The misunderstanding between the Federal and the Lagos State governments over the legality or otherwise of the 37 ‘local council development authorities’ (LCDA), formerly known as ‘new local government areas’ (LGAs) of Lagos State raises fundamental questions about Nigeria’s peculiar form of federalism and constitutionalism.There is ample evidence to posit that Nigeria has in fact been operating a unitary state, rather than federalism in many respects, either because the Constitution made it so or the operators of the document wilfully do so. Sometimes the operators conspire or accede to such unitary set-up. A good example was when the National Assembly and the presidency conspired to pass the Electoral Act 2001 which smuggled in the provision of tenure of local government elected officials, something that is the exclusive right of the various state houses of assembly to legislate on. Then President Obasanjo, in signing the law, asked those who were aggrieved to go to court. Thankfully the Supreme Court later shut down that provision of the law. Similarly, the government of Akwa Ibom state was at one point arm-twisted to abandoning its duly-passed and operated Local Government Law which provided for parliamentary system of government at that level. To the extent that that law was consistent with section 7 of the Constitution, it was valid. That section states: 7. (1) The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils. It was disheartening and a disservice to constitutionalism and the principle of federalism for the Federal Government and the ruling Peoples Democratic Party to pressure the PDP government of that state to change to the presidential system, as practised in the rest of the country. The argument was simply that one state could not be different from all others in the federation. Even the argument of Akwa Ibom that its adopted system was inexpensive (compared to the presidential system) and more effective at that level was considered. More importantly, the parliamentary system qualified as a “government by democratically elected local government council” and thus met the constitutional requirement.In an ideal federal system, the responsibility for the creation or division of LGAs resides in the state government. But ours is not an ‘ideal’ federal structure. Our pseudo-federal Constitution provides for local government area creation by state governments, but limits such power by making the creation subject to “ratification” by the National Assembly (NASS). We should also note that the federating states in Nigeria do not have their individual Constitution, as you would expect in a true federal structure. In the case of Lagos State’s 37 ‘new’ LGAs, the Supreme Court held that the process followed in their creation was legal but that until the National Assembly made the consequential order (which many have described as “ratification”), the said creations remained inchoate. The dictionary defines “inchoate” as: “not yet completed or fully developed; rudimentary; just begun; incipient; not organised; lacking order” etc.Some commentators have drawn an allusion between the Lagos LGA creation and childbirth. They opine that the child has already been born and that what the federal legislature was required to do was merely a naming ceremony. If that be the case, then we could argue that when the Supreme Court referred to the LGAs as inchoate, it meant, using the example of a baby, that the baby is ill-formed, maybe premature! In such a situation, the baby must be kept in an incubator until it is properly formed and ready to face the real world. But it seems the health officers (in this case, NASS) have refused to provide the necessary support and medication needed to guarantee life for the baby.No doubt, Lagos, for its mere population and resources, deserves more local government areas, but that is no reason to support a short cut approach to the creation of the new areas.One equally agrees that NASS should not unduly withhold the ratification of any LGA duly created. But parliamentary actions, including ratification, are more than legal issues. They also touch a lot, if not more, on politics. It must be further noted that once the National Assembly ratifies the creation of the new LGAs, the new LGAs take up equal status with all the existing 774 LGAs and must be taken into account when money from the Federation Account is distributed to the states, which are the federating units. The argument that Lagos can generate its own resources to maintain the new LGAs is not enough reason because by the Constitution, all LGAs must be allocated funds from the Federation Account.It seems likely that the reluctance of NASS to ratify may be hinged mainly on the fear of a deluge of returns from several states for similar ratifications. Recall that virtually all the states had previously “created” more LGAs in the last 10 years and only backed down when they were confronted by federal authorities. The way to cure this concern again takes us to the fundamentals of true federalism. If each federating unit (the state) depended on its generated resources to fund its operations and not from the largess of federation account allocation, fuelled by oil rentier system, nobody would bother about how many LGAs a state decides to create. What any aggrieved party to the failure/refusal/negligence of NASS to ratify the creation of new LGAs needs to do is (unfortunately) to keep lobbying and appealing to NASS to ratify. Were the ratification a mere administrative action to be taken by the executive arm of government, an aggrieved party could have resorted to approaching the court to issue an order of mandamus directing such authority to carry out a duty it is obliged to. Unfortunately, we cannot obtain such an order against the legislature. Merely changing the appellation of the “new LGAs” to “local council development authority” is no cure for the situation, especially when the new creations still have the full components of LGAs – an elected chairperson who heads the executive arm, the legislative council made up of elected councillors, local authority secretariat, marriage registries etc. Those who say the “new LGAs” have already come into being should also consider another provision of the Constitution which says that any amendment to the Constitution by NASS shall be subject to ratification by two-thirds of state houses of assembly. Would we therefore argue that once NASS passes a resolution to amend the Constitution, such amendment would become effective even before ratification by the states? What all these mean is that our present Constitution needs immediate amendment, if not a total overhaul to save us from logjams as this.
Effanga, a lawyer, is Parliamentary Advisor with ActionAid Nigeria in Abuja
*Published in the Law page of Thisday newspaper of August 4, 2009 under the rider, "National Assembly cannot be compelled to ratify LCDAs"
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
DIS-honourable member admits taking blood oath
A member of the Ogun State House of Assembly, Wale Alausa, is featured naked, apparently taking a blood oath of allegiance to whatever or whomever, as opposed to his constituency, in the discharge of his constitutional role.While Compass newspaper owned by Gov. Gbenga Daniel claims the man took the oath of secrecy with others to oppose the governor, PM news says the dishonourable member admits that he is the one in the photograph but that the event was actually in 2007, in Gbenga Daniel's house and that he was forced by Daniel to take the oath of allegiance to him (Daniel) as condition for being 'given' the PDP's ticket to stand election to go to the House of Assembly.There are two stories from opposing newspaper camps on the same issue. Choose your perspective. The story behind it gives an insight to the extent our politicians go to gain power, sustain it and rob us all of our collective resources.‘Honourable’ Wale Alausa has not denied taking the oath but is disputing where it was taken, at whose behest and for what purpose. Whichever way, it is SHAME, SHAME and SHAME on him and his likes. And you know what? The man may at the same time be an ‘active’ or vocal claimant to one of the two major religions in the country.Sickening, isn’t it?
Ogun G15 lawmakers in blood oath scandal Monday, 29 June 2009 00:00
•Storm Ijebu-Igbo shrine COMPASS NEWS
•Pledge first childSoji Adefemi
THE crisis in Ogun State involving G 15 members of the House of Assembly was triggered by a blood oath taken at a shrine in Ijebu-Igbo, Ijebu North Local Government, last year, the Nigerian Compass learnt last night. The members took the oath to ensure a united front against Governor Gbenga Daniel.The oath was sponsored by some politicians including the father of a prominent politician in Abuja, a Senator, a former South-West governor, a former minister and another prominent politician in Ogun State.The oath, which was taken naked by the members and in daylight, was witnessed by the sponsors and the native doctors, the administrators of the oath.Items used for the oath included blood, cow heads, calabash and other fetish materials.Each participant swore to upholding opposition to Daniel at all times and submitted to the death of their first born, should they renege on the oath.Each of them was required to mention the name of their first child in the course of the oath, setting in motion serious consequences for the children should their fathers go back on the prescribed course of opposition.The Nigerian Compass learnt that the finality of this oath is why prominent traditional rulers such as the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona, the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo, the Akarigbo of Remoland, Oba Michael Sonariwo, and other prominent leaders such as Prince Bola Ajibola, General Tunji Olurin and Yeye Oodua H.I.D. Awolowo were unable to persuade them to change their stance.In exclusive photographs obtained by the Nigerian Compass, one of those who took the oath, Hon. Wale Alausa, representing Ijebu-Ode State Constituency and a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), is seen holding a white article of oath, standing in front of a calabash filled with blood at the shrine.The photographs were taken by the initiators of the oath to blackmail the G 15 members and prevent them from reneging. The Nigerian Compass obtained some of the photographs following a disagreement in the camp of the initiators.Behind him in the photograph on the right taken outside the shrine (with his hand showing) is one of the native doctors who administered the oath. The photograph on the left was taken inside the shrine.A source said last night: “It is because of the oath that the crisis in the state has been protracted. They have vowed that nobody or nothing will stop them from achieving their goal, which is to impeach the governor and make the state ungovernable.“This lawmaker called Alausa was jobless when his father, Alhaji Agboola Alausa, took him to the governor and the governor made him a special assistant in the office of the deputy governor. Even when he was working with Alhaja Salmot Badru, the deputy governor was not happy with him because of the various scandals he was involved in. “In 2007, the father also begged that he should be made a lawmaker and the state PDP respected his view by giving the Ijebu-Ode State Constituency to his son.“But since Wale Alausa and other members of the G 15 seized the Assembly in a coup last year, peace has eluded the state. That is why they are blocking the N50 billion bond and embarrassing members of the executive under the cover of oversight functions.”It would be recalled that the recalcitrant lawmakers began the festering crisis in the state by first impeaching the then Speaker, Mrs. Titi Shodunke-Oseni.They followed the impeachment with her suspension and that of another member of the House who was loyal to her, despite the fact that the court ruled otherwise.For several weeks, they also refused to sit, blaming lack of protection by security agents for their action.Besides, they recently passed Resolution 167 barring financial institutions from dealing with the state government, especially over its attempt to raise a N50 billion bond.
