beginning of a new era of ideological and combative journalism anchored on a campaign against racial superiority and domination. From an initial print-run of 6,000 copies the pilot was selling 20,000 copies 13years later. Azikiwe was then encouraged to introduce the idea of group newspapers. From 1940 and for the next 20 years, he founded the following papers: Eastern Nigeria Guardian (Port Harcourt 1940); Nigerian Spokesman (Onitsha, 1943); Southern Nigeria Defender (Warri, 1943); Daily Comet (Lagos, Kana, 1944). Eastern Sentinel (Enugu, 1955); Nigerian Monitor (Uyo, 1960) The influence spread and the industry grew. The Nigeria Daily Times founded in June 1926 was acquired in 1948 by the Daily Mirror Group of London. The paper, then became simply Daily Times and by the benefit of modem technology the paper improved tremendously in quality. Similarly in August 1960, the Amalgamated Press of Nigeria Limited, Publishers of the Daily service, Sunday Express and Irohin Yoruba went into partnership with Thomason International of Toronto, Canada, to publish a new Newspaper to be called the Daily Express. As a result of this partnership, the Daily Service, organ of the Action Group, was transferred to the stable of the Allied Newspapers Limited established by Obafemi Awolowo of the Action Group in 1959 along with the Nigerian Tribune, Irohin Yoruba, C.O.R. Advocate (Uyo), Mid-West Echo (Benin), Middle Belt Herald (Jos) Northern State (Kana). Eastern observer (Onitsha) and Borno people (meant for Maiduguri but published in Jos due to accommodation problems in Maiduguri.
At independence, the three regional governments – North, East and West felt the need to set up newspapers of their own. In 1960, the Eastern Nigeria Government upgraded its Eastern Nigerian outlook into a daily and renamed it the Nigerian outlook. In 1961, the Federal Government set up its own paper, the Morning Post. Three years later the Western Nigeria Government established the Daily Sketch and just before the January 15, 1966 coup, the Northern Nigeria Government set up the New Nigerian.
As states were created, more state owned newspapers sprang up. There was the Nigerian Observer in Bendel State, Triumph in Kano, Renaissance in East Central State Nigerian Standard in Benue Plateau, Chronicle in South Eastern State and as more states were created more newspapers mushroomed: Pointer in Delta, Eko Today in Lagos, Statesman in lmo, the Nigerian tide in Rivers, the Ambassador in Abia, the pioneer in Akwa Ibom, Hope in Ondo, Benchmark in Ekiti, The Voice in Benue, Herald in K wara, Legacy in Zamfara, Trumpeter in Bauchi, Newsline in Niger, The Path in Sokoto, National Light in Anambra and Daily Star in Enugu etc.
The 60s and 70s became, as it were, the golden era of public ownership of newspapers. AIl of these newspapers, some of them set up by military governments and some by civilian governments were aimed at bringing government closer to the people and the people closer to the government. When I left the editorship of the Nigerian Chronicle in December 1980, the paper was selling 100,000 copies a day. The Sketch in Ibadan, the Renaissance in Enugu, the New Nigerian in Kaduna and the Herald in Ilorin were respected government papers in those days because they showed a lot of professionalism and courage. I remember that The Renaissance owned by the East Central State Government allowed its pages to become a parliament of sorts in which Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe took on Governor Ukpabi Asika in a robust exchange of diatribe in a debute that came to be known as “No condition is Permanent”
This was because of the liberal attitude of Governor Asika as well as the courage and professionalism of the editors of the Renaissance.
In his Newswatch column of April 8, 1985, Yakubu Mohammed, Deputy Chief Executive of Newswatch who was Associate Editor of the New Nigerian in the late 70s, indicated the courage of the editors of the New Nigerian. He reported that during the burning of Fela Anikulapo Kuti’ s Kalakuta Republic in 1977 by the “unknown soldier” some editors had gone round various newspaper offices in Lagos urging the editors not to publish the story and that all the editors had agreed to the conspiracy of silence. However, The New Nigerian and the Punch Published the story. According to Mohammed, in 1978, there was a collision between a Nigeria Airways F28 and an Air force plane. The Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, Major General Shehu Musa Yar’ Adua, had directed editors during his monthly press briefing not to write editorials on the incident. His reason was that if they did, international aviation authorities would ask Nigeria to separate military and civil airports. The New Nigerian defied the order and wrote an editorial condemning the incident.
