Categories
Editorial Latest News

Not a Laughing Matter: Hardship in Nigeria advancing to tipping point

Not a Laughing Matter: Hardship in Nigeria advancing to tipping point
Not a Laughing Matter: Hardship in Nigeria advancing to tipping point

 

Not a Laughing Matter: Hardship in Nigeria advancing to tipping point

Anyone holding position of authority in Nigeria currently should not be seen in public places laughing. What are they laughing at? The citizens are suffering and this should reflect in the mood of all policy makers. As Nigerians await the decision of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the minimum wage contention, there are indications already that what the government will come up with will not be something cheering.

By sheer removal of fuel subsidy and devaluation of Nigeria’s currency, the cost of living in Nigeria has quadrupled. It is important to note that this sharp rise in the cost of living happened unexpectedly and drastically. In his inaugural address, Tinubu said fuel subsidy was gone. Immediately, the cost of the premium motor spirit went from a little above 200 naira to about 700 naira. Immediately after, the government also tampered with the exchange rate which has taken the exchange rate to a dollar from 600 naira to 1500 naira currently. While these things are happening, the government has not implemented any economic policy to cushion the effect of the policies. For instance, salary earners are still on their old salary structures; farmers are still finding it difficult to go to their farms because of insecurity and things are still in their lowest ebbs.

How are Nigerians, especially the poor ones who depend on their daily earnings for survival actually survive? This is the background of the minimum wage controversy.

These economic policies have taken the average Nigerian to a very bad position. Indications that the government could raise minimum wage beyond 100,000 naira is not there. The orgnaised labour unions have taken their demand down to 250,000 while the government is still at 62,000. Before arriving at its current stage, negotiations between the government tripartite committee and the Organised Labour had consistently hit a brick wall with both parties offering conflicting quotations.

Recall that the unions had earlier given the May 31, 2024 deadline for the conclusion of new minimum wage negotiations after demanding N615,000.

However, the government only raised its minimum wage offer from N57,000 to N60,000, just as the labour unions reduced their demand to N494,000 from N497,000 they later proposed.

Despite several calls and threats from Organised Labour to shut down the economy if its minimum wage demand was not met, the government insisted on not increasing its minimum wage offer beyond N62,000.

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, in a statement by his media aide, Rabiu Ibrahim last Saturday, said the proposed N494,000 minimum wage being demanded would result in an annual expenditure of N9.5tn, a burden he described as untenable for the nation’s finances.

Corroborating this, the Special Adviser on Information and Strategy to the President, Bayo Onanuga, also said the Organised Labour should be reasonable in its demand, except if it was using the declared strike to display its frustration over the loss of the Labour Party in the 2023 presidential election.

“Labour leaders need to be reasonable and not paralyse our economy unless they are using the strike as a continuous ventilation of the frustration they had when their party lost the 2023 presidential election.

“Can you pay your driver or cleaner N500,000 a month? Let’s not befuddle the issue: the government is not saying it is not reviewing minimum wage, it is saying it will pay something affordable and sustainable. N500,000 or N615,000 is out of it,” Onanuga wrote on his verified X handle.

The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, also threatened legal action if the Organised Labour should go ahead with its industrial action move, describing it as “premature, ineffectual, and illegal”.

In a letter dated June 1 and addressed to the leadership of the TUC and NLC, Fagbemi noted that it was wrong for the Organised Labour to have declared a strike because the negotiations between them and the Federal Government on the new national minimum wage had not reached a conclusive end.

He said that Organised Labour should have considered the interests and capacities of all employers, including the organised private sector, in setting a minimum wage that benefits the entire working population.

Drawing attention to legal provisions, Fagbemi cited Sections 41(1) and 42(1) of the Trade Disputes Act 2004 (as amended), which mandate both NLC and TUC to issue mandatory strike notices of at least 15 days.

He argued that the failure of the labour unions to comply with these provisions renders their strike action illegitimate and unlawful.

Furthermore, Fagbemi questioned the legality of the proposed strike action, pointing out that the labour unions had not initiated trade disputes with their employers or issued any strike notices as required by law.

He emphasized the gravity of non-compliance with the mandatory 15-day notice, highlighting the criminalization of such actions under Sections 41 and 42(1) of the Trade Disputes Act.

“I wish to further draw your attention to the fact that the conditions outlined by our national legislation for exercising the right to strike are in tandem with the International Labour Organization principles concerning the right to strike.

“It is the position of the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association that the obligation to give prior notice, the obligation to have recourse to conciliation, mediation, and (voluntary) arbitration procedures in industrial disputes, etc are prior prerequisites for declaring a strike,” the AGF said.

However, despite the legal threat and intervention from the National Assembly, the Organised Labour commenced an indefinite strike on Monday, June 3, 2024, to press home its demand.

The move expectedly plunged the country into total blackout following the alleged shutting down of the National grid by members of the National Union of Electricity Employees in compliance with the strike.

Also, there was an utter breakdown of economic activities across the country as banks, airports, public schools, and courts were shut.

This triggered nationwide outrage and forced the Federal Government to convene an emergency meeting to find a way out of the impasse.

In a bid to move the negotiation forward, the Organised Labour on Tuesday temporarily suspended the industrial action for five days after President Bola Tinubu agreed to pay a national minimum wage higher than N60,000 and the tripartite committee pledged its readiness to convene daily until a new minimum wage is announced.

However, irrespective of the agreement reached at the national meetings, the issue of minimum wage has been the subject of heated public debates in recent times with many public analysts and social commentators supporting either the government or the striking unions on the contentious arguments.

While those on the side of the government argued that the demands from the Organised Labour were utterly outrageous and would further worsen the inflationary pressure afflicting the country, those with the counterargument said the labour unions wouldn’t have even resolved for industrial action if the government had been very sensitive to their plights and those of over 200 million Nigerians they represent.

In an article he shared on his verified X handle on Tuesday, a retired judge in the United Kingdom and good governance advocate, Dr Charles Omole, stated, “The demand by Labour for over N400,000 minimum wage is outrageous and unhelpful. Asking for over 1000% increase in minimum wage is bad economics in many ways. How do you take seriously Labour leaders who seem to be living in their imaginary world? Their basis for their demand is not good economics. Listing the average cost of transportation; food etc and coming to a figure is not the way to calculate minimum wage.

“Firstly; prices go up and down all the time. So will the wages awarded be reduced if there is a sudden crash in prices of goods and services?  Secondly; Minimum wage is not supposed to meet all your needs. It isn’t anywhere in the world. If you can meet most of your needs with minimum wage; what is the incentive to get an education and earn much more than minimum wage?