‘How Daniel Forced Me To Take Oath’—LawmakerJune 29, 2009 15:19, 2,610 views PM NEWS By Jide Osokoya
Honourable Wale Alausa, representing Ijebu-Ode Constituency in the Ogun State House of Assembly, has said that governor Gbenga Daniel forced him to take an oath in 2007, contrary to the report in the Nigerian Compass this morning.Reacting to the story, “Ogun 15 lawmakers on blood oath,” Hon. Alausa said it was a fabrication aimed at ridiculing his person and his colleagues in the house by Daniel and his agents. He confessed that the photographs published by Compass today, were genuine but were taken in 2007, inside Daniel’s Sagamu mansion and its environs, when he was forced to take an oath before he could get the PDP ticket to the state House of Assembly.The lawmaker said he and his colleagues (G15) never took any oath and neither did they visit any shrine in Ijebu-Igbo to take an oath, adding that it was pure blackmail by Daniel to stop the House from carrying out its oversight functions. “The photographs on the front page of Compass today, were truly mine but the story was fabricated. I was forced to take the photographs in governor Daniel’s Sagamu home in 2007, when he forcefully implemented the oath on me in order to get me a ticket to the House of Assembly. And that is what he has done to everybody.“Let him come out and deny, if he did not compel my father, Chief Agboola Alausa, to persuade me to take the oath. I rest my case for now. But the struggle continues,” he said. According to Compass: “the crisis in Ogun state involving the G 15 members of the House of Assembly was triggered by a blood oath taken at a shrine in Ijebu-Igbo, Ijebu North Local Government, last year, the Nigerian Compass learnt last night.“The members took the oath to ensure a united front against governor Gbenga Daniel. The oath was sponsored by some politicians including the father of a prominent politician in Abuja, a Senator, a former South-West governor, a former minister and another prominent politician in Ogun state.” The report added that: “the oath, which was taken naked by the members and in daylight, was witnessed by the sponsors and the native doctors, the administrators of the oath.“Items used for the oath included blood, cow heads, calabash and other fetish materials. Each participant swore to upholding opposition to Daniel at all times and submitted to the death of their first born, should they renege on the oath. “Each of them was required to mention the name of their first child in the course of the oath, setting in motion serious consequences for the children should their fathers go back on the prescribed course of opposition.“The Nigerian Compass learnt that the finality of this oath is why prominent traditional rulers, such as the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona; the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo; the Akarigbo of Remoland, Oba Michael Sonariwo, and other prominent leaders such as Prince Bola Ajibola, General Tunji Olurin and Yeye Oodua H.I.D. Awolowo were unable to persuade them to change their stance.”
Ogun G15 lawmakers in blood oath scandal Monday, 29 June 2009 00:00
•Storm Ijebu-Igbo shrine COMPASS NEWS
•Pledge first childSoji Adefemi
THE crisis in Ogun State involving G 15 members of the House of Assembly was triggered by a blood oath taken at a shrine in Ijebu-Igbo, Ijebu North Local Government, last year, the Nigerian Compass learnt last night. The members took the oath to ensure a united front against Governor Gbenga Daniel.The oath was sponsored by some politicians including the father of a prominent politician in Abuja, a Senator, a former South-West governor, a former minister and another prominent politician in Ogun State.The oath, which was taken naked by the members and in daylight, was witnessed by the sponsors and the native doctors, the administrators of the oath.Items used for the oath included blood, cow heads, calabash and other fetish materials.Each participant swore to upholding opposition to Daniel at all times and submitted to the death of their first born, should they renege on the oath.Each of them was required to mention the name of their first child in the course of the oath, setting in motion serious consequences for the children should their fathers go back on the prescribed course of opposition.The Nigerian Compass learnt that the finality of this oath is why prominent traditional rulers such as the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona, the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo, the Akarigbo of Remoland, Oba Michael Sonariwo, and other prominent leaders such as Prince Bola Ajibola, General Tunji Olurin and Yeye Oodua H.I.D. Awolowo were unable to persuade them to change their stance.In exclusive photographs obtained by the Nigerian Compass, one of those who took the oath, Hon. Wale Alausa, representing Ijebu-Ode State Constituency and a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), is seen holding a white article of oath, standing in front of a calabash filled with blood at the shrine.The photographs were taken by the initiators of the oath to blackmail the G 15 members and prevent them from reneging. The Nigerian Compass obtained some of the photographs following a disagreement in the camp of the initiators.Behind him in the photograph on the right taken outside the shrine (with his hand showing) is one of the native doctors who administered the oath. The photograph on the left was taken inside the shrine.A source said last night: “It is because of the oath that the crisis in the state has been protracted. They have vowed that nobody or nothing will stop them from achieving their goal, which is to impeach the governor and make the state ungovernable.“This lawmaker called Alausa was jobless when his father, Alhaji Agboola Alausa, took him to the governor and the governor made him a special assistant in the office of the deputy governor. Even when he was working with Alhaja Salmot Badru, the deputy governor was not happy with him because of the various scandals he was involved in. “In 2007, the father also begged that he should be made a lawmaker and the state PDP respected his view by giving the Ijebu-Ode State Constituency to his son.“But since Wale Alausa and other members of the G 15 seized the Assembly in a coup last year, peace has eluded the state. That is why they are blocking the N50 billion bond and embarrassing members of the executive under the cover of oversight functions.”It would be recalled that the recalcitrant lawmakers began the festering crisis in the state by first impeaching the then Speaker, Mrs. Titi Shodunke-Oseni.They followed the impeachment with her suspension and that of another member of the House who was loyal to her, despite the fact that the court ruled otherwise.For several weeks, they also refused to sit, blaming lack of protection by security agents for their action.Besides, they recently passed Resolution 167 barring financial institutions from dealing with the state government, especially over its attempt to raise a N50 billion bond.
‘How Daniel Forced Me To Take Oath’—LawmakerJune 29, 2009 15:19, 2,610 views PM NEWS By Jide Osokoya
Honourable Wale Alausa, representing Ijebu-Ode Constituency in the Ogun State House of Assembly, has said that governor Gbenga Daniel forced him to take an oath in 2007, contrary to the report in the Nigerian Compass this morning.Reacting to the story, “Ogun 15 lawmakers on blood oath,” Hon. Alausa said it was a fabrication aimed at ridiculing his person and his colleagues in the house by Daniel and his agents. He confessed that the photographs published by Compass today, were genuine but were taken in 2007, inside Daniel’s Sagamu mansion and its environs, when he was forced to take an oath before he could get the PDP ticket to the state House of Assembly.The lawmaker said he and his colleagues (G15) never took any oath and neither did they visit any shrine in Ijebu-Igbo to take an oath, adding that it was pure blackmail by Daniel to stop the House from carrying out its oversight functions. “The photographs on the front page of Compass today, were truly mine but the story was fabricated. I was forced to take the photographs in governor Daniel’s Sagamu home in 2007, when he forcefully implemented the oath on me in order to get me a ticket to the House of Assembly. And that is what he has done to everybody.“Let him come out and deny, if he did not compel my father, Chief Agboola Alausa, to persuade me to take the oath. I rest my case for now. But the struggle continues,” he said. According to Compass: “the crisis in Ogun state involving the G 15 members of the House of Assembly was triggered by a blood oath taken at a shrine in Ijebu-Igbo, Ijebu North Local Government, last year, the Nigerian Compass learnt last night.“The members took the oath to ensure a united front against governor Gbenga Daniel. The oath was sponsored by some politicians including the father of a prominent politician in Abuja, a Senator, a former South-West governor, a former minister and another prominent politician in Ogun state.” The report added that: “the oath, which was taken naked by the members and in daylight, was witnessed by the sponsors and the native doctors, the administrators of the oath.“Items used for the oath included blood, cow heads, calabash and other fetish materials. Each participant swore to upholding opposition to Daniel at all times and submitted to the death of their first born, should they renege on the oath. “Each of them was required to mention the name of their first child in the course of the oath, setting in motion serious consequences for the children should their fathers go back on the prescribed course of opposition.“The Nigerian Compass learnt that the finality of this oath is why prominent traditional rulers, such as the Awujale of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona; the Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo; the Akarigbo of Remoland, Oba Michael Sonariwo, and other prominent leaders such as Prince Bola Ajibola, General Tunji Olurin and Yeye Oodua H.I.D. Awolowo were unable to persuade them to change their stance.”
Monday, March 23, 2009
Celebrating our Women
And I got flowers…
We had our first argument last night, and he said a lot of cruel things that really hurt me. I know he is sorry and didn't mean the things he said, because he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today. It wasn't our anniversary or any other special day.
Last night he threw me into a wall and started to choke me.
It seemed like a nightmare, I couldn't believe it was real.
I woke up this morning sore and bruised all over.
I know he must be sorry cause he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today, and it wasn't Mother's Day or any other special day.
Last night, he beat me up again, it was much worse than all the other times. If I leave him, what will I do? How will I take care of my kids? What about money? I'm afraid of him and scared to leave. But I know he must be sorry because he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today. Today was a very special day. It was the day of my funeral. Last night, he finally killed me. He beat me to death. If only I had gathered enough courage to leave him, I would not have gotten flowers today…
The above words of an anonymous writer, captures the danger many women out there are being exposed to within an environment that is ordinarily meant to provide haven for them – their homes. Many homes than we can imagine have since stopped being havens, but hell for some. Unfortunately for many women who find themselves as wives or partners in such environments, they cannot run to any other place, or so they think. They therefore have to imagine that things could and will get better or that things aren’t as bad as they seem after all. And so, they continue to live with the monster until it is too late.
For many others, it is the shame of letting others know what they are passing through or the influence of tradition or interpretation of religious injunctions about divorce that box them in the environment of danger until they get the last flower of the character in the above illustration. Sometimes too, it is the family, their parents, siblings and others who urge them not to leave their husband’s house for any reason. Our society thus looks disdainfully at a divorced woman or one separated from the husband, no matter what led to it, only to give flowers (wreath that is) to the “courageous” ones who stick in there until they are killed.
In January 1999, one Reginald Ifeanyi Ononye, a superintendent of police battered his wife, Veronica to death. It was not a one-off incident, for Reginald had manifested a pattern of regular assault of his wife. Each time the wife ran to her family, Reginald would go back begging, promising never to do it again and the family would promptly urge their daughter to return to her marital home. But on January 22 of that year, Veronica got that final beating that qualified her for a wreath.
There is yet another blood-chilling recording of domestic murder in the book, Beyond Boundaries written by Josephine Effah-Chukwuma and Ngozi Osarenren of Project Alert against Violence on Women. It is the murder in 2004 of a 60-year old medical doctor, Dr. (Mrs.) Nnalu Chukwudebelu, allegedly by her husband of 30 years, himself a professor of gynaecology. In this case, the woman had lodged a complaint with the police about threats to her life by her husband and two of the husband’s sisters. After listening to the complaint, the state police commissioner advised the woman to go home and return on July 25, 2000 but she was killed the day before that appointment.
In the two incidents above, the society, both the family and the police could have saved the lives of the deceased persons if they took the matter of threat to life more seriously. For too long, domestic violence has been treated as family affairs that should be left for the parties to settle privately. As we have continued to see, the “settlements” have often been to disastrous finality.
Our public institutions have failed in many ways to curb gender violence. The police stations are yet to be victim-friendly, making it difficult for people to lodge complaints. Even where complaints are so lodged, many women have complained about the hostile and degrading manner the officers they meet at the stations relate to them. I am yet to get over an experience I had in 2003 when I gave a talk to some senior police officers on how to handle reported cases of domestic violence. Current trend demands that domestic violence being first of all a crime, should be regarded as such by the police, not minding that the perpetrators may be family members of the victims.
Many of the superior officers, mainly men of course, shamelessly said that the women should be blamed for the violence they received from their husbands, as many of them do not respect their husbands, are very rude, do not get the food ready on time and blah blah blah. It was almost a waste of time convincing those ones that their duty as police officers was to first react to the crime of assault occasioning harm and not to decide who was at fault in the so-called domestic affairs. If the superior officers, many of who were heads of police stations and area commands could reason that way, where then lies the hope for the society, where such cases get to their stations?
What is the relevance of all the above today? Yesterday was Mothering Sunday (or Mother’s Day) in many churches across the world. Some other churches may yet mark the day next Sunday or some time later in the month. Also, Wednesday is the International Women’s Day. This is therefore the week to celebrate our women. For the Mothering Sunday (some folks actually pronounce it murdering Sunday, making one wonder at the cruel pun), many churches elaborately celebrate the occasion, many homes too. But beyond the gifts and genteel attitude towards the women by their husbands and children this season, can society claim to really care much about the women after such events? How many of the homes practice equity between the boy and girl child, without unduly withholding the rights and opportunities of the latter in relation to the earlier? For instance, if a family cannot afford school fees for all its children, what determines which child to benefit from the limited resources? Will it be the ability of each child or the gender?
How many of the men who “celebrate” our women as wives and mothers this week still respect and celebrate those women when the unfortunate happens – on the loss of the woman’s husband? Aren’t these men the first to abandon their Christian standards in order to embrace the standards purportedly set by their “culture” and “tradition”, requiring that certain obnoxious widowhood practices must be observed and the women stripped of inheritance from their late husbands? Some of those women who were happily decked in their colourful wrappers and other aso ebi (uniform dress) yesterday are equally guilty of debasing womanhood by being the custodians and executors of the same repugnant widowhood practices, back in their villages, on the death of their male relations. But yesterday they were at their Christian best celebrating the womanhood they do not truly appreciate.
I strongly believe that Mothering Sunday and Mothering Week could be better celebrated by the churches through the holding of seminars, trainings and lectures on the growing incidents of domestic violence and the (dying?) culture of harmful widowhood practices. Unfortunately, many churches would rather not talk about it, pretending that such do not exist among their members. Yet many of the reported incidents of domestic violence involve people who are regular members of churches, even church leaders. A classical example was the murder of one Jumoke Martins, an evangelist, by her husband, Femi Martins, the pastor/founder of a church in Ibadan.
And as we celebrate the International Women’s Day this week with the theme, "Women in decision-making: meeting challenges, creating change", there will, as usual, be a lot of activities at governmental and non-governmental levels to highlight the issues of inequality and inequity between men and women, the women being on the disadvantaged side of the divide though. The theme should be a wakeup call especially for us in Nigeria. The number of women in political decision-making positions may have increased marginally in recent years, but it is still less than the 30 percent universal benchmark. Even the increased number of women in government must also be weighed against the increase in the number of positions also available, to see whether in real terms, there has been an improvement. The situation is even worse when it comes to elective positions as the women hardly get through the primaries.
