News
Nigeria: What Colour Of Opposition?
In 1959, before Nigeria’s Independence from Britain, three political parties dominated the political terrain, preparatory to the proper handover date.
They were: the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) under the leadership of late Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) led by late Ahmadu Bello and the Action Group controlled by late Chief Obafemi Awolowo.
As their leadership structures clearly indicated these parties were ethnically inclined to the East, North and West, respectively, just as 17 other parties that emerged within the first republic (1960 – 1966). They include: Borno Youth Movement (BYM), Igale Union (IU), Northern Elements Progressive Union (NEPU), Zamfara Commoners Party (ZCP) and Lagos State United Front (LSUF), among others.
As ethnic/regional parties they could not muster the necessary majority support base to clinch an outright victory during the election except for a temporary fusion between the NPC and the NCNC that lasted for a short while.
Nevertheless, the dominance by both aforementioned parties naturally pitched others against them with Awolowo as leader of the opposition even as their angst and nadir were ethnically oriented.
The story was not different during the second republic (1979 – 1983) when seven political parties stood out to contest the various political positions in the country.
It was a relatively open and democratic environment of the second republic that witnessed the emergence of new political parties such as the National Party of Nigeria (NPN), the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), Nigerian Peoples Party (NPP), Great Nigeria Peoples Party (GNPP) and Peoples Redemption Party (PRP). They were merely incarnates of the NPC, AG, NCNC and NEPU.
While the NPN controlled the North, the UPN dominated in the West, including old Bendel and Kwara States, and the NPP held sway in the East. Without doubt, it was an indication that despite the emergence of new political parties, they were still characterised by the interplay of primordial political loyalties and forces. Again, it was natural that while the NPN controlled the federal government other political parties, devolved into opposition though from very weak frontiers. So weak were they that the ruling party even, if myopic, dictated what true governance was. Invariably, that became a veritable platform for the party to continue in power for as long as it could, despite agitations of corruption permeating the fabrics of the society. Yet, besides dominating in their respective native regions the much the opposition political parties could do was to look on until the 1983 coup d’etat that shoved Alhaji Shehu Shagari aside for General Muhammadu Buhari to take over the mantle of leadership. It was closely followed by another coup in August 1985 that brought General Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida to power.
With Babangida’s “a little to the left and a little to the right” Social Democratic Party (SDP) and National Republican Convention (NRC), his long tenure could not organise a successful election even as he made the entire world believe that his imposed parties were intended to discard with the primordial ethnic sentiments associated with our political parties and the opposition. But despite these lapses Nigerians tolerated IBB Jaunta’s antithesis to natural evolution of political parties to look forward to a vibrant election which nonetheless became a fluke and turned out to be known in Nigeria’s political history as ‘abortive third republic’. Even so, opposition inevitably mounted against the novel tactics that would line everybody behind two self-imposed parties. Unfortunately they could not voice out their anger or muster enough courage to confront the military. However, the full strength of the opposition manifested after the long military rigmarole between IBB who was prevailed upon to step aside and General Sani Abachi who displaced the Interim National Government (ING) of Chief Ernest Shonekan. Of the seven political parties that contended or seemed to oppose the Abacha administration’s make-belief new political dispensation, the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) was a gadfly and notable opposition that rattled the Abacha Junta to a standstill. Others were: Committee for National Consensus (CNC) Democratic Party of Nigeria (DPN), Justice Party (JP), National Centre Party of Nigeria (NCPN), Grassroots Democratic Movement (GDM) and United Nigeria Congress Party (UNCP).
Unfortunately, what became of these parties under Sani Abacha is now the dark history of Nigeria’s political past.
On May 29, 1999 General Abdulsalami Abubakar midwifed the election that heralded the fourth republic which made the former military leader Olusegun Obasanjo the new president. Suffice it to say that out of the 29 registered political parties, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) stood and still stands out, dominates the political clime and rules the country till date with little or no impressive opposition save at the regional levels where the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) and the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) enjoy ethnic support base.
That is to say the history of Nigeria’s Political dispensation is replete with weak opposition that over the years could not engender any positive change. Coupled with rampant corruption, nepotism, insincerity, and ethnic bias, the political class had been overwhelmed by elements bereft of viable political ideology to anchor the nations’ political future and offer a desired constructive opposition.
