₦airaland Forum

Question: If she new the country is "Unreformable", why did she come back? To nudge it into its grave?

This is not the first time David Mark has played "Judas". His very first public service of note was an appointment as Governor of Niger State by none other than Buhari. Yet, at the end of the day, the same David Mark worked as foot soldier for Babangida to overthrow Buhari. So, nothing new here.

I came across this interesting interview that I believe will educate a lot of people in this forum:

Source: http://fridaydiscourse..com/2012/05/interview-1-evening-with-balarabe-musa.html

FRIDAY DISCOURSE BY DR. ALIYU U. TILDE
Interview (1): An Evening with Balarabe Musa



In his interview with Aliyu U. Tilde of the Premium Times, on 13 April 2012, the first executive Governor of defunct Kaduna State and the Chairman of Conference of Nigerian Political Parties, Alhaji Abdulkadir Balarabe Musa, bared his mind on a number of issues in contemporary Nigerian politics. Sitting in residence in Kaduna, Musa spoke on his participation in NEPU and PRP, taxation, corruption by the children of emancipated masses, his call for a revolution, his support for Obasanjo, his differences with late Malam Aminu Kano and Abubakar Rimi, his involvement in G34 movement, North-south pilitics, etc. In this marathon interview, Balarabe Musa was hot. He indicted a number of personalities. He rated Obasanjo an idiot, Rimi good only for "make-up" (kwalliya), Ekwueme very weak, Falae lacking in principle, President Yaradua a tragedy, the Kaduna Mafia as “are greedy, selfish, reckless but very intelligent", and present stock of northern leaders as "mere commodities". After some discussion regarding governance during the colonial era and the First Republic, we went ahead to discuss the politics of emancipation.


QUESTION: What do you think was the reason behind your performance as PRP governors?

With all modesty, I will say that we PRP governors distinguished ourselves due to the training we received from our party. But there would always be good and bad people. And as I speak to you in 2012, if checks are made, it will not be impossible to find in this dispensation governors that have distinguished themselves like the PRP governors.

QUESTION: Coming to the contribution of NEPU and PRP. Malam Aminu Kano and the likes of Saadu Zungur brought up people like you. You were lucky to have the opportunity to implement what you learnt from them as governors. But there is presently the fear that the children of Talakawas (masses) who were emancipated have betrayed that struggle. After they have attained political leadership, there is nothing to show more than corruption and and outright theftof public funds. Here, are you of the opinion that the cause of your struggle is betrayed by the children of the very masses you emancipated?

There are two things here. Today, the system of governance has been bastardized. The practice today has become so bad that it is almost impossible for anyone to live within his means. If you take the ordinary worker for example, you will see that he can hardly live on his salary.
Two, NEPU and PRP only tried to cultivate public awareness. Moreover, they administered only two out of nineteen states then. Therefore, their effort was just a start, not enough to totally emancipate the masses to the extent that they would avoid these bad habits. What NEPU and PRP did was to emancipate the mases from traditional rulers and colonialists. But it has not emancipated them from western educated elite who inherited the two. Those involved in corruption admittedly now are educated children of the masses. Unless total emancipation of the masses is attained, this trend will continue.

QUESTION: Do you then see any possibility for that total emancipation in the future, given the fact that despite your saintly character, people, including some governors who were former PRP members, preferrd to join the PDP in preference to your party have, the PRP?

As I told you, the present political system and leadership that it portends are based on selfishness. But there will be a change someday, though it may not come in a way people would like.

QUESTION: Through elections?

Those on power would not allow it so. Even if a good person wins the election, he will not be allowed to attain power. Examples here are Abiola and Buhari. As Professor Nwosu recently said, Abiola did win the June 12 elections. Buhari also won presidential elections since 2003 and 2007. There was no election in 2011.

QUESTION: Now, in what way do you anticipate the coming change then?

There must be a struggle like the Arab Spring or a more thorough one like the Bolshevik and Maoist revolutions. Those in power have amassed so much wealth and they have corrupt record. So they will not allow any better person to defeat them. In addition, the opposition parties that have seats at states and local governments are not better than the PDP, unlike during the Second Republic when governors of GNPP and PRP showed some level of transparency. The situation now is so bad that nothing can check them. The only way is through a revolution.
QUESTION: Now let us return to the Second Republic. Recently, there was a debate on one of the internet groups regarding your abolishment of poll and cattle taxes as PRP governors during the Second Republic. As undergraduates, I remember we were very happy with the measure. However, a revision of our contemporary history has shown that the measure has has some negative effects on the economy of the country, especially in the North. It created unemployment, weakened the authority of government and encouraged apathy. Even one of your diehard supporters during the debate categorically supported the reintroduction of these taxes. Sir, have you developed a second thought about the abolishing of those taxes that you made?