Luckily, Africa has just witnessed the emergence of its first democratically-elected female president in Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia. Is there any hope of Nigeria replicating the feat, perhaps drawing from the rich collection of women professionals, technocrats and politicians that dot the country today? It may yet be a distant and tall dream, until the political system is thoroughly reformed to allow for the so-called “even playing field”. Until the cash and carry electoral system is done away with, it would be so difficult for women to make it to decision-making positions since women remain the poorest of the poor in the society.
This piece was last published in NewAge newspaper of March 6, 2006 and was updated from a similar piece by this writer, published in NewAge of March 7, 2005
We had our first argument last night, and he said a lot of cruel things that really hurt me. I know he is sorry and didn't mean the things he said, because he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today. It wasn't our anniversary or any other special day.
Last night he threw me into a wall and started to choke me.
It seemed like a nightmare, I couldn't believe it was real.
I woke up this morning sore and bruised all over.
I know he must be sorry cause he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today, and it wasn't Mother's Day or any other special day.
Last night, he beat me up again, it was much worse than all the other times. If I leave him, what will I do? How will I take care of my kids? What about money? I'm afraid of him and scared to leave. But I know he must be sorry because he sent me flowers today.
I got flowers today. Today was a very special day. It was the day of my funeral. Last night, he finally killed me. He beat me to death. If only I had gathered enough courage to leave him, I would not have gotten flowers today…
The above words of an anonymous writer, captures the danger many women out there are being exposed to within an environment that is ordinarily meant to provide haven for them – their homes. Many homes than we can imagine have since stopped being havens, but hell for some. Unfortunately for many women who find themselves as wives or partners in such environments, they cannot run to any other place, or so they think. They therefore have to imagine that things could and will get better or that things aren’t as bad as they seem after all. And so, they continue to live with the monster until it is too late.
For many others, it is the shame of letting others know what they are passing through or the influence of tradition or interpretation of religious injunctions about divorce that box them in the environment of danger until they get the last flower of the character in the above illustration. Sometimes too, it is the family, their parents, siblings and others who urge them not to leave their husband’s house for any reason. Our society thus looks disdainfully at a divorced woman or one separated from the husband, no matter what led to it, only to give flowers (wreath that is) to the “courageous” ones who stick in there until they are killed.
In January 1999, one Reginald Ifeanyi Ononye, a superintendent of police battered his wife, Veronica to death. It was not a one-off incident, for Reginald had manifested a pattern of regular assault of his wife. Each time the wife ran to her family, Reginald would go back begging, promising never to do it again and the family would promptly urge their daughter to return to her marital home. But on January 22 of that year, Veronica got that final beating that qualified her for a wreath.
There is yet another blood-chilling recording of domestic murder in the book, Beyond Boundaries written by Josephine Effah-Chukwuma and Ngozi Osarenren of Project Alert against Violence on Women. It is the murder in 2004 of a 60-year old medical doctor, Dr. (Mrs.) Nnalu Chukwudebelu, allegedly by her husband of 30 years, himself a professor of gynaecology. In this case, the woman had lodged a complaint with the police about threats to her life by her husband and two of the husband’s sisters. After listening to the complaint, the state police commissioner advised the woman to go home and return on July 25, 2000 but she was killed the day before that appointment.
In the two incidents above, the society, both the family and the police could have saved the lives of the deceased persons if they took the matter of threat to life more seriously. For too long, domestic violence has been treated as family affairs that should be left for the parties to settle privately. As we have continued to see, the “settlements” have often been to disastrous finality.
Our public institutions have failed in many ways to curb gender violence. The police stations are yet to be victim-friendly, making it difficult for people to lodge complaints. Even where complaints are so lodged, many women have complained about the hostile and degrading manner the officers they meet at the stations relate to them. I am yet to get over an experience I had in 2003 when I gave a talk to some senior police officers on how to handle reported cases of domestic violence. Current trend demands that domestic violence being first of all a crime, should be regarded as such by the police, not minding that the perpetrators may be family members of the victims.
Many of the superior officers, mainly men of course, shamelessly said that the women should be blamed for the violence they received from their husbands, as many of them do not respect their husbands, are very rude, do not get the food ready on time and blah blah blah. It was almost a waste of time convincing those ones that their duty as police officers was to first react to the crime of assault occasioning harm and not to decide who was at fault in the so-called domestic affairs. If the superior officers, many of who were heads of police stations and area commands could reason that way, where then lies the hope for the society, where such cases get to their stations?
What is the relevance of all the above today? Yesterday was Mothering Sunday (or Mother’s Day) in many churches across the world. Some other churches may yet mark the day next Sunday or some time later in the month. Also, Wednesday is the International Women’s Day. This is therefore the week to celebrate our women. For the Mothering Sunday (some folks actually pronounce it murdering Sunday, making one wonder at the cruel pun), many churches elaborately celebrate the occasion, many homes too. But beyond the gifts and genteel attitude towards the women by their husbands and children this season, can society claim to really care much about the women after such events? How many of the homes practice equity between the boy and girl child, without unduly withholding the rights and opportunities of the latter in relation to the earlier? For instance, if a family cannot afford school fees for all its children, what determines which child to benefit from the limited resources? Will it be the ability of each child or the gender?
How many of the men who “celebrate” our women as wives and mothers this week still respect and celebrate those women when the unfortunate happens – on the loss of the woman’s husband? Aren’t these men the first to abandon their Christian standards in order to embrace the standards purportedly set by their “culture” and “tradition”, requiring that certain obnoxious widowhood practices must be observed and the women stripped of inheritance from their late husbands? Some of those women who were happily decked in their colourful wrappers and other aso ebi (uniform dress) yesterday are equally guilty of debasing womanhood by being the custodians and executors of the same repugnant widowhood practices, back in their villages, on the death of their male relations. But yesterday they were at their Christian best celebrating the womanhood they do not truly appreciate.
I strongly believe that Mothering Sunday and Mothering Week could be better celebrated by the churches through the holding of seminars, trainings and lectures on the growing incidents of domestic violence and the (dying?) culture of harmful widowhood practices. Unfortunately, many churches would rather not talk about it, pretending that such do not exist among their members. Yet many of the reported incidents of domestic violence involve people who are regular members of churches, even church leaders. A classical example was the murder of one Jumoke Martins, an evangelist, by her husband, Femi Martins, the pastor/founder of a church in Ibadan.
And as we celebrate the International Women’s Day this week with the theme, "Women in decision-making: meeting challenges, creating change", there will, as usual, be a lot of activities at governmental and non-governmental levels to highlight the issues of inequality and inequity between men and women, the women being on the disadvantaged side of the divide though. The theme should be a wakeup call especially for us in Nigeria. The number of women in political decision-making positions may have increased marginally in recent years, but it is still less than the 30 percent universal benchmark. Even the increased number of women in government must also be weighed against the increase in the number of positions also available, to see whether in real terms, there has been an improvement. The situation is even worse when it comes to elective positions as the women hardly get through the primaries.
Luckily, Africa has just witnessed the emergence of its first democratically-elected female president in Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia. Is there any hope of Nigeria replicating the feat, perhaps drawing from the rich collection of women professionals, technocrats and politicians that dot the country today? It may yet be a distant and tall dream, until the political system is thoroughly reformed to allow for the so-called “even playing field”. Until the cash and carry electoral system is done away with, it would be so difficult for women to make it to decision-making positions since women remain the poorest of the poor in the society.
This piece was last published in NewAge newspaper of March 6, 2006 and was updated from a similar piece by this writer, published in NewAge of March 7, 2005
Friday, January 23, 2009
On Obama's inauguration, I wore black
On Obama’s inauguration, I wore black!
By Obo Effanga
On January 20 2009, a black man, his even "blacker " wife and two black daughters moved into The White House – a house built more than 200 hundred years ago by black labourers, but until now only occupied by whites! What more could be described as “a defining moment in world history” than this? A little over a year ago, many still said this day would never come. But for some of us, we saw in Barack Hussein Obama, a freshness and change we could believe in. But yet many more said “our sights were set too high”; that America “was too divided; too disillusioned to ever come together around a common purpose“.
