Editorial

In Defence Of Oct 25, Gov Amaechi

Published

12 years ago

October 28, 2013

When the framers of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, as amended, opted for a multi-party system, the intention was to expand the minefield of political ideologies, alternative views and indeed foster healthy competition among Nigerian political platforms, upon which the country can depend for the electable representatives. To achieve that feat, the same constitution provided political parties with the necessary powers and quasi-sovereignty to conduct their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.

Their internal affairs with little or no interference by the National Electoral Commission (INEC), the lawful body empowered to superintend election and elections matters in the land, and oversee activities of the parties.
So powerful, political parties even succeeded in preventing the judiciary from interfering in their internal crises, no matter the magnitude of threat such unlimited freedom posed to the fragile democracy, the Nigerian state was experimenting.
Undoubtedly, that seeming limitless power to decide on candidates for general elections brewed dangerous signals of undemocratic culture, as the choice of candidates at various times, depended on everything except merit and intra party democracy.
It took what is now commonly referred to as the Amaechi re-instatement ruling of October 25, 2007 by the Supreme Court of Nigeria for parties to realise that the liberty to run their internal affairs were also limited by the religious adherence to intra-party democracy and indeed obedience to rules contained in their various party constitutions. Another is the fact that anytime such constitutions were observed in the breach, or when their provisions conflict with those of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the latter reigns supreme.
The Tide believes that the epochal Supreme Court judgement which restored Rt. Hon. Chibuikre Rotimi Amaechi’s mandate about five months after another had been sworn-in went beyond a personal victory. That ruling indeed, redefined Nigeria’s judicial courage and gallantry, defended fairness, equity and the rule of law, promoted intra-party democracy and most importantly, institutionalised enduring structures for punishment and reward in electoral matters.
To appreciate the value, import and indeed propriety of October 25, the history of how then Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Amaechi contested and won the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship primaries as required by law; how he was denied the mandate to contest the April 14, 2007 election on account of the K-leg theory; how, despite his subsisting protest through the lower court to Appeal Court and to the Supreme Court, he was suspended from the party for seeking justice outside the party; how he was substituted with another candidate, even along the run of litigation, without cogent and verifiable reasons and finally, how Barr . Celestine Omehia was eventually declared winner of the general elections even if he did not contest the party’s primaries as prescribed by law, must be put in context and perspective.
More importantly, the Supreme Court ruling ended the familiar culture of impunity often demonstrated by dogmatic political party leaders and god –fathers who often imposed candidates, ‘win’ elections by hook or crook, get such rogue candidates endorsed by INEC and sworn-in, in belief that once such sponsored stooge takes oath of office, the resources of the state would be employed to defend the wrong, and make it look right at all cost.
In such instances, the best the judiciary was often left to do after identifying obvious flaws was to order fresh elections, which was the worst case scenario manipulators of Governor Amaechi’s mandate anticipated.
But in what has become a landmark judgement designed, among other things, to erect stronger reward structures in electoral matters, the Supreme Court ruled that by Amaechi’s unchallenged victory at the party’s primaries, and his eventual illegal substitution without cogent and verifiable reasons by INEC as required by law, whosoever contested the election on the PDP platform was an impostor or did so for and on behalf of Governor Amaechi. It then gave the order that he be sworn-in as elected governor of Rivers State.
The Tide would have considered this elaborate recall totally unnecessary if not for questions recently raised against the propriety of reliving events of October 25, 2007 as an important date in the state’s democratic calendar.
In fact, some politicians have argued that such annual observance had been over taken by events, for the singular reason that Governor Amaechi had since sought, earned and won re-election in 2011, which in their view, diminishes the 2007 redemption of his first mandate.
The Tide disagrees. Without the Supreme Court’s verdict, and considering the antecedent of political parties in punishing members who seek justice beyond the confines of existing intra-party disciplinary structures, Governor Amaechi’s second-term bid would have been more tortuous than the first. Infact, analysts insist without October 25, 2007 serving as check, Amaechi’s re-election as the PDP candidate would have been a mirage.
More importantly, going by the content of congratulatory messages sent to Governor Amaechi in the press by appreciative stakeholders of the Rivers project, what was celebrated was the conviction that without the October 25, 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the impressive developmental strides recorded by the Rivers government would have been unthinkable.
Such stakeholders variously pointed to landmark achievements in the areas of education, with the erection of more than 150 model primary schools, and more than10 state of the art secondary schools and still counting; health centres with countless modern health centres and world class referral centres, infrasturctural development, with roads, inter-changes fly-overs and bridges, and huge investment in agriculture, among many others. Without Amaechi, these many others and the recent recruitment and posting of more than 13,000 teachers would have been a pipe dream.
These are why The Tide joins other well-meaning Nigerians, especially lovers of enduring intra-party and inter-party democracy, to celebrate the gallantry of the nation’s apex court, for that historic judegment with Governor Amaechi merely the vessel for such justice delivery.
That in short was what the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloysius Kastina-Alu, meant in his lead ruling of October 25, 2007, when he said, ‘ “the justice of the case demands that this court do substantial justice. The only way to redress his right, which was violated by the illegal substitution, is to declare him the winner of the April 14 governorship election in Rivers State”.
This without a doubt is the right way to appreciate the import and potency of October 25, in the annals of our democratic experience, and not to diminish it simply in exercise of personal vendetta against the Rivers Governor.

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.