“A minimum wage of over N400,000 will also mean a similar increment for all wage levels above the minimum as well. So a director who earns 300k at the moment will now need to be paid over N1m per month.  As the minimum goes up; all levels get increased as well.

“Also, many in public service earn more than the basic salary. There are all manner of allowances and awards that are also paid. An increase in the minimum wage is not just an increase for the lowest-paid staff. All staff (including the Permanent Secretary) will also get an increase. This outrageous demand by Labour will bankrupt any economy and the government must resist their blackmail,” Omole posted.

He argued that “In saner climates; you don’t see labour going on strike over minimum wage. The government simply announces the percentage increases in the minimum wage without any organised protest. The misuse of strike actions by the NLC and TUC has become damaging to the collective bargaining in this country.

“The government should stand firm with the 100 per cent increase in minimum wage it has offered. Anything more will just be playing to the gallery. Some states have not been able to pay the current N30,000 up until now. How do you expect them to pay N60,000 much less over N400,000.”

However, in a contrary argument, Nigerian lawyer and former Director-General of the Bureau of Public Service Reforms, Dr Joe Abah, said, “A minimum wage of N60,000 per month is just N2,700 per day, using a 22-day work month. You cannot say that people should not factor in the cost of transportation, food, electricity, and petrol in calculating minimum wage. That’s bizarre.”

He argued that “It is also not true that most public servants have all manners of allowances. Finally, anyone trained in negotiation skills knows that you don’t give your best offer first. That is why if something sells for an average of N100 and you tell me it’s N500, I will price you N10. When you reduce to N400, I will increase to N20 until we both decide to stop wasting each other’s time.”

He said, “I am ideologically opposed to strikes as a means of resolving labour disputes, but we have always had people negotiating for the government based on the offices they hold not because they have had any negotiation training.

“Until there was a tiny increase a few months ago, a fresh graduate in the civil service took home about N48k (all in, including allowances). A Director who has put in 27 years of meritorious service, with a PhD on top, took home less than N300k (all in, including allowances). The pay and allowances of a few agencies like CBN, NIMASA, NCC, and others can give the impression that people are reasonably compensated in the rest of the public service. That is not the case at all.

“The majority are performing miracles just to get to work every day. Any economic shock like sickness or a Caesarean delivery immediately plunges them into abject poverty. That is the context. As a private citizen, I pay my domestic staff more than the government pays many of its staff,” Abah added.

Aside from the pro and con arguments, some analysts have also shared the minimum wages payable in some advanced countries and the procedures as well as legal principles that underpin the payment of these minimum wages.

It was gathered that both the National Minimum Wage and the National Living Wage exist in the United Kingdom. A health and safety specialist based in the UK, Babatunde Soile, told Sunday PUNCH that the current minimum wage payable in the British country was £13.

However, a publication obtained from the UK government website showed that every year on the 1st of April, the National Living Wage and National Minimum Wage of the country change with stipulated wage payment rate for all age grades within the country. For instance, since April 1, 2024, the new NMW in the country, stood at £11.44 per hour for workers of age 21 and above, £8. 60 for those between 18 and 20 years of age, £640 for workers between ages 16 and 17, and £6.40 for apprentices.

Providing more insights, Soile said only the UK government and a few private establishments often pay the fixed annual Minimum Wage as some private employers, who can’t afford it, do lay off their workers, who mostly would have no choice than to rely on the government monthly social intervention payment to survive pending the time they would be able to secure another job.

“There is a fixed Minimum wage in the United Kingdom, which I have told you. But most times, it is mostly those working under government agencies that can pay, even though it is established by law. Some private establishments sometimes may not be able to afford it and they end up downsizing. Their laid-off workers would have no choice in the interim than to rely on the government’s monthly social intervention payment, which may not even be enough for an individual to take care of himself and his family. So, getting another job as quickly as possible remains the best, but it is not always as easy as it may sound,” the UK health specialist told Sunday PUNCH.

However, in the United States, though the Federal minimum wage has remained at $7.25 per hour, many states in the country have minimum wage laws. In cases where an employee is subject to both the state and federal minimum wage laws, the employee is entitled to the higher of the two minimum wages.

Offering more insights on this, a US-based media personality identified as General Oluchi on X said, “No one earns minimum wage in America, not the toilet cleaners, garbage disposal guys, fast-food workers, or even those who greet you in front of Walmart! No company pays $7/hour today. No Nigerian in the Diaspora earns $7/hour! A minimum wage is only a baseline of what a company can’t pay less than. Not what a company must pay you.

“The minimum wage is just a law that says you can’t pay anyone less than that amount no matter how bad things get. To be competitive, employers consider other factors before paying someone. The lowest hourly salary I have ever seen today is $15 – $17/hour and that’s for a low-skilled worker.

“The more skilled you are the more money you earn. My first salary 17 years ago was $12/hour (while the minimum wage was $6+), and I was fresh from Nigeria, fresh out of secondary school. I doubt that company pays that low to anyone today — even unskilled workers,” Oluchi posted recently.

Sharing similar perspectives, an environmental consultant based in the United States, Patrick Omenye, said, “The $7 per hour is for Federal government limit. Virginia minimum wage is $11 per hour and most people who earn the lowest earn $15 per hour. Even McDonald’s pays $15 at least.”

Similarly, a user identified on X as Gabriel N, who is a software engineer based in Brookfield, a city in Wisconsin, United States, posted, “It’s not even realistic for anyone to make any permutations based on the federal minimum wage of $7 per hour because almost every state has their operating minimum wage. For example, the minimum wage in Wisconsin is $7.25 per hour, while that of neighbouring Illinois is $15 per hour. And while New York minimum wage is $16 per hour, the District of Columbia has $17 per hour minimum wage.”

However, another user identified as Agba Man on X said, “That minimum wage has not been changed since 2009. The pernicious argument about raising the minimum wage to $15 has kept it there. Yet people are being paid more than that and the United States economy has not collapsed.”

OLADIPUPO@Best_2123 also said, “In summary, every job title in the United States has a customary pay level which means you can’t be paid below the level of your job title. The rate can even be dragged up if you have experience to back it up. I don’t think anyone is getting below $10/hour unless you’re a gig worker.”

Comparing this with the Nigerian situation, some observers have said it was expedient that each state of the federation be allowed to determine the minimum wage benchmark it can successfully pay its workers, even if there would be a Federal minimum wage for the country as being practiced in the advanced countries. However, it is still yet to be seen whether this will ever materialise in Nigeria as the minimum wage controversy lingers on.

