Introduction

Recently, the National Assembly has embarked on further amendment of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

We indeed need to further amend our constitution. It is a notorious fact that no constitution is perfect but the present constitution ab initio is flawed. It started on a faulty note, with a lie if you like by saying that “ we the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria..” Ironically, the same constitution that claimed that “ we the people of Federal Republic” was decreed into existence through Decree No.24 of 1999 promulgated by the military administration of General Abdulsalam Alhaji Abubakar.

Again, even though the constitution has been hurriedly amended, there are still some areas that require amendment which was dropped because of the obnoxious quest for third term. The following areas need to be commented upon.

IMMUNITY CLAUSE: SECTION 308

Section 308 of 1999 constitution as Amended exempts the President, Vice President, Governor and Deputy Governor from civil and criminal proceedings while in Office. Many political pundits have called for deletion of this section so that the office holders mentioned thereon will no longer be immuned from civil and criminal proceedings.

I personally do not subscribe to the removal of immunity clause from the constitution. The office holders mentioned therein need all the concentration to enable them discharge their functions without let, hindrance or harassment.

It is also dangerous for our fledgling democracy to subject such office holders especially to criminal proceedings as that will create an avenue for intimidation and removal of such office holders from office by the Federal Government or presidency. We all witnessed the illegal impeachment of some Governors during President Obasanjo’s administration with fingers being pointed at the presidency as the mastermind of such actions.

Will it not amount to trivialization of the hallowed office of the Governor that a commissioner of police who is an appointee of the federal government has power to arrest a Governor, charge him with commission of a heinous crime and clamp him into jail pending probably for advise from the Attorney – General. Let us take a cue from what happened to former senate President, Adolphus Wabara. He was accused of corruption, removed from office and was discharged and acquitted by the court but he lost his exalted position and humiliated out of office. Similar treated will be meted out to such office holders if immunity is removed.

I do not agree with those who argue that corruption will be checked if immunity clause is abolished because, it is extremely difficult to successfully prosecute a sitting Governor. I ask the question, who will have the audacity to testify against a sitting Governor. Let us not forget that the Attorney- General who is an appointee of the Governor has power to enter a nolle prosequi thereby stopping any prosecution against the Governor. I believe that it is easier to prosecute a Governor when he had left office than when he is still in office.

We need to strengthen the House of Assembly so that the members can perform their assigned legislative and oversight functions effectively. Today, most member Houses of Assembly are merely Governors stooges that lack the will power to question the Governor.

PROCLAMATION OF STATE OF EMERGENCY: SECTION 305

Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides for proclamation of state of emergency and further provides that the president has power to issue a proclamation of a state of emergency only when the Federation is at war, Federation is in imminent danger of invasion or involvement in a state of war, breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part therefore requiring extraordinary measures to avert such danger etc.

There is no place in the entire section 305 that allows the president to decapitate the elected office holders yet we witnessed during president Obasanjo’s administration the removal from office of some Governors like Governor Joshua Dariye of Plateau State, Ayo Fayose of Ekiti because of proclamation of state of emergency. The basic principle of interpretation is that you do not read into a document what is not in the document. Today, the bad precedence has been laid and it is regrettable that attempt to correct this bad precedence through judicial pronouncement was frustrated as in the case of Plateau. State v. A.G. Federation (2006)25 WRN 1.

We now need an amendment to expressly add that the proclamation of a State of emergency does not empower the president to remove the Governor or any of elected office holder unless as provided by the constitution.

If this is not done, I bet you that tomorrow, a president may rise, declare a state of emergency in a State and remove the elected office holders in that State citing what President Obasanjo did as precedence.

STATE POLICE: Part I, item 45 OF EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE LIST

Part 1, item 45 of the Exclusive legislative list makes the police exclusively under the control of the Federal Government. Recently, there is a renewed agitation that states should be empowered to establish their own police.

I do not support creation of State Police, the situation is not yet ripe for establishment of State of Police. It is also interesting that most states that survive on monthly handout from the Federal Government, are calling for increased expenditure through establishment of State Police.

The country is still polarized based on ethnic sentiments. It is in this country that a State sacked all the civil servants who have been working in the State because they are not from the state. It is in this country that a judge was denied elevation to higher bench just because he is not from the State. We are all guilty of ethnic jingoism therefore a State Police will no doubt operate in that line of ethnic sentimentalism and emotionalism with it attendant hostilities to the non indigenes .

As an Igbo, I will not support a State Police because we are the most peripathetic and gregarious ethnic group in Nigeria therefore a State Police will be akin to release of Alsatian dog to your us. We shall be at receiving end of the excesses of state police.

Our politicians will also use State Police against their perceived political opponents even intimidate the electorate during voting.

Another reason, I am against the State Police is because it will engender disintegration of the country since States will now have their Police and equip them with arms. The Federal Government cannot regulate the amount and nature of arms that will be among the people.

This will also lead to proliferation of arms and increase in violent crimes rather than check crime. Today, arms are easily smuggled into the country; you can then imagine when more arms are in the hands of more people through State Police. The existing para-military bodies is pointer to what the State Police will look like.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM

The country should deliberate whether it intends to retain the local Government system or not. This is because, the Governors have literally destroyed the local Government system by their refusal to organize a local Government election and refusal to release the funds due to the local Government Areas.

If we indeed intend to run an independent local Government system then we should release the local Government system from the strangle hold of the Governors. To do so we then need to amend the following provisions of 1999 constitution

1. Exclusive Legislative List Part 1 item 22 which excludes the conduct of local Government election from the control of Federal Government and by extension INEC. I advocate a full presidential system of government at the Local Government Councils and where their elections will be conducted by INEC like the latter does for House of Assembly, National Assembly etc. we are witnesses to a situation where the Governors bluntly refused to organize a local Government election and where the few hold the election, the fairness of such election is always in doubt. The question that will continue to agitate discerning minds is why parties win elections in a State but when the Local Government election is organized, the same parties hardly win any Local Government seat.

2. To ensure the independence of the Local Government system, section 162(7)(8) of 1999 constitution should be amended to grant financial autonomy to the Local Government councils wherein they will receive their allocations directly from federation account.

The present situation of joint State and Local Government account is very attractive to the Governors who in order to retain the hinge resources meant for all the local Government councils in that states refuse to organize election or run the local Government through care taker committee and appoint their surrogates who cannot question than to run the Local Governments. In a situation like above, the growth of democracy is stultified. Local Government is the closest tier of government to the people and should be promoted. It should also serve as a training ground for budding politicians. Democracy at that level should be encouraged therefore Governors who refuse to conduct local Government election are greatest enemies of democracy.

The third provision is Part II B which creates independent State Electoral Commission should be deleted in view of the transfer of the function to INEC.

CROSS CARPETING

My position is that it is immoral for a person who is elected under a platform to abandon the platform and join another platform without resigning from the position. Section 68 (1)(g) and section 109 (g) prohibit that though they provide a leeway that allows cross-carpeting as a result of a division in the political party of which a parliamentarian was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.

This proviso though commendable but it has been abused. We witness a situation whereby members of legislative House cross-carpet from minority party to a ruling party in the State or Federal Government without any qualms irrespective of whether there is any faction or merger in the party they were previously sponsored.

The only protection is that their new party is the ruling party therefore nobody will ask them to vacate their seats as provided in section 68 (1) and 109 (1) 1999 constitution as amended.

My take therefore is that since we now operate tyranny of the majority in this case, let us delete the proviso so that any member of the Legislative House whether National or State shall vacate the seat if he joins another political party except the party he was elected into the seat.

STATE CREATION

I advocate that the amendment of section 3(1) and or First Schedule of the 1999 constitution to include a State from the South- East. Equity is Equality therefore out all the six Zones in the country, the South-East has the least number of States (5) five as against Six (6) or even seven (7) by other zones.

The same South –East has the least number of Local Government Areas yet the local government system forms part of the distribution of the commonwealth. South – Easterners are being cheated in the distribution of the Federal allocation and other common wealth.

It would be recalled that during President Obasanjo’s regime, a State was approved for South- East but this was scuttled because of the fear of third term.

This is therefore another opportunity for the hallowed Green and Red Chambers to right the wrong by creating a State for South-East

–

Mr. Anyadubalu, a lawyer cum prolific writer, writes from 129 Okota Road Lagos.

When the controversial Mallam Sanusi took his habitual goof a step further by insulting the intelligence of the Nigerian masses at the Second Annual Capital Market Committee Retreat in Warri, Delta State last week by stating that ‘at least 50% of the Nigerian entire workforce should be sacked’, many people believed that the Mallam had touch the tale of a tiger and he must pay for the consequence. Immediately I read it in The Punch Newspaper of Wednesday 28^th, 2012, I thought I could predict what exactly the reaction to his comment was going to look like: NLC leaders will immediately come up with a press statement castigating Sanusi and perhaps call for his removal, the civil society will rise up in their numbers to reprimand the capitalist’s hit-man, our ever-zealous Femi Falana and other concerned learned ‘comrades in gown’ will caution this agent of destruction to watch his statements, our ever-articulate pen-pushers will begin to open our eyes to the high level of corruption and money that is being accrued to the institutions such as the Central Bank under Sanusi and the National Assembly will advise him to stop overheating the polity. Then, everybody, including the NLC, will go back to sleep and Sanusi will continue to enjoy all the luxury that his office attracts. After all, this is Nigeria where every citizen is expected to have a short memory.

