Politics
Political Intrigues Of Subsidy Removal
In the past, several
attempts have been made to deregulate the downstream sector of the oil industry and this date back to the military era in the governance of Nigeria.
The former military President, General Ibrahim Badamesi Babaginda in 1986 engaged Nigerians in an elaborate debate over proposal for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan and the deregulation of the Petroleum Sector. The debate coordinated by the then Minister of Finance Kalu Idika Kalu generated interest among Nigerians as they argued for and against the intention of the government.
Like the President Goodluck Jonathan’s New Year’s gift to Nigerians, the idea which was absolutely rejected by majority of Nigerians inspite of government’s persuasion. Unfortunately the nationwide disapproval could not stop the Federal government from accessing the loan while the heat on deregulation defiled the Khaki, boot and gun to subsist with resultant increase in the pump price of petroleum products.
That was the scenario by successive administrations and even the born again democratic Olusegun Obasanjo merely settled for an increase in the pump price until the advent of Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan who took the bull by the horn and on January 1,2012; announced the total removal of petroleum subsidy.
As expected the pronouncement made the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) to issue an ultimatum to the Federal government to revert to the old pump price regime of N65,00 per litre or face industrial dispute beginning from January 9.
The Federal government quickly constituted the Alfa Belgore Committee to dialogue with the organised labour in addition to a court injunction to stop the strike, but Labour leaders ignored the moves and went ahead with the strike which paralysed economic activities throughout the country for one week, putting government business to a halt.
However, Nigerians expressed mixed feelings over the large heart of the president in venturing to tread where others scared particularly coming after his speech at the Inter denominational service organized to mark the nation’s 51st independence anniversary at the National Christian Centre, Abuja, in October 2011.
President Jonathan told Nigerians, who had been expecting more drastic measures in the process of addressing the nation’s numerous problems such as the insecurity challenges posed by the Boko Haram religious sect to hold their breadth.
According to him, “some Nigerians still want the president to be a lion or a tiger; somebody that has that kind of strength, force and agility to make things happen the way they think. Some others will want the President to operate like an army general, like Chief of Army Staff commanding his troops.
Incidentally, I’m not a lion; I’m also not a general. Somebody will want the president to operate like the Kings of Syria, Babylon, Egypt and King Pharaoh – all powerful people that we all read about in the Bible”.
Surprisely, President Jonathan mustered enough political sagacity to announce subsidy removal that ultimately took the organised labour and civil society organisations to the streets to protest the action of the government.
Sensing that politicians had hijacked the process to vent their political misfortune on the ruling government, the organized labour leaders demonstrated their commitment to the corporate existence of Nigeria by accepting to engage the authorities in further dialogue with the pegging of pump price of petrol at N97 per litre from the deregulated pump price of N141.00 per litre. The one week national strike adversely affected every sector of the Nigerian society hampering all forms of business transactions.
President Jonathan acted in the best interest of the nation but what was probably lacking in the subsidy issue was the timing of the implementation of the policy as enough sensitisation had not taken place. This is exemplified in his broadcast to the nation on Saturday January 7, when he announced 25 per cent cut in the salaries of government officials including his in addition to reduction in the number of oversea travels.
As a show of patriotism, and the zeal to make a difference in the governance of the country must have motivated him as well as the need to fulfil his electioneering campaign promises, to the people when he said “we must act in the public interest no matter how tough, for the pains of today cannot be compared to the benefit of tomorrow”.
Realizing that the continued subsidy regime, was benefitting a few rich persons to the detriment of the common people with the attendant paucity of resources to provide essential basic infrastructure in the critical sectors of power, health, education, transport and so on, the president introduced palliatives to cushion the effect of the stark realities of the policy direction in repositioning the country for growth.
President Jonathan, being the first Niger Delta indigene to occupy such exalted office has vowed not to disappoint the region, the party and indeed Nigerians for electing him in April 2011.
Analyst believe that no political party as presently constituted in Nigeria is capable of giving the people a new lease of life if the current high level of corruption, insecurity and ethnic milieu continue to play out. The promised land Nigerians longed for will remain elusive, a mere mirage, unless the unity that has kept us together is incontrovertibly expressed in action.
History does not only teach about past events, it equally teaches that at every key moment in life, people must rise to position their collective destiny in proper perspective.
It is often said that a day makes a difference in politics and the agents of anarchy having failed to use the subsidy removal protest to destabilise the nation, have resumed the bombing and killing of innocent Nigerians.
No doubt, the insecurity created by the activities of Boko Haram religious sect is perilous, perfidious and dangerously bringing Nigeria close to disintegration if nothing is done fast. The rising incidents of religious intolerance and inter ethnic hatred as well as discrimination have challenged the age long notion that Nigeria is a united, multi-religious, multi ethnic and multi cultural country enjoying unity in diversity.
There is no gainsaying the fact that no nation can advance economically and politically on the platform of instability. President Jonathan in reacting to the several bombings in the country, promise that the perpetrators would be brought to book but he appears to be helpless when he admitted that members of the Boko Haram sect had infiltrated his government. Consequently, the escape of top Boko Haram suspect, Kabir Sokoto alleged to be the mastermind of the Christmas Day bombing in St Theresa’s Catholic Church Madalla, Niger State from Police detention collaborates the President’s position.
It is alleged that those against Jonathan’s Presidency are seriously at work doing all within their reach to create disaffection. The President did not realise the move when his first proposal for a single tenure term to reduce cost and crisis associated with second tenure described largely as selfish and self-serving in some quarters and no sooner the idea was tabled in public domain than it was put in the cooler.
The proposed constitutional review before the National Assembly is another issue attracting wide and divergent views. They include those calling for sovereign national conference, true fiscal federalism, constitutional reform, ethnic nationality conference and even a Referendum – irked by the menace of Boko Haram activities, the National President of Arewa Youth Consultative Forum Alhaji Yerima Shettima on Wednesday last week blamed the “Northern oligarchy” for the recurring cases of Boko Haram and called for an urgent convocation of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) to avoid disintegration of the country.
Obviously, the sentiments expressed by the Northern Youth Leader confirms the agitation of the Niger Delta people in calling for a fiscal federalism and the holding of a sovereign national conference of all ethnic nationalities as the panacea to the problems of Nigeria because it would afford everyone the opportunity to state the terms of coming together as a nation.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