Infact, Mamman Daura who edited the New Nigerian in the 70s said that much in a lecture he delivered at the Scandinavian institute of African Affairs, Helsinki, in 1970 He said: “The New Nigerian has not been subject to sustained government interference; indeed, we are by common consent more independent than the commercially viable and independent Daily Times. We have been able to withstand government pressure more successfully than they are” That may be true and one can attribute this to the quality of the men who edited the paper. But more importantly, The New Nigerian was owned at the time by all the Northern Governments and it didn’t seem such an attractive proposition for anyone running a government at the centre to attempt to take on a paper owned by the North. Its growing strength and audacity may be the reasons why, in 1975, the Head of State, General Murtala Muhammed’s Government decided not just to interfere but to take over the New Nigerian and the Daily Times.
That decision can be regarded as a backhanded tribute to the strength and professionalism of both papers. Infact, specifically on the New Nigerian, Mr. A.I. Howson -Wright, a notable press historian, had said, during the 10th anniversary of the New Nigerian: “over the years, it has on the whole sustained its readers with a diet of bold and well – informed and lucidly argued editorials and balanced news coverage.” The two newspapers along with other government-owned newspapers are either dead or dying largely because of interference, low capitalization, poor management, low credibility and the robust entry of well-funded, professionally run private newspapers. I shall return to this presently. Alhaji Lateef Jakande, a veteran newspaper man and former Governor of Lagos State, had tried to explain the low longevity of State Government newspapers when he wrote a foreward to the book,’ Not His Master’s Voice written by Peter Ajayi, a former editor of The Herald. Jakande said: “The lesson to be learnt is that a government owned newspaper can only survive if allowed to run as a commercial enterprise” Very true but this is also true of privately – owned newspapers. Today, you cannot find at the newsstand such private papers as Prime People,Vintage People,Crown Prince,Mr, Quality, Akapa’s Choice, Classique, Thisweek,Viva, President, Newbreed, Financial Post, Nigerian Economist,Democrat,Today,The third Eye, The Post Express, Daily Sketch, TNT, Hotline,Citizen, TSM,Sentinel, The Reporter, National Concord,African Concord, African Guardian, The Satellite, the Trumpet, Searchlight, The Eagle, The Horn. Daily News, The Outlook, The Sunray National Post, Guardian, Express etc.
The universal truth is that for any newspaper, private or public, to survive, it must be well Capitalised and must be run along professional, commercial lines with a keen eye on the bottom -line.
The 70’s and early 80’s witnessed a resurgence in the private newspaper industry.
That was the period when the Punch, Concord, Guardian and Vanguard came on stream followed closely by the establishment of Newswatch, a weekly news magazine, by four journalists ‘Dele Giwa, Ray Ekpu, Dan Agbese and Yakubu Mohammed. These former editors came from a background of academic and professional training and experience. Their aim was to publish an authoritative magazine in the mould of Time and Newsweek, two popular American magazines that had a solid reputation for thorough investigation, analysis and elegant writing. This marked the beginning of serious magazine journalism.
Today, we have about half a dozen or more. Of note was the grand entry of the Guardian newspaper into the market on February 27, 1983 as a Sunday newspaper and on July 4, 1983 as a daily .The paper, jointly sponsored by Alex Ibru, a businessman and Stanley Macebuh a journalist of the intellectual tradition, was an instant hit.
The paper sought to publish stories in a balanced and fair manner and to comment with solid reasoning and argumentations, thus, elevating the tone of public discourse. The Guardian remains, till this day, the most authoritative Nigerian Newspaper.
It can be said that the current mushrooming of newspapers and magazines is a direct product of the relative successes of the newspapers and magazines of the 80’s and 90’s.
The second reason for this proliferation has been the onset of competitive politics and electioneering and the need for the politicians to reach their constituents. Also, the battle for gender equality has given the newspapers the latitude to cover women’s activities and interests more than ever before. Unfortunately, this coverage has been largely tilted towards women fashion, beauty and how technology can assist to be more beautiful with very little attention paid to their career development and the contributions they can make or have made towards national development and renewal.
