Connect with us

Opinion

2015 Election: In The Eyes Of The People

Published

on

Mr Hope Solomon – Civil Servant.
Compared to previous
elections, I think this year’s election is better.  Though there were some areas where violence was reported but  at Port Harcourt Township where I voted, everything went smoothly, calmly, there was no problem.
I think so far, this is the best election. For the first time a sitting president conceded defeat and congratulated the winner of the election immediately.  We were not expecting it.  We were even thinking that the election would have been very violent but everything went peacefully.  Compare to previous elections, this one was more violent free.
Though we recorded success in the past election, I believe there is still need for improvement. In subsequent elections we have to improve more.  We should improve on the card reader.  We also need to do something about the age limit of voters because we saw some areas where underage children were voting during the past election.  We also have to carry out more sensitisation. We should minimize rigging. Rigging is not good.  We heard about rigging in some areas and it is not the best.   When we rig we can’t have the best candidates. Let the electorates say who they want and not the hijacking of electoral materials that was reported in some areas.
And for the people that were elected, a lot is expected.  They should improve on what the current administration has done so that Nigeria will be a better country for all of us.

Deacon Levin Mgbudu – Financial analyst.
In my view I think the system we are in is generally corrupt. So you can’t say this person is right.  None of the political parties that took part in the elections did the right thing. I look at what happened during the election as the survival of the fittest, you play the game I know you can play, I play the game you know I can play.  So if I over-smart you, I become the winner.  That was exactly what happened not only in Rivers State.
We know that Rivers State has been a volatile state, the relative peace we have here is very very fragile.  Most people were afraid of participating in the elections. A lot of people stayed at home.  The few that went out observed a lot of irregularities.  So my overall assessment is that all of them played the game together and one came out successful.  But that is not what election is supposed to be.
Ideally, everybody is supposed to go to the polling station for accreditation, after that you queue up to cast your vote without any molestation, without any fear, without somebody behind you or somebody to drag the ballot box papers or box.  So, the best thing is to be on the queue, cast your vote, you wait or you go home as INEC instructed.  But it was the other way round. By this I mean PDP went to play their game to succeed, APC equally went to play their game to succeed, the same with Labour Party.  So, no one is a saint here as far as Rivers State election is concerned.
So for future elections we need to educate our people and also bring back the old system of electoral process, that is ensuring that the electorates conduct themselves properly.  If possible the police or the army should guide the people  to be on queue, they should cast their votes peacefully and those that are responsible to count the votes should be there to make sure that our votes count.
There were a lot of irregularities in the past election in many states of the federation.  We know in the north that underaged children voted.  So INEC should come up with proper re-orientation of our people.  Let them know the right thing to be done. If the card reader will be a kind of problem in future, then we should go back to former manual accreditation system.  Maximum security should also be provided. I also insist that our people should be enlightened on the electoral process.  A lot of people do not know what they are supposed to do.  All some people know is that election is all about struggle.  To struggle, to carry weapons to overpower your opponents.  Once you overpower him, you become the winner. They should tell our people that this is not the right thing.  We should have that re-orientation towards the electoral processes.

Mr Iheanyi Ezinwo-Newspaper Publisher.
You know before the election there was so much tension.  People were scarred.  Those living up north, especially the southerners were travelling home. There was a general atmosphere of uncertainty.  But looking back, I can say that the election was peaceful.  Yes there had been some skirmishes in one or two places, you know conflict is a natural thing, you can’t rule it out.  But one thing that was noticeable was that the election was largely peaceful. I think that is one element that stands out at the end of the elections.  Both at the national and state levels, it was largely peaceful compared to the tension that was building up before the elections.  Definitely you don’t expect a human being to get everything perfectly. Definitely there were problems and that was why some people had argued that the card reader shouldn’t have been brought at this large scale of elections in Nigeria, that it would have been better if they had brought it during Anambra, Ekiti or Osun elections, so that they would have been able to identify the issues and rectify them before coming to national level.
In every human activity conflicts are bound to arise but it depends on how they are managed. I believe that in Rivers State we had our own fair share of the challenges and I want to believe also that INEC had taken some steps to address the problems where they identified them.
Having said that, I also believe that there are areas we need to improve upon in our future elections.  One key area is on security. It’s unfortunate that some characters came up with spurious arguments and even went to court and got some judgement that armed security operatives should not be seen around the polling units.  That was why some of these things happened. It’s like some of those people have some ulterior motives.  Subsequently, armed policemen or even military should be engaged.  Even if they are not inside the polling station, they should be around that area.  That will check all the thugs from coming around to freely cart away electoral materials and disrupt the electoral process.
So we are happy that the elections have come and gone peacefully but I will advice those elected to subordinate their interests to the interest of the public. Look at what Jonathan did,  he subordinated his own interest to national overall interest.  So I want to advise them, yes they have aspirations, personal interest but please that should be within the limits of national interest.
Again, they should work together because it is in working together that they will be able to achieve more and move the country forward.

Mr Lundi Frank Waribo – Politician
Almost before every election people talk about how heads will roll during the election.   But take a clean look at it, they say that without Egypt there will be no Nile and without Nile there will be no Egypt.  There is no way you can remove at least a bit of rigging in politics.
It’s always everywhere more especially in a country like Nigeria.  We are not a developed country.  We are just one of the developing countries.  So if you remove rigging completely, you can’t make it right.  In my own ward in Andoni where I voted the election was free and fair.  We heard there were killings in certain area but I don’t believe that.  We were not there.  They were just framing it to make the whole world believe in them. In the north we saw children that were not of voting age taking part in the election but in order to allow peace reign in the country, President Jonathan accepted defeat without grudges.  Incidentally, in Rivers State here, some of our former leaders are causing problems for us.  They don’t want us to go forward.  Elections have come and gone but they will remain in the guilty memories of the past while the rest forges ahead.
The introduction of the card readers was too new to every Nigerian but it did work though not perfectly but let’s go on with that, it will improve.
In future elections, INEC should also check the way people go about enticing people with money in polling units on election days.  If we can stop people from coming to the polling centres with bags of money on election days it will help us grow.  Our mothers in the village do not know where to vote or who to vote for, but if they are able to go to them and tell them what is happening in the country they will be able to take a decision and tell you where they want to vote.  So INEC should carry out more sensitisation.

Mrs Lilian Okonkwo – Journalist.
For me, the 2015 general election was free and fair.  Be that as it may you cannot rule that the fact that there were some incidents that were quite condemnable.  But on the average, when you take a look at those incidents and the percentage of those that came out and the percentage of those who voted, we have every reason to say that the election was free and fair.  Of course the world is not a perfect place and we cannot expect it to be perfect.  We all know that there was problem with the card readers, there was problem of  late arrival of electoral materials. But in all, I think INEC did a good job.
In future elections I will like us to improve upon the card reader because you find out that in most areas they ended up voting without making use of the PVC or the card reader.  So it means that  we weren’t really ready for the card reader.  We all had stories of how it rejected President Jonathan and his wife, not leaving out the masses.  There were a lot of complains.  I know some people who had to clean their hands with kerosene, people who had to pull off one water proof from the card reader to enable it work and things like that.
So I’m hoping that in 2019 these issues would have been solved and then we get it much, much better. On the issue of violence, well we have always had it like that but I am thinking that by 2019 Nigerians should drop that attitude of killing, shooting and all that.  We should all be reasonable.  We should act reasonably and put aside that idea of shooting and killing so that our election will be more credible.  Our politicians should also learn how to accept defeat and move on and also support those who win to make a better society.  President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan’s reactions as regards his defeat is a very big lesson for us all. It is not easy for an incumbent to lose a election. So if somebody at that level who could have used the military, the police and the Nigerian oil money to ensure that he remains in power could concede defeat and even call to congratulate his opponent, I think it is a big lesson for us all.
Other contestants should learn a lesson from that.  If the man who is at the apex of leadership could conceded defeat, why not every other persons?
For emphasis, I observed the elections, I went round Port Harcourt and Obio/Akpor LGAs and what I saw was good.  Fortunately for me I didn’t see any terrible incident, and so it gives me the reason to say that the election was free and fair.

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending