Kogi State Constitutional Logjam: Why The Supreme Court Cannot Intervene

By Inibehe Effiong

The Supreme Court of Nigeria does not have original advisory jurisdiction. The apex court only have original and appellate jurisdiction on certain specified matters. See Sections 232 and 233 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

Idris Wada

There is no constitutional support for the proposition and agitation by a section of the public that the Attorney General of the Federation should approach the Supreme Court for advise on how to resolve the constitutional logjam arising from the death of the Kogi State gubernatorial candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Prince Abubakar Audu. It is a recondite reasoning that cannot stand legal test.

The Supreme Court cannot assume original jurisdiction on a matter that does not fall within the very limited scope of Section 232 of the Constitution. By original jurisdiction, I mean the power of a court to hear and determine a matter or dispute directly, as a court of first instance.

The original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Nigeria under Section 232 of the Constitution is limited to:

(1) dispute between the Federal Government and a State of the federation;

(2) dispute between States of the federation;

By virtue of Section 1 of the Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002 the Supreme Court of Nigeria can also sit as a court of first instance in respect of disputes between:

(a)    the National Assembly and the President;

(b)    the National Assembly and any State House of Assembly; and

(c)    the National Assembly and any State of the Federation,

No case or dispute, no matter how urgent and fundamental, can be taken to the Supreme Court directly if it does not fall under any of the five categories of disputes enumerated above. Every other cases can only be entertained by the apex court as an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal by invoking the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Section 233 of the Constitution.

There are litany of decisions on the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The following cases are instructive on the point: Attorney General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & 35 Ors (2001) 11 NWLR (Pt. 725) 689 and Attorney General of Bendel State v. Attorney General of the Federation & Ors. ( 1983) ANLR 208.

This is one aspect of our law that cannot be negotiated.

The proper court for interested parties, including the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), to approach over the Kogi State constitutional logjam is the Federal High Court. See Section 251 (1) (q) of the Constitution.

Given the fundamental nature of the issues arising from the death of Mr. Audu and the controversy surrounding it, it may be necessary to invoke the referral/reference clause under Section 295 of the Constitution.

Section 295 of the Constitution empowers the Federal High Court to refer substantial questions of law on the Interpretation or application of the Constitution to the Court of Appeal. Where the Court of Appeal is of the opinion that the question (s) referred to it from the Federal High Court involves a substantial question of law, it shall refer same to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court shall give its decision on the question.

The court in which the question arose (in this case the Federal High Court) shall dispose of the in accordance with that decision. This is the only way that the Supreme Court can give direction on the Kogi State crisis.

No person or authority in Nigeria, not even the Attorney General of the Federation, can approach the Supreme Court directly except in respect of a dispute that falls within Section 232 highlighted supra.

In the case of F.R.N v. Ifegwu (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt.842)113, His Lordship, UWAIFO, J.S.C (as he then was) enunciated the position of the law on reference of substantial question of law thus:

” It is clear from those cases that there are conditions which must exist before a reference can be made under this provision. First, the question must be as to the interpretation or application of the Constitution. It is the foundation for  even contemplating making a reference: see Gamioba v. Esezi II (1961) 2 SCNLR 237; Atake v. Afejuku (1994) 9 NWLR (Pt.368) 379.

“Second, such a question must arise in the proceedings in connection with an issue before the court making the reference: see Olawoyin v. Commissioner of Police (No. 2) (1961) 2 SCNLR 278, (1961) 1 All NLR 203; Bamaiyi v. A.-G., Federation (2001) 12 NWLR (Pt.727) 468, (2001) 7 SC (Pt.11) 62. Third, the matter for reference must involve a substantial question of law. The court making the reference must decide the substantiality of the question: see African Newspapers of Nigeria Ltd. v. The Federal Republic of Nigeria (1985) 2 NWLR (pt.6) 137.

“There might be instances where the question presents no difficulty in ascertaining whether it is substantial or not. But it is useful to take as a guide what was said by the Federal Supreme Court in Gamioba v. Esezi II (supra) at p.588 per Brett, F. J. that the question “must clearly be one on which arguments in favour of more than one interpretation might reasonably be adduced.” Fourth, the court making the reference to the higher court is not required to, and must not, give an opinion of law on the question: see Adesanya v. The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981) 5 SC 112; (1981) 2 NCLR 358.”

From the foregoing, it is clear that the Supreme Court cannot intervene in this case. Therefore, the call made by some legal practitioners and commentators for the Attorney General of the Federation to approach the Supreme Court over the matter is legally indefensible and unnecessary.

However, the Attorney General of the Federation being the Chief Law Officer of the Federation by virtue of Section 150 of the Constitution can offer advice to the INEC on how to resolve the controversy. It should be noted that such advice is not binding on INEC.

In an earlier opinion, I had elaborately discussed the legal implications of the death of Mr. Abubakar Audu. It is now left for the APC to substitute its deceased candidate with another person. INEC should proceed with the supplementary election in the 91 outstanding polling units.

Inibehe Effiong is a Legal Practitioner.

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Kogi State Constitutional Logjam: Why The Supreme Court Cannot Intervene

The Judgment In The Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petition And The Akwa Ibom Case

By Inibehe Effiong

The Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal in Lafia headed by Justice Halima Shammaki on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 delivered judgment in the petition filed by Mr. Labaran Maku of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) against the election of Governor Tanko Al-makura of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Edo State Tribunal

The Tribunal unanimously dismissed the petition for lacking in merit.

I have not had the privilege of reading the full text of the judgment, but going by the report in the Punch Newspaper on the judgment especially on the issue of Card Reader, data analysis of the forensic experts, allegations of malpractice and over voting, I am confident that justice will prevail in the Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Petition.

I will not make specific conclusions on how the Nasarawa State’s case relates or affects the Akwa Ibom case as doing so may be subjudice. However, suffice it to say that the Petitioners in the Akwa Ibom case satisfied the requirements which the Petitioner in Nasarawa case failed to meet.

Inter alia (among other reasons), the Tribunal in Nasarawa dismissed the petition because of the failure by the Prtitioner to prove certain facts. Subject to the decision of the Tribunal, those preconditions and facts were met by the Petitioners in the Akwa Ibom case especially as it relates to Card Reader data and forensic analysis.

Of importance is the reasoning of the Nasarawa Tribunal on the issue of failure to use Card Readers. The Tribunal in its judgment held that the Petitioner had failed to prove that Card Readers were not used in certain polling units. This apparently was fatal to the case of the Petitioner.

Another significant part of the judgment as reported by the Punch Newspaper relates to the credibility and probative value of the data analysis by the forensic experts engaged by the Petitioner. The Tribunal it its judgment held that it cannot rely on the data presented by the experts because they did not originate from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). In other words, INEC was not the source of the data relied on the experts in arriving at their conclusions.

In the Akwa Ibom case, the issue of whether Card Readers were used or not or whether the number of votes cast exceeded the number of accredited voters will be determined by the data contained in Exhibit 317 ( The Certified True Copy of the polling unit by polling unit Card Reader accreditation report for the whole of Akwa Ibom State obtained by the Petitioners from INEC on 27th April, 2015).

Therefore, in the Umana Umana’s case, INEC is the source of the data. Exhibit 317 will speak and the Tribunal will draw necessary conclusions accordingly.

Again, the forensic experts in the Akwa Ibom case carried out forensic analysis on the election materials and INEC documents sequel to an order granted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal equally granted the Petitioners the leave to call the forensic experts as additional witnesses. Their report which was based on data obtained from INEC was tendered and admitted. The report was accompanied with 14 appendices.

Another point worthy of note is the part of the judgment in the Nasarawa case as reported by the Punch Newspaper that the Petitioner failed to prove malpractice during the election. In the Akwa Ibom case, beyond the testimonies of witnesses and documentary evidence led on the issue of malpractices and violence, there is Exhibit 337 (A Police Report that detailed instances of violence during the election). The Tribunal will determine their probative and evidential value.

Finally, the Tribunal in Nasarawa also held that the Petitioner did not sort out the ballot papers. In the Akwa Ibom case, INEC (the 4th Respondent) had criminally and wilfully lumped ballot papers of different polling units, wards and local government areas, immersed them in water and packed them into bags in the most despicable manner contrary to the express provisions of the INEC Manuel for Election Officials all in an effort to frustrate sorting and inspection.

The ballot papers in their terrible state were tendered and admitted in evidence and marked Exhibit 345. The forensic report detailed all these infractions.

In the course of trial, the INEC Electoral Officer for Onna Local Government Area, Mr. Dominic Okena, who testified as Defence Witness 26 could not identify the ballot papers used for Onna Local Government Area where he supervised. He admitted in the open court that the ballot papers were mixed. Whether the Respondents will be allowed to benefit from their own illegality and wrong doing is left for the Tribunal to determine.

I will not go further having covered all the issues reported by the Punch Newspaper. The question now is: how will these disparities between the cases of the Petitioners in Nasarawa and Akwa Ibom affect the judgment in the Akwa Ibom case? I cannot answer this because doing so will be subjudice. The Tribunal will decide one way or the other.