I still remember Obama’s speech on January 3 2008, after winning the first caucus of the Democratic Party primaries in Iowa. He said the Iowans had done what America could do within that year – “stand up and say that we are one nation; we are one people; and our time for change has come.” He talked about the change that was coming to America and many of us added, “nay, the change is coming to the world”
As testimony to the momentousness of Obama’s presidency, a record-breaking number of television viewers watched the event across the world. It topped the current record held by the funeral of Princess Diana in 1997; man’s landing on the moon in 1969 and the final game of the FIFA World Cup 2006. An estimated 1.2 million international audience also massed at Lincoln Memorial Square for the event. I remember seeing people wave their individual countries’ flags – Canadian, Kenyan, Brazilian etc.
January 20, 2009 certainly marked one great step for America and one giant stride for humanity. It is hoped that many more states are going to follow this path to abolish segregation and other attitudes which stress our differences rather than the oneness of humans as God’s creation.
Yes, we are all differently created and turn out as blacks and whites; men and women; able and disable; Jews, Christians, Muslims etc; rich or poor; yet we are all humans and equal before God.
Can we in Nigeria seize this auspicious moment to consider what went well in the American elections that made an Obama phenomenon possible and latch onto it?
Americans listened to the message, not necessarily the messenger – a man who came along with, as he and his wife Michelle joke about it, “a funny name”. What was worse, Obama arrived the scene when his near name sake, Osama (bin Laden) had become the world’s pariah-in-chief!
The sitting president did not abandon his presidential duties and railroad everyone in his Republican Party to support any single candidate over and against all others. Even when Senator John McCain emerged the standard bearer of his party, George W. Bush did not give him a presidential jet to fly around neither did he follow, nor lead him to campaigns. That would have amounted to creating an uneven playing field among the contestants.
Ordinary folks filed out, mobilised, campaigned and volunteered to make the elections work, confident that their votes will count. If they were ever in doubt about their votes counting, they protected them. In Florida, the Obama campaign recruited 5000 lawyers to be ready to go to court if anything fishy propped up.
Because rules were properly followed and not redrawn overnight, the results were out as soon as they were tallied and the non-winner (I cannot call him loser) immediately congratulated the president elect because America and its dream are more important than any sectional and personal interests. That night of November 4 last year, McCain made one of the best speeches of the 2008 presidential elections.
The electoral body did not obstinately and convolutedly remove valid candidates from the ballot. Law enforcement agencies did not hound candidates or tie their hand to their backs while the preferred candidates of the state were let lose and hand-held by the incumbent president to campaign grounds.
On November 4 2008, I remember going to my office, dressed in white and announcing that I wore that because on that day a fellow black, was going to take the White House. Someone said I was in for a shocker. Yes, I got a shocker…a black man took the White House and we cried tears of joy.
On Obama’s inauguration, I wore a black caftan because black is beautiful and my ‘brother’, Obama his wife Michelle and their lovely daughters, Malia-Ann and Natasha (and their dog, which Obama promised the girls) were going to enter and claim the White House. And they did, in grand style. After all the White House was built from the sweat of blacks!
By Obo Effanga
On January 20 2009, a black man, his even "blacker " wife and two black daughters moved into The White House – a house built more than 200 hundred years ago by black labourers, but until now only occupied by whites! What more could be described as “a defining moment in world history” than this? A little over a year ago, many still said this day would never come. But for some of us, we saw in Barack Hussein Obama, a freshness and change we could believe in. But yet many more said “our sights were set too high”; that America “was too divided; too disillusioned to ever come together around a common purpose“.
I still remember Obama’s speech on January 3 2008, after winning the first caucus of the Democratic Party primaries in Iowa. He said the Iowans had done what America could do within that year – “stand up and say that we are one nation; we are one people; and our time for change has come.” He talked about the change that was coming to America and many of us added, “nay, the change is coming to the world”
As testimony to the momentousness of Obama’s presidency, a record-breaking number of television viewers watched the event across the world. It topped the current record held by the funeral of Princess Diana in 1997; man’s landing on the moon in 1969 and the final game of the FIFA World Cup 2006. An estimated 1.2 million international audience also massed at Lincoln Memorial Square for the event. I remember seeing people wave their individual countries’ flags – Canadian, Kenyan, Brazilian etc.
January 20, 2009 certainly marked one great step for America and one giant stride for humanity. It is hoped that many more states are going to follow this path to abolish segregation and other attitudes which stress our differences rather than the oneness of humans as God’s creation.
Yes, we are all differently created and turn out as blacks and whites; men and women; able and disable; Jews, Christians, Muslims etc; rich or poor; yet we are all humans and equal before God.
Can we in Nigeria seize this auspicious moment to consider what went well in the American elections that made an Obama phenomenon possible and latch onto it?
Americans listened to the message, not necessarily the messenger – a man who came along with, as he and his wife Michelle joke about it, “a funny name”. What was worse, Obama arrived the scene when his near name sake, Osama (bin Laden) had become the world’s pariah-in-chief!
The sitting president did not abandon his presidential duties and railroad everyone in his Republican Party to support any single candidate over and against all others. Even when Senator John McCain emerged the standard bearer of his party, George W. Bush did not give him a presidential jet to fly around neither did he follow, nor lead him to campaigns. That would have amounted to creating an uneven playing field among the contestants.
Ordinary folks filed out, mobilised, campaigned and volunteered to make the elections work, confident that their votes will count. If they were ever in doubt about their votes counting, they protected them. In Florida, the Obama campaign recruited 5000 lawyers to be ready to go to court if anything fishy propped up.
Because rules were properly followed and not redrawn overnight, the results were out as soon as they were tallied and the non-winner (I cannot call him loser) immediately congratulated the president elect because America and its dream are more important than any sectional and personal interests. That night of November 4 last year, McCain made one of the best speeches of the 2008 presidential elections.
The electoral body did not obstinately and convolutedly remove valid candidates from the ballot. Law enforcement agencies did not hound candidates or tie their hand to their backs while the preferred candidates of the state were let lose and hand-held by the incumbent president to campaign grounds.
On November 4 2008, I remember going to my office, dressed in white and announcing that I wore that because on that day a fellow black, was going to take the White House. Someone said I was in for a shocker. Yes, I got a shocker…a black man took the White House and we cried tears of joy.
On Obama’s inauguration, I wore a black caftan because black is beautiful and my ‘brother’, Obama his wife Michelle and their lovely daughters, Malia-Ann and Natasha (and their dog, which Obama promised the girls) were going to enter and claim the White House. And they did, in grand style. After all the White House was built from the sweat of blacks!
Friday, December 19, 2008
Christmas, their Christmas
The harmattan is here; sounds of knockouts or bangers are everywhere. The year is coming to an end; there is excitement and anxiety in the air. People are more in a hurry than usual to do everything, from walking, driving, making money and cheating. They call it Christmas time!
Christmas marks the biblical event of the birth of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, the foundation upon which the world's largest religion is based. The story of that birth itself is a lesson in humility. Interestingly, the celebration of that event leaves much to be desired. It is often said that most people go about celebrating Christmas without appreciating the reason for the season.
Many followers of history have even queried the propriety of celebrating the birth of Christ at all or on December 25. The argument is that the Bible has no record anywhere where God or Christ commanded the celebration of the Saviour's birth. This point is further buttressed by the fact that at the Last Supper, Christ specifically told his disciples to: "do this (i.e. the Last Supper) in remembrance of me." The argument therefore is that if God intended people to commemorate the birth of Christ, such would have been specifically mentioned or ordered. In law, the specific mention of one thing excludes the use of a general interpretation to include others.
December 25 was neither scientifically nor theologically chosen but arbitrarily picked to coincide with the celebration of the heathen festival of nativity or the feast of the sun god. Christians decided to fix Christmas at the same time so as to “Christianize” that date. Today, it is doubtful whether Christmas has actually Christianized the celebrations associated with December 25 or the heathen celebration itself has demonized Christendom. Perhaps there was a time the date really carried the toga of Christianity but today it is more of a secular celebration.The church should do more to stress the essence of Christmas. The people need to know that Christmas should provide a time to reflect on the humility of Christ's birth, his purpose in coming to the world and the hope he offers.