However, there is no doubt that the current debate has stretched beyond the expectations of Nigerian workers, especially those in the public sector. While the payment of the new minimum wage ought to have begun in May, stakeholders are still engrossed in the haggling about what the new wage should be at the minimum level.

This story is written with excerpts from report by Punch newspaper.

Categories
Editorial Latest News

Urgent! Fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria: A call for responsibility

Urgent! Fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria: A call for responsibility
Urgent! Fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria: A call for responsibility

 

Urgent! Fuel subsidy removal in Nigeria: A call for responsibility

The Government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu truly braved the occasion of his inauguration on May 29, 2023 and announced that fuel subsidy was gone! It was a decisive pronouncement because several past governments have planned to say this but could not. Other governments, particularly that of former President Goodluck Jonathan in 2011 seemed to be more interested in the after-effect of subsidy removal on the poor Nigerians than scoring that political point. A lot of protests sprung up, led partly by the incumbent President, Tinubu. Jonathan was not allowed to go on with the execution of his planned phased removal of the subsidy of fuel. Former president Muhammadu Buhari also had plans about fuel subsidy removal but could not implement it until he left the office. Then came Tinubu who did not want to entertain any excuse for not removing the subsidy that ran into N1 trillion in two months.

Defending his intentions, Tinubu said he had to insert the pronouncement against the advice of his media handlers. They had removed the ‘fuel subsidy is gone’ statement from the President’s speech. But when Tinubu was about mounting the pedestal for his inaugural speech, he re-introduced the statement himself. His conviction was that there was no better opportunity to make the pronouncement than in his inaugural address.

That was the pronouncement that has changed the life of ordinary Nigerians for worse in the last two months. Nigeria is a mono-product economy which is driven by petroleum products. Anything that affects petroleum affects the whole economy. The removal of fuel subsidy which took the retail price of the product from N198 to N617 currently is causing untold hardship to a lot of Nigerians.

Economy watchers believe that the ‘subsidy is gone’ statement should not just a mere statement. But a statement backed with responsibility. More than a two-third population of Nigerians are poor people who depend on daily income for survival. Workers are poorly remunerated. The rate of Unemployment and underemployment is often rated so high at about 70 percent. That was before the removal of subsidy. Bearing these circumstances in mind, one would expect the Government to have been able to roll-out subsidy palliative measures within one month of its removal, to be able to cushion the adverse effect on the population. It’s two months already after this pronouncement yet the citizens are not getting any better for it.

The government has introduced more economic policies that heighten the pressure rather than ameliorate it. One is foreign exchange policy which has now taken the exchange rate is about N800 per a $USD. With this, a lot of Nigerians cannot afford to pay school fees in $USD. There are also increases in school fees and other basic issues of the ordinary Nigerians.

Nigerians are now more than two months into this harsh economic reality. And they are getting to a tipping point if the government fails to revise some of these policies or introduce a robust palliative to cushion the effects on Nigerians.

The proposed N80,000 monthly for 12 million households is an absurd proposal. It should not have been announced that anybody. It was in bad taste and does not seem to have been put together having the interest of Nigerians at heart.

The government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu should urgently think out solution to these problems to ease these burdens on the ordinary people. If this fails, in the coming months, the situation will become unbearable to the majority of Nigeria and that may start a revolution the government wound not be able to contain.

Categories
Editorial Politics

Nigeria 2023 Election: Muslim-Muslim Ticket is Insensitive and Cruel

Nigeria 2023 Election: Muslim-Muslim Ticket is Insensitive and Cruel
Nigeria 2023 Election: Muslim-Muslim Ticket is Insensitive and Cruel

Nigeria 2023 Election: Same-Faith Ticket is Insensitive and Cruel

In less than 24 hours, Nigerians will again throng the polls to elect their president. There are three top contenders: Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressive Congress and Peter Obi of the Labour Party.

Nigeria, easily the giant of Africa in terms of population and size is multi-ethnic and religious country. In terms of religion, the predominant ones are Christianity (predominantly in the South of Nigeria) and Islam (predominantly in the North). In terms of ethnicity, the Hausa in the north are predominantly Muslims, more than 80 percent. The Yoruba in the South-West have about 70 percent Christians and 40 percent Muslims. The Igbo in the South-East and South-South of Nigeria are predominantly Christians, more than 90 percent. Historically, the people of Nigeria know their differences; a panacea to which is their creed for equitable representation in government.

There have negative consequences for lack of equitable representation in terms of religion and ethnicity. The Nigerian civil war fought between 1967 and 1970 was a major consequence of perceived imbalance in the representation of the various segments of the country. In order to forestall further crises, Nigerian leaders are careful to balance appointments into federal positions.

Political parties also tow this path by ensuring that their candidates for any national positions reflect the diversity of the people.

In the build-up to the 2023 elections, the All Progressive Congress is the only major political party that failed to recognise the diversity of the people as it fielded a same-faith ticket: Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a Southern Muslim and Ibrahim Shettima, a Northern Muslim for the positions of the President and Vice respectively. This ticket fails to observe that Christians in the country need representation in the government. a lot of Muslim who defend Muslim-Muslim ticket will be opposed to Christian-Christian ticket for the same reason of equal representation.

The level of insecurity, often heightened by religious issues are already high in Nigeria. Installing a same-faith ticket at this time will further aggravate the situation and make it worse. It is our considered view that the same-faith ticket of the APC is insensitive and cruel and as such is not good for the people of Nigeria.

<

p style=”text-align: justify;”> 

Categories
Editorial

Nigerian Bank’s Easter Message: Government’s silence not golden

Nigerian Bank’s Easter Message: Government’s silence not golden
Nigerian Bank’s Easter Message: Government’s silence not golden

 

Nigerian Bank’s Easter Message: Government’s silence not golden

A Nigerian Bank, Sterling Bank, during the just concluded Easter period, through its official communications channels, released a message, purported to be Easter message. The message compares the resurrection of Christ with the rising of Agege Bread, a colloquial name for locally made unbuttered bread. The message said: He is risen like Agege Bread. It accompanied this writing with a visual expression of bread.

To even a layperson, that particular message from the Sterling Bank is uncreative, insensitive, drab and distasteful. Expectedly, Nigerians, especially those of the Christian faith took to their media handles to criticise the bank for the creation and dissemination of this message. As usual, this issue has divided Nigerians along religious lines.