It can be said without any fear of contradiction that the Nigerian press, especially, the print media, have contributed substantially to the development of the nation. In particular, one can mention the media’s robust fight against colonialism, military rule, and bad governance by military and civilian administrations, corruption, tribalism, sit-tight overtures by our rulers and other sundry sins. In recent times, the removal of the Speakers of House of Representatives, Ibrahim Salisu and Mrs. Etteh and the Senate President, Evans Enwerem, for offences bordering on misconduct can be attributed to the crusade mounted by the press.
During the Sani Abacha era, the politicians showed exemplary cowardice by five of their parties endorsing General Abacha for the presidential elections whereas the press stood in solid opposition to the gamble at great personal risk. For the first time, the words guerrilla Journalism crept into our lexicon as journalists showed resilience and cunning by publishing their newspapers and magazines from different parts of the city of Lagos week after week.
During the last few months of President Obasanjo’s reincarnation, there was a feverish attempt by his political jobbers and sycophants to extend his tenure beyond the constitutionally sanctioned two terms. Monies changed hands, advertorials dominated the media, and spirited attempts were made by hirelings to railroad the country into a constitutional crisis if they did not have their way. But for the courage of the Senate President, Senator Nnamani, the African Independent Television and the print media, the country would have been on the fast lane to its political Golgotha.
When you consider the various hurdles put on the way of the media by the various governments from the colonial days to the present, it can be said that the Nigerian press has been very resilient. The hurdles range from oppressive legislation, prosecution, persecution proscription to imprisonment, brutalisation and assassination. A few examples will suffice.
The most sensational crisis that the press faced in the 70’s was perhaps the Minere Amakiri case. Amakiri, a Port Harcourt based reporter of the Bendel State owned Nigerian Observer, had filed a story in 1973 on a teachers’ strike which was looming in the Rivers State. His editor in Benin thought his story had all the ingredients of a Front pager and gave it the right treatment. Amakiri must have jumped up for joy when he saw his byline on the front page .However, unluckily for him, the story was published on the 315t birthday of the Rivers State Military Governor, Alfred Diete-Spiff When the Governor saw the story the champagne glass may have fallen down from his hand. He promptly hit the roof. He ordered his ADC R.M Iwowari to give Amakiri a clean haircut, “no bill sent, with an old rusty blade” He was stripped naked and given 24 strokes of the cane on his bare back. There was an uproar within the media and outside it. The crusading Lagos lawyer, Gani Fawehinmi, took up the matter in court. The court awarded damages to Amakiri.
There was an interesting episode in September 1991 involving the editor of the Nigerian Observer, an Edo State Government owned newspaper.
The Editor, Tony Ikeakanam, had decided that the photograph of Nigeria’s First Lady, Mrs. Maryam Babangida should adorn the front page of his paper and so he put it there. The lady, who was considered by many as elegant and glamorous, thought that the photograph was unglamorous and did not show off her beauty appropriately. She pulled the right strings and the next day the poor editor was demoted, because he had demoted a First lady by publishing a photograph that was unflattering of her. Now, I ask you all to decide who was guilty: the cameraman, or the camera, or the photograph, or the paper which it was printed or the chemical used in processing the photograph or the printer or the newsprint or the newspaper editor or all of the above.
Some of the pressures on the press have been fatal. On October19, 1986, Dele Giwa, first editor in Chief of Newswatch, was-sent a parcel bomb on a Sunday morning. As he opened the letter, the bomb exploded and killed him. Since then many other journalists have been killed in very bizarre circumstances, thus making the practice of journalism the next thing to being at the war front.
There have been other pressures of less fatal but nonetheless dehumanizing or disconcerting nature. When I was editor of the Nigerian Chronicle, I had to publish a story about St. Margaret’s Hospital, Calabar. The military Governor, Col Paul Omu, had gone on a tour of the Hospital and found many pregnant women lying on the bare floor. Bed space was the problem. He awarded a contract for the building of a new block and before the project was completed he was posted out of the State. A naval officer, M.A.B Elegbede, was appointed Military Administrator. The contractor completed the building, locked up the place and took the keys away hoping that would force the government to pay him. My reporter did a story on the project and I slapped it on the front page of the Nigerian Chronicle.
The Military Administrator sent for me. On getting there, I met the Commissioner of Information, Chief Horace Ekwere, in the Governor’s outer office. He asked what I thought might be the reason for our being summoned. I said it might be in connection with that day’s front page story of our paper. He said he didn’t think so after all the story was true.
