Editorial

Beyond South Sudan’s Independence

Published

14 years ago

July 19, 2011

Before July 9, 2011, Sudan was regarded as the largest country in Africa with impressive potentials. However, after attaining its second independence, first in 1956, before South Sudan’s sovereign status, Sudan’s history, no doubt, has been re-written.

For historians, Sudan’s transmutation was not only a dream come true but an action whose time has come. From onset, they believed the crisis stage was set when the first Arab-led Khartoum government reneged on the promises of a federal system, leading to mutiny by Southern soldiers that sparked 17 years of civil war between 1955 and 1972.

Another failed promise in governance by the regime of Maj-Gen. Abrahim Abboud caused resentment which compelled the military to relinquish power in 1964. The same story continued between 1966 and 1969 when Sudan had governments that neither agreed on a permanent constitution nor coped with problems of factionalism, economic stagnation and ethnic dissidence. The second coup de’ tat of May 25, 1969 enthroned Col Gaafar Nimeiry as prime minister, who also suffered another coup arising from dispute between Marxist and non-Marxist elements in the military.

What was considered the second civil war was re-ignited in the South following Sudan’s Islamisation policy. Yet, another coup de’ tat occurred in 1989 that brought in Omar al-Bashir as the new leader who soon declared himself the president. Al-Bashir’s administration met with a new form of resistance in 2003 when Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) and Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) began in the Western region of Darfur. It took the intervention of Chad in 2004 to facilitate a humanitarian ceasefire even as the war continued.

The African Union had to step in and introduced a Cease-Fire Commission (CFC) to monitor its observance with 300 Rwandan and Nigerian troops. However, a final peace treaty between the North and Southern rebels was signed on January 9, 2005 in Nairobi promising that:The South will have authonomy for six years and a referendum on seccession; in case of negative result from the referendum, both sides would merge their armed forces; income from oil fields to be shared equally; Islamic law remains in the North while elected Assembly in the South would decide use of Sharia in the area; and jobs to be split accordingly in varying ratios, more in favour of government.

Incidentally, not a few political observers saw the January 2011 referendum as a forgone conclusion which it turned out to be. The people of South Sudan spoke with one voice as a prelude to the July 9, 2011 independence when they entered the biblical Promised Land, thus opening a new chapter in their chequered history.

Just after the Speaker of parliament, James Wani Igga declared South Sudan a sovereign nation, the first foreign dignitary to react was Kenya’s President, Mwai Kibaki, who said his country “fully recognises South Sudan.” Leader of the United States delegation, Susan Rice noted that “independence is not a gift you were given, but is a prize you won,” even as she saluted Dr. John Garang and others who could not make it to “Canaan.”

Also, United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon said that Africa’s 54th United Nations member’s sovereignty was, “both a right and great responsibility.” For Ethiopia’s Meles Zenawi, his country was “welcoming you as a full member of IGAD”, the East African bloc. According to China’s Special Envoy, Hu Jintao, it was their expectation that the two Sudans would be “good neighbours, partners and brothers forever,” just as Robert Zoellick of the World Bank Group pledged to be “a strong partner as we help transform a day of independence into a decade of development.”

But for President Goodluck Jonathan, the occasion marked the beginning of a new dawn for the people of South Sudan, while pledging Nigeria’s continuous support in the task of building a new nation.

Indeed, the tasks are legion. The new government must ensure that Sudan’s inglorious historic past has no place in the new country. Leaders of South Sudan must eschew divisive actions and inactions.

Their new constitution should check internal conflicts and guarantee peace which would engender genuine development. Despite its oil, South Sudan remains one of the poorest nations of the world with 85 per cent wide-spread illiteracy, meager infrastructure and pervasive internal rebellion.

As the 196th country in the world and the 193rd member of the United Nations, South Sudan’s first President, Salva Kiir must embark on aggressive education of the citizenry who are expected to take up responsibilities in various aspects of the country’s development – locally and internationally – or they would remain isolated.

He must confront the evils of tribalism and pervasive corruption which overwhelmed the country for years. He should avoid any form of seclusion and run an all-inclusive government to retain the trust of other tribes in the union.

Also, Kiir should be wary of delicate issues of North and South and seek appropriate means of sharing oil proceeds as the South’s economy fully depends on it.

No doubt, the events in Sudan should interest the people of Nigeria as both countries have so many things in common. They share same diversity, population and natural endowment. Also, they are confronted with almost similar geographical disposition of North –South dichotomy, always playing up threatening religious and ethnic differences.

Nigerians should, therefore, know that the advantages of diversity could turn destructive if mismanaged just like in Sudan where more than three million people lost their lives and over four million were displaced because of irreconcilable differences which made it impossible to sustain one peaceful democratic nation.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

5 days ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

5 days ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

3 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.