For The Record
Nigeria: The 2015 Question
Being a text of a lecture delivered at the second conference of the People’s Media Limited by Rt. Hon Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, CON, Governor, Rivers State and Chairman Nigeria Governors’ Forum at the Ladi Kwali Hall, Sheraton, Abuja on Thursday, March 6, 2014.
The invitation to speak was a bit confounding to me as it reeled out names of important men and women who will grace this occasion. The topic also appeared difficult and rather general. There was the need to streamline the topic. I therefore decided to speak on “The Metaphor of Change and the Politics of 2015.” My view of course is that while this is similar to the general theme it is somewhat more specific and focused.
To deal with the idea of change, one must first chronicle what is to be changed. Nigeria, a nation amalgamated in 1914 by a crusading colonialist with economic motivations was granted an unwilling political independence on October 1, 1960.
Nigeria has a chequered political and economic history which ranged from a “democratic election” that saw the emergence of Alhaji Tafawa Balewa as Prime Minister and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe as ceremonial President to the current government of President Goodluck Jonathan. Nigeria’s political and economic history is beset with ethnicity, corruption, poor and weak or lack of institutions, glorified by poor leadership. In the 60’s Nigeria was blessed with some quality leadership like Nnamdi Azikiwe, Tafawa Balewa, Obafemi Awolowo and Ahmadu Bello, amongst others. The colonialists left behind a (Westminster system of government) which embraced a bit of federalism to accommodate different ethnic and religious interests.
The different ethnic, political, religious, economic and the growth of corruption led to Nigeria civil war after the coup that had the principal officers of government assassinated. The coup and the assassinations were seen as ethnically motivated and led to a counter coup, which in itself resulted to a civil war. This was after a protracted negotiation between the two leaders of the Nigerian nation and the emerging Igbo nation. An estimated over one million persons died in the war. Several Nigerians leader were killed during the coup that ushered in the leadership of General Aguiyi Ironsi, most of which were of the northern extraction. Soldiers of Igbo or Eastern extraction led the coup. The counter coup itself and the insurrection that followed led to the killing of southerners in the North.
The resultant civil war ended in 1970 and the counter coup had thrown up Yakubu Gowon as Head of State. The Army had become involved in civil and political administration. With the impunity and command control structure attached to the military, corruption and dictatorship grew in the Nigerian polity and became the common reason advanced by the military marauders and economic scavengers for the frequent coup d’états and the change of government. This was the basis on which General Gowon was over thrown in 1975. General Murtala Mohammed was killed in 1976 after a few months in office. And after General Obasanjo emerged, and organised an election that ushered in democracy and Alhaji Shehu Shagari.
They also made different contributions at development especially the governments of General Olusegun Obansajo and that of General Yakubu Gowon. The short-lived General Mohammed Buhari was focussed on anti corruption. For this reason and more it was quickly set aside. The regime of General Ibrahim Badamosi Babaginda ushered in development, economic and political reforms. It took us through different phases of democracy, had unsuccessful coup attempts to dethrone him. The regime created states like that of General Gowon. It had a dramatic exit that led to a brutal regime of General Abacha. Abacha mostly characterized by corruption and human rights abuses after a palace coup that took away the brief regime of Ernest Shonekan.
The death of General Sani Abacha ushered in the Government of General Abudusalam Abubakar whose presence we are enjoying today. One of his greatest achievements is transitioning the country to a democracy with Rtd. General Olusegun Obasanjo returning to governance. He calmed and stabilized a country in turmoil from the brutality of an Abacha who wanted to return as a civilian dictator in the name of democracy and election. We have since then had three democratically elected presidents.
A common feature that characterized the different governments is corruption in varying degrees. The fight against corruption was given a serious thought under civilian administration of Obasanjo. He instituted the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) as a corruption-fighting agency despite the fact that there was in existence a Nigeria Police who has as one of its responsibilities fighting corruption. Nigeria as a country had abandoned its progress in Agriculture development and Agrarian economy for and economy driven by oil revenue.
The oil revenue itself enhances the development of an army of looters. John Campbell the one time America Ambassador to Nigeria in his book “Nigeria Dancing on the Brink” had this to say,
Gov. Amaechi
“Throughout the post-civil war period, the self-enrichment of individual military officers was made possible by immense oil revenues combined with weak institutions of governance with little accountability to the public. Militarization and centralization of government authority went hand in hand, power in Nigeria became much more centralized than its “Federal” label would indicate.”
Like was said earlier, corruption is not a repository of the military alone. The politicians were also experts at it. We had earlier reported the institutionalization of the fight against corruption through a state agency fro the first time in the history of Nigeria by President Obasanjo. The degree of progress that was made may be open for debate especially as it was alleged that he used the same agency to go after his political opponents. John Campbell continued in his treatise,
“Where he created anti-corruption agencies, he used them against his own political enemies. Nevertheless, their establishment bodes well for the future if they evolve into mainstay for the political enforcement for the law.”
The progress made in fighting corruption began to erode under President Yar Adua. His short-lived region cannot be assessed in this wise. Currently in the present regime of President Goodluck Jonathan, corruption appears to have been institutionalized. A whopping sum of twenty billion dollars is alleged to have been missing. The stories of both fuel and kerosene subsidy are not anything to behold. It smears of corruption and rottenness. The aviation bulletproof saga remains unresolved. The Shell Malabu story is a macabre dance. The response of the regime to corruption is to imprison those exposing corruption. The impunity in corruption is extended to the punishment of those who fight corruption. The removal of the Governor of Central Bank is unconstitutional. Constitution means nothing to the current government. What we see is the re-emergence of civilian dictatorship, but enough about corruption.
Statistics emanating from both the World Bank and National Bureau of Statistics states that unemployment rate is 23 percent in Nigeria. It was by far lower than this before the enthronement of the Government of President Jonathan. Unemployment rate averaged at 14.6 percent, reaching an all-time high of 23.9 percent in 2011. It had an all-time high record low of 5.3 percent in 2006. Nigerians live in want, hunger and penury. Unemployment and poverty may differ in regions to varying degrees, but it knows no faith, nor religion, knows no tribe, nor nation. It brews violence and has led to the annihilation of families in the North East and South-south of Nigeria. Death on the streets of Borno, Yobe, Adamawa, Kano, and Bauchi are no longer lessons for discussions. They are a daily occurrence. The debate is whether it is religious, motivated or it is driven by ignorance, hunger, and poverty. Whatever part of the divide you find yourself, you will know that violence has overwhelmed the government. Kidnapping is an everyday affair in the Niger Delta. It becomes strange, any day it does not occur. Political assassination is also on the rise. Violence is the order of the day. Richard Dowden in his book, Africa, Altered States, Ordinary Miracles, had this to say “ Nigeria is famed for its sudden explosions of violence, usually in cities where a politician has stirred up his own ethnic group or co religionist to try to wipe out a rival. These brief explosions regularly leave 400 or 500 dead in a couple of days when gangs of thugs take up clubs, machetes and knives. Whole suburbs are burned down – often with people locked in their homes.”
This is a similar picture with the burning of the Federal Government College in Yobe State and the killing of the existing students. There are ethnically driven violence as exemplified in the cases of the Fulani Herdsmen in Zamfara, Benue and Plateau.
Nigeria is famous for out of school children. We top the list with a figure of 8.6m-10m out of school children. Education is not affordable and accessible. Education infrastructures are deteriorating or non-existent.
Beyond the education infrastructure are the softer issues, insufficient, poorly trained and ill-motivated teachers, a static curriculum, a lack of monitoring and quality control to ensure that education is not only available but is fit for purpose, competitive and qualitative. The result is that our children leave school, half baked at best and uneducated at worst.
Infrastructure
The current administration of President Goodluck Jonathan has spoken variously about its commitment to infrastructure development on a broader scale. Its efforts in resuscitating the railways and its sale of the power infrastructure are commendable initiatives that should be followed through. Regardless of the first steps though, complaints by the different buyers of the generation and distribution companies point to debilitating challenges in the roll out that might affect the government’s power delivery promises. In the roads and maritime sector however much remains to be done. Water and sanitation should also receive better attention especially with donor agencies anxious to support investments in that sector.
The Rule Of Law
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of our nationhood is the arrogant display by the elite of power above the rule of law. The learned Joseph Bodunrin Daudu, SAN, in his welcome address at a stakeholders symposium on the rule of law organized by the Nigeria Bar Association, puts it very succinctly. I have taken the liberty to quote him quite generously “ Strict adherence to the rule of law remains the hope and solution to Nigeria’s multifaceted problems. it is a guarantee against unworthy livelihood. the rule of law helps to forestall vices such as dictatorship totalitarianism, anarchy, oligarchy personifies. it also serves a s a guarantee that those who are strong and valiant today will not be molested in their moments of weakness and infirmity brought about by old age and ill health. Thus the able politicians of today require no other protection whether in or out of office than the existence of an entrenched rule of law regime. the same goes for the citizens.”
It then is evident that the failure by government to provide the appropriate environment for the people to thrive, and a failure to guarantee the people’s right could lead to a breakdown of society. Democracy requires more than just the right to vote. A democratic country has to guarantee basic human rights to every person. Although these rights are enshrined in the country’s Constitution, it is crucial that the rights are ensured and protected by government as well as the citizens themselves. I will quote the learned Daudu again, “ Breaches or non observance of the Rule of law breeds inequity. Some may say that all fingers are not equal but at least we take equal care of all fingers when we wash our hands.”
Good governance is the responsibility of every democratic government working in the interest of the public, as is the smooth handing over of batons from one administration to another. Nigeria is at the threshold of history with yet again another election. The Electorate is already demanding a better deal. The poll commissioned by the All Progressive Congress being unveiled today has shown that more than half of those polled insist that they are dissatisfied with the status quo and want change. The message is clear, the people want to be allowed a chance to freely make up their mind about who should lead them.
In political circles the drums of war and voices of intolerance gives cause for worry about the determination of the Federal Government controlled People’s Democratic Party to guarantee free, fair and transparent elections in 2015. It is crucial that the elite and those of us in government understand that disallowing free elections would not just be an albatross but could be an invitation to anarchy.
The Encyclopedia Britannica says with regard to change, “Students of political systems must grapple with a subject matter that is today in constant flux. They must deal not only with the major processes of growth, decay, and breakdown but also with a ceaseless ferment of adaptation and adjustment. The magnitude and variety of the changes that occurred in the world’s political systems beginning in the early 20th century suggest the dimensions of the problem. Great empires disintegrated; nation-states emerged, flourished briefly, and then vanished; world wars twice transformed the international system; new ideologies swept the world and shook established groups from power; all but a few countries experienced at least one revolution and many countries two or more; domestic politics in every system were contorted by social strife and economic crisis; and everywhere the nature of political life was changed by novel forms of political activity, new means of mass communication, the enlargement of popular participation in politics, the rise of new political issues, the extension of the scope of governmental activity, the threat of nuclear war, and innumerable other social, economic, and technical developments”.
For an extended period of time, change became somewhat subdued around the world? Then came the blinding sand storm dubbed the Arab Spring, our own January protests in Nigeria ( which while I may not entirely agree with was an indication that Nigerians do have a potential to rise up) and more immediate the spectacle in Ukraine and Venezuela.
People around the world have become restless because certain existing political systems are trampling on the two key internationally adopted United Nations covenants:
1. The international covenant on political and civil rights
2. The international covenant of economic, social and cultural rights.
These rights define the very substance of life and once abused or denied will ultimately lead to birth pangs of unpleasant change.
The state has three key institutions, each with separate powers: government has executive power to run the country according to the policies of the ruling party, parliament has legislative power to enact the laws which government has to enforce and the courts of law have the judicial power to protect the Constitution and legislation passed through parliament.
Civil society, labour, business, media, communities and citizens, along with government, carry the responsibility to protect the country’s constitutional rights. Participation is central to these stakeholders fulfilling their obligation. It can be realized in a number of ways. After the end of apartheid, more democratic structures were established to enable active participation at local, provincial and national levels. However, if people do not become part of these structures, decision-making is left to a minority group.
For example, legislation requires schools to establish democratic school governing bodies for parents, educators and learners to manage the schools’ affairs collectively. School fees cannot be increased without the input from the three parties. But if parents fail to attend meetings or respond to correspondence, the educators and school management are forced to make decisions that may be regarded as undemocratic, causing unhappiness within the community.
One’s level of education, financial status or language should not hinder active citizenship. When we become active in our communities, we stand a better chance at entrenching values such as accountability, transparency, honesty, trust and respect, which are needed in order for democracy to thrive. For example, in a democracy, everyone is free to voice his or her opinion as long as it does not amount to hate speech. The media has the right to report on all matters concerning the public, even if it means exposing the wrongdoings of government, powerful institutions or people.
Even in a democracy, public protests have a place as a form of participation in community issues. However, it is important to acknowledge that with public protest comes the need for disagreeing parties to talk to each other. Talking about our different viewpoints is perhaps the most difficult engagement, but it is the most viable means to resolving complex matters. Yet an intolerant government that doesn’t appreciate the role of the electorate as partners in ensuring better governance is a government that is on its way out.
In a speech to the Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France, on January 23, 1967, former British Prime Minister and Statesman Harold Wilson said, “He who rejects change is the architect of decay. The only human institution which rejects progress is the cemetery”.
Are we where we are, in this decay of uncertain dimension because we are rejecting or resisting change? Have we voluntarily or involuntarily built a tower of babel where progress suddenly comes to a halt? Electoral frauds constitute the substructure of the abuse of political rights. And abuse of one right can lead to the abuse of other rights or all rights.
What has been the Nigerian experience with respect to elections and by extension political rights?
Here are the facts:
·1n 1993, when we thought we had repented of The post independence national election of 1964 set the stage. It was characterized by wide spread rigging, intimidation, and chaos
The election of 1965 followed the same pattern and became one of the reasons for the 1966 coup.
When the country returned to the ballot box in 1979, the ghosts of the 1964 and 1965 elections came back to town to cause havoc.
· Four years later in 1983, things took an even worse turn
·1n 1993, when we thought we had repented of our sins, the baby was not even allowed to come out deformed, it was aborted
·In 1999, 2003 we barely limped along with bruises
And then crowned things up with the 2007 election described at that time as the worst in Nigerian electoral history.
Just when you thought we have learnt our lessons, the 2011 elections came along with all the imprimatur of all previous elections.
Since 2003, almost every election has been called a make or mar election due to fear of massive rigging and its byproduct of violence. The big question is, how many make or mar elections should we have in the life of a nation?
Once again, here we are in a pre-election year. And once again, the witches’ cauldron has begun to boil over. Majority of our political gladiators are neither debating ideological leanings nor scrutinizing past records to guide rational choices in the upcoming general elections. Rather they are engaged in a series of spectacular arguments about agreements reached in dressing rooms and whose turn it is to be at the villa.
Today, the attention is not on possible post-election mayhem or violence. The twin evil of insecurity and violence are already here with us. Right to life has been diminished as never before. We have become so used to stories that hitherto were blood chilling that we flip over them in our newspapers. A new normal has been enthroned. And the man is dying in each of us. Yet elections loom ahead with a fast moving cloud soaked with highly flammable materials. Meanwhile, the political space is so constricted that politicians are gasping for breath and forced into unseasonal migrations. Today’s lecture for me is a wake up call for all of us in the political space, government, politicians and electorate alike. It is a call to ensure that we all work together to guarantee the sustenance of our democracy and the existence of our nation. I will end with another comment by Dowden in the same book. He says “ on the contrary, I sometimes feel Africa is not violent enough. If Africans fought back sooner against theft and oppression instead of allowing themselves to be slaves to the rich and powerful, Africa would be a much more peaceful place. Instead, African patience allows exploitation and oppression to thrive until everyone looses their temper and explodes.” Hopefully this would not be our lot.
Thank you for your kind attention and May God bless Nigeria.
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