It is worrisome that since this unfortunate incident on April 17, 2022, the Nigerian Government has not made any comment on it, thereby leaving citizens alone to abuse one another on the social media space as they tried to accentuate the rightness or otherwise of the message. The Government has not deemed it necessary to make a comment condemning this insensitive message from a banking institution.

It is unfortunate that the Nigerian Government does not take decisive actions to stem the root causes of religious hatred in Nigeria which dates back to the amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914 and manifested first in Kano in May 1953 in what became popular as the Kano riot of 1953. What happened in May 1953? The riot was a clash between Northerners, predominantly Muslims who were opposed to Nigeria’s Independence as first suggested in 1953 by a Southern politician, Anthony Enahoro and Southerners made up of Christians mainly the Yoruba and the Igbo who supported immediate independence for Nigeria. The riot that lasted for four days claimed many lives of the Southerners and Northerners and many others were wounded.

Since the 1953 incident, Nigeria has gone through bloody times: through the civil war, military coups and counter coups, electoral or political violence to its current unenviable Boko Haram and era of banditry. The underlying issue that runs through all social unrest in Nigeria is largely faith-based. Religious intolerance. Governments should not therefore condone anything that has the capacity of sparking-off social restiveness, such as the message by the Sterling Bank. One would have expected the Federal Government or any of its actors to speak out sternly against such callous undermining message against the Christian faith by a Bank being patronised by both Christians and Muslims. Although the Bank, which is headed by a Northerner, Suleiman Abubakar, has tendered an apology to the public, it behoves on the state actors to send a strong signal against religious intolerance in Nigeria. It is commendable that the Bank’s Chief Executive Officer, Suleiman, in a statement apologised. He said, “On behalf of the management and staff of Sterling Bank Plc, I write to tender our unreserved apology to you and members of our nation’s Christian community for our Easter message of 17 April 2022.

“The content of infographics and the message it contained was insensitive and failed to consider the very sober nature of the event being commemorated, being the death of Jesus Christ.

“While the message had no malicious intent, there is no place for content that fails to fully account for the feelings of billions of people all over the world.

“Our honest intent was to join our millions of customers in Nigeria and worldwide to celebrate this solemn event., but our execution fell short on this occasion.

“Our policies are clear on what constitutes acceptable customer communication, and this message should not have been released to our customers. On this occasion, our editorial processes fell short of our policy standards.

“As a responsible institution, we immediately withdraw the offensive material and initiate a review of the circumstances that led to this failure. We will further sensitise our workforce to ensure this unfortunate lapse in judgement never repeats itself.”

We note that the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON) through its Chief Executive Officer, Dr Olalekan Fadolapo, condemned Sterling Bank’s action, saying said the bank will face sanction for the “provocative Easter celebration advertisement”. APCON’s reaction is also commendable. However, it is not enough. APCON is not a government body, it is a registered association gazetted by the government, struggling to find its feet.

For a country which has seen the bitterness of religious conflicts, the government should be proactive in nipping such issues in the buds by sending strong signals that it cannot condone utterances capable to inciting religious crises.

Categories
Editorial Health Interviews

COVID-19 Spread: African Nations Should Declare 21-Day Lockdown Now!

COVID-19 Spread: African Countries Should Declare 21-Day Total Lockdown
COVID-19 Spread: African Countries Should Declare 21-Day Total Lockdown

 

COVID-19 Spread: African Nations Should Declare 21-Day Lockdown Now!

 

With the rate of coronavirus infection rising in Africa, the only way to curtail this pandemic in Africa is by a total lockdown of all activities for at least 21 days. Movements in the towns must be reduced to essentials and properly monitored by the authorities. 

The government should make strict policies about observance of the lockdown until the environment is safe.

If this situation is allowed to spread in Africa where most countries are unprepared for China, United Kingdom or Italy experience, many lives will be lost to poor healthcare facilities and poor social distancing cultures. The Governments must take decisive actions to guard against full blown health war in Africa. It may get out of control. 

 

Also read: Coronavirus pandemic 

Categories
Editorial

New Year Message:Africa must return power to the people as way forward

New Year Message: Africa must return power to the people
New Year Message: Africa must return power to the people

 

New Year Message:Africa must return power to the people as way forward

On July 26th 1847, Liberia became independent from the American Colonization Society, becoming one of the foremost African countries to be independent from any form of foreign rule. A number of African countries like Ethiopia in the East and Morocco in the North have no known history of foreign rule.  Then from Liberia, other African countries achieved self-rule, such as Egypt, on February 28, 1922 (from Britain); Ghana (formerly the Gold Coast), on March 6th, 1957 (Britain); Ivory Coast, on August 7, 1958 (from France); Nigeria, on October 1st, 1960 (from Britain) etcetera.

However, about 173 years down the line, Africa is still in a bad shape, with appalling stories on all facets development indices. As at 2019, last year, African governments celebrated their ability to secure international loans as monumental achievements; thereby sticking out their heads again for re-colonization.

Second Scramble for Partition of Africa 

There is currently a great deal of interest in Africa by China, the US and Russia. The reasons is largely because Africa has not been able to organize itself and harness its resources. Despite being home to largest mineral deposits in the world, Africa still depends on foreign aid for survival.

The US accused China of having undue interest in Africa. China on the other hand accused the US of wanting the whole world for itself, describing its plans for Africa as “fairly simple and transparent,”; Russia is also making inroad in Africa.

Also Read:

US accuses China of Encouraging Dependency of Africa

US Warns Africa Against Chinese Loans 

According to Ejeviome Eloho Otobo, the three big powers are deploying the traditional tools of statecraft and diplomacy. These include economic cooperation; military assistance; and technological support.

The share of each of the big powers’ arms export to Africa during the period 2013-2017, Otobo said, was China 21%; Russia 13%; and US 2.2%. Conversely, he stated, the share of arms imports by African countries from the big powers during the same period were Russia 39%; China 17%; and US 11%.

“In terms of military foot print, during 2017-2018, the United States has military bases or Lily Pads in 17 African countries; offered training assistance for 22 countries; military exercises in 12 countries; combat operations in nine countries; and air drone strikes in two countries.

By contrast, China has a military base in one country; and offered anti-piracy drilling exercises in four countries; and medical team visits to four countries. Russia also has a military facility in one country and offered in-country training to two African countries”, he noted.

What is the problem with Africa?

Several authors on the problem with Africa have pointed at leadership challenge. Everything revolves around politics and power. Like Sam Adeyemi noted, the cultivation of leaders with exceptional character and skills is critical to Africa’s development.