Case are decided on their merits. No two cases are the same.

Judgment in the Akwa Ibom State governorship petition will be delivered on or before the 25th day of October, 2015. That is the day that the mandatory 180 days period stipulated by Section 285 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) for the determination of election petitions will elapse in the Akwa Ibom State governorship election petition.

Our faith in the Judiciary is unshaken.

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

The Judgment In The Nasarawa State Governorship Election Petition And The Akwa Ibom Case

President Buhari, The North And The Dangers Ahead, By Inibehe Effiong

The assumption that capacity, antecedents and credibility are the sole parameter guiding the appointments made so far by President Muhammadu Buhari is logically and morally untenable. We cannot be swimming endlessly in the ocean of hypocrisy pretending that there is nothing wrong in President Buhari exuding ethnic bias and bigotry in making key appointments. What competence? Is it the competence of Northerners or is the president so stereotyped that he can only see competent people from a particular section of the country?.

A perfect story for the gods.

Buhari

Nigeria is an already polarised and deeply divided nation. The least one would have expected from Buhari is to be sensitive to the urgency for national healing and unity. For a man who was rejected by the electorates at three previous elections principally because of the fear that he is a divisive figure whose sense of perception and judgment is dictated by ethnic and religious considerations to be giving credence to the very issue that truncated his previous aspirations for the presidency is to say the least disappointing. We need to tell ourselves the truth, a divided country cannot prosper. The American president, Barrack Obama, said that much when he hosted Buhari recently.

Those canvassing the view that president Buhari is at liberty to make his appointments the way it suits him provided the nation is salvaged are within their constitutional right to freedom of thoughts and expression. This view is unfortunately rather pretentious and simplistic. Development cannot be driven without the cooperation of the citizens and that cooperation is lost when people have a strong perception that the leader is pursuing a primordial interest. One of the hallmarks of responsible and successful leadership is the ability of the leader to galvanise divergent interests in a manner that promotes inclusiveness and a sense of belonging among the mass of the citizenry.

Nigeria is undeniably an heterogeneous country with its attendant cultural, religious, social and political diversity. Our forebears understood the complexity of Nigeria which informed their preference for a federal system of government and even regionalism as practiced in the first republic. When the military stroked in 1966, they set aside the very arrangement that encouraged growth and development. We are yet to recover from that tragic mistake of history.

Upon return to democratic rule, the framers of our Constitution in their wisdom opted for a federation, though imperfect, as contained in Section 2 (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). They went further to compliment this provision by inserting the federal character principle in Section 14 (3) of  the Constitution.

The intention and substance of the federal character principle is to ensure that the composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few State or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies.

President Buhari has made key appointments into his government in a manner that has undeniably resulted in the predominance of persons from a particular section of the country and ethnic group – the North, in his government. This is not only repulsive to the heterogeneous nature of Nigeria but a brazen violation of the constitutional provisions on federal character. It is hypocritical for people to be agitating for true federation while ignoring the federal character principle.

I support meritocracy. I believe that people should be elected and appointed into leadership positions base on their capacity and credibility to deliver. The issue is not really a contest between meritocracy and federal character. The real issue in controversy is whether president Buhari has wilfully and tactically discriminated against qualified and competent Nigerians from other sections of the country? Discriminatory appointments cannot be excused under the guise meritocracy. Anyone that is unable to find competent and credible people from all parts of a vast country like Nigeria to work with is not suitable for the presidency.

We need to be very practical about the consequences of what the president is doing. An insider in the presidency hinted a friend long before now that the president’s delay in making key appointments was because of intense pressure and insistence from the Northern political class that key positions, including the Secretary to the Government of the Federation must come from the North. The source further hinted that president Buhari had personally expressed preference for Mr. Femi Adesina as his spokesperson but was blackmailed by the same Northern political class into equally appointing Mr. Garba Shehu for the same duty for regional balance.

Some commentators in an attempt to justify the president’s discriminatory appointments have stated that his predecessor, Goodluck Jonathan, did the same thing. But Buhari’s campaigns was premised on change. Nigerians voted for change not for the escalation of the sins and infractions of Jonathan. Others have opined that at the end of the day what really matters is development. That is appealing. But the problem with this contention is that it downplays the complexity of Nigeria. Once there is ethnic mistrust, attention will be focused on sentiments and centrifugal considerations.

As a vociferous supporter of President Buhari, I am worried that the goodwill that brought him to power is dwindling because of his appointments. Buhari needs to appreciate the fact that ethnicity and tribalism is still very much in the blood of Nigerians. We are not not yet a true nation, as such, any leader that wants to succeed must be sensitive to the diverse character of Nigeria.

Those of us who went all out in support of Buhari’s candidacy owe him a responsibility to tell him the truth at all times. Pretensions will not help his administration. I understand many of us who want the president to succeed at all cost are reluctant to disagree with him on any issue to avoid being labelled.

In his attempt to defend the indefensible, presidential media aide, Mr. Femi Adesina, stated during an interview on Ray 100.5 FM on Friday August 28, 2015 that president Buhari will “balance” his appointments in September; a clear admission that the appointments so far are not balanced. So what is the argument about if the presidential media aide himself has alluded to the imbalanced nature of the appointments?.

Why do we have quota system in our educational system which gives some states and parts of the country undue advantage over others? Why should a candidate from Akwa Ibom State be required to score far higher than his peer in Borno State in examinations to be eligible for admission? Why do we have some states practicing Sharia law in a so-called secular state? How come that voices that were vociferous in accusing former president Jonathan of “marginalising the North” are now preaching the gospel of meritocracy? How come that the Arewa Consultative Forum has suddenly lost her voice since the emergence of president Buhari? These and many more questions makes it deceitful for anyone to say that the president can make appointments any how.

Our diversity is visible to the blind.

I concede to those who say that politicians have over the years exploited our differences for selfish political gains. But the hard truth is that Buhari is widening our differences by skewing his appointments overly in favour of a section of the country. I agree that technocrats who do not have much vested political interests should be appointed into critical positions. But I strongly disagree that only technocrats from a particular section of the country should be appointed by the president.

Can president Buhari honestly say today by his recent appointments that he belongs to nobody, and that he belongs to everybody?.

President Buhari needs to rise above primordial sentiments. We elected him as the president of Nigeria and not as the head of the Arewa House. This may not be the intention of the president, but perception is very important. I am a pan-Nigerian and pro one Nigeria. If radical remedial measures are not taken by the president to disabuse the minds of members of the public on this perception, every action and policy of his administration in the future may be greeted with allegations of ethnic bias and prejudice and the consequences on the polity and the success of his government are very predictable.

This is the danger that our dear president should avoid and I pray that God should give him a stronger spirit of discernment and the courage to do what is best in the overall interest of Nigeria.

In all, I love Buhari but I love Nigeria the more.

Inibehe Effiong

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

President Buhari, The North And The Dangers Ahead, By Inibehe Effiong

Validity Of Akwa Ibom APC Gubernatorial Candidacy: The Facts And The Lies, By Inibehe Effiong

The social and mainstream media has been saturated by series of malicious, false and concocted stories by paid and unpaid agents and hireling of Mr. Udom Emmanuel, Sen. Godswill Akpabio and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Akwa Ibom State alleging that Engr. Benedict Ukpong the deputy gubernatorial candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Akwa Ibom State did not resigned or disengaged from the public service before the election as required by law, and as such, that the joint candidacy of the APC gubernatorial candidate Umana Okon Umana and his running mate is invalid.

However, contrary to these malicious reports aimed at diverting attention from the monumental setbacks suffered so far at the Tribunal by those sponsoring these lies, I wish to present to the public documentary evidence that of a truth Mr. Ukpong had legally and effectively disengaged from his employment at the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA) based on the outcome of my independent investigation.

For emphasis, Section 182 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) requires that a person seeking to contest election to the Office of governor and deputy governor should retire, withdraw or resign at least thirty (30) days before the date of the election.

Mr. Ukpong on 22nd December, 2014 submitted his letter of application for voluntary retirement to the Executive Secretary of the FCDA which was duly received and documented. Please find attached the letter of application.

On 14th January, 2015 an unconditional approval was given by the Office of the Director of Finance and Administration of the FCDA for Mr. Benedict Ukpong to voluntarily retire from service effective 22nd December, 2014. Please find attached the letter of approval. The implication is that he had retired and disengaged from service as required by law more than ninety (90) before the April 11, 2015 gubernatorial election.

However, the FCDA erroneously continued to credit his account with salaries after his retirement. Mr. Ukpong who does not believe in reaping where one didn’t sow retrieved and subsequently returned same to the FCDA. A copy of the official receipt issued upon return is available and also in my possession.

We all know that such official slip is a regular occurrence in our public service with its well known bureaucratic pitfalls. In any case, public servants do not pay themselves. They have no control over their salaries. There have been countless cases where people receive more or less than what they are lawfully entitled to which is usually rectified subsequently. I know individuals that have experienced this in the past.

Also, it is humbly submitted that even if the funds wrongly credited by the FCDA in his bank account were not returned by him it would still not affect his legal qualification for election. At worse, it would have only raised a moral question. But Mr. Ukpong went further to fulfill all righteousness by returning it despite the fact that the FCDA has not paid him his retirement benefits. Some Nigerians would have simply kept the money.

It is trite that qualification for election is a pre-election matter which can only be litigated at the High Court. Even if it can be raised at the Tribunal, the right party that ought to raise it is the Petitioner(s) by virtue of Section 138 (1) (a) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended). And if for want of argument as in this instance the Respondents decide to canvass it at the Tribunal it has to be part of their Reply to the Petitioner’s petition. Neither Udom, INEC nor PDP raised this issue in their Reply(ies). They cannot smuggle it in by Motion.

We all know that those sponsoring these reports have been having consternation at happenings at the Tribunal. In order to diffuse the effects of the consternation, they ran to their ‘Abobaku’ for this childish propaganda just to divert attention from what is going on at the Tribunal.

Since the commencement of the proceedings at the Akwa Ibom State Governorship Election Tribunal, Mr. Udom Emmanuel, the PDP and their agents have been chasing shadows; resorting to one propaganda or the other. They have tactically evaded any demand to defend their so-called “victory” at the Tribunal. There is nothing they haven’t done to frustrate the petition. But in all, they have failed and will continue to fail.

That was how they concocted falsehood that our President, Muhammadu Buhari, didn’t have the necessary educational certificates to contest for the presidency. In the end, they failed woefully and Buhari won. Since they haven’t learnt lessons, history will repeat itself.

Inibehe Effiong

Email: inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Validity Of Akwa Ibom APC Gubernatorial Candidacy: The Facts And The Lies, By Inibehe Effiong

National Assembly Debacle, The Future Of Buhari"s Presidency And The Urgency Of Now, By Inibehe Effiong

The protracted scandalous impasse and controversy over the emergence of the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives and selection of other principal officers of the current National Assembly which escalated into fisticuff on Thursday June 25, 2015 in the House of Representatives evinces that our country is yet to be freed from the clutches of evil forces and imperial elements. We are back to the trenches of national ruination orchestrated by the egregious activities and aspirations of unpatriotic racketeers whose insatiable inclinations takes precedence over the collective good of our country.

APC senators fighting

There is no moral prescription that justifies the contemptuous treatment of the APC by it renegade legislators. The argument that the party cannot dictate who should be the Leader, Deputy Leader, Chief Whip and Deputy Chief Whip of both houses is not only untenable but preposterous. Precedents shows that it is the Party Caucus of both houses that determines those that should occupy positions that are exclusively reserved for the party in the majority and minority as the case may be. If this is the case, the relevant question is: what is the decision of the majority in the APC Caucus in both the Senate and the House of Representatives? Since those who occupy these offices are invariably representing their political party, does the APC not have the right to determine, influence or at least set parameters for the emergence of those that should represent it?

Can one become a Majority Leader for instance without being in the PARTY that has the majority of members in the house? The answer is obviously in the negative. So how can anyone say that the occupation of these offices are not to be dictated based on political party consideration? What has been the practice in the past? How did Sen. Victor Ndoma Egba emerge as the Leader of the 7th Senate? Was it not the decision of the PDP leadership and the PDP Caucus in the Senate then? Was it not the insistence of the PDP that enabled the emergence of Mrs. Mulikat Akande as the Leader of the 7th House of Representatives after she had contested against Tambuwal and lost despite being the official candidate of the PDP.

It is true that Tambuwal emerged contrary to the wishes of his party at the time, principally because of the support he got from the then opposition APC. However, we need to advert our minds to the fact that that only happened because the election (voting) of a Speaker is constitutionally open to to all members of the House, irrespective of political party affiliation. However, it is on record that despite being the wish of majority of members of the then House, the then PDP federal government of Goodluck Jonathan refused to accord Aminu Tambuwal recognition after he joined the APC. His official security was withdrawn by a lawless and partisan Inspector General of Police without any supporting order of a court of competent jurisdiction declaring his seat vacant.

I therefore find the press release issued by the PDP condemning President Buhari and the APC for their insistence on party supremacy as hypocritical, insulting and baseless. It is nauseating for the PDP, the very party that destroyed this country and derailed our democratic process, to be talking about democracy when they have not yet demonstrated remorse for raping our country mindlessly for 16 years. PDP should first re – brand her terrible image before building a structure for constructive, objective and mature opposition nurtured by truth, accountability and justice.

If the present revolt against the APC is nemesis for the past support given to Tambuwal by the APC, that nemesis should have ended after the emergence of Bukola Saraki and Yakubu Dogara as Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives respectively, contrary to the wishes of their party. It is offensive to the ethos of political practice and the principles of party supremacy for Saraki and Dogara and their fellow renegade legislators to disregard the wishes of the party on whose glory and momentum they rode to power. It is unacceptable.

While it is true that the legislators have the right to determine those who should lead them in various capacities, it should be noted that they were all elected on the platform of political parties. The present constitutional regime does not accommodate independent candidacy. The responsibility of the political parties did not cease upon their election into the National Assembly. Political parties do not merely exist to enable politicians win elections and actualise their political ambitions.

The relationship between the parties and their candidates does not stop because of electoral victory. It continues and subsist throughout the currency of the elected members’ tenure. Therefore, I cannot decipher why some members of the APC in the National Assembly will totally disregard the wishes, feelings and views of the very party on whose platform they were elected in the first place. There is nothing undemocratic in the APC writing to Saraki and Dogara on those they prefer as principal officers that should represent the party in the National Assembly. More so when majority of the APC Caucus in both houses are in support of the party’s position on the matter.

Some have contended that it is undemocratic for the APC to express her preferences for the principal offices, and I ask: is there a democratic way of passing faeces? What the APC has done to my mind is basically an attempt to maintain cohesion in the party which may be endangered if the individual aspirations of the members is not checked. I am not a member of the APC, but I cannot understand why the likes of Dino Melaye who could not secure his reelection to the House of Representatives in 2011 will now be leading a revolt against the very party on whose glory he rode to victory in 2015. It is not activism but the height of ingratitude.

It is deeply saddening that the oasis of hope which herald the emergence of the Muhammadu Buhari presidency is diminishing daily with its attendant destructive effects on the polity and the nation. It is a sad commentary that the leadership and members of the ruling APC in the National Assembly have not exuded the discipline expected of them. One would have expected that the APC will deliberately obviate the reoccurrence of the blunders, cancerous modus operandi and dictatorial proclivities of the PDP which ultimately led to the PDP’s defeat in the historic 2015 presidential poll.

Beyond the crisis over the leadership of the National Assembly is a worrisome and frightening possibility; the Buhari presidency may in the final analysis be undermined and fatally derailed. If things remain the way they are in the National Assembly, I see a very challenging future for president Buhari. We cannot continue to deny the fact that some very corrupt characters supported and funded the election of Buhari and the APC. These characters cannot guarantee the security of their illicit lucre if they do not have a strong hold on the current government. They know that without access to the powers  that be, they may not survive the expected onslaught against corruption in the country.

Looking at the present crisis in the National Assembly, one can see the hands of these money bags. It is also a truism that some of the current crop of lawmakers in the National Assembly are among the most vicious and corrupt people in Nigeria. For example, do we expect some former governors who looted their states to a halt and sought refuge in the Senate to just sit back and allow a decent or saner leadership to emerge in the Senate?

There is no need for prevarication, Buhari cannot fight corruption or transform the country without putting in place the required legislative framework. Certain laws will need to be enacted or amended. Actions of men are mostly actuated by the need for self – preservation. Corruption cannot fight corruption nor can the corrupt make laws against corruption.

It is this possibility that makes the “I belong to nobody” attitude of president Buhari in the circumstance unacceptable to some of us. How can our president be sitting in the presidential villa singing “I belong to nobody” when a structure is being laid to frustrate his presidency? Does Buhari think that we are still in the military era when the Head of State can just wake up in the morning and issue a Decree to accomplish his purpose?. Is the president not aware that the National Assembly, though an independent arm of government, will play a vital and even indispensable role in the attainment of his much touted change?

Now that the National Assembly leadership has merged with the PDP that was rejected by Nigerians at the polls and other anti – change elements, what becomes of president Buhari? I do not know those advising Buhari, but they are leading him to a very vulnerable future. The change that the Nigerian people voted for seems to have been hijacked by a monstrous and corrupt cabal that is determined to truncate the change, development and anti – corruption mantra of Buhari’s presidency and return our country to the era of the locusts.

The president needs to rise up to the urgency of now. By virtue of his position, Buhari is the leader of his party. The APC should immediately assert it authority and restore discipline, even if it will entail expelling some people from the party. President Barrack Obama wouldn’t have succeeded in having the historic medical care for all legislation (Obamacare) passed by the American Congress if the Democrats in Congress were not strongly on his side during the heated debates on the law.

That Buhari is sleeping comfortably while the very party that brought him to power is being destroyed is not a sign of responsible leadership. If this is naivety, then it is the worse type of it. Belonging to nobody does not mean committing political suicide.

The time to act is now.

Email: inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

National Assembly Debacle, The Future Of Buhari"s Presidency And The Urgency Of Now, By Inibehe Effiong

President Buhari"s Failure To Declare His Assets Publicly Is Treacherous And Heart Breaking

By Inibehe Effiong

Lately, the media, especially the social media, has been inundated with commentaries and debates on the secret declaration of assets by President Muhammadu Buhari and his vice, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo contrary to the former’s pre-election promise to do so publicly.

In a statement issued to the media on Saturday May 30, 2015 by Garba Shehu for the Buhari Media Team, it was stated that President Muhammadu Buhari and Vice President Yemi Osinbajo have declared their assets in line with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The statement said that the Code of Conduct Bureau had on Friday May 29, acknowledged the submission of the two leaders’ assets declaration forms. The forms, the statement said, were submitted separately on May 28 and signed for by the organization’s Chairman, Sam Saba. It said: “President Buhari’s Declarant ID was given as: ‘President: 000001/2015′.

It is in the light of the foregoing that this opinion is offered, not necessarily as a reprimand, but as a conscientious attempt by a devoted believer in the change campaign, not as an anti- Buhari element but as a passionate supporter of President Muhammadu Buhari who gave his modest support to his candidacy. This point is essential because the undying support given to Buhari by us: ‘’the collective children of anger” which resulted in his historic victory at the March 28, 2015 presidential election was conditional. I will return to this issue later.

It is pertinent to state clearly that there is no constitutional or legal obligation on president Buhari, his vice or any other public officer to disclose or declare their assets to the public.

Section 140 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) provides that the president shall not begin to perform the functions of his office until he subscribes to the oath of office and allegiance, and declares his assets. The implication is that declaration of assets is not only a condition precedent to the performance of constitutional functions by elected public officers but a mandatory requirement.

It is therefore utterly mischievous for Mr. Garba Shehu to have said in the press statement that by declaring his assets, the president has fulfilled his campaign promise to Nigerians. The truth of the matter is that Buhari had no choice than to declare his assets as required of him by the Constitution. He didn’t do anyone any favour by doing so. In the real sense, his promise was that he will declare his assets PUBLICLY.

Paragraph 11 of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution enshrines the details on declaration of assets by public officers. For clarity, the provisions are reproduced below:

11. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, every public officer shall within three months after the coming into force of this Code of Conduct or immediately after taking office and thereafter –

(a) at the end of every four years; and

(b) at the end of his term of office, submit to the Code of Conduct Bureau a written declaration of all his properties, assets, and liabilities and those of his unmarried children under the age of eighteen years.

(2) Any statement in such declaration that is found to be false by any authority or person authorized in that behalf to verify it shall be deemed to be a breach of this Code.

(3) Any property or assets acquired by a public officer after any declaration required under this Constitution and which is not fairly attributable to income, gift, or loan approved by this Code shall be deemed to have been acquired in breach of this Code unless the contrary is proved.

A careful perusal of the above provisions leads to the irresistible conclusion that the issue of whether or not declaration of assets and liabilities should be publicized is left solely to the discretion and volition of individual public officers. The constitutional forum for asset declaration is exclusively the Code of Conduct Bureau.

Since the assets declared by public officers to the Code of Conduct Bureau is accessible to the public, those wishing to know the asset declared by public officers are at liberty to apply for same.

However, the issue at stake is that the President had made a solemn promise to the Nigerian people before the election that he will not only make his assets public but that he will equally encourage those working with him to do the same as a way of encouraging accountability, probity and transparency. By not publishing his assets, Mr. President has breached his promise to the Nigerian people.

We didn’t vote for change for things to remain the same or become worse. We voted for change because President Buhari had persuaded us that he is of a different cast of mind. We voted for change so that things may indeed be done differently. Our patience has exhausted, we are no longer willing to indulge needless excuses, pointless prevarication and nauseating presidential shenanigans. The era when the president could lie, renege on solemn promises and capitulate on sacred undertakings with reckless abandon has ended.

President Buhari needs to wake up to the reality and appreciate the urgency of now. He needs to come to terms with the historical significance of his election immediately before it is too late. Buhari needs to muster the required political will to isolate whatever or whoever is standing as a barrier to the actualization of his plans for the nation.

It is pertinent to say that failure to abide by promises accounted, among other reasons, for the rejection of former president Goodluck Jonathan at the polls. Therefore, we will not tolerate any act of treachery from this government. Our condition for electing Buhari was that he will salvage our country, no matter the prize or cost.

Nigerians did not vote for a return to the days of the locusts, they voted for change. The impact that the public declaration of assets will have on the polity and the perception of the citizenry are enormous. Firstly, it will reinvigorate the oasis of hope that remains of that very elusive concept called “the Nigerian spirit”. Secondly, it will demonstrate that we now have a president whose words are his bond. Thirdly, it will erase the growing apprehensions and fears about the sincerity of the new government’s change mantra.

If Buhari has more assets, properties or liabilities than we thought, he should be bold enough to let us know. There is no need leaving the issue in the realm of conjecture. Even if one cow and a pair of shoe is all that he owns, Nigerians still deserve to know. It is just too early in the life of a change driven administration for this sort of treachery.

There is really nothing spiritual about publicizing one’s worth, it is a sign of responsibility. The late Yar’Adua had set a precedent of public declaration of assets. Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, the firebrand Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) publicly declared his assets on February 21, 2012 following his appointment by the then president, Goodluck Jonathan. Therefore, it is unpardonable for Buhari of ‘all people’ to do otherwise more so when he had vowed to publish same.

I call on President Buhari to rise above any primordial consideration that may hamper the fulfillment of his campaign promises. The President has no choice but to abide by his oath of office. Buhari should publish his assets in the media without further delay. Nigerians will be more critical of his administration than that of his predecessor.

The equitable and jurisprudential concept of promissory estoppel as espoused for several decades implies that failure to keep to a promise made by one person to another which alters the position of the other person is actionable. Since the remedy for Nigerians in this instance lies not in the court, Buhari should be prepared for whatever backlash, opprobrium and lacerations that may be occasioned by this infidelity to his electoral promise.

We have had enough of deceits and irresponsible governance in this country, it is time for change, so let the change begin.

Inibehe Effiong is the Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders (COHRD).

Email: inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

President Buhari"s Failure To Declare His Assets Publicly Is Treacherous And Heart Breaking

Governor Akpabio, The Empty Boasts Of A Drowning Dictator By Inibehe Effiong

“Those who sow the seeds of dictatorship will be consumed by dictatorship”

(Late Chief Gani Fawehinmi, SAN).

Whenever the tragic story of the fall of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the historic defeat of President Goodluck Jonathan by the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), General Muhammadu is told, the name – Godswill Obot Akpabio, will feature prominently. Very few Nigerians really know the true character, history and proclivities Mr. Akpabio.

It is one thing for a person to be egoistic, despotic and belligerent. But it is an entirely different issue when a man who had long attained the age of majority and is occupying a high public office perennially behaves and incurably talks in a manner that calls his sanity to question. The Akwa Ibom State Governor, Godswill Obot Akpabio is clearly not insane but given his most recent outburst one is tempted to question his rationality.

On Tuesday April 1, 2015 Akpabio led some of his fellow governors elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on a consolatory visit to President Goodluck Jonathan on his defeat at the March 28, 2015 presidential election. In his capacity as the Chairman of the PDP Governor’s Forum ( a body which was birthed because of the undemocratic and egregious actions of Akpabio) Akpabio spoke to the media during which he was quoted  as saying among others:

“We as governors came to assure him (the President) that we are going back as field commanders to hold our states and that come April 11, PDP will still maintain its lead across Nigeria…

“The party has already indicated that it will explore all legal means in order to ensure redress. So, we are also proud of the party and we want to congratulate all our voters and all PDP faithfuls across Nigeria for their peaceful disposition…”

What was Akpabio thinking while making the above unguarded and baseless utterances? Shouldn’t there be an end to frivolities and irrationality? Akpabio should be informed immediately by whoever has his time of the upsetting wind of change that has swept away the monstrous imprints of the PDP from the Nigerian polity. It is puerile and clearly indefensible for Akpabio to boast that the so-called “field commanders” (PDP governors) will still maintain its lead across Nigeria.

Undoubtedly, Governor Akpabio is among the first five (5) individuals in Nigeria who’s negative, oppressive and selfish actions resulted in the shameful defeat of President Jonathan at the polls. Being himself a product of electoral malfeasance, rigging and corrupt political process, Akpabio thought that with or without the votes of the mass of the Nigerian electorates that Jonathan will win. Unknown to him, Nigerians had taken a decision to truncate the era of the locusts.

Contrary to the empty boast of Akpabio that the PDP governors will ensure that the PDP emerges victorious at the April 11, 2015 gubernatorial and States Houses of Assembly elections, the reality is that most Nigerians have rejected the PDP.

Under the leadership of Akpabio-led PDP Governors Forum, Jonathan was defeated convincingly in many PDP States. A simple check reveals that many PDP Governors including; Ibrahim Dankwambo (Gombe); Ramalan Yero (Kaduna) Idris Wada (Kogi), Sule Lamido (Jigawa); Isa Yuguda (Bauchi); Babangida Aliyu (Niger); Gabriel Suswam (Benue); Ibrahim Shema (Katsina); Olusegun Mimiko (Ondo) failed woefully to deliver the PDP and President Jonathan in their States at the just concluded presidential elections.

In Akwa Ibom State, Akpabio had manipulated the presidential election in favour of his party thereby giving a very false impression of the popularity of the PDP in the State. The truth of the matter is that there was no election properly so-called in Akwa Ibom State. Over 75% of Polling Units in the State had no election materials, especially result sheets. Results were reportedly written in the Government House. Videos and photos have emerged in the media showing how the election was rigged.

Interestingly, Akpabio reiterated that his party will be going to the Election Tribunal to challenge the outcome of the presidential polls. How are the mighty fallen! It will be very entertaining to see the PDP going to the Tribunal. Over the years, the opposition was insulted and maligned for seeking electoral justice by people like Akpabio.

Instead of talking arrogantly, Akpabio should be sober because his days of power are over. In the last 8 years of his oppressive reign in Akwa Ibom State, 3 Gs’ ( God, Godswill and Gun ) were the only source of power. Akpabio has demonstrated an uncommon hatred for any form of opposition. Today, his party, the PDP has been reduced by the Nigerian people to an opposition party. Akwa Ibom State cannot afford to be part of the opposition.

As a Senator-elect, Akpabio will be going to the Senate as an opposition Senator because the APC has won majority of the seats in the Senate. So in practical terms, Akpabio in few days time will become an insignificant factor in the affairs and politics of this country. That is the nature of power; flexible and ephemeral.

What I expect this wasteful governor to do now is for him to prepare to face trial for the massive looting of Akwa Ibom State resources. He should equally be getting ready to answer questions from the dock for the lives of innocent Nigerians that have been assassinated under his watch.

I do not see Akpabio escaping prison under General Buhari’s presidency. Indeed, there is no escape for him because the immunity that he is presently enjoying under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) does not apply to the Legislature.

Majority of Akwa Ibom people and residents are ready to reclaim their State from the monstrous grip of Governor Akpabio, his wife, family and cronies. If Akpabio thinks that he can use the Police and the Army to subvert the will of the people come April 11 then he is dreaming. Not anymore. Not now that the APC has taken over the leadership of the country.

As someone that is close to the grass root in Akwa Ibom State, I know that PDP’s chances of winning the gubernatorial election is very slim. The jubilation that erupted in the State following Buhari’s emergence makes nonsense of the so-called popularity of the PDP in the State. Akpabio today is fighting for political survival, but it is already too late for him.

Mr. Gabriel Achong, the Akwa Ibom State Commissioner of Police whose partisanship is visible to the blind and the embattled INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner in the State, Mr. Austin Okojie cannot save Akpabio this time. Any attempt to rig the forthcoming gubernatorial and State House of Assembly elections in the State will be resisted by the people.

Those planning to rig the elections should know that General Buhari will bring them to justice. Akwa Ibom State being the highest oil producing State in the country cannot afford to to be mislead by a drowning dictator to the opposition in view of the radical change in the political equation of Nigeria.

Come April 11, the battle will be between a drowning dictator and Akwa Ibom people. No Police, Army or corrupt INEC official can stop the wind of change that is coming to Akwa Ibom State.

The days of political slavery – the days when Akpabio held himself out as a mini – god whose insatiable wishes were not subject to vetting are over. We are now a free people and there is absolutely nothing that 100 Godswill Akpabio of this world can do about it. The game is up.

Enough is enough!

Inibehe Effiong is the Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders ( COHRD ).

Email: inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Governor Akpabio, The Empty Boasts Of A Drowning Dictator By Inibehe Effiong

Gov. Akpabio’s Reign Of Terror And The Politics Of Blood In Akwa Ibom State, By Inibehe Effiong

“Just as God threw Lucifer unto the Earth, those who have betrayed the governor of Akwa Ibom State will not enter the Government House…,those who want to take power through the backdoor will die and the PDP will continue.”

( Gov. Godswill Obot Akpabio, Wednesday 16th July, 2014. See Punch Newspaper of 17th July, 2014).

The inauguration of Chief Godswill Obot Akpabio as the Executive Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria on May 29, 2007 birthed and herald an upsurge in political killings, violence and cultism unprecedented in the history of Akwa Ibom State and Nigeria. From 1st October, 1960 when Nigeria became independent to date, no civilian government in the history of this country, both at the federal and state level, has demonstrated, aided or abetted the level of contempt for human life and dignity like the Governor Godswill Akpabio’s regime.

Without mincing words, the present regime in Akwa Ibom State is a scar on the conscience of humanity. The framers of our Constitution were not in error by giving the sanctity of human life a constitutional protection and upholding the security and welfare of the people as the primary purpose of government. This can be inferred from the clear provisions of Sections 33 and 14 (2) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 ( as amended ) which provides for the right to life and the security and welfare of the people, respectively.

Under Akpabio’s watch, Akwa Ibom State has witnessed so much politically motivated killings, attacks and violence. The situation is so precarious that the streets of Akwa Ibom State is literary littered with the blood of innocent citizens, political opponents and critics of the regime.

The gruesome assasination of a House of Assembly candidate of the opposition All Progressives Congress ( APC ) and former Deputy Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Mr. Okon Uwah by assassins and thugs of the ruling party on Wednesday 18th March, 2015 reportedly led by the Vice Chairman of Ukanafun Local Government Area of the State, Mr. Effiom Abai who has been arrested by the police has once again brought to the fore the barbarism and the politics of blood that has turned the once peaceful state into an animal farm.

Quoting an annual report by the Nigeria Police Force, a Sunday PUNCH report of November 21, 2010 (page 3) said there were 74,064 murders and similar cases in Nigeria within two years. A state-by-state analysis of this report ranks Akwa Ibom State with a population of 3.9m (2006 estimate) as being the highest with preponderance of such crimes.

The police report said in 2009 alone, Akwa Ibom recorded 177 murders (most of which are said to be politically motivated), 62 attempted murders, one manslaughter, eight suicides, 21 attempted suicides, 320 assaults, 18 child stealing, 93 rape cases and indecent assaults, 29 kidnappings, among others. The 2011 figures marked a remarkable increase when compared to 2007. Few examples will suffice.

Engr. Albert Jimmy Ukpanah, an outspoken chieftain of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party was a vociferous opponent of the 2015 senatorial ambition of Gov. Akpabio. Like several other persons in his area that subscribe to the PDP zoning policy, he believed that it was the turn of his area (Abak Federal Constituency) to produce the next senator to represent the Ikot Ekpene Senatorial District of Akwa Ibom State in the Senate come 2015. He saw Akpabio’s Senate bid as a grave injustice to his people.

On March 12, 2014 Engr. Ukpanah was hacked to death by assassins at his residence. His only son, Odudu Ukpanah, a masters degree holder in Oil and Gas Management from Coventry University, United Kingdom has been incarcerated since 27th May, 2014 on the orders of governor Akpabio on the baseless allegation that he murdered the very father who sponsored his Masters Degree in the UK. Despite the cries of the three sisters of Odudu that their brother is innocent and should be freed, Akpabio has remained unruffled. The mother of the slain politician is critically down with cancer, pakinson and stroke.

Dr. Ime Sampson Umanah, a prominent elder statesman and philanthropist who played an important role in the creation of Akwa Ibom State was arrested and detained for being critical of the nefarious activities of governor Akpabio. He has been standing trial since October 2010 without any plausible evidence of crime against him.

Sen. Helen Esuene, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Women Affairs was attacked on 5th October, 2014 in Essien Udim LGA while on a campaign tour by armed thugs for daring to campaign in the governor’s town. She later decamped to the Labour Party where she was offered the gubernatorial ticket to contest for the 2015 governorship election in the State.

Mr. Sunny Udom, the Director General of the campaign organization of the gubernatorial candidate of the All Progressives Congress ( APC ) in Akwa Ibom State, Mr. Umana Okon Umana, escaped assassination in July 2014 when armed bandits invaded his office in Uyo. Fortunately for him, the criminals didn’t meet him but his office was shattered with gunshots.

In December 2013, Mr Umana Umana himself received a written threat at his Uyo residence ordering him to withdraw from the 2015 governorship race or face death. He immediately reported the threat to the police, but was shocked to learn that the governor had also ordered the withdrawal of his police protection.

Engr. Emmanuel Okon Ekpenyong and his brother Mr. Mathias Okon Ekpenyong were murdered on June 30, 2011 reportedly for refusing to part with their sand quarry site which they inherited from their father as demanded by those who feel they own Akwa Ibom. One Dagogo Minago, alias Puff Daddy admitted to the killing of the Ekpenyong brothers. Instead of prosecuting the confessed killer and going after those who sponsored him, the State Attorney General hurriedly entered a nolle prosequi (a discontinuance) in the case.

Shockingly, the government framed up and detained one Dr. Chris Ekong, a former Commissioner in the State and three others and charged them to court for the murder of the Ekpenyong brothers. Not done, the government arrested, detained and charged Mr. Fabian Ekpenyong (the only surviving Ekpenyong brothers) for the murder of his own brothers for refusing to give false evidence against Mr. Chris Ekong and three other innocent persons. Eventually, the court discharged and acquitted all of them of all the charges.

Engr. Ini Udonwa who had indicated interest to vie for the gubernatorial election on the platform of PDP in 2011 was attacked by kidnappers, he narrowly escaped death but his mother, Mrs Philomina Udonwa was kidnapped, raped, killed and her corpse dumped by the roadside because his overseas based son dared to vie for the governorship of his state despite repeated warnings to withdraw from the race.

Chief Paul Inyang, a former Zonal Officer of the Peoples Democratic Party who was favoured to emerge as the State party chairman was gruesomely assassinated on Sunday June 20, 2010.

Dr. Akpan Akpanudo, a young medical doctor was assassinated on January 1, 2011 because he left his profession to seek election into the State House of Assembly.

Retired General Edet Akpan, former Director General of National Youth Service Corp and a PDP stalwart, was kidnapped in the Church ostensibly for his refusal to support Akpabio’s re election.  Three female members of the Church were killed in the process. It took the intervention of the Nigerian military for him to be rescued.

Edidem Robert Obot, the Oku Ibom 111 (leader of the Ibibios) and Paramount Ruler of Nsit Ubium Local Government Area who had became a thorn in the flesh of the powers that be in the state was murdered on 30th January, 2011. This is the first Paramount Ruler to assassinated in the history of Nigeria.

Chief Effiong Ononokpono, an outspoken and fearless octogenarian and political activist had raised some fundamental questions pertaining to the affairs and resources of the State for Governor Akpabio to answer in the Nation Newspaper. Instead of answering the questions, Governor Akpabio ordered his arrest. He was charged to court on trump – up charges and remanded in prison custody from March 25, 2010 to May 14, 2010. His health condition deteriorated and on December 7, 2010, he died.

Barr. Imo Udonwa, a prominent member of PDP in the State and former member of the State House of Assembly and an associate of former Governor Victor Attah, was murdered because of his rumoured aspiration to vie for the chairmanship of the PDP in the State.

On July 16, 2011, one Abasiema Sunday Peters, was shot on both legs by the security detail of the Governor Akpabio’s wife because he did not drive off the road fast enough as the governor’s wife convoy drove by. The young man was not given any medical treatment. Rather, he was arrested together with the other occupants of the vehicle who were all students of the state owned Polytechnic and detained by the ever unprofessional Nigeria Police Force. The parents of the young lads had to spend much resources to secure the release of their children.

The list is endless.

Following the pre – election violence that engulfed the State in 2011, President Goodluck Jonathan who has completely closed his eyes to Governor Akpabio’s reign of impunity set – up a Panel of Enquiry to investigate the violence that trailed the 2011 elections in the State headed by Sheik Ahmed Lemu. On the sources of weapons used in the political violence which occurred in Akwa Ibom State the panel found that sophisticated weapons employed in state included “pistols, pump action guns, RPGs, grenades, SMGs, AK 47s”. This point is important because of the frequent and free use of weapons by hooligans who now feel immuned from criminal prosecution.

Late last year, the Department of State Service (DSS), Akwa Ibom State Command, embarked on a covert operation which led to the recovery of arms in the state? (See. Punch Newspaper of October 5, 2014). The proliferation of arms in the state is one of the legacies of Governor Akpabio. Before Akpabio’s emergence, cases of killings and political violence was rare in the state. Today, everyone lives in fear, things have fallen apart and the centre can no longer hold. Security has completely eluded the oil rich state; it is either you are a sycophant of the government or an enemy.

With less than seventy (70) days to the ends of Akpabio’s soulless, despotic and murderous regime, the state is again in flames. Some deceitful minds may seek to exonerate the governor from the killings and violence in the State. But the question is: would these nefarious crimes have taken place under the leadership of a governor who has aversion for criminality? Responsibility is the hallmark of leadership, someone has to account for the blood of innocent Nigerians that has been wasted in Akwa Ibom State since May 29, 2007 to date.

Painfully, no one has been prosecuted for these atrocities against humanity. People who ordinarily shouldn’t be heard in public are the ones calling the shots in Akwa Ibom State. Touts, illiterates, cultists and thugs are being venerated by the political class. The good people have been completely relegated under Akpabio. Governance has been reduced to a full blown criminal enterprise.

When I consider the many threats to my life for refusing to dine with the scavengers of democracy in my dear State, it becomes morally compelling to speak out so that history may vindicate us. Akwa Ibom people have had enough of this impunity and terror. Akpabio should know that the International Criminal Court (ICC) is still in existence. Therefore, if he escapes justice in ‘Jonathan’s Nigeria’, the international community will bring him to justice.

Enough is enough!

Inibehe Effiong is the Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders ( COHRD ).

Email : inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Gov. Akpabio’s Reign Of Terror And The Politics Of Blood In Akwa Ibom State, By Inibehe Effiong

Open Letter To The First Lady, Dame Patience Faka Jonathan, By Inibehe Effiong

Dear Dame Patience Faka Jonathan,

I hope all is well with you and your family? Let me begin by apologising for conveying this message to you through this medium. If it were possible, I would have preferred to converse with you directly to obviate the public backlash that may likely be occasioned by this open letter.

Mrs. Patience Jonathan
| credits: kenetomagazine.blogspot.com

However, I just had to perish the thought of communicating my concerns to you ‘one on one’ owing to the unbeatable protocol associated with you and the countless combat ready armed security officers that follow you all the time except maybe when you are passing feces or attending to your conjugal obligations. That is if you still have time for that given your deep involvement in state affairs. Let me also apologise for the frequent use of the pronoun ‘I’ in this letter. It is not indicative of ego or self – glorification but unavoidable in view of the very nature of this piece.

Madam, be rest assured that before writing this long innocuous letter, I had dispassionately ruminated over the possible consequences of an ‘ordinary’ citizen like me engaging the most ‘vociferous’, powerful and dreaded woman of the most populous black nation on earth. I equally adverted my mind to the fact that you are not only a married woman but the wife of the President and Commander – In – Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. I did that because in my culture, it is not permissible to express perceivable insolence towards a married woman.

Let me quickly state that this cultural immunity is not rigid. The immunity is liable to be disregarded, taken away or waived. When a married woman exudes total contempt for acceptable cultural, moral, ethical and legal prescriptions and standards without reference and regard to her marital status she is deemed to have waived this immunity and will be treated like any other person. Madam, as someone who aspires to be with God in Heaven on the last day, can you honestly say that your public conduct and utterances entitles you to this cultural marital respect and immunity?.

Just in case you are oblivious of the non – recognition of the office of the First Lady by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and by any other law in Nigeria, may I humbly put you on notice that a ‘First Lady’ whether of Nigeria or of a state of the federation is and remains an unconstitutional being. It is a creation of the society and the political class not law.

Being the wife of the president or governor does not make one a public officer; it does not confer any legally cognisable privilege or right. You were quoted by a section of the media sometime ago while deprecating your state governor, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi for demolishing waterfront settlements in Port Harcourt as saying that you are “the highest political office holder from Rivers State”. If indeed you said so, then something is wrong. If you doubt my submission, please consult your lawyer for legal advice.

Whatever respect and recognition is accorded you and wives of governors by other citizens of this country is purely out of courtesy. It is not because they stand to lose anything if they don’t respect you. It does not also imply that they regard you as anything more than what you are; a woman that happens to be the wife of the president. Recall that Nobel Laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka had admonished you in the past to first be a lady before being a “first lady”. He also described you as a “mere domestic appendage “. Mr. Soyinka actually spoke the minds of millions of Nigerians especially we the “collective children of anger”.

Madam, in the past few days, you’ve been polluting the already murky waters of our politics with inciting, reprehensible and nauseating utterances targeted at an individual that has not offended you in any way; an individual whose only ‘transgression’ is his patriotic aspiration to rescue our nation from the very agonising precipice that your beloved husband has taken it to. This man to the best of my knowledge has never said anything offensive about you. His wife, has never disparage your darling husband.

During one of your recent needless campaign tour(s), you reportedly described the presidential candidate of the opposition All Progressives Congress ( APC ), General Muhammadu Buhari  as “brain dead”. An unfortunate outburst that has been upheld and reiterated by the spokesperson of your husband’s second term campaign organization, Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode who is presently standing trial on corruption charges. Haba Madam! Is it not you that is called ‘Mama Peace’? Are you no longer the founder and president of the African First Ladies Peace Mission?. So why instigate violence and rancour? Why are you making statements that are capable of derailing our electoral process?

It is widely reported in the media that you are at war with the governor of your husband’s home state, Bayelsa, Mr. Seriake Dickson. We understand this cold war has adversely affected the electoral fortunes of your husband in the state and there appears to be no sign of resolution at the moment. Cases of political rivalry abound in other parts of the country because of your meddlesome and autocratic actions in the politics and affairs of this country.

Please do not get me wrong, it is not my wish that you or the future wives of presidents and governors of this country be confined to the kitchen. Indeed, I am an advocate of women emancipation. I don’t subscribe to any kind of gender discrimination because we are all children of God with fundamental right under Constitution. I believe that women have equal leadership capabilities with men and should not be relegated in politics.

However, in saner climes, first ladies only play ceremonial roles. They don’t arrogate governmental powers to themselves to the detriment of their country. So why is your case different? Is it because your husband has contributed in making Nigeria a lawless nation where anything goes? Or could it possibly be because one dishonourable member of the Rivers State House of Assembly referred to you as his “jesus christ”?

Dear first lady, you are not the first woman on planet earth whose husband is privileged to be the president of a country. Others were before you, and many will be after you. So there is nothing peculiar or spiritual in being the wife of the president of a country. I am emphasising this point because it’s time you stop tormenting the soul of this country. It’s time you retrace your steps and retreat from your inglorious war of attrition and campaign of calumny against weak and innocent people. Why should Lagos, Rivers and other states be shut down because of your visits? Why should innocent citizens be subjected to untold hardship because of your movement(s )?.

God forbid that I should willfully set out to crucify or denigrate you. If not for anything, you are old enough to be my mother. But I cannot imagine a woman that gave birth to me recklessly exercising totalitarian, absolute and arbitrary powers at the peril of innocent people simply because her husband is the president of the country. No self – respecting woman will act and talk in a manner capable of portraying her husband as weak and irresponsible.

There is a school of thought that postulates that the wife of a president is the ‘mother’ of the nation. Supposing that postulation is plausible and tenable, then you’re the mother of Nigeria. If that is the case, please treat other citizens as your children. When a child is hungry ( as Nigerians are ) it is the duty of a responsible mother to give them food not sorrow, tears and stones. Please, I urge you in the name of whatever you venerate to treat and address people with respect and dignity so that they can reciprocate same.

Always be mindful of the fact that Nigeria is greater than the first family. It is greater than Dr. Goodluck Jonathan. Without Nigeria, there will be no country for your husband to lead. And without your husband you will not be the wife of the president. Also, please take out time to appease those you have wrongly hurt these past years because your days in Aso Rock are numbered. Nigerians are tired of the lies, excuses and failings of your husband.

Nigerians are not prepared to tolerate another four years of the locust. In 2011, your husband told us the story of his humble and undignified childhood; that he had no shoes. We were seduced, we voted for him in the hope that he will appreciate the historical significance of his election. Instead of paying us back with responsible and God fearing leadership, he took away our tattered slippers and gave it to the dogs. Now again, he thinks his ethnic, religious and hypocritical messages will secure him a second term.

Chai, there is God ooo!

Inibehe Effiong is a Human Rights Activist and Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders ( COHRD ).

Email : inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Open Letter To The First Lady, Dame Patience Faka Jonathan, By Inibehe Effiong

2015: Why Jonathan And PDP Will Loss In Akwa Ibom State, By Inibehe Effiong

I know countless people from Akwa Ibom State that will never vote for Goodluck Ebele Jonathan in 2015. Most of them cannot declare their stance publicly for fear of being haunted, maligned and insulted by the ever abusive pro-Jonathan attack dogs.

Jonathan takes nomination form

Apart from the indubitable fact that there is practically no federal presence in terms of empowerment and projects in the state since Jonathan’s emergence, these set of detribalised Akwa Ibomites are totally disenchanted with the conspiratorial silence on and obvious acquiescence of Mr. Jonathan with Governor Godswill Akpabio’s dictatorial tendencies, especially as it concerns the forthcoming gubernatorial election in the state.

Those who arrogantly boast that Akwa Ibom State is a “PDP State” should get ready for a shocker come 2015. I am very aware that this crude arrogance stem from the very notorious PDP culture of rigging and violence during elections as witnessed during the 2011 elections in Akwa Ibom State.

The truth is that less than five percent (5%) of Akwa Ibom residents and indigenes are registered or card-carrying members of political parties. Our people are not really obsessed with any political party. They are primarily interested in the candidate(s) that represent their collective resolve for good governance, democratic dividends and better welfare.

The 2015 elections will be a watershed in the politics of Akwa Ibom State and Nigeria. Those whose strength and confidence lies in the power of looted money and guns will be taught bitter lessons of their lives through the tested and potent instrumentality of the ‘Peoples’ Will’. The days when politicians cite “Abuja’s directive” as an authority for political direction in Akwa Ibom State are gone, and gone for good.

The 2015 elections in Akwa Ibom will not be determined by political party affiliation. The PDP claim of exclusive ownership of votes from Akwa Ibom State is borne out of sheer ignorance. Indeed, a tsunami kind of revolt is awaiting the PDP in Nigeria’s richest but almost poorest state.

As I told a colleague recently, if all political parties are bad, then no single bad party have monopoly of ruling over us. If all the political parties are the same, then let us try another party. PDP has shown us her capacity since 1999, it is time we allow another party ( whether bad or not) to take charge. There is nothing spiritual about voting for the PDP; the very party that has looted, embarrassed and completely ruined this country for over a decade.

I do not know those advising President Jonathan, but I am certain that they are leading him to a shameful and clear defeat in the next election. It is utter naivety to think that the people of South South will unanimously cast their votes for Jonathan in 2015.

By giving state governors the leverage to manipulate the PDP structures in the states, the PDP is set to commit political suicide, especially in Akwa Ibom State. Our people are fade-up with the insults, arrogance and provocative insensitivity of President Jonathan and the PDP to the wishes of the people and they will show to the world that there is no gain or pride in slavery and imposition.

The last time I visited Edo State was during the burial of one of our comrades, Late Prof. Festus Iyayi, during my almost one week stay in Edo State, I could see clearly the disenchantment of the people of Edo with the Jonathan presidency. Rivers State PDP is deeply polarised with the very courageous governor Amaechi of the APC leading the anti-Jonathan campaign. With the crisis in Cross River, Bayelsa and even Delta State chapters of PDP, it will be a tough fight for Jonathan and the PDP in the South South come 2015.

So tell me, how possible will it be for Jonathan to garner in 2015 the kind of support and votes he had from the South South in 2011? Yes, ethnic and geo-political lining is a strong factor in our polity, but things have changed radically given the visible governance failings and unpardonable political miscalculations of President Jonathan who thinks that the support of governors ultimately means the support of the people.

No matter how one looks at it, President Jonathan and the PDP will not sweep the votes of Akwa Ibom electorates effortlessly in 2015. As things stand today, Jonathan and the PDP should perish the thought of wining the 2015 gubernatorial and presidential elections in Akwa Ibom State.

Inibehe Effiong can be reached via:

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

+2348065142135

Viewed 1 times
2015: Why Jonathan And PDP Will Loss In Akwa Ibom State, By Inibehe Effiong

Withdrawal Of Tambuwal"s Security Aides And The Culture Of Impunity

By Inibehe Effiong

On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 the Speaker of Nigeria’s House of Representatives, Alhaji Aminu Tambuwal formally announced his defection from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) at the plenary of the House.

Tambuwal

The newly confirmed Inspector General of Police, Mr. Suleiman Abba, ordered the withdrawal of the official police security aides attached to Mr. Tambuwal on Wednesday October 29, 2014-a day after his defection, allegedly in compliance with Section 68 (1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

The State Security Service (SSS) and the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) are said to have followed suit.

I have read a lot of uninformed and indefensible commentaries on the effect of Mr. Tambuwal’s defection from the ruling PDP to the opposition APC. Some have argued that by defecting to the party in the minority, Tambuwal has lost his office as Speaker.

Others have contended that it is morally wrong for Tambuwal to defect to the APC without first resigning as the Speaker. This line of reasoning is not only deceitful and hypocritical, but a desperate attempt to rig history.

There is no singular provision in either the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act Cap. L12 LFN 2004 or even under the Standing Orders of the House of Representatives that states that the Speaker of the House shall come from the party with the majority of members in the House.

Based on political practice, it is usually in a parliamentary system of government that the political party with the majority of members usually produce the head of the parliament and form a government. Even in countries practicing parliamentary system, instances abound where political parties have to form a coalition for the emergence of the head of the legislature to be achieved.

On the other hand, presidential system erodes the influence and role of political parties in the emergence of the head of the parliament, thereby giving much leverage to the members of the parliament to individually and independently elect the principal officers without much regard to the interest of their respective political parties on whose platform they were elected.

How can we forget so soon? This is the same Tambuwal whose speakership aspiration the same PDP never supported. PDP never made him Speaker. As a matter of fact, his election was an act of revolt against the PDP which had preferred Mrs. Mulikat-Adeola Akande- the current Majority Leader of the House to be the Speaker.

Tambuwal was elected Speaker by his colleagues because of his charisma and acceptability, not really because he was a member of the PDP. So what is the ongoing cacophony about? PDP cannot eat her cake and have it. He who comes to equity must come with clean hands and he who seeks equity must do equity.

By the provisions of Section 50 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), the Speaker of the House of Representatives can ONLY vacate his office-

(a) if he ceases to be a member of the House of Representatives otherwise than by reason of a dissolution of the House; or

(b) when the House first sits after any dissolution of that House; or

(c) if he is removed from office by a resolution of the House by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of the members of that House.

For Mr. Tambuwal to be validly removed from office, at least 240 (which is the two-third of the 360 members of the House) will have to vote in favour of his removal. Anything other than this is and will be nakedly unconstitutional, null and void.

It is only a court of competent jurisdiction that have the power to make a pronouncement on the constitutionality of Tambuwal’s defection. Whether the much cited provisions of Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution is in favour or against his defection is exclusively for the court to say.

It amounts to a violent rape on the letters and spirit of the 1999 Constitution for the Inspector General of Police to declare the office of the Speaker vacant; it is clearly an arrogant usurpation of the judicial powers of the courts under Section 6 of the 1999 Constitution and it should not go unchallenged.

Were Nigeria a sane country where rule of law prevails over tyranny, the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Suleiman Abba, would have honourably tendered his resignation having displayed a clear political partisanship which is unbecoming of his office as the head of the nation’s primary security agency -the police.

But then, this is Nigeria where any idiot can just wake-up and do whatever he or she likes with atavistic impunity. A country where the law is disregarded and violated by those who swore to uphold it.

This is not about Mr Tambuwal

or the APC, I have no links with either of them. This is about the ongoing threats against our nascent democracy. We deserve a police system that does not dance to the primordial melodies of the powers that be. We cannot continue like this as a nation.

President Jonathan should see maintenance of law and order as his responsibility. He should rise above pettiness and egregious considerations. Jonathan should be reminded timely that his oath of allegiance is to the Federal Republic of Nigeria and not to his party. We have had enough of impunity under his presidency and the time to stop it is now.

The security aides of Mr. Aminu Tambuwal, the Speaker of the House of Representatives should be restored immediately. Should anything happen to him, there will be no guessing as to those responsible.

The Time to end this unholy culture of impunity is now.

Inibehe Effiong is a Human Rights Activist. He can be reached via-

+2348065142135 or

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Viewed 1 times
Withdrawal Of Tambuwal"s Security Aides And The Culture Of Impunity

Nigeria At 54: The Shame Of A Nation And Why We Should Not Celebrate

By Inibehe Effiong

What is ‘Nigeria’? Who is really a Nigerian citizen? Would Nigeria have fared better if she was still under British colonial rule? Is mere political independence the ultimate measure of a nation’s greatness and pride? Are there cogent, verifiable and justifiable reasons for celebrating the 54th independence anniversary of the nation Nigeria? When we say or exclaim ‘happy independence day’, what do we really mean?

Nigeria

I deem it necessary and most expedient to commence this piece with the above thought- provoking and somewhat rhetorical and unconventional questions which are intended to direct our minds away from the usual and obscure Nigerian psyche to enable us properly appreciate the other side of the argument; that at 54, we should not be celebrating but protesting on the streets.

There is a common epitaph that a fool at 40 is a fool forever, in other words, if at the age of 40, a man still behaves foolishly, then he is an irredeemable fool. While this is usually said in reference to a human being, it also has some practical bearing to the life of a nation as well. Nigeria as an independent political entity was birthed on October 1st, 1960; 54 years ago. So Nigeria is well over 40, but her very existence is being threatened by the wilful, unpardonable, crass and almost irredeemable foolishness of her leaders.

It will be unfair and intellectually dishonest to equate or compare Nigeria with America, France, Britain, Germany and other Western and European nations, just as it will be fraudulent to compare Nigeria with Zimbabwe, South Sudan, Guinea-Bissau Mozambique, or Serra Lone.

But then, there is no sin in a child emulating the mature ways of his elders. There is absolutely nothing wrong in Nigeria taking after these sane and developed countries in areas like credible elections and in the fight against corruption. If we can emulate their fashion, sexual orientation, phonetics, and other cultural indices, why can’t we do the same in our governance practice and democratic ethos?

It is not an excuse that Nigeria is only 54, it is an indictment. Yes, Rome wasn’t built in a day, but there was a systematic, sincere and conscious effort to build Rome.

At almost the same time Nigeria gained self-rule from the United Kingdom on October 1,1960, several other countries also achieved the same feat. Few examples will suffice.

Malaysia, a Southeast Asian country, is just about three years older than Nigeria. It also gained her independence from the United Kingdom on August 31, 1957.

Singapore is Nigeria’s ‘younger sister’ by five years. It seceded from the Malaysian Federation on August 9, 1965.

Cyprus, an island country in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, also got its independence from the same United Kingdom on August 16, 1960, incidentally, it also celebrates it on October 1, 1960, the same day with Nigeria.

South Africa had gained her independence since December 11, 1931, but the British monarch remained head of state. It only became a republic in 1961. It was not until 1994 that South Africa became a truly liberated country, having officially brought the apartheid era to an end that year, with the strong support of Nigeria.

Today, Malaysia, Singapore, Cyprus and South Africa have by far surpassed Nigeria in terms of political, economic educational, technological, institutional and democratic indices. By indices, I mean practical, visible and verifiable evidence of growth and human capital development. Not the useless and serially false voodoo economic statistics that the rulers of Nigeria occasionally throw at our faces to cajole and deceive the gullible.  The GDP that Nigerian officials usually and arrogantly boast about when it suits their fancies is not the globally known Gross Domestic Product in economic. GDP in Nigeria means ‘Government Deceiving People’.

At 54, we are yet to agree on the system of government that is best suitable for us, we are still running around from one useless Conference, National Conference and Political Conference to the other. We are still debating whether Nigeria should be a secular or theocratic state; we are still killing and fighting in the name of religion.

Even as we approach another election year, the debate today is not about the issues- education, unemployment, infrastructure, institutions, health care, human rights, poverty, etc. But whether the next President should come from the North, core North, South South and whether he should be a Christian or a Muslim. We are busy cursing and fighting each other because of zoning when saner countries are talking of going to the space, finding a cure for Ebola, cancer HIV and other terminal infirmities.

Is it not very shameful that at 54, Nigeria lies prostrate, heading irredeemably towards the precipice, occasioned the well integrated forces of corruption, bad governance, poverty, decayed infrastructure and other myriads of problems besetting our nation?. At 54, our president who preaches “transformation” sees absolutely nothing wrong in associating with and appointing individuals standing trial for corruption into ministerial and other executive positions. President Jonathan has turned the National Honour Awards to a yearly criminal feast of shame where those who are fleecing the nation to death are celebrated.

At 54, the Nigeria police Force and security agencies are still operating with the colonial policing mentality with its usual trademark; extra-judicial killing, rape, extortion, illegal detention and other gross human rights abuses. Life in Nigeria today is not just worth less than a coin, but short, nasty and brutish. Nigeria today is a preparation ground for what the religious sects called ‘Hell Fire’. Indeed, whoever has survived in Nigeria will find hell fire a place of solace and comfort. Can any place be more hellish than Nigeria? It is debatable.

Amidst this state of excruciating  hopelessness is the nauseating imbecility and selective amnesia of a suffering and smiling citizenry, totally destitute in civics. Nigerians today are bordered about anything but their collective agony, we seem so comfortable with our present shared sorrows that we are ever prepared to abuse, curse and denigrate whoever dares to urge us to do something. We are ferociously ready to defend the stupidity, corruption and tyranny of the vagabonds in power who falsely pride themselves as our leaders once they our of our tribal, ethnic and religious leaning. Simply put: we are slaves madly in love with our chains.

Given our fatal failures at 54, we should not be talking about celebration. Rather, we should be on the streets protesting; demanding good governance and better welfare. For us to dissipate time and resources in the name of celebrating Nigeria’s 54th independence day anniversary is to show the world that we are doomed as a nation and people. Some people will ask whether I have not seen anything worth celebrating, my response is that that is sheer mediocrity.

Why should I celebrate when Chibok girls have not been rescued? Why should I celebrate when people are going to bed with one eye widely open? Why should I celebrate when the poor is getting poorer and the rich richer? Why should I celebrate when our hospitals have become death centers and our roads death traps? Why should I celebrate when graduates have no jobs? Why should I celebrate when we are more divided than ever? Why should I celebrate when corruption is now an official state policy? Please tell me what or why I should celebrate?

As a citizen, I am not happy, so I cannot wish Nigeria or anyone happy independence. Rather, I say to fellow countrymen; arise, fight and take back your country before it is too late.

Inibehe Effiong is a Human Rights Activist. He can be reached via +2348065142135

inibehe.effiong@gmail.com

Viewed 1 times
Nigeria At 54: The Shame Of A Nation And Why We Should Not Celebrate