In all the events that have happened since the Mallam’s provocative and anti-people statement, this writer has been proved right. Strangely, the only unexpected twist that has since been added to the drama was the entrance of the CPC who lambasted NLC leadership over its call for Sanusi’s removal. To the party, the CBN boss is just an individual who cannot influence any policy within the Executive! This statement only shows the level of intellects of those that made up the CPC and it also indicates that in terms of policies, all the present capitalist political parties in Nigeria are birds of a feather. But how could anyone fault the CPC’s position? After all, its leader is Muhammadu Buhari, a man who declared in one of his 2011 Presidential debate that there is nothing wrong with the Nigerian Educational sector. To him, ‘everything is just perfect’.

Beyond this, however, Sanusi’s tirade and the CPC’s diatribe are reflections of the erosion of NLC’s leadership hypothetical intimidating credentials. It portrays them as the paper tiger that only appears scary but cannot exhibit the real traits of a true tiger. In a sanity capitalist’s clime, the name of organised labour is enough to intimate any oppressive strata of the ruling elites, even the President of a Country cannot just say that workers are irrelevant not to talk of a bourgeoisies economic handbag such as the CBN Governor. Ditto for political parties, the control that the Labour leadership has over the masses electorate is enough to compel these political parties to always hold the NLC Leadership in such a high reverence.

In our case, reverse has been the case. That a political party who is still relying on the goodwill of the people to climb the mantle of relevance could tell the NLC leaders to go to hell and ‘stop being hypocritical’ shows a sad reflection of NLC’s popularity. Sanusi may be anything but daft, he knows that Nigeria is the only country where a government agent could make such a statement and still be allowed by the labour unions to remain in power. In a sanity clime, his tenure would have become history by now. But our own NLC is just a paper tiger whose threat doesn’t go beyond the pages of newspapers.

In its hey days, Trade union leadership played an inestimably productive task in the progression of Nigerian society. It organized masses and promoted their interests in the framework of exploitative, manipulative and unfair civil relations. It participated vigorously in the decolonization process, and it struggled against neo-colonial regimes to gain concessions so as to protect the socio-economic interests of the downtrodden. It often opposed laxity, negligence and corruption in the management of the affairs of the state, and pursued a relatively nationalist and unifying project in contrast to the highly divisive politics of the post-colonial Nigerian ruling elites.

Ironically, the same cannot be said of the current crop of leadership. As Nigerian situation continues to get worsened by the day, the little gains of the labour movement to improve the living conditions of the Nigerian workers have become eroded; workers are now more agitated, disconcerted and perturbed, and they are looking forward for their leadership to proffer a concrete way forward but the leadership are either not just there or are busy romanticizing and dining with the ruling elite.

The disappointing manner in which the NLC ended the mass protests of January is still very fresh in the minds of the masses as the Union leaders maintained that it agreed to this as the Jonathan administration had promised to implement some programme that would ease the plight of the working masses. Unfortunately for the Labour leaders, the outcome of the whole drama points out the futility of being a gentle-compromising man in an encounter with a rascal. For barely two months after, the same government openly suspended the implementation of the limited ‘palliatives’ proposed in this respect while the fuel price is presently being sold, albeit unofficially, at the rate of #120 in many states across the land.

The result of such betrayal is the declining authority of NLC over industrial unions, stirring of discontent among the rank and file, declining popularity of labour officials and increased workers apathy and droopiness. When a sizeable number of State NLC were locked up in battle with their state Governors over the non-implementation of #18, 000 minimum wage, there was no concrete response from the National Leadership; when the workers’ casualization became the major policies of many state across the South West and even the Federal Government with its proposed U-win, the National leadership bluntly refused to fight against this evil of capitalism and while the university administrations across the land are raising their school fees to an astronomic levels that is beyond the means of the common masses and the progressives Unions are being proscribed, the NLC, with its TUC counterpart, is simply looking the other way.