A few minutes later, we were ordered into the Military Administrator’s office. He barely responded to our greetings but simply brought a copy of that day’s Chronicle and dropped on the coffee table, turned to me and hollered: “Did the contractor pay you to publish this?” I simply told him, calmly, that it was a true story to which we thought we should draw the government’s attention.” That answer probably angered him more and he spouted: “Who are you working for?” I kept quiet and he turned to the Commissioner: “Why do you allow these boys to publish any nonsense they like” The Commissioner replied: “I have been speaking to them, your Excellency” 1 took it that the Commissioner had a right to lie to keep his job and I did not bother to contradict him. After a stony silence, the Administrator left us and went into his inner office. I waited for a few minutes and told the
Commissioner that I had to go back to work because I didn’t think he would come
back to us. I left while the Commissioner waited. We never heard from the Administrator again on the matter.
In 1983, I had written an article titled, Sodom and Gomorrah, which was published in the Sunday Concord. It was an analysis of the evolving trend whereby public buildings where there were cases of corruption were torched in order to obliterate the evidence. The article was on the Nigerian External Telecommunications (NET) which had recorded a huge case of corruption. I had warned that it was needful to protect the building from possible arsonists.
To be contd
For The Record
BROADCAST BY HIS EXCELLENCY, SIR SIMINALAVI FUBARA, GSSRS ON TUESDAY, 18TH JUNE, 2024
For The Record
An Open Letter To President Bola Ahmed Tinubu On The Imperative Of Revisiting The Eight-Point Resolution Brokered As Truce For The Rivers Political Crisis
Your Excellency, as belated as it may come, please, do accept my congratulations on your victory in the last Presidential election, and the seamless swearing-in ceremony that ushered you in as the sixth democratically elected President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Of course, your victory did not come as a surprise to many, given your antecedents as a democrat, astute administrator and, a go-getter. Whereas your track record as a political activist, especially in the wake of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election is self-evident; your exceptional performance as Governor of Lagos State is a clincher any day.
It is my prayer therefore, that the good Lord, who has brought you this far, guide and direct your ways to steer the ship of state aright.
That being said, Your Excellency, please permit me to commence this correspondence with an allegory drawn from our recent past. A few years ago, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was elected Nigeria’s President on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). You were equally elected Governor of Lagos State on the platform of the Alliance for Democracy (AD). This electoral upshot inevitably placed you in opposition to the government at the centre.
The dust raised in the wake of the elections was yet to settle before you disagreed with then President Obasanjo. The bone of contention transcended personal vendetta, or so it seemed. Again, it happened at a time when our democracy could rightly be described as nascent. You had approached the court to seek judicial interpretation on some grey areas of our constitution, as provided for, in the concurrent list.
Much as Obasanjo would have loved to have things go his own his way, he was apparently restrained by the grundnorm. And he recognized it was within your right to seek judicial interpretation as to whether he wasn’t exercising his powers as president ultra vires. That was the rule of law at play; a classic specimen of what we fondly refer to as the beauty of democracy in our political parlance.Above all, it underscored the centrality of the constitution in resolving state matter.
Nigerians gave you thumbs up for engaging Obasanjo and the federal government all the way up to the Supreme Court. Moreover, happening at a time when the fear of President Obasanjo and the unwritten federal might were considered the beginning of political wisdom in our polity. Of course, the constitution came handy as a leveler between your good self and former President Obasanjo.
In light of the above, Nigerians naturally expect a clear departure from what the Obasanjo era and the immediate past regime offered them as constitutional democracy. Whereas it is still early in the day to rate your performance in this regard, one cannot but acknowledge that you have so far shown that you have some listening ear. Your intervention in what could have degenerated into a total breakdown of law and order in Rivers State late last year comes as a reference point. For me, stepping in to halt the ship of state from completederailment is an eloquent attestation to the fact that you place the security of lives and property, peace and harmony, and national cohesion over and above partisan interest.
You could equally have looked the other way and allow the crisis fester, since Rivers State is a PDP state. But you hearkened to the voice of reason, and that of well-meaning Nigerians, particularly, Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark, the leader of the Ijaw nation, and, the Ijaw National Congress (INC) to halt the drift. Notwithstanding your tight schedule, you took out time to summon the governor of Rivers State, Sir Siminalayi Joseph Fubara, his predecessor, now FCT minister, Barr. Ezebunwo Nyesom Wike and Hon. Martins Amaewhule who were the principal actors in the crisis to the Villa, and have them subscribed to a peace deal.