There are three things here. We abolished those taxes because of they were a burden and a source of oppression not only on the masses but also on the agents of the NA system – mainly the district and ward heads. These agents were annually tasked with collecting specific amount of taxes regardless of whether the amounts are reasonable or not, or whether their wards could afford them or not. Some of them had to resort to oppressive measures in order to meet the demand. It was a burden which many of them were glad to see it done away with.

Two, tax has to be commensurate with the income of people. If a person cannot afford to feed himself, how do you tax him? Under the former system, you are taxed because your name is on record, regardless of whether you are living or not, whether you can afford it or not. This is unjust.

Three, the essence of taxation is to contribute your quota to development. Now what is the essence of taxation if what you pay is stolen or misappropriated?

Yet, even during our time there are categories of people, like workers in the public and private sector, that continued to pay tax according to their abilities.

In short, three things are associated with taxation. One, it must not be oppression or a means of oppressing the masses. Two, it must be done commensurate with the income of the citizen. Three, it will be used for development and not misappropriated.

QUESTION: What then would be your advice regarding taxation today that will encapsulate the three points you just enumerated, given your training as an accountant?

Right now, there is no need for any advice because nobody will use it.

QUESTION: You mean the governors will not take it?

How would they take it? These are people who are not even afraid of God. People today are no longer afraid of God, unlike before when a mere saying of Allah ya isa was enough to instigate remorse in them. This time is only for struggle and revolution. But that revolution must be based on fear of God and faith in Him, in which case the struggle would even be a regarded as a Jihad.

QUESTION: Okay sir. At the end of the interview, I would like to raise two issues. It is normal even in scholarship for people to differ from their mentors. We have seen that between Malik and Shafi’I; between Afghani and Abduh; and even between Aqqad and Sayid Qutb. Now, you and late Abubakar Rimi, after the 1979 elections were won and you came to power, PRP became embroiled in bitter conflict to the extent that you were expelled from the party. I remember at that time, you pitched camp with the 'progrssive' southern parties like the UPN, NPP and even with clandestine politicians like Shehu Yar’adua as you recently revealed. What lessons would younger generations learn from that conflict?

It is good that you mentioned how such conflict were found in Muslim history. That was the type of conflict that happened between us and Malam Aminu Kano. But here there is a difference between me and Rimi. I have been a NEPU member since my days as a clerk during the colonial era. Rimi was only a member of PRP.

Actually, we rebelled against Malam. What happened was that the issue started from Kano. Kano was different from Kaduna because unlike the latter, the former comprised of masses, traditional rulers, western educated elite and ulama. When the issue of gubernatorial candidate came up during the second republic, nobody among the elite came forward except Salihi Ilyasu, who then was a civil servant in Lagos and who some powerful civil servants managed to get him disqualified. PRP had to look for someone else. That was how Abubakar Rimi was picked. So there is a difference between us.

Now after the election was won, conflict started in Kano, though the majority of the house of assembly members in Kano was from PRP, unlike my case in Kaduna where I had a majority NPN assembly. Late Salihi Ilyasu became the chairman of the party in Kano. He prepared a list of commissioners and took it to Malam Aminu for approval. Lawal Dambazau, on the other hand, alerted Rimi on the development and advised him to make his own list. Malam would approve it, he anticipated, forgetting that he has endorsed the other one. Malam endorsed it and it was subsequently approved by the House.

Back in 1974, we realized that Malam had a health problem that renders him almost unaware of happenings around him whenever it struck. It was this illness that some evil people around him exploited, making him approve things which under normal circumstances he would reject. It was under such circumstance that our expulsion from the party was obtained.
A reconciliation committee was formed under Umaru Chief. Rimi and I agreed to be taking directives from the party only when it came from Malam directly. As governors we were bound by the constitution of the country with which that of the party may be in conflict. We trusted that Malam, given his experience, would know how to reconcile the two. An agreement was reached and a date was fixed for its submission publicly before Malam. But just before that could happen, those people got Malam to change his mind. From then things went bad.
We in Kaduna supported Rimi because if he were overcome, we would become an easy prey to those people. We also hoped that our action would make Malam contemplate his action and investigate those matters accordingly.

The party eventually became divided into ‘yan santsi and ‘yan ta’bo factions. We the governors met in 1980 in Lagos and appointed Malam’s deputy to become the head of our faction.
Effort was made to reconcile the two. the party formed a committee under Chukwumereji. He spoke to Malam, Rimi, myself, legislators, etc. It will be good to see the contents of the report.