In fact many believe that Nigeria at best can boast of compromised opposition parties who for material benefit have long abandoned their traditional role as peoples watchdog, ensuring checks and balances on the ruling government and resorted to scouting for pecks of office.
That also explains why in Nigeria individuals that constitute the opposition view it as an opportunity to warm themselves into the heart of the ruling party for recognition. Indeed Nigeria’s opposition parties seem to have no plans, no programmes, no value added and lack credibility to challenge unpopular government policies.
Presently they constitute over 40 mushroom political contraptions with the sole aim of receiving grants from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Like seasonal preys, they hibernate after major elections only to reappear and heat the polity during elections.
It goes without saying, therefore, that bankruptcy in ideology and vision reduced party politics in Nigeria to bread and butter game. Monetisation of the political process has become the bedrock of loyalty and support, a situation that erodes the objective of the democratic process anchored on supremacy of popular will.
Even when members of the political class in realiSation of their lame-duck approach to opposition initiated the Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP), Nigerians welcomed the move as the most robust in the nation’s history of political opposition devoid of ethnic, elitist and parochial sentiments. But that was not to be. Allegations mounted that some CNPP leaders compromised their positions for material benefits in form of physical cash or juicy appointments from the ruling parties in their states.
Unlike the first and second republics when ethnicity dictated the actions of the AG and UPN opposition, the present democracy, though better in ethnic orientation has suffered severe degradation owing to inability of the political clas to adhere to the rules of the game. Apart from the ACN with some remarkable efforts, genuine opposition seems to be missing in action in Nigeria.
Apparently, the tragedy of the opposition in Nigeria presently is that there is no difference in party ideology and structure between the PDP and the so-called opposition. By all intent and purposes they are the same and therefore considered as really not having much to offer.
The opposition parties should cease to bemoan their fate and blaming their dismal electoral outing and concentrate on being resourceful and proactive in strategic politicking.
It is instructive to note that inordinate ambition remains the greatest threat to the success of the opposition parties in Nigeria, for instance, the alliance between the AG and UPGA in the first republic was designed to realise the presidential ambition of late Chief Awolowo who was leader of the opposition under the parliamentary system of the first republic. The same was true of the PPA configured to actualise Chief Awolowo’s unrealised presidential ambition in the second republic. And, as if following the trend the political summit spearheaded by the ANPP in 2007 was to realise the presidential ambition of Muhammadu Buhari, a major opposition leader, but it clashed with the presidential ambition of Vice President Atiku Abubakar who left PDP to contest under the newly formed Action Congress. Of course, their clash of interest doomed their ambition and neutralised the strength of the opposition.
Also imperative is the fact that Nigerian political class should endeavour to grow beyond shoddy orientation and pedestral values, and acknowledge that political parties bear the peoples identity whether in opposition or not. Until they come to that realisation our political system would always churn out leadership based on faulty premises and opposition dictated by materialism rather than personal conviction.
Valentine Ugboma
Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, has passed a vote of ‘no confidence’ in the Federal Government, saying that the Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, has failed Nigerians.
Falana was reacting to Adelabu’s appearance before the Senate to defend the increase in the electricity tariff and what Nigerians would pay on Monday.
The rights activists also claimed that the move is a policy imposed on the Nigerian government by the International Monetary Funds (IMF) and the World Bank.
Speaking on the Channels TV show on Monday night, Falana said, “The Minister of Power, Mr Adebayo Adelabu has failed to address the question of the illegality of the tariffs.
“Section 116 of the Electricity Act 2023 provides that before an increase can approved and announced, there has to be a public hearing conducted based on the request of the DISCOS to have an increase in the electricity tariffs. That was not done.
“Secondly, neither the minister nor the Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission has explained why the impunity that characterised the increase can be allowed.”
Falana also expressed worry over what he described as impunity on the part of the Federal Government and electricity regulatory commission.
““I have already given a notice to the commission because these guys are running Nigeria based on impunity and we can not continue like this. Whence a country claims to operate under the rule of law, all actions of the government, and all actions of individuals must comply with the provisions of relevant laws.
“Secondly, the increase was anchored on the directives of the commission that customers in Band A will have an uninterrupted electricity supply for at least 20 hours a day. That directive has been violated daily. So, on what basis can you justify the increase in the electricity tariffs”, Falana queried.