Compromise under the guise of Consultation is rapidly replacing the Labour’s established method of Confrontation; the Specious Strategy of Settlement is Speedily Supplanting the ideologically rooted principles of Struggle as a Tactic, the social relevance of trade unions are becoming lowered to zero and the political relevance of Labour Union leaders have been whittled down. The condition and situation is even more disconcerting at the state levels as many Chairmen are simply parading the state parastatals and the Governors’ houses seeking appointment and contractual slots to make their personal purse swell and engorge. Arguably, the Nigerian Trade Unions has never had it this bad.

The workers’ goals cannot be realized by a set of leaders who will say one thing in the open but say something else in the secret; it cannot be actualized by those set of leaders who will yell all the principles of socialism to the rooftops only when they wanted to acquire a pecuniary affluence. The present NLC and TUC leadership are no more giving direction, if it has not lost direction itself.

And now that the Financial Hit-Man of the Nigerian ruling elites has spoken, NLC must not be deceived that Sanusi is speaking all alone. He has tactically revealed what the Jonathan government has in the pipeline for the Nigerian masses after 2015 election: Labour and the masses had better get set for the battles ahead.

That NLC’s intervention is pivotal to the growth and sustenance of genuine development of Nigeria is not in doubt. But, NLC’s ability to play active roles in promoting these principles as well as serving as a genuine mouthpiece of the masses have been severely circumvented in the last five years. For the NLC and TUC to be taken seriously by both the state and the employers, their leaders need to reflect seriously in their actions.

Finally, while it is envisaged that the current leadership of the Union will learn to do things better with time, a deliberate inconsistence which is almost becoming the order of the day will not only spell doom for the Union, it will erode the confidence which the entire masses had in it. The present leadership of the Union, therefore, needed to shape up or in the alternative remain stagnant, not only to its peril but also to the peril of the masses that are looking forward to the Union as their Saviour. Whatever be the situation, one thing that is clear is that it must not continue to be business as usual at the stable of Labour.

Adewale Stephen

Department of History,

Obafemi Awolowo University

Ile Ife, Osun State                                                                                                                  Nigeria

08031509489

Let me begin with fact that all Nigerians are aware of and that is, Sanni Abacha in his sick mind believed he did well in developing the country and its citizens. But every Nigerian in the absence of intimidation and death threat denounced every action by that rotten regime. True, the country did very well in sports then but yet we hated (and still) that dictator.

Democratic Principles

Before turning to the merits of the Sports Minister statements to Duro Ikhazuagbe of Thisday Newspaper of 3 December 2012 (Mr. Bolaji was a former editor of Thisday Newspaper) I need to deal with issue of constitutional importance, specifically, democratic principles.

The Sports Minister said and I quote, “When the Federal Government wanted to introduce the 6-3-3-4 system, were states education commissioners asked for inputs? When we were going to introduce the basic education, were the commissioners involved? If the Federal Government wants to take a decision on fertilisers, are states commissioners of agriculture called to decide what to do? Yes, we know that sports by nature gives room for everybody to act as experts but the point we are making is that the Federal Government has taken a decision that the festival be open for the good of the competition. However, were we will not be right is not to carry along the states in determining the rule of participation because the rules will affect them directly.”

Unfortunately, this Minister forgot that the country is in democracy and federal government cannot act alone without a legislation empowering it to do so. Looking at these statements, does this Minister believes he can control and have powers over any state Governor or National Assembly? If he does, he must be shown the door with immediate effect. This is dictatorship and his cited precedents were in fact military actions.

Demerits of Mr. Bolaji Abdullahi Assertions

1. “The aim of the festival since inception in 1973 is to discover talents and serve as a platform for unity of all Nigerians but right now it is serving that purpose in a limited way. This is so because most of those coming to the festival are either first timers or athletes who have not been able to break into the elite class.”

Not only is it nonsense to suggest that athletes selected by any state to represent that state are first timers but the statement though condescending and rude suggests that the Minister never competed in his life in any sport. The festival is apex of athletes competing based on prior training regimes and to represent a state meant that you were selected among many other athletes as that state flag-bearer. Many athletes in the elite category now, competed at the festival. This Minister simply believed he can act without any supervision of National Assembly. Surely, this Minister insulted most athletes.

2. “The National Sports Festival is our biggest competition in this country and so we cannot continue to keep it at the level of glorified inter-house sport competition.”

I will tell the Minister to say that to his adviser friends, discredited and banned former athletes he cited who had competed at earlier festivals that the festivals were inter-house sports. Quite frankly, I doubt if this Minister ever attended or competed in any inter-house sports before in his life. I did and I was also part of NSF 1977.