In addition to their inordinate ambition to remain in office forever, there is this prevailing incompetence in leadership in most African countries. This is also a reflection of the leadership culture. In the same vein, Adeyemi noted: “We’ve had different leaders with the same results for decades. The power distance that exists between leaders in government and citizens is also reflected in organizations and families. In such a structure, leaders don’t serve; they are served, because occupying leadership positions make leaders superior and unaccountable to the people they lead. Africa needs leadership development systems, and it is incumbent on development partners and global leaders to understand how cultural differences affect these”

True Democracy is the solution

Africa must emphasize democracy as the form of government that could quicken development. At several fora, Africans have yelped for a change. When they travel to Europe and America, Africans desire a change. This is expressed during elections. But in most cases, the will of the people is not midwifed in the electoral process. The biggest virtue of Democracy is that it is government by the people for the people. The government represents the views of the people who elect them and can throw them out if the government does things that the people do not like. Unlike other forms of government democracy is about the little man, everyone rather than the elite that are often disconnected from how everyone else lives their lives.

 

Categories
Editorial

Why Nigerian Government must not force RUGA on the people

EDITORIAL: Nigerian Government must not force RUGA on the people
EDITORIAL: Nigerian Government must not force RUGA on the people

 

Why Nigerian Government must not force RUGA on the people

Through the benefit of hindsight, one can understand why most Nigerians, especially from the South are against the new RUGA settlement project of the President Muhammadu Buhari.

The migration of the Fulani herdsmen into various parts of the country and their threats and domination through guns and machetes is sending worrying signals to neighbourhoods.

States like Benue, Taraba, Plateau, Kaduna, Niger, Kwara, Nasarawa, Zamfara among others in the North have had more than their own fair share of communal crises because of the establishment of Fulani settlement in those states many years ago. Today, both the migrant herdsmen and the original inhabitants of those states are claiming ownership of lands and this is causing bloodshed at all times.

In the South, States like Enugu, Ebonyi, Ekiti, Rivers among others are living in constant fears of attack by arms-welding Fulani cattle herders who unleash terror on them occasionally.

The new RUGA project of the Nigerian government is meant to settle more Fulani communities in more parts of the country, the same way the herders were settled years ago.

Nigeria has been battling with settling disputes between the Fulani migrants and their host communities. But not much progress seems to have been achieved. Creating more settlement of the Fulani across the country the way RUGA is seeking to achieve will compound Nigeria’s problems. It is either that the Fulani succeed in conquering the whole country or that all parts of the country would be enmeshed in bloody wars at all times. This is the reason Nigerians are protesting against RUGA and this is the more reason the government should not force the project on the people.

On Wednesday, reports had it that President Buhari has succumbed to pressure, suspending the controversial Ruga settlement scheme.

The suspension was announced in Abuja after governors representing the six geopolitical zones of the country met with Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

The Chairman of the National Committee on Food Security/Herders/Farmers Conflicts and Governor of Ebonyi State, Mr Dave Umahi, disclosed the government’s decision to journalists after the meeting.

Besides Umahi, others at the meeting included Plateau State Governor, Mr Simon Lalong; Governor of Kebbi State, Atiku Bagudu; and the Deputy Governor of Adamawa State, Mr Martins Nasir.

Umahi explained that the controversial Ruga policy was not consistent with the National Livestock Transformation Plan, which was earlier deliberated upon and approved by the National Economic Council. Osinbajo is the Chairman of the NEC.

The Ebonyi State governor spoke further, “We, the NEC committee on farmers/herders crises under the chairmanship of His Excellency, Mr Vice-President, met today to deliberate on the approved programme of NEC and the Federal Government, tagged ‘National Livestock Transformation Programme.’

“We are aware today that Mr President has suspended the implementation of the Ruga programme, initiated and being implemented by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

“(This is) because it is not consistent with the NEC and the Federal Government-approved National Livestock Transformation plan, which has programmes of rehabilitation of internally displaced persons resulting from crises and also the development of ranches in any willing state of the federation. The word is willing state of the federation

“The beauty of the National Livestock Transformation plan is that what NEC and the FG approved is a voluntary programme for all the 36 states that like to participate. So, it is not compulsory; it is for any state that is willing to key into the programme.

“Any state that is interested in this programme is required to bring up a development plan that is keyed toward the implementation in line with our own programme here that is unique to his state, based on the challenges that he has in respect of the crisis. That is the decision of this committee.”

The government had last week named 12 states as the pilot states for the Ruga scheme, resulting in immediate nationwide outcry.

The states mentioned included Sokoto, Adamawa, Nasarawa, Kaduna, Kogi, Taraba, Katsina, Plateau, Kebbi, Zamfara and Niger.

Wednesday’s meeting of the committee was the first after the President’s inauguration on May 29.

Last week, as the Ruga project generated tension in the country, the VP’s office quickly denied that Osinbajo was supervising the implementation of the scheme.

The Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity to the Vice-President, Mr Laolu Akande, in a statement, said the VP only knew about the NLTP and not Ruga.

He stated, “The National Livestock Transformation Plan 2019-2028 is a programme to be implemented in seven pilot states of Adamawa, Benue, Kaduna, Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba and Zamfara (as decided by NEC in January), being states in the front lines of the Farmer-Herder crises. Afterwards, six other states have indicated readiness to also implement the plan. They are Katsina, Kano, Kogi, Kwara, Ondo, and Edo states.

Akande gave other details, “The plan has six pillars through which it aims to transform the livestock production system in Nigeria along market-oriented value chain while ensuring an atmosphere of peace and justice.

“The six key pillars include, economic investment, conflict resolution, justice and peace, humanitarian relief and early recovery, human capital development and cross-cutting issues such as gender, youth, research and information and strategic communication.”

But, on his own part, Buhari’s spokesman, Mr Garba Shehu, stated that Ruga and the NLTP were “semantics”, as both meant the same thing.

However, some group of Nigerians are yet satisfied with the reported suspension of the RUGA idea. The pan-Yoruba socio-cultural group, the Afenifere, dismissed the suspension of the Ruga settlement programme by the Presidency, describing it as a ploy to buy time.

It endorsed calls for referendum by various groups to determine the future of the country, noting that the insistence on the implementation of the initiative by some northern groups showed that the need for a referendum was more urgent than ever.

Afenifere’s spokesman, Yinka Odumakin, stated, “I think they are just buying time. We would have said they were bending to public opinion if the programme was cancelled.”