Although I had my reservations over the eight-point resolution ab initio, I refrained myself from joining the bandwagon in pointing out some of the obvious limitations in the document at the time. My position was informed by the following reasons. First, I didn’t see it as the wisest thing to do at a time when the crisis was raging like a wildfire. For me, nothing could have been more paramount than bringing the situation under control, which the armistice effectively accomplished. Second, I trusted your judgment, and honestly believed that you brokered the deal in good faith. I was therefore willing to give the truce the deserved benefit of the doubt by putting it to test. Finally, and most importantly, the governor who was in the eye of the storm was unwavering in restating his commitment to the terms of the truce.
However, three months after the deal was struck, I dare say, Your Excellency; that it has failed in attaining the ultimate goal of reconciling the warring factions.Instead, it had become the template for the palpable tension the state has since been grappling with. This outcome is by no means surprising to any discerning mind. And the reasons are not far-fetched. First, as I mentioned earlier, it would appear that in a bid to halt to the looming anarchy, the constitution which is the grundnorm was not properly consulted in forging the eight-point resolution. Also, a reexamination of the document reveals a certain degree of political fiat in its construct.
That the eight-point resolution has since triggered a plethora of litigations is only natural. That it has induced a near state of anomie clearly points to the inherent flaws in the document. That it has thrown up desperadoesand warmongers like Chief Tony Okocha and Engr. Samuel Nwanosike who now disparage, distract and outrightly abuse a sitting governor with reckless abandon is equally expected. As for Wike, the man believes the governor is his lackey, therefore, tongue-lashing, and outrightly threatening to give the governor sleepless nights are privileges he believes are within his right. But most worrisome, is the fact that Wike doesn’t make empty threats. In other words, backtracking on getting the governor out of office, either by hook or crook isn’t just an option.
The truth is, some of the articles in the eight-point resolution stealthily stripped the governor of the powers and aura of his office;thus exposing him to the ridicule we see today. For instance, article three directed the governor to reinstate former members of the state executive council,who had earlier resigned their appointments from the state cabinet. Truth be told, such directive to a sitting governor, in the very least, leaves a sour taste in the mouth. Perhaps, it would have been a different kettle of fish had the governor whimsically sacked the commissioners because he suspected their allegiance lay with the FCT minister. But here, these supposed honourable men and women resigned their appointments on their own volition, citing “personal grounds”.
One would have expected Your Excellency toresolve the issue a little differently given your groundedness in public and private administration; knowing that trust and mutual respect took flight the moment those commissioners handed in their resignation letters. In other words, people with obvious reservations against each other cannot truly work as a team.
The constitution expressly confers the powers to appoint commissioners on the governor of a state. It follows therefore that commissioners owe their loyalty to the governor who appoints them. While in the saddle, Wike was unequivocal in demanding a hundred percent loyalty from his commissioners. And that was what he got during his eight-year reign. Granted that the commissioners in question were all nominated by the FCT minister as we now know; the question is, was it also within his right to direct their resignation at will, and then re-direct their reinstatement because the plot to remove the governor failed?
If you ask me, requesting Wike, the nominator, to nominate fresh persons in their stead would have created more semblance of statecraft, seriousness in governance and, more importantly, saved the governor’s face. It also would have gone a long way to demonstrate that some things are beyond trifles. Put differently, the notion that a crisis of that magnitude could be resolved absent collateral damage rest on a faulty premise.
Again, article six of the eight-point resolution apparently puts the governor in a catch 22 situation. Directing the governor to re-present the state Appropriation Bill that has already been passed and signed into law to Hon. Martins Amaewhule and his co-travelers, in my humble opinion, was another sore point in the document. I doubt it was a fitting consideration for a failed impeachment that shouldn’t have happened in the first place; not after the courts have already made pronouncements on the issues.
Your Excellency, I honestly believe you didn’t intend the current stalemate between the executive and the legislative arms of government in Rivers State. Nevertheless, that is the reality on ground, as the governor, on one hand, governs the state with an infiltrated state civil service; and Martins Amaehule with his ‘Assembly’ members, working at cross-purposes with the governor, dish out all the anti-executive bills they can imagine. A case in point is the latest piece of legislation coming from the ‘Assembly’. Again, one wonders,what Assembly worth its salt, wouldseekto elongate the tenure of the current local government chairmen and councilors; knowing they were elected and sworn into office for a three-year term that expires in June? The question is, do we now enact our laws retroactively?
Now, to the crux of the matter, Wike is a man with a history of political violence. His politics thrives in an atmosphere of strife and rancour. It cannot be over emphasized that he presently seeks to overheat the Rivers polity, and possibly make the state ungovernable. He is hell bent on accomplishing the intendment of a failed impeachment. His penchant for violence explains why Rivers State under his reign wore the appalling badge of a conquered territory. The state hasn’t exploded yet, given its current tenuous peace of the graveyard,is because, Gov. Siminalaye Fubara has refused to swallow Wike’s bait. In fact, his refusal to join issues with the man he calls master, and probably heat up the polity explains why restive Wike wants 2027 switch place with 2024 in the Nigeria political calendar.
Already, his vicious supporters are on the prowl, momentarily rehearsing vandalism and arson of public and private properties, with no qualms, even in broad day light. Sadly, the license to take laws into their hands springs from standing on Wike’s mandate. This much is evident in a video that has gone viral on the cyberspace. One would have dismissedthe ongoing rampageas the man’s political trademark, except that wily Wike claims to be standing on your mandate, even though he has been most cautious in defecting to his supposedly ‘cancerous’ APC.
Your Excellency, is it not curious that Wike and his supporters are the only band daily chanting “On your mandate we shall stand, Jagaban”, one year after you had contested and won the February 25, 2023 presidential election?
Of utmost concern is the disturbing silence of the Police, the DSS and other security agencies in the face of Wike’s supporters running amok. Rather, than live up to their constitutional billing, they seem to unwittingly nudge the people to resort to self-help. And while they continue in their ostrichism, the fire is being steadily stoked by the man who thinks Rivers State is his sole enterprise, and to balm his bruised ego could unleash the unimaginable.
It is however reassuring that Your Excellency is no stranger to Rivers politics and its combustive nature. As Dr. Peter Odili’s contemporary as governors, you were well abreast of what transpired in the state from 1999-2007. You were also a major player in the Amaechi-Wike debacle while the former was the occupant of Brick House. In fact, you were purported to have saved Amaechi’s skin from the Jonathans, when, in cahoots with Wike, they unleashed the federal might.
You saw Rivers State went upin flame from 2013-2019, all for Wike to succeed his Ikwerre brother as governor in a multi-ethnic state. You were also witnessto how thepolitically induced inferno incredibly extinguished itself as soon as Wike’s vaulting ambition was achieved. But while the carnage last, Rivers people lost their lives in their hundreds.
As governor, and for eight years, Wike ruled like a demigod, and the state, his footstool. He literally vetoed the constitution on Citizens’ Rights, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Association, Procurement, and Social Justice. In fact, one of the lion-hearted among us aptly tagged the Wike-era as the years of the Rivers of Blood.
Your Excellency, there is no better way to say Rivers State is presently sitting on a keg of gunpowder, while drifting daily towards the precipice. And if something is not done urgently to avert a repetition of its recent ugly past, tomorrow may be too late.
I have personally bemoaned the lot of the Rivers man since the dawn of the fourth republic in my book: The Rivers Season of Insanity. I would spare you the details therein. However, it may interest Your Excellency to know that as a Rivers man; I have tremendous respect for you, just as I envy what you have made of Lagos State. I’m therefore genuinely bothered that Rivers State may just be the odd state out as you are set to replicate the Lagos wonder across the federation. Rivers State can only andtruly share in the Renewed Hope, if Wike is restrained from plunging it into another round of bloodletting.
Much as it is the truth, I hate to reiterate, that in all her abundance, Rivers State can only boast of the loudest and most vaulting chief executives ever, since 1999. The allure to graduate from Brick House to Aso Villa has become an elixir, which those we elect to govern have not been able to extricate themselves from. And to make a bad situation worse, it remains the only state in Nigeria that flaunts an obnoxious injunction that insulates her past and serving governors from the ethics of good governance, such as transparency, accountability and probity.
I have no doubt in my mind that you already saw through Wike and his antics. And it is only a matter of time before you reined him in. My concern however, is that it shouldn’t happen only after he must have thrust the state into another round of massacre. Need I say, that going by his claim, what Wike delivered in last year’s election were Rivers votes, not his votes.