I will say this, it is more acceptable to ban the NSF altogether than inject more money for the sake of bringing foreign based professionals into it. I say that before on economic terms because a single foreign based-athlete will be funded in excess of N2.5Million which can train over 100 youths for better tomorrow. And the probability that the foreign based will not pan-out is higher than future performances of 100 youth athletes. Essentially the idea is to find a way of circumventing money laundry legislations.

3. “So I believe that if you open it to top class athletes like Ajoke Odumosu, Omolara (Omotosho), Blessing Okagbare, (Obinna) Metu and all our top athletes and others from around the world, these are the top athletes that will attract advertiser into the competition. Television will cover it and ultimately bring the competition to the living rooms of Nigerians like the Olympic. When this happens, Nigerians would want to troop to the venues to see these stars. Everyone will know that something big is going on in Nigeria. So, I think if you want to create an opportunity for us to discover good talents and also make it glamorous, we have no choice but to open it up… One of the benefits of opening up the game now is that the festival will now have more commercial value for advertisers to want to put their money on it”

Mr. Minister just doesn’t have any fact to suggest anything in this bogus belief. Firstly, we have annual National Championships that the NSC paid the Athletics Federation (AFN) in excess of N200Million over 3years where AFN also collected over N250Million from Cross Rivers State and private companies.

These monies were used to bring those cited by the Minister to compete annually and let me be clear, NO SPECTATOR OR EVEN THE SPORTS MINISTER SHOWED UP AND EVEN ATHLETES THEMSELVES NEVER SHOWED UNLESS THEY ARE COMPETING ON THAT GIVEN DAY. So to suggest that the NSF will draw crowd is nothing but a hollow ambition to waste money.

Yes, some marketers made foolish statements to support this crazy idea. Again, the Sports Minister royally ‘miss road’ (credit to Fela).

Secondly, we have Grand prix competitions where no spectator or Minister ever showed up and some of the invited athletes had to petition International Amateur Athletics Federation (IAAF) to force AFN to pay them three years after. This Minister lacked credibility or knowledge of anything about sports.

4. “The Under-17 National competition you are planning to start to serve as a platform for talent discovering, have you consider how the states are going to react to that since most of them (states) are opposed to throwing the festival open? …The national Under-17 competition that I have proposed is to serve as a lower tier games to serve the purpose of talent discovering. It is strictly a developmental competition aimed at discovering talents. An open National Sports Festival without a junior competition like the national under-17 will be counter-productive.”

If all states are opposed and this Minister want to force the agenda on them then he is a dictator. (Full-stop)

5. “But good as your proposal is, honourable minister, do you really think this will fly at the larger National Council of Sports forum since most of the states opposed to throwing the festival open are going to be in majority? First, I want you to remember that the National Sports Commission, (NSC) is the custodian of the Federal Government’s position on sport in the country. The NSC owns the proprietary rights of the national sports festival. So, we as the custodians of the festival decided that for the festival to serve better purpose of its creation, it has to be an open festival.”

The Minister is dead wrong here and his knowledge of law is pretty much primitive. The custodian does not own rather holding on ‘behalf of’ and the federal government only act under supervision of the National Assembly. Mr. Minister, Nigerians own the NSF not you or your cronies.

6. “Who says we cannot bring on board past athletes like the Falilat Ogunkoya, Mary Onyali-Omagbemi, Olapade Adeniken, The Ezinwa brothers, Davidson and Osmond, Funke Oshonaike, Bose Kaffo and several of our ex athletes to come and compete in the masters category as a way of creating excitement? Younger generation athletes who have heard of them but did not have the opportunity of seeing them in action will feel motivated and inspired. These are some of the dynamics an open festival will create for the competition.”

IAAF says Mary Onyali and Chioma Ajunwa cannot compete again. Mr. Minister simply forgot that those he cited are either banned from athletics for dope violations by IAAF or are simply too obese to compete or they have called it ‘a day’ years ago. This Minister simply lacked any knowledge of the reality and practicality of his view. These same people along with the destroyer of AFN named Solomon Ogba were paraded in London and in fact made no dent rather enhanced destruction of our team chances.

This Minister is yet to speak well, as such he must be pushed out of Sports Ministry for dictatorial tendency. Opening the festival is aimed at athletics where that federation shamed the country at the London Olympics. Those in charge of that federation are advisers of Delta governor who continues to control this Minister.

I will stop here and expects the Minister and his cronies to voice their views which are fundamental right the Minister doesn’t think Nigerians has.

I rest.

Dr. Rashid A. balogun, CPA, LLB(Hons.), LLM(London)