He expressed suspicion over the ultimatum issued by the northern groups and their threat to evict Southerners living in the north if the Ruga programme was not allowed in the Southern part of the country.

Odumakin noted, “How come the day the Ruga was suspended was the day a coalition of northern groups is issuing an ultimatum that the policy must be implemented within three weeks?

“We support the calls by different groups that a United Nations-supervised referendum should hold to determine whether we should live together under true federalism or go our separate ways.”

Opposing the suspension of the initiative, the Pan-Niger Delta Forum said it expected the government to cancel it.

The PANDEF National Secretary, Dr. Alfred Mulade, argued that the scheme could compromise national security and the safety of Nigerians.

He said, “The suspension is not enough, it should be cancelled outright because suspension is a temporary measure, what we want is total cancellation. Ruga shouldn’t be mentioned at all. It is against the collective peace and survival of the people of Nigeria.”

Earlier on Wednesday, there were indications that traditional and religious leaders in the three senatorial districts of Akwa Ibom State would meet on Saturday in Uyo, the state capital, over the suspended Ruga herdsmen settlements.

The state Chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria, Rev. Ndueso Ekwere, who stated this in a statement, said the meeting became necessary to take a concrete position on the issue.

He stated, “There are plans for a meeting between the leaders of Christian communities and traditional rulers in Akwa Ibom State. The meeting becomes necessary following rejection of the Ruga by Christians in Akwa Ibom State. We viewed President Buhari’s move to establish Ruga settlements as counterproductive to the economy of the state, as such establishment will deprive most farmers of their land and space for infrastructural expansion and location of industries, to boost economic activities and revenue generation.”

On its part, the apex Igbo cultural organisation, the Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide, commended the Federal Government for suspending the Ruga project.

In a statement in Enugu, the Ohanaeze Ndigbo President , Chief John Nwodo, through his Special Adviser on Media, Chief Emeka Attamah, said “It is heartwarming to observe that for the first time the current leadership at the federal level has deferred to people’s opinion on public issues.

“The Federal Government should take immediate measures to disarm the Ak-47 trotting herders throughout the country. Issues surrounding the suspended Ruga scheme indicate the importance of consulting the people before taking certain decisions that will affect them.”

“Ohanaeze Ndigbo is as worried about the restoration of peace between farmers and herders in the country as the Federal Government and believes that the ultimate solution to it is to embrace ranching

“Government should carry out an audit of foreigners in the country and ascertain those with genuine entry papers, deport those illegally in the country as well as ensure that the nation’s borders are properly controlled and manned to avert further massive infiltration.

“As a process towards healing the present wounds and uniting the country, adequate compensation should be paid to relations of victims of the unwarranted killings in the country in recent times.”

It is clear that Nigerians are not in support of RUGA. Experience is teaching them lessons. Nigeria is a democratic country and the government should allow the will of the people to prevail. Our position is that Buhari should outrightly cancel RUGA or whatever thing that means establishing Fulani settlements across the country.

 

Categories
Editorial Politics

EDITORIAL: S/Sudan: High Time President Kiir, Machar gave peace a chance

At the closed two-day retreat in the Vatican for the African leaders, the pope asked South Sudan's president and opposition leader to proceed with the peace agreement
At the closed two-day retreat in the Vatican for the African leaders, the pope asked South Sudan’s president and opposition leader to proceed with the peace agreement

EDITORIAL: South Sudan: High Time President Kiir, Machar gave peace a chance

The video and photo clips of Pope Francis, the 82 year-old 266th pope of the Catholic faith struggling, kneeling and kissing the feet of rival South Sudan leaders on Thursday are graphic and emotional. It is an extreme act of humbleness and burden for peace.

By now, over 400, 000 people have lost their lives in the South Sudan Civil War since 2013 from South Sudan’s population of 12 million people. Both the President Salva Kiir and opposition leader Riek Machar with their power monger allies are still while a huge number of South Sudan masses have gone to blazes. This shows that it is the common people that bears the brunt of this lingering Civil War and not the protagonists.

Pope Francis message to the leaders of the country is clear and direct. And the chief priest has gone ahead to demonstrate this by his heart-rendering act of kissing the leaders’ feet.

What more do they want to make peace in South Sudan? It is high time these protagonists made peace and give peace a chance in the interest of the common people.

Salva Kiir and Riek Machar should allow the message from Pope Francis to sink into their hearts. They must let this message sink.

Thursday, in an unprecedented act of humbleness to encourage them to strengthen the African country’s faltering peace process.

At the closed two-day retreat in the Vatican for the African leaders, the pope asked South Sudan’s president and opposition leader to proceed with the peace agreement despite growing difficulties. 

Then he got down on his knees and kissed the leaders’ feet one by one.

The pope usually holds a ritual washing of the feet with prisoners on Holy Thursday, but has never performed such a show of deference to political leaders.

‘I express my heartfelt hope that hostilities will finally cease, that the armistice will be respected, that political and ethnic divisions will be surmounted, and that there will be a lasting peace for the common good of all those citizens who dream of beginning to build the nation,’ the pope said of South Sudan in his closing statement.

The spiritual retreat brought together President Salva Kiir and opposition head Riek Machar. Also present were Kiir’s three vice presidents. The pope kissed the feet of all of them.

South Sudanese Vice President Rebecca Nyandeng Garang said Francis’ actions moved her profoundly.

At the closed two-day retreat in the Vatican for the African leaders, the pope asked South Sudan’s president and opposition leader to proceed with the peace agreement

‘I had never seen anything like that. Tears were flowing from my eyes,’ she said.

South Sudan, gained independence from Sudan in 2011 and in 2013, the country plunged into a bloody civil war, which left at least 400,000 people dead.

The two-day Vatican meeting was held a month before the end of the shaky peace deal’s pre-transition period. On May 12th, opposition leader Machar is expected to return to South Sudan and once again serve as Kiir’s deputy.

Pope Francis poses with South Sudan’s President Salva Kiir Mayardit (C-L), South Sudan opposition leader Riek Machar (C-R) and a delegation of South Sudan prelates at the Pope’s Santa Marta residence in the Vatican

However, the agreement, which was signed in September in Khartoum, the capital of neighboring Sudan, has been met with delays, missed deadlines and continued fighting with key aspects still not implemented.

A military coup in Sudan on Thursday fueled worries in South Sudan that the toppling of longtime President Omar al-Bashir could derail the already fragile peace deal.