Later when Malam realized how those people were making him to take decisions detrimental to the interest and unity of the party, he started some measures for reconciliation. This caused me to return from London where I was living after my impeachment. It was planned that a big gathering would be held at Malam’s house, including journalists. It was while we were waiting at Wada Abubakar's house for the gathering to hold at 10am that we received the information that Malam has relapsed into his sickness. The gathering could not hold and Malam eventually died.

After his death, we reasoned that since Malam did not live to realize his dream of uniting the party, the best honour we can give him is to ensure that we carry the effort to fruition. The party became united. Hasan Yusuf of Damaturu became the party chairman, Michael Imodu continued as the deputy, And I became the vice president. Rimi decamped to NPP. That is how we continued with PRP until today.

QUESTION: This leads us to the last question. Prior to this time, politics in Nigeria was regionally based. Though there was Plateau state that was in NPP already, Rimi’s decamping to NPP was the first time the Hausa-Fulani would pitch camp with a party from the south in a subordinate position. Before that Saadu Zungur had joined the NCNC but later, as he showed in his poem Arewa Jamhuriyya ko Mulukiya, he showed that a durable political intercourse between North and south was difficult due to difference in tradition. Since Rimi and other 'progressives' started to intercourse with the South since 1983 elections, the practice has continued through the Babangida and finally culminated in the formation of the PDP. Rimi in fact has revealed that PDP was named so in his house. Most of those who partnered with him since 1983 were brought in to form it. Now, after over a decade of its formation, happenings within the PDP have once again proved Saadu Zungur right. Obasanjo was elected as a unity candidate who the North believed could trust. But immediately he took over, things turned different. When northerners started to condemn him, I remember you were among those who argued that people should give him some time. However, after the 2003 elections, you too became critical of him and indeed became the Chairman of the opposition Conference of Nigerian Political Parties.

Here, some people believe that that was Zungur’s prophecy come true after 50 years of composing that poem. I do not know if this sequence of history – from 1983 to date – that I tried to thread across is correct or there is a correction to make about it. Also, given how Nigerian politics has become so much ethnically based once again and the preponderant feeling of betrayal in the North, do you think here will come a time when the two sides would cohabit once again under another umbrella like it happened in the PDP? I said this because many elections have taken place but the south has always identified with their own. It has shown that it is ready to elect a southerner no matter his defects even in preference to a better northern candidate. What will you say on these issues?

You have said many things. I would like you to bring back the last aspect of your question later. But I will try to correct some notions that I know are not correct.

The first political party in Nigeria was NCNC led by its first leader, Herbert Macualay. After his death which followed a campaign visit to Kano, Zik became the national chairman of the party. Saadu Zungur was since the beginning a member of NCNC, which was a national, not sectional party. He was its secretary. So Zungur could not have made a mistake because NCNC was the only party in the country then. It was later that NEPU was formed in 1950, then NPC and Action Group in 1951. NEPU was formed as a result of the problem found in NCNC.

As a result of the formation of NEPU, the colonialists formed NPC and Action Group. Most of the persecution of NEPU happened because the colonialists were afraid of the reincarnation of reformist Mahdi (of Sudan) in the North and its communist ideology as reflected in the Sawaba Declaration.

You mentioned that Rimi has claimed that PDP was conceived in his house. I am not sure if this is true but it could be possible. The history of PDP preceded its name. The Kaduna Mafia started to oppose Abacha and formed the G16. They invited me to a meeting at Adamu Ciroma's house. There I told them this: "The problem you enumerated were nationwide in nature. We are tired of people using the North to exploit us. Two, you have been with Abacha until recently. Are you forming this group now because Abacha has expelled you from his government? But agreed that these problems are on ground. So if you want us to join the group, it must be national, not restricted to the North."

That is how G34 was formed. We used to meet at Jerry Gana’s house in Abuja. Rimi did not know about this because he was then in prison. All the political gatekeepers of the country used to attend the meeting.

After a while we learnt that when Abacha became jittery, he met with Adamu Ciroma behind our back. We challenged the leadership of the group under Ekwueme for meeting with Abacha without our approval. We told them that the military is now afraid of us. If you isolate yourselves, they will overpower you. Later, they started taking steps for transforming the G34 into a political party. We objected and said, "G34 is now popular. Why would not you leave the group to remain as an umbrella "with the purpose of serving to discipline political parties such that they can be credible enough to restrain the military." And if the military would take over power, we as a group should reject them. Three, any party that wins credible elections, though the group will continue as an opposition umbrella, it should allow the party to work for the people.