The human rights lawyer alleged that the Nigerian government is heeding an instruction given to her by the Bretton Wood institutions.
He alleged, “The Honourable Minister of Power is acting the script of the IMF and the World Bank.
“Those two agencies insisted and they continue to insist that the government of Nigeria must remove all subsidies. Fuel subsidy, electricity subsidy and what have you; all social services must be commercialised and priced beyond the reach of the majority of Nigerians.
“So, the government cannot afford to protect the interest of Nigerians where you are implementing the neoliberal policies of the Bretton Wood institutions.”
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria accused Western countries led by the United States of America of double standards.
According to him, they subsidize agriculture, energy, and fuel and offer grants and loans to indigent students while they advise the Nigerian government against doing the same for its citizens.
Following the outrage that greeted the announcement of the tariff increase, Adelabu explained that the action would not affect everyone using electricity as only Band A customers who get about 20 hours of electricity are affected by the hike.
Falana, however, insisted that neither the minister nor the National Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) has justified the tariff increase.
The senior lawyer said that Nigerian law gives no room for discrimination against customers by grading them in different bands.
He insisted that the government cannot ask Nigerians to pay differently for the same product even when what has been consistently served to them is darkness.
Following the outrage over the hike, Adelabu on Monday appeared at a one-day investigative hearing on the need to halt the increase in electricity tariff by eleven successor electricity distribution companies amid the biting economic situation in Nigeria.
However, Falana said that nothing will come out of the probe by the Senate.
He advised that the matter has to be taken to court so that the minister and the Attorney General of the Federation can defend the move.
The Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) on Monday, released the results of the 2024 Unified Tertiary Matriculation Examination, showing that 1,402,490 candidates out of 1,842,464 failed to score 200 out of 400 marks.
The number of candidates who failed to score half of the possible marks represents 78 per cent of the candidates whose results were released by JAMB.
Giving a breakdown of the results of the 1,842,464 candidates released, the board’s Registrar, Prof. Ishaq Oloyede, noted that, “8,401 candidates scored 300 and above; 77,070 scored 250 and above; 439,974 scored 200 and above while 1,402,490 scored below 200.”
On naming the top scorers for the 2024 UTME, Oloyede said, “It is common knowledge that the Board has, at various times restated its unwillingness to publish the names of its best-performing candidates, as it considers its UTME as only a ranking examination on account of the other parameters that would constitute what would later be considered the minimum admissible score for candidates seeking admission to tertiary institutions.
“Similarly, because of the different variables adopted by respective institutions, it might be downright impossible to arrive at a single or all-encompassing set of parameters for generating a list of candidates with the highest admissible score as gaining admission remains the ultimate goal. Hence, it might be unrealistic or presumptive to say a particular candidate is the highest scorer given the fact that such a candidate may, in the final analysis, not even be admitted.
“However, owing to public demand and to avoid a repeat of the Mmesoma saga as well as provide a guide for those, who may want to award prizes to this set of high-performing candidates, the Board appeals to all concerned to always verify claims by candidates before offering such awards.”
Oloyede also noted that the results of 64,624 out of the 1,904,189, who sat the examination, were withheld by the board and would be subject to investigation.
He noted that though a total of 1,989,668 registered, a total of 80,810 candidates were absent.
“For the 2024 UTME, 1,989,668 candidates registered including those who registered at foreign centres. The Direct Entry registration is still ongoing.
“Out of a total of 1,989,668 registered candidates, 80,810 were absent. A total of 1,904,189 sat the UTME within the six days of the examination.
“The Board is today releasing the results of 1,842,464 candidates. 64,624 results are under investigation for verification, procedural investigation of candidates, Centre-based investigation and alleged examination misconduct”, he said.
Oloyede also said the Board, at the moment, conducts examination in nine foreign centres namely: Abidjan, Ivory Coast; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia; Buea, Cameroon; Cotonou, Republic of Benin; London, United Kingdom; Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; and Johannesburg, South Africa.
“The essence of this foreign component of the examination is to market our institutions to the outside world as well as ensuring that our universities reflect the universality of academic traditions, among others. The Board is, currently, fine-tuning arrangements for the conduct of the 2024 UTME in these foreign centres,” he explained.
A former Director of Information Technology with the Central Bank of Nigeria, John Ayoh, has alleged that he collected on behalf of the former governor of the apex bank, Godwin Emefiele, a sum of $600,000 in two installments from contractors.
Ayoh, the second witness of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), disclosed this on Monday while recounting instances where he facilitated the delivery of money to Emefiele, claiming it was for contract awards.
Under cross-examination at the Ikeja Special Offences Court in Lagos by the defence counsel, Olalekan Ojo (SAN), Ayoh admitted to facilitating the alleged bribery under pressure.
The embattled former governor of the apex bank is having many running legal battles both in Abuja and Lagos and is being tried by the EFCC at the Special Offences Court over alleged abuse of office and accepting gratification to the tune of $4.5 billion and N2.8bn.
He was arraigned on April 8, 2024, alongside his co-defendant, Henry Isioma-Omoile, on 26 counts bordering on abuse of office, accepting gratifications, corrupt demand, receiving property, and fraudulently obtaining and conferring corrupt advantage.
Emefiele’s defence, however, challenged the court’s jurisdiction over constitutional matters, urging the quashing of counts one to four and counts eight to 24 against him.
Ayoh, who was led in evidence by the EFCC prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), said the first money he collected on Emefiele’s behalf was $400,000 which his assistant, John Adetola, came to collect at his house in Lekki, Lagos State.
He further told the court that the second bribe of $200,000 was collected at the headquarters of CBN, at the Island office.
He said the money was brought in an envelope, adding that when the delivery person, Victor, was on the bank’s premises, he contacted Emefiele, who insisted on receiving the package directly from Ayoh without involving third parties.
He said when he went to deliver the package, he saw many bank CEOs waiting to see the former apex bank governor.
When questioned if he had ever been involved in any criminal activity, he responded in the negative but admitted that he had facilitated the commission of crime unknowingly.
“I believe I did admit in my statement that I was forced to commit the crime. I don’t know the exact word I used in my statement, but I said we were all forced with tremendous pressure to bend the rules,” he said.
When asked if he opened the envelopes he collected on the two occasions and counted the money to confirm the amount, he was negative in his reply, adding that he did also write in his statement that the money was given to influence the award of contracts.
On whether the EFCC arrested him, the witness said he was invited on February 20, 2024, and returned home after he was granted bail.
Earlier, Emefiele asked the court to quash counts one to four and counts eight to 24 against him, as the court lacks the jurisdiction to try him.
Speaking through his counsel, Ojo, he said counts one to four were constitutional matters, which the court lacked the jurisdiction to determine.
In his argument, citing Sections 374 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act and 386(2), the defence counsel told Justice Rahman Oshodi that Emefiele ought not to be arraigned before the court on constitutional grounds.
He, therefore, urged the court to resolve the objection on whether the court had the jurisdiction to try the case or not.
The second defendant’s counsel, Kazeem Gbadamosi (SAN), also relied on the submissions of Ojo.
The EFCC counsel, Oyedepo, however, objected, as he asked the court to disregard the decision of the Court of Appeal relied upon by Ojo, saying that the Court of Appeal could not set aside the decision of the Supreme Court on any matter.
Ruling on the submissions of the counsel, Justice Oshodi said he would give his decision on jurisdiction when he delivered judgment as he adjourned till May 3.
He also directed the EFCC to serve the defence proof of evidence on witness number six and his extrajudicial statement.
-
Nation1 day agoVCDF in Partnership with LAWMA & Iru LCDA Conducts ‘Street Hygiene & Cleanliness’ Campaign in Lagos
-
News4 days ago
NANS Threatens Nationwide Protest Over Fuel Scarcity
-
News4 days agoEx-CBN Director Admits Collecting $600,000 Bribe For Emefiele
-
Nation4 days ago
Ibom Developers Supports 160 Women with Skill Acquisition Training in Akwa Ibom
-
News4 days ago
1.4m UTME Candidates Scored Below 200 -JAMB
-
News4 days ago
Gunmen Kidnap Four In Abuja
-
News4 days agoYou Failed Nigerians, Falana Slams Power Minister
-
Nation4 days agoIbom Developers Supports 160 Women with Skill Acquisition Training in Akwa Ibom