‘Sudan has helped us with the peace deal. We hope that the new system will also focus on the agreement, ensuring that it will be implemented,’ said opposition leader Machar, who attended an evening prayer vigil for peace, held at Rome’s church of Santa Maria in Trastevere.

The South Sudanese Civil War is an ongoing conflict in South Sudan between forces of the government and opposition forces. Wikipedia writes that in December 2013, President Kiir accused his former deputy Riek Machar and ten others of attempting a coup d’état. Machar denied trying to start a coup and fled to lead the SPLM – in opposition (SPLM-IO). Fighting broke out between the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) and SPLM-IO, igniting the civil war. Ugandan troops were deployed to fight alongside the South Sudanese government. The United Nations has peacekeepers in the country as part of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). In January 2014 the first ceasefire agreement was reached. Fighting continued and would be followed by several more ceasefire agreements. Negotiations were mediated by “IGAD +” (which includes the eight regional nations called the Intergovernmental Authority on Development as well as the African Union, United Nations, China, the EU, USA, UK and Norway). A peace agreement known as the “Compromise Peace Agreement” was signed in August 2015. Machar returned to Juba in 2016 and was appointed vice president. Following a second breakout of fighting within Juba, the SPLM-IO fled to the surrounding and previously peaceful Equatoria region. Machar was replaced by Kiir as First Vice President by Taban Deng Gai, splitting the opposition, and rebel in-fighting has become of major part of the conflict. Rivalry among Dinka factions led by the President and Paul Malong Awan have also led to fighting. In August 2018, another power sharing agreement came into effect.

About 400,000 people are estimated to have been killed in the war, including notable atrocities such as the 2014 Bentiu massacre.[53] Although both men have supporters from across South Sudan’s ethnic divides, subsequent fighting has had ethnic undertones. Kiir’s Dinka ethnic group has been accused of attacking other ethnic groups and Machar’s Nuer ethnic group has been accused of attacking the Dinka. More than 4 million people have been displaced, with about 1.8 million of those internally displaced, and about 2.5 million having fled to neighboring countries, especially Uganda and Sudan. Fighting in the agricultural heart in the south of the country has soared the number of people facing starvation to 6 million with famine breaking out in some areas. The country’s economy has also been devastated. According to the IMF, real income has halved since 2013 and inflation is more than 300% per annum.

Categories
Editorial Latest News

Buhari must arrest erosion of confidence in Nigeria’s 2019 election

Our Stand: Buhari must arrest erosion of confidence in 2019 election
Our Stand: Buhari must arrest erosion of confidence in 2019 election

Buhari must arrest erosion of confidence in Nigeria’s 2019 election

 

In a matter of days from now, on February 16th, Nigeria’s presidential election would be underway. By all standard, that election is a deciding election; so critical to Nigeria that lives and fortunes, unity and progress and development of Nigeria depend on it.

In the history of Nigeria’s democracy, there has never been a time Nigerians intended to participate in the electioneering process like they did for the 2019 election. More than 77 political parties are fielding candidates for the election. 31 political parties fielded presidential candidates. That is to say that there are 31 presidential aspirants.  This is the hugest as far Nigerian political participation is concerned.

Hitherto floundering opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) struggled through the court to stabilise and surprisingly conducted primaries which all members accepted. Other opposition parties and candidates also nurtured their ambitions through the ranks, hoping that the will of the power would happen through the ballots.

There had been faith in the process leading to the election until recently. Fears for the credibility of the general elections started late last year after the conduct of Ekiti State Governorship election. There was palpable interference in the process through vote buying. International and local election observers noted that there was undue interference. The ruling party clamped down media houses which reported under dealing in the process. Eventually, the candidate of the ruling All Progressive Congress (APC) was elected and returned. The opposition party, the PDP, went to the election tribunal, hoping to find justice.

Second was the conduct of Osun State Governorship election. After the election, the opposition party won. But the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) said the PDP did not win properly or clearly; that there was a need for a run-off. The ruling party won the run-off by some laughable margin. After all hues and cries, the candidate of the ruling party was declared elected and returned by the INEC. Again, the opposition went to the election tribunal, hoping that the court could grant them some fair hearing.

Concerned stakeholders have cried out, alleging plans by the ruling government to rig the 2019 elections. Former president Olusegun Obasanjo in a recent pubic letter warned that President Muhammadu Buhari wanted to thwart to collective will of the people and urged the world to stand up in defence of democracy in Nigeria. Obasanjo was not alone in this. Other well-meaning Nigerians joined in the calls.

Then comes the forceful suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria and immediate swearing in of his purported replacement. Both local and international bodies have expressed displeasure and concern over the manner the CJN, Walter Onnoghen was removed and replaced. But Nigerian government has refused to budge.

A lot of things depend on the Judiciary. If the Judiciary is cowed, it will be right to say that the whole country is cowed. That is why the whole world seems to be concerned about the Judiciary.

The United States reacted to the suspension of Onnoghen. In a statement on Saturday, January 26, 2019 the US embassy in Nigeria said it had taken note of widespread criticisms that the suspension is illegal.

“The Embassy of the United States is deeply concerned by the impact of the executive branch’s decision to suspend and replace the Chief Justice and head of the judicial branch without the support of the legislative branch on the eve of national and state elections, “ the statement read.

“We note widespread Nigerian criticism that this decision is unconstitutional and that it undermines the independence of the judicial branch.

“That undercuts the stated determination of government, candidates, and political party leaders to ensure that the elections proceed in a way that is free, fair, transparent, and peaceful – leading to a credible result.

“We urge that the issues raised by this decision be resolved swiftly and peacefully in accordance with due process, full respect for the rule of law, and the spirit of the Constitution of Nigeria.

“Such action is needed urgently now to ensure that this decision does not cast a pall over the electoral process,” the statement ended.

In a seperate statement, the UK Government also reacted to the suspension of Walter Onnoghen as Chief Justice of Nigeria by President Muhammdu Buhari noting the reactions of prominent Nigerians especially the Nigerian legal profession.

In a statement published on the British High Commission to Nigeria’s website on Saturday, January 26, 2019 the UK Government said it calls for peaceful solutions to the apparent constitutional crisis.

“The British High Commission expresses serious concern over the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria. We have heard a wide range of credible and independent voices, including in the Nigerian legal profession and civil society, who have expressed concern over the constitutionality of the executive branch’s suspension of the chief officer of the judiciary.

“We respect Nigeria’s sovereign authority and its right to adjudicate on constitutional provisions but as friends of the Nigerian people, we are compelled to observe that the timing of this action, so close to national elections, gives cause for concern.