Ask the Jonathans if their alliance with Wike was worth the trouble, given the benefit of hindsight, and your guess will be as good as mine.
In a nutshell,Your Excellency, Rivers State has had more than her fair share of bloodletting since 1999. It is against this backdrop that I most fervently pray that the blood of Dr. Marshall Harry, Chief A. K Dikkibo, Hon. Monday Ndor, Hon. Charles Nsiegbe, Amb. Ignatius Ajuru, Hon. Monday Eleanya, Barr. Ken Aswuete and several other victims of assassination be allowed to water the peace initiative and advocacy of the incumbent governor.
Finally, Your Excellency, in view of the above, it is my humble submission that the eight-point resolution be revisited with the hope that it guarantees sustainable peace and harmony in the Rivers polity.
“The time is always right to do what is right.”
-Martin Luther King Jr.
Thank you for time and consideration.
Yours Respectfully,
Caleb Emmanuel Fubara
Fubara hails from Opobo Town
Background
On Thursday, February 15, 2024 at its 109th Legislative sitting, the House passed into Law, the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission (Amendment) Bill, 2024. The Bill repealed the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission (Amendment) Law, No. 3 of 2006 and further amended the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission Law of 1999. The Bill was sent to the Governor for his assent and after the statutory 30 days, the House re-passed the Bill into Law on 22nd March, 2024.
The Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission was established by the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission Law of 1999. Section 2 provides:
“The Commission shall comprise a Chairman and four other members who shall in the opinion of the Speaker be persons of unquestionable integrity.
“The Chairman and members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Rivers State House of Assembly acting on the advice and recommendation of the House Committee of Selection and shall in making the appointment be guided by the geographical spread and diversity of the people of Rivers State.”
The above section was repealed by the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission (Amendment) Law No 3, 2006. In Sections 2 and 3, the Amendment Law provides that:
S. 2 “Section 2 of the Principal Law is amended by repealing subsection (1) and substituting the following subsection:
“(1) The Commission shall comprise a Chairman and 4 (four) other members.
S. 3 “Section 2(2) of the Principal Law is amended by repealing subsection (2) and substituting the following subsection:
“(2) The Chairman and members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Governor subject to the confirmation by the House of Assembly and shall in making the appointment be guided by the geographical spread and diversity of the people of Rivers State.”
The import of the 2024 Amendment Bill passed into Law by the House is that the Governor will no longer have the power to appoint the Chairman and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission and the power of appointment shall be vested in the House of Assembly.
Legal Issues
The first issue to consider is the Constitutional power of the Governor. Section 5(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 provides that the executive powers of the State shall be vested in the Governor of that State.” Further, Section 176(2) provides that: “The Governor of a State shall be the Chief Executive of that State.”
This follows that the Governor is the Chief Executive Officer of the State Government and by the powers vested on him, is responsible for making appointments into various executive bodies, subject to the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and other statutes. All Commissions and other parastatals are executive bodies under the control of the Governor. The House of Assembly Service Commission is an executive body and as such, the Chairman and members can only be appointed by the Governor. The House of Assembly has no powers to make any appointment into an executive body as no statutory body is under the control of the legislature. The Rivers State House of Assembly should not mistake the presence of the building of the Service Commission in its premises as conferring powers on the House to appoint the Chairman and members of the Commission.
The second issue to consider is the Constitutional alteration of 2023. In that alteration, the Third Schedule was amended to include State Houses of Assembly Service Commissions, which invariably follows that a State House of Assembly Commission is one of State bodies established by section 197 of the 1999 Constitution. Let’s be reminded that Section 198 of the 1999 Constitution gives the Governor the power of appointment into various executive bodies, subject to confirmation by a resolution of the House of Assembly of a State. The job of the Rivers State House of Assembly ends with the confirmation of the appointees.
The alteration to the Third Schedule, paragraph 1A provides that the composition, tenure, structure, finance, functions, powers, and other proceedings of the Commission shall be as prescribed by a law of the House of Assembly of the State. Notice that the appointment of the Chairman and members of the Commission is not listed. Therefore, it can be safely inferred that the power to appoint the Chairman and members of the House of Assembly Service Commission lies with the Governor, as is the case with the other bodies listed under Section 197 of the 1999 Constitution.
There is nothing in the Alteration that, by any stretch of imagination, can be inferred to confer the power of appointing the Chairman and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission on the Rivers State House of Assembly, notwithstanding the fact that the law creating the Commission was enacted by the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Thirdly, is the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission and its staff under the control of the State Government? To answer this question, we will take our voyage to Section 318 of the 1999 Constitution. That section gives the definition of a Public Service of a State to mean: “the service of the state in any capacity in respect of the government of the state and includes service as: clerk or other staff of the House of Assembly; member of staff of the High Court, the Sharia Court of Appeal, the Customary Court of Appeal or other courts established for a state by the Constitution or by a law of a House of Assembly; member or staff of any Commission or authority established for the state by this Constitution or by a law of a House of Assembly; staff of any Local Government Council; staff of any statutory corporation established by a law of a House of Assembly; staff of any educational institution established or financed principally by a government of a State; and staff of any company or enterprise in which the government of a State or its agency holds controlling shares or interest.
The purport of this section is that the Assembly Service Commission is not an appendage of the legislature but under the control of the State Government. Even at the national level, the members of the National Assembly Service Commission are appointed by the President in collaboration with the National Assembly.
Fourthly, what is the position of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission Law vis-à-vis the National Assembly Service Commission Act? Section 4(5) of the 1999 Constitution provides: “If any Law enacted by the House of Assembly of a State is inconsistent with any law validly made by the National Assembly, the law made by the National Assembly shall prevail, and that other law shall, to the extent of inconsistency, be void.”
Further, in A.G Bendel v AG Federation & 22 Ors (1982) 3 NCLRI, the Supreme Court held per Fatayi Williams CJN (as he then was) “neither a State nor an individual can contract out of the provisions of the Constitution. The reason for this is that a contract to do a thing which cannot be done without a violation of the Law is void.”
The fifth issue is: “can a statute revive a repealed statute?” In the case of Idehen v University of Benin, Suit No FHC/B/CS/120/2001, delivered on 19th December, 2001, the court held that:
“Contrary to the contention of the University, the effect of a repealing statute is to erase the repealed statute from the statute book. When a statute is repealed, it ceases to exist and no longer forms part of the laws of the land. In other words, the effect of the repeal is to render the repealed statute dead and non-existent in law. Like a dead person, it cannot be revived.”
The court also held in Onagoruwa v IGP (1991) 75 N.W.L.R (pt. 193) 593 that in law, a non-existent statute is dead and cannot be saved or salvaged by the court.
In Madumere v Onuoha (1999) 8 NWLR (Pt. 615) Pg 422, the Court of Appeal held that:
“the effect of repealing a statute is to obliterate it completely from the records of the Parliament as if it had never been passed. Such a law is to be regarded legally as a law that never existed…This means in effect that when a statute is repealed, it ceases to be an existing law under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
For the purpose of reviving your memory, the provision giving the Governor the power to appoint the Chairman and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission under the repealed 2006 Law provides in its opening paragraph:
“3. Section 2(2) of the Principal Law is amended by repealing section 2 and substituting the following section…” (emphasis mine).
Further, Section 6(1)(a) of the Interpretation Act provides:
“(1) The repeal of an enactment shall not revive anything not in force or existing at the time when the repeal takes effect.”
Please note that Section 318(4) of the 1999 Constitution provides that “The Interpretation Act shall apply for the purposes of interpreting the provisions of this Constitution.”
It follows from the above that the House cannot repeal Sections 2 and 3 of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission (Amendment) Law No 3, 2006 to revive the already repealed provisions of the 1999 Law.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Rivers State House of Assembly lacks the powers, legal or otherwise, to remove the power of appointment of the Chairman and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission from the Governor and vest that power on themselves. The provision in the Rivers State House of Assembly Service Commission (Amendment) Law, 2024 seeking to vest that power on the House is in clear contravention of the 1999 Constitution, and therefore, a nullity in the eyes of the Law. See the case of MacFoy v UAC (1961) 3 All ER 1169 where the court held that you cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand.
In that case, Lord Denning stated: “If an act is void, then it is in law a nullity. It is not only bad, but incurably bad. There is no need for an order of court to set it aside. It is automatically null and void without more ado, though it is sometimes more convenient to have the court declare it to be so. And every proceeding which is founded on it is also bad and incurably bad. You cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stay there. It will collapse.”
Rt Hon Ehie is Chief of Staff, Government House, Port Harcourt.
By: Edison Ehie