The most shocking thing was that in spite of the political record of Rimi and that these things happened while he was in prison, just few days after he was released, when I went to attend the meeting of the group at Jerry Gana’s house, I was told that it will now hold at Rimi’s house. I was shocked. Rimi is dead. May God have mercy on him. For me, “I did not regard Rimi as disciplined enough” to handle this task and I did not see any logical reason why we would leave Jerry Gana’s house – someone “who was more tolerable than Rimi at least at intellectual level. Shi ken nan, things relocated to Rimi’s house. Then “I suspected something.” And you will be surprised at the people who used to go to Rimi’s house. They included Ojukwu, Bola Ige and even Adamu Ciroma who had the least respect for Rimi. “So I was frightened” that there was something sinister. I refused to go to the meeting that day. That was the last time I had anything to do with G34, which eventually became PDP. So it is possible that after this occurrence, the name PDP was given to the party in his house.

QUESTION: So the idea of the group remaining a vanguard that would check the excesses of political parties was abandoned… now it is a fully blown political party.

Yes. Exactly, we wanted it to be like the current CNPP. Unfortunately, the CNPP has become worthless. We only maintain the name in order not to give PDP the impression that they have been left alone to do as they like.

QUESTION: And about your relationship with Obasanjo..

Okay. PDP was formed and all political gatekeepers in the country joined it. We in the PRP did not have a register. Our philosophy in PRP is that whether we are registered or not, we will continue to exist as a movement for political mobilization. So we could not contest in 1999. But before then, an army officer – a General in fact – came here and met me. He discussed with me which candidate would the North support to ensure the unity of the country. Would it be Falae, Ekwueme, Rimi, Obasanjo or who? The army officer came soliciting our support for Obasanjo.

I told him that Obasanjo has a number of problems. But after a several visits and prolonged analysis, we agreed that Obasanjo “constituted the least risk". In fact, my analysis was public: As for Rimi, if I could remember I said some things about him which people did not like. I said, Rimi is only good for make-up (kwalliya), he cannot be “considered for anything serious". Ekwueme is so weak that he was of no use to Shagari in spite of the problem that Shagari had. Again, he was our chairman of G34 but he allowed this mistake to be made. And I mentioned that we put forward Ekwueme as a leader on a number of things but we ended up with failure, right from the time we were at Kiri-kiri prison during the Buhari era where we lived like brothers. There too he demonstrated extreme weakness. Falae, on his part, was the author of SAP. And if you read his writings, you will understand that he does not have principles. His only credentials are that he was associated with Awo’s struggle due to his marital relationship with Ajasin. Beyond that Falae was empty. I said under the circumstance, Obasanjo is the least risk we can take, despite the fact that any candidate in Nigeria is a risk. Later I was to use the same logic to support Buhari, given that he is not a thief and he has courage.

So I actively campaigned for Obasanjo. My analysis was once published by the PDP in eleven newspapers. But even during the campaign, I refused to associate with Obasanjo because he was distributing money through that general that was visiting me. Even after Obasanjo won neatly, I refused to see him, in spite of the pressure from that general.

After Obasanjo spent one year in office, I analysed his performance and concluded that he will end up in tragedy. A foreign newspaper published it. So Obasanjo was advised to arrest me but some people objectedto that. Instead, he was advised to invite me based on our commitment in the PRP to the principle of assisting any party which we helped to come to power. So he invited me through the same general. I told the general that I have done my best to assist him but we will not participate in his government because he has betrayed the people. Two, I am not a contractor so I will not go and be waiting for days before i could see Obasanjo. There, the general guaranteed that I should go and see Obasanjo and tell him my mind. I agreed out of respect for the general.

I went and saw Obasanjo within 15 minutes with the general. Where I understood Obasanjo is an idiot or he was being used was that immediately after the three of us sat down and exchanged pleasantries, Obasanjo asked me, “What do you want?” I told him, “As the President who is shouldering this enormous responsibility, you should not asked me what I personally want as the first question. You should ask me my feelings about your style of governance, given that I supported your election. Even if I should have something to ask, this concern should be the primary one. But since you are about to see the American secretary of state now, I will return to my people to discuss how we can assist your government to correct some things. When we are done, we will submit a written memo to you.”

That is how we came up with a twenty-one page memo. Dr. Bala (Usman) was with us. I gave it to the same general. Obasanjo acknowledged its receipt and commented on the points we raised in the memo. I remember that the first thing we warned him against was privatization. It was wrong, ethically or politically. Two, marginalization. No body expects margninalization under him, much less to allege it. It is a shame, particularly his comment that he was favouring the Yoruba because he was consoling them. We said he had no reason for doing that. We showed him the state of corruption and how things are worsening, etc.