There can still be Christmas without unrestricted merry making and spending only to become sober the month after. In Nigeria, it is said that January is the longest month of the year. That is because people borrow or over-spend for Christmas, even from the December salaries, which get paid earlier than usual and then have to live it rough throughout January and battle with school fees.For many children, their impression of Christmas is a time for eating and drinking, getting new clothes and toys, visiting, singing or listening to carols, using fireworks and playing at carnivals. To many youth it is the season for partying, drinks, drugs and violence.
The adults don't fare any better in this matter. Is it not the time to make more money by whatever means? Isn't it the time many Christians get back to their villages and perform one occult ritual or another and euphemise it as 'my people's tradition'? The lesson of Christ as the hope of the world is hardly remembered at Christmas. In fact, Christmas day sermons are about the most ineffective in winning people to Christ. Many attend church service on Christmas just to fulfil all righteousness, before setting out on their frolicking.
But why is the season so popular? The answer is simple. The season is by far the most commercially viable in the year. It is the time traders sell off their stocks, companies roll out bonanzas to woo customers, transporters hike fares, employers pay bonuses, media houses hold children's parties and profiteer from it. Coming at the end of the year too, many see it as the perfect season to celebrate all the achievements made throughout the year.In Lagos and many western states, one is likely to encounter money collection boxes in public offices. The idea is for visitors to such offices to drop some money, which the staff later share. You may call it advanced begging or extortion but to the beneficiaries, it is their Christmas dividend.
There are also a lot of misnomers, misconceptions and culturally irrelevant symbolisms about Christmas. It is often taught to kids that at the birth of Christ, three wise men from the East went to pay homage to the infant Jesus. Truth is that the Bible never recorded that three wise men visited. It only records wise men. The fact that they went with three gift items does not necessarily mean there were three of them.One finds it difficult to comprehend, let alone explain the concepts of “white Christmas”, “one horse open sleigh”, “snow bells” and “Jack Frost” etc. to a Nigerian child as necessary incidents of Christmas.
Given our environment and culture, shouldn't one be talking about “O what fun it is to throw knockouts on a dusty harmattan evening”? That, at least, makes more sense to the Nigerian child than “O what fun it is to ride on a one horse open sleigh”.To most people who would celebrate Christmas it cannot be Christmas without all the above seemingly baseless practices. This is so, just as the news or announcements in the radio and television must necessarily include a police warning that the ban on the use of firecrackers is still in force, even if these firecrackers are also sold in police barracks and nobody is ever known to have been convicted of flouting this ban.
Equally predictable too is the news on radio and television stations the day after Christmas holidays that “work resumes today after the Christmas festivities”. Then, and only then, many would realize that the tea party is over and the time to face life soberly has arrived. Happy celebrations!
Christmas marks the biblical event of the birth of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, the foundation upon which the world's largest religion is based. The story of that birth itself is a lesson in humility. Interestingly, the celebration of that event leaves much to be desired. It is often said that most people go about celebrating Christmas without appreciating the reason for the season.
Many followers of history have even queried the propriety of celebrating the birth of Christ at all or on December 25. The argument is that the Bible has no record anywhere where God or Christ commanded the celebration of the Saviour's birth. This point is further buttressed by the fact that at the Last Supper, Christ specifically told his disciples to: "do this (i.e. the Last Supper) in remembrance of me." The argument therefore is that if God intended people to commemorate the birth of Christ, such would have been specifically mentioned or ordered. In law, the specific mention of one thing excludes the use of a general interpretation to include others.
December 25 was neither scientifically nor theologically chosen but arbitrarily picked to coincide with the celebration of the heathen festival of nativity or the feast of the sun god. Christians decided to fix Christmas at the same time so as to “Christianize” that date. Today, it is doubtful whether Christmas has actually Christianized the celebrations associated with December 25 or the heathen celebration itself has demonized Christendom. Perhaps there was a time the date really carried the toga of Christianity but today it is more of a secular celebration.The church should do more to stress the essence of Christmas. The people need to know that Christmas should provide a time to reflect on the humility of Christ's birth, his purpose in coming to the world and the hope he offers.
There can still be Christmas without unrestricted merry making and spending only to become sober the month after. In Nigeria, it is said that January is the longest month of the year. That is because people borrow or over-spend for Christmas, even from the December salaries, which get paid earlier than usual and then have to live it rough throughout January and battle with school fees.For many children, their impression of Christmas is a time for eating and drinking, getting new clothes and toys, visiting, singing or listening to carols, using fireworks and playing at carnivals. To many youth it is the season for partying, drinks, drugs and violence.
The adults don't fare any better in this matter. Is it not the time to make more money by whatever means? Isn't it the time many Christians get back to their villages and perform one occult ritual or another and euphemise it as 'my people's tradition'? The lesson of Christ as the hope of the world is hardly remembered at Christmas. In fact, Christmas day sermons are about the most ineffective in winning people to Christ. Many attend church service on Christmas just to fulfil all righteousness, before setting out on their frolicking.
But why is the season so popular? The answer is simple. The season is by far the most commercially viable in the year. It is the time traders sell off their stocks, companies roll out bonanzas to woo customers, transporters hike fares, employers pay bonuses, media houses hold children's parties and profiteer from it. Coming at the end of the year too, many see it as the perfect season to celebrate all the achievements made throughout the year.In Lagos and many western states, one is likely to encounter money collection boxes in public offices. The idea is for visitors to such offices to drop some money, which the staff later share. You may call it advanced begging or extortion but to the beneficiaries, it is their Christmas dividend.
There are also a lot of misnomers, misconceptions and culturally irrelevant symbolisms about Christmas. It is often taught to kids that at the birth of Christ, three wise men from the East went to pay homage to the infant Jesus. Truth is that the Bible never recorded that three wise men visited. It only records wise men. The fact that they went with three gift items does not necessarily mean there were three of them.One finds it difficult to comprehend, let alone explain the concepts of “white Christmas”, “one horse open sleigh”, “snow bells” and “Jack Frost” etc. to a Nigerian child as necessary incidents of Christmas.
Given our environment and culture, shouldn't one be talking about “O what fun it is to throw knockouts on a dusty harmattan evening”? That, at least, makes more sense to the Nigerian child than “O what fun it is to ride on a one horse open sleigh”.To most people who would celebrate Christmas it cannot be Christmas without all the above seemingly baseless practices. This is so, just as the news or announcements in the radio and television must necessarily include a police warning that the ban on the use of firecrackers is still in force, even if these firecrackers are also sold in police barracks and nobody is ever known to have been convicted of flouting this ban.
Equally predictable too is the news on radio and television stations the day after Christmas holidays that “work resumes today after the Christmas festivities”. Then, and only then, many would realize that the tea party is over and the time to face life soberly has arrived. Happy celebrations!
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Alluring Calabar
These are some of the sights of Calabar, an alluring city in the South
South of Nigeria. It has a rich history pre-dating modern Nigeria. Calabar hosted the first game of football in Nigeria and is home to many schools which give Nigerians a leap in life.Hope Waddell Training Institution founded in 1895 by the Church of Scotland (now known as Presbyterian Church) missionaries is one of such schools. It boasts of training many nationalists including two, whose faces adorn Nigeria's currencies - Nnamdi Azikiwe (Nigeria's first president) and Alvan Ikoku (an educationist).
Calabar, the capital of Cross River State, is without doubt the cleanest city in Nigeria today.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
The role of CSOs in implementing fiscal responsibility law
By Obo Effanga
One of the most critical problems of Nigeria’s development is that of poor management of its enormous resources. Despite its huge earnings mainly from oil, the level of development in Nigeria has persistently failed to rise in commensurate measure. This is caused mainly by an irresponsible management of resources, corruption, poor fiscal responsibility and lack of laws and policies to guide proper management.
The gravity of the situation has been painted by the pioneer executive chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Nuhu Ribadu, who alleged that Nigeria’s previous leaders stole from public coffers an estimated $507 billion (about N64 trillion)[1]. This figure is the equivalent of 26 years’ national budget. The above corroborates the submission of Dr. Antonio Maria Costa of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crimes who alleged that about $400 billion was stolen from Nigeria by its leaders and stashed away in foreign banks as of the commencement of civilian rule in 1999[2].
There is every indication that this all-time record of public corruption might have been broken during the past nine years of civilian rule, going by all the so-called revelations in the last one year. Until the various probes instituted in the National Assembly and the executive arm of government are concluded, we may not be able to paint a full picture of the extent of mismanagement of public funds.
The galloping increase in the price of Nigeria’s major revenue earner – oil, in the world market seems to have brought harder times to the country. Since the return to Constitutional government in 1999, the country has been enjoying large surplus in revenue from the budgeted figure because the price of crude oil has always sold above the benchmark price each year. Much of the surplus are frittered away by state governors soon after the allocation to each tier of government, pursuant to the provision of the Constitution. This is because the additional amounts were never budgeted for and; without a very effective oversight from the legislature, whose duty it is to appropriate state funds and monitor spending; many governors allegedly mismanaged such funds. Mismanagement here is a mere euphemism for stealing as much of the funds were allegedly converted to private and personal uses.
The problem of fiscal irresponsibility must also be situated in the peculiar political structure in Nigeria. During the many years under military rule, the ruling class and by extension the larger public was so used to a powerful military officer (the head of state or the state military governor) issuing instructions that had the practical force of law including appropriation of public funds. A good dose of that attitude was emulated by the emergent Constitutional presidents and state governors (some of whom are also former military officers).
Added to the above, many heads of the executive arm of government have become so powerful due to their control over state resources to the extent that they have ‘pocketed’ members of the legislature who would often approve any spending by the earlier, whether or not such expenditure is in the best interest of the state. We must also remember that many of these members of the legislature were sponsored and assisted by the head of the executive arm to ‘obtain’ the party ticket or secure ‘victory’ in the general elections and as such see themselves as stooges of their ‘benefactors’.
The Fiscal Responsibility Law
The introduction of the Fiscal Responsibility Bill and the Public Procurement Bill was a response to the above sorry pass. The FRB is meant to ensure financial prudence, budgetary discipline and transparency in fiscal activities. It is expected to introduce a culture of fiscal behaviour that will promote prudence and sound financial management in the system and at the same time promote good governance.
After years of discussion involving all stakeholders, the Fiscal Responsibility Bill was eventually passed last year and signed into law by President Umaru Yar’Adua.
It sets out a general framework for budgetary planning, execution and reporting and sets the general targets and limits for selected fiscal indicators for the country with sanctions for non-compliance. If properly implemented, the law is expected to ensure balanced (or nearly balanced) budgets, low debt profile and accountable/transparent government through the setting up of Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the fiscal strategy paper. The above would streamline the spending of government by providing a three-year roadmap upon which budgets are based.
What Fiscal Responsibility Act aims to establish
The preamble to the Fiscal Responsibility Act makes it clear that the law sets out to give teeth to certain aspects of Chapter 2 the Constitution otherwise seen as non-justiceable. These are Sections 13 and 16 which charge the State to harness the resources of the nation, promote national prosperity, and ensure efficient, dynamic and self-reliant economy. The Act also seeks to give opportunity to the State to control the national economy in a manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity. It also seeks to ensure the State’s promotion of a planned and balanced economic development and to harness the nation’s resources for the common good.
It has been argued[3] that the Nigerian Constitution has not made adequate provisions with respect to comprehensive procedure for budget preparation, comprehensive framework for preparation and holistic presentation of the budget as well as a comprehensive content of the budget built on a verifiable database. For that reason, the fiscal responsibility law is seen as necessary.
Because the law requires the preparation of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) which is to streamline the contents of the budget each year, the Act could entrench a system of fiscal stability and discipline which has been lacking.
The law also provides for savings and assets management by mandating the relevant tier of government to save its share of surplus funds accruing from the reference commodity in a special fund. What it means currently is that the federal government can save its share of the excess crude money for future use, since that amount was not budgeted for. When, as it is hoped, the various state governments adopt their own fiscal responsibility laws, the excess crude funds would then be effectively mopped up for better use than we see currently.
However, it must be stressed that the mere passage of a law may not necessarily translate to the correction of a situation. Every law must be engaged with to make it work for the people it is meant for. One critical sector which must be involved in this is that of the Civil Society Organisation.
How CSOs can make the FRA work
Popularise the law
The first step to making the Fiscal Responsibility Act work is to popularise its existence. While presenting the 2008 Budget proposal to the National Assembly last year, President Yar’Adua announced that he had signed the Fiscal Responsibility Bill into an Act. He also announced that he had reached understanding with state governors to propose similar laws to their state legislatures for enactment. Nearly one year after, the ‘authentic’ copy of the document is yet to be officially released and mass-produced or circulated. It is also not posted on official websites. CSOs need to engage the Civil Society liaison office in the National Assembly to get the copies of this law out. Various organisations can then reproduce copies for wider publicity and use, just as it was done with other legislation of high public interest such as the ICPC Act, EFCC Act, Public Procurement Act, NEITI Act and the Electoral Act.
The law needs to be made popular not only to the civil society but also to the government officials who are given key roles to play in implementing this law. This includes the agencies whose inputs the minister is required seek for the preparation of MTEF. This is to make them realise their obligations under the law and even more importantly, their liability for prosecution in the case of a breach as indicated in some sections of the law.
Engage the implementers
As stated above, we need to engage certain government officials in order to ensure the implementation of the law. Interestingly, the law provides for the establishment of a Fiscal Responsibility Council and Board which membership shall include members of civil society. CSOs must therefore demand involvement in setting up the Council and Board both through direct nomination by them (the CSOs) and by asking critical questions about the qualifications of other nominees. We should in fact demand for a public hearing before the screening of nominees.
The Act makes provision for the minister to hold a public hearing for the preparation of MTEF, pursuant to the proviso to Section 13(2) of the Act. We should see this opportunity as one created for the people to make their input to the process. As CSO, we should start by getting the views of regular and ordinarily excluded people to the table.
Build technical skills
CSOs must of necessity familiarise themselves with the provisions of the Act and update their technical skills to be able to make practical and effective input to this process. With such skills, they should be in a good stead to provide technical support to the various arms of government, especially the legislature to make them fully implement the law.
Promote effective oversight
Another way to ensure the effectiveness of this law is through the oversight function of parliament. CSOs need to partner with the legislature to ensure effective oversight through the provision of information. They could also request to accompany the legislative committees on their oversight visits.
Lobby state governments
The current law being a federal law, there is a need to encourage the state governments to adopt their respective enactments to deepen the work of fiscal responsibility. I am aware that some state governments, such as Rivers and Delta have already sent a similar Bill to their respective Houses of Assembly. It behoves CSOs in those states to follow up the process. This could be achieved if CSOs begin to lobby governments at those levels to see why this law is needed. This campaign should not be embarked upon haphazardly and, learning from the FOI campaign, we must not take things for granted that everybody in government wants or should want to see this legislation put in place, no matter how beneficent we think this is going to be to the whole society. We need therefore to set out clear strategies for handling this campaign.
Strengthen CSO networks
To achieve the above and all, CSOs must strengthen and expand the existing networks to make them effective in holding the governments accountable in the new fiscal responsibility regime we all want to see. With a formidable CSO network and synergy, government personnel would be put in check to ensure the effectiveness of this law.
* Paper presented by Obo Effanga, Parliamentary Liaison & Policy Advisor, ActionAid Nigeria at the Civil Society Advocacy Workshop/Road Show organised by NDI in Calabar July 4, 2008
[1] Strategies for winning the anti-corruption war in Nigeria, ActionAid Nigeria briefing paper no2 of 2008
[2] Http://allafrica.com
[3] Odiri, J.E: “The legislature and fiscal responsibility bill”, paper presented at the Kaduna legislative dialogue on Fiscal Responsibility Bill (June 2-4, 2006)
One of the most critical problems of Nigeria’s development is that of poor management of its enormous resources. Despite its huge earnings mainly from oil, the level of development in Nigeria has persistently failed to rise in commensurate measure. This is caused mainly by an irresponsible management of resources, corruption, poor fiscal responsibility and lack of laws and policies to guide proper management.
The gravity of the situation has been painted by the pioneer executive chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Nuhu Ribadu, who alleged that Nigeria’s previous leaders stole from public coffers an estimated $507 billion (about N64 trillion)[1]. This figure is the equivalent of 26 years’ national budget. The above corroborates the submission of Dr. Antonio Maria Costa of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crimes who alleged that about $400 billion was stolen from Nigeria by its leaders and stashed away in foreign banks as of the commencement of civilian rule in 1999[2].
There is every indication that this all-time record of public corruption might have been broken during the past nine years of civilian rule, going by all the so-called revelations in the last one year. Until the various probes instituted in the National Assembly and the executive arm of government are concluded, we may not be able to paint a full picture of the extent of mismanagement of public funds.
The galloping increase in the price of Nigeria’s major revenue earner – oil, in the world market seems to have brought harder times to the country. Since the return to Constitutional government in 1999, the country has been enjoying large surplus in revenue from the budgeted figure because the price of crude oil has always sold above the benchmark price each year. Much of the surplus are frittered away by state governors soon after the allocation to each tier of government, pursuant to the provision of the Constitution. This is because the additional amounts were never budgeted for and; without a very effective oversight from the legislature, whose duty it is to appropriate state funds and monitor spending; many governors allegedly mismanaged such funds. Mismanagement here is a mere euphemism for stealing as much of the funds were allegedly converted to private and personal uses.
The problem of fiscal irresponsibility must also be situated in the peculiar political structure in Nigeria. During the many years under military rule, the ruling class and by extension the larger public was so used to a powerful military officer (the head of state or the state military governor) issuing instructions that had the practical force of law including appropriation of public funds. A good dose of that attitude was emulated by the emergent Constitutional presidents and state governors (some of whom are also former military officers).
Added to the above, many heads of the executive arm of government have become so powerful due to their control over state resources to the extent that they have ‘pocketed’ members of the legislature who would often approve any spending by the earlier, whether or not such expenditure is in the best interest of the state. We must also remember that many of these members of the legislature were sponsored and assisted by the head of the executive arm to ‘obtain’ the party ticket or secure ‘victory’ in the general elections and as such see themselves as stooges of their ‘benefactors’.
The Fiscal Responsibility Law
The introduction of the Fiscal Responsibility Bill and the Public Procurement Bill was a response to the above sorry pass. The FRB is meant to ensure financial prudence, budgetary discipline and transparency in fiscal activities. It is expected to introduce a culture of fiscal behaviour that will promote prudence and sound financial management in the system and at the same time promote good governance.
After years of discussion involving all stakeholders, the Fiscal Responsibility Bill was eventually passed last year and signed into law by President Umaru Yar’Adua.
It sets out a general framework for budgetary planning, execution and reporting and sets the general targets and limits for selected fiscal indicators for the country with sanctions for non-compliance. If properly implemented, the law is expected to ensure balanced (or nearly balanced) budgets, low debt profile and accountable/transparent government through the setting up of Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the fiscal strategy paper. The above would streamline the spending of government by providing a three-year roadmap upon which budgets are based.
What Fiscal Responsibility Act aims to establish
The preamble to the Fiscal Responsibility Act makes it clear that the law sets out to give teeth to certain aspects of Chapter 2 the Constitution otherwise seen as non-justiceable. These are Sections 13 and 16 which charge the State to harness the resources of the nation, promote national prosperity, and ensure efficient, dynamic and self-reliant economy. The Act also seeks to give opportunity to the State to control the national economy in a manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity. It also seeks to ensure the State’s promotion of a planned and balanced economic development and to harness the nation’s resources for the common good.
It has been argued[3] that the Nigerian Constitution has not made adequate provisions with respect to comprehensive procedure for budget preparation, comprehensive framework for preparation and holistic presentation of the budget as well as a comprehensive content of the budget built on a verifiable database. For that reason, the fiscal responsibility law is seen as necessary.
Because the law requires the preparation of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) which is to streamline the contents of the budget each year, the Act could entrench a system of fiscal stability and discipline which has been lacking.
The law also provides for savings and assets management by mandating the relevant tier of government to save its share of surplus funds accruing from the reference commodity in a special fund. What it means currently is that the federal government can save its share of the excess crude money for future use, since that amount was not budgeted for. When, as it is hoped, the various state governments adopt their own fiscal responsibility laws, the excess crude funds would then be effectively mopped up for better use than we see currently.
However, it must be stressed that the mere passage of a law may not necessarily translate to the correction of a situation. Every law must be engaged with to make it work for the people it is meant for. One critical sector which must be involved in this is that of the Civil Society Organisation.
How CSOs can make the FRA work
Popularise the law
The first step to making the Fiscal Responsibility Act work is to popularise its existence. While presenting the 2008 Budget proposal to the National Assembly last year, President Yar’Adua announced that he had signed the Fiscal Responsibility Bill into an Act. He also announced that he had reached understanding with state governors to propose similar laws to their state legislatures for enactment. Nearly one year after, the ‘authentic’ copy of the document is yet to be officially released and mass-produced or circulated. It is also not posted on official websites. CSOs need to engage the Civil Society liaison office in the National Assembly to get the copies of this law out. Various organisations can then reproduce copies for wider publicity and use, just as it was done with other legislation of high public interest such as the ICPC Act, EFCC Act, Public Procurement Act, NEITI Act and the Electoral Act.
The law needs to be made popular not only to the civil society but also to the government officials who are given key roles to play in implementing this law. This includes the agencies whose inputs the minister is required seek for the preparation of MTEF. This is to make them realise their obligations under the law and even more importantly, their liability for prosecution in the case of a breach as indicated in some sections of the law.
Engage the implementers
As stated above, we need to engage certain government officials in order to ensure the implementation of the law. Interestingly, the law provides for the establishment of a Fiscal Responsibility Council and Board which membership shall include members of civil society. CSOs must therefore demand involvement in setting up the Council and Board both through direct nomination by them (the CSOs) and by asking critical questions about the qualifications of other nominees. We should in fact demand for a public hearing before the screening of nominees.
The Act makes provision for the minister to hold a public hearing for the preparation of MTEF, pursuant to the proviso to Section 13(2) of the Act. We should see this opportunity as one created for the people to make their input to the process. As CSO, we should start by getting the views of regular and ordinarily excluded people to the table.
Build technical skills
CSOs must of necessity familiarise themselves with the provisions of the Act and update their technical skills to be able to make practical and effective input to this process. With such skills, they should be in a good stead to provide technical support to the various arms of government, especially the legislature to make them fully implement the law.
Promote effective oversight
Another way to ensure the effectiveness of this law is through the oversight function of parliament. CSOs need to partner with the legislature to ensure effective oversight through the provision of information. They could also request to accompany the legislative committees on their oversight visits.
Lobby state governments
The current law being a federal law, there is a need to encourage the state governments to adopt their respective enactments to deepen the work of fiscal responsibility. I am aware that some state governments, such as Rivers and Delta have already sent a similar Bill to their respective Houses of Assembly. It behoves CSOs in those states to follow up the process. This could be achieved if CSOs begin to lobby governments at those levels to see why this law is needed. This campaign should not be embarked upon haphazardly and, learning from the FOI campaign, we must not take things for granted that everybody in government wants or should want to see this legislation put in place, no matter how beneficent we think this is going to be to the whole society. We need therefore to set out clear strategies for handling this campaign.
Strengthen CSO networks
To achieve the above and all, CSOs must strengthen and expand the existing networks to make them effective in holding the governments accountable in the new fiscal responsibility regime we all want to see. With a formidable CSO network and synergy, government personnel would be put in check to ensure the effectiveness of this law.
* Paper presented by Obo Effanga, Parliamentary Liaison & Policy Advisor, ActionAid Nigeria at the Civil Society Advocacy Workshop/Road Show organised by NDI in Calabar July 4, 2008
[1] Strategies for winning the anti-corruption war in Nigeria, ActionAid Nigeria briefing paper no2 of 2008
[2] Http://allafrica.com
[3] Odiri, J.E: “The legislature and fiscal responsibility bill”, paper presented at the Kaduna legislative dialogue on Fiscal Responsibility Bill (June 2-4, 2006)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)