“It risks affecting both domestic and international perceptions on the credibility of the forthcoming elections. We, along with other members of the international community, are following developments closely.

“We encourage all actors to maintain calm and address the concerns raised by this development through due process, demonstrating their commitment to respecting the constitution and the impartial administration of the rule of law.

“We further urge them to take steps to ensure that elections take place in an environment conducive to a free, fair and peaceful process,” the statement ended.

Also, in its reaction, the European Union Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) expressed concern over the process and timing of the suspension.

Its statement reads:

“The European Union was invited by the Independent National Electoral Commission to observe the 2019 general elections.

“The EU Election Observation Mission (EU EOM) is very concerned about the process and timing of the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Walter Onnoghen, on 25 January.

“With 20 days until the presidential and National Assembly elections, political parties, candidates and voters must be able to have confidence in the impartiality and independence of the judicial system.

“The decision to suspend the Chief Justice has led to many Nigerians, including lawyers and civil society observer groups, to question whether due process was followed. The timing, just before the swearing in of justices for Electoral Tribunals and the hearing of election-related cases, has also raised concerns about the opportunity for electoral justice.

“The EU EOM calls on all parties to follow the legal processes provided for in the Constitution and to respond calmly to any concerns they may have.

“The EU EOM will continue observing all aspects of the election, including the independence of the election administration, the neutrality of security agencies, and the extent to which the judiciary can and does fulfil its election-related responsibilities.”

Also, a presidential candidate, Olawepo Hashim, criticised the president’s action, calling for urgent international sanctions against Mr Buhari and his administration officials.

Mr Olawepo in his statement said Mr Buhari has plunged Nigeria into dictatorship.

“This is a clear indication that we have returned to full blown dictatorship. Following the suspension of the Chief Justice of the Federation, we are seeing full-blown dictatorship in Nigeria. It is an abyss, an aberration and a clear violation of our laws.

“We will not allow Nigeria fall into dictatorship anymore.

“I call on all lovers of Nigeria and lovers of democracy and the international community to immediately impose sanctions on officials of the executive arm of government, their families, including their friends and associates,” Mr Olawepo said.

But Buhari has called all concerns by the foreign bodies, meddlesomeness. Nigerian government has said it refused any foreign ‘interference’. This calls for a concern. The current body language of Muhammadu Buhari is worrisome. This is the same body language of African dictators such as Yahayah Jammeh of Gambia who was forced out by African leaders, including Buhari to give way for Adama Barrow.

We like to reiterate that Buhari is taking wrong steps. Nigeria is strategic and important to both Nigerians and outsiders. One illusion that anybody could habour is to think that everyone would fold their hands and watch one individual destroy the heritage that all have laboured to build. That may be the illusion in the heads of the ruling party in Nigeria. However, we like to state again that the sooner Buhari arrests the current erosion of confidence in the conduct the coming elections and set Nigeria again on the path of democracy, the better for everyone.  

Categories
Editorial Latest News

Nigeria’s Kid Gloves Approach to Boko Haram Fight and Matters Arising

Nigeria’s Kid Gloves Approach to Boko Haram Fight and Matters Arising
Nigeria’s Kid Gloves Approach to Boko Haram Fight and Matters Arising

 

Nigeria’s Kid Gloves Approach to Boko Haram Fight and Matters Arising

In a short while, the government of the Federation of Nigeria will release another set of Boko Haram suspects into the society.  No fewer than 155 of the terrorists will be released soon, according to government sources. Another batch of about 100 Boko Haram fighters were released in February this year. Recently, 480 Boko Haram fighters were granted pardon by the government of President Muhammadu Buhari and also released after they were said to have been rehabilitated under the De-radicalisation, Rehabilitation and Reintegration (DRR).

The other season, earlier in the year when 480 members of the deadly regained freedom, there were attacks on public spaces in the North-East. One of the terrorists who was released vowed that he was going back to terrorism and his wife said there was no regret being married to the terrorist.

One astonishing fact is despite the despicable acts of the Boko Haram, the government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria seems to be too soft about them.

On Sunday, more than 70 officers of the Nigerian soldier were mauled down by Boko Haram fighters. Unofficial sources said about 115 military officers would have died in that attack on Nigeria’s 157 Task Force Battalion in Borno State while much more than that number could not be accounted for as we write. The military kept this attack under cover until foreign media blew the lid.

At the last cursory count, no fewer than 500 officers of the Nigerian Army have died under the guns of the Boko Haram members since this year. Civilian casualties are much more than this. And it beats imaginations that the military authority would rather want to hide the real situation in their Boko Haram fight. Nigerians have been fed with information that Boko Haram has been defeated and government urging residents of flashpoint areas to return home. In that guise, captured fighters of the terrorist group were set free. But the real situation is what we see today.

President Buhari should know that Boko Haram is far more deadly and dangerous than he might want to believe. If Boko Haram were a monster created by any individuals, those creators may wish to know that the monsters they created have gone weird beyond their control. It is important to note that the government should deploy drastic measures against Boko Haram, the same way the government could tackle any other form of insurgency from any other part of the country.

Barely one week after slaughtering over 70 officers, President Buhari on Saturday said he was shocked over the killing of military personnel in Metele village of Borno State by Boko Haram terrorists, assuring at the same time that immediate measures are being taken to ensure that the loopholes which led to the fatalities are blocked once and for all.

 According to President Buhari, no responsible Commander-in-Chief would rest on his oars or fold his hands to allow terrorists to endanger the lives of its military personnel and other citizens. “Our loyal forces have proved their strength over the terrorists and we are ready to give them all the needed support in terms of equipment and manpower to succeed in ending the renewed threat. In the coming days, I am engaging the Military and Intelligence Chiefs in extensive discussions on the next steps we shall be taking.”

“The President noted that fighting terrorism has taken a global dimension, which necessitates international collaboration among states facing similar security challenges.

“President Buhari reassured Nigerians of his continued commitment to their security and of his efforts to sustain the momentum in the previous significant successes recorded against the terrorists.

“He, however, advised Nigerians against making a political capital out of national tragedy, stressing that members of the armed forces are one family who are commonly committed to the security and safety of all Nigerians”, Presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu said in a statement.

There is no denying the fact that this terrorist group, about the deadliest of them all has taken more lives in Nigeria more than any epidemic. The Government should look at them as terrorists they are and enforce actions that would check their activities and stop their spread. Treating Boko Haram with this approach we consider a kid gloves approach is not doing Nigeria any good.

Translate »