After his comments, the general – who used to see three of us in the North at least once every fortnight – returned. I told him, “Look. Now that we have done the first thing, I can tell Obasanjo what I want.” (Then, I needed to only pick my phone and say I would like to see Obasanjo and his secretary would immediately arrange for it.) So I met Obasanjo and told him that now that we have done the first thing, I would like to tell you what I want. What I want is a register for PRP. He said, “Ahh. I am not a dictator.” I told him that it was he who registered APGA which had less spread than PRP. "Our party had also better spread than AD which was restricted to the southwest. And I can remember in 1979, it was you who registered PRP on merit. PRP is now stronger because subsequently we do win local government elections. Lastly, in your government there are enemies of the PRP, particularly members of the Kaduna Mafia, like Adamu Ciroma, who will do all they can to fight us. So since we have supported you, strengthen us in such a way that we can defend ourselves.” He said, “Ah yes. Bla bla. I know PRP's demands are modest and not difficult to meet.” But nothing happened. Instead, it was deliberately organized to ensure that PRP has not won election anywhere simply because the Kaduna Mafia – who “are greedy, selfish, reckless but very intelligent…

QUESTION: Sir, who are the Kaduna Mafia? We have heard a lot about them since we were small. From what you said now, it is obvious that Adamu Ciroma was among them.

Let me tell you. Kaduna Mafia is a collection of groups of civil servants and intellectuals of Ahmadu Bello University and institutions connected with ABU like Vom, New Nigerian, NNDC, etc. The death of Sardauna created a vacuum in Northern Nigeria. It is they who tried to fill it. They first emerged immediately after the coup while I was in study in England. As a critic in NEPU we were watching political development particularly in the North where powersas stronger. We noticed that they have formed a group under Mamman Daura. They had a magazine through which we used to follow their development. They were expanding their sphere of influence to the extent that at a time, no northerner can hold an executive position without a note from one of them. As I said, their leader was Mamman Daura; others included Adamu Ciroma, Umaru Dikko, Ango Abudullahi who was serving as their boy; Ibrahim Tahir was like their intellectual leader given his sound western education and the adavantage he had of Islamic education, Sola Saraki, and so on. It was an informal group that could be identified only by those who knew them. So we used to call them Kaduan Mafia (laughter), a name that was publicised by a Tiv journalist called Jibo or so who had problem with the group.

Anyway, in the end, it was clear “that we could not continue supporting Obasanjo without undermining our camp.” So we started attacking him publicly.

Question: Okay. About the last aspect which you asked me to delay until you have made these clarifications. Now it is clear that there is a problem with politics in Northern Nigeria. We seem to be at the crossroads. The constitution requires a candidate to get at least 25% of the votes cast lest about twenty-four states of the federation. From our recent experience, even if the North presents a very credible candidate, the south has shown that it will not vote for him. Buhari is an example. During the last election, he did not meet that requirement in any state in the south. How would this situation lead us to the unity of Nigeria and the possibility that the two sides would reconcile and live under one political umbrella in future?

I will answer your question in brief. The North that you talk about is no longer like the one we knew before during the colonial era and the First Republic. Now, the leadership of the North is worthless. Before, during that era, even if you do not subscribe to a northern leader, you will agree with that he commands dignity. It could be called false dignity of the imperialist or feudalist, but it is dignity all the same. He would not dance naked as the southerner would do. But today that dignity is not there. Leaders of the North are worthless. “They are just a commodity.” The corruption of the southern leadership derived from that of the North. Let me give you an example.

South south once teamed up with the North to keep Nigeria one. It supported the North in every election. But northern leaders gave themselves in in such a way that Sardauna and Tafawa Balewa would not do. Then for whatever reason, Jonathan became the vice-president under Yar’adua. Umaru Yaradua was himself a tragedy which the North allowed to become the president, though that is a different issue altogether. For no fault of Jonathan, a situation arose where he should be the acting president. But the leaders of the North objected "due to their limited calculations", though the constitution has indicated that Yaradua should appoint him acting president. If it were the former northern leaders like Sardauna, "they would have seen it as a matter of honour". Though there is a risk, they would say, it is better to take the risk than to betray (our partners). In the end, Jonathan even became the president.

Two, look at the ongoing corruption. If the northerners had been upright, would they have allowed what is going on today? If it were not for Shagari, this country would not have been in the unfortunate situation it is today. In 1979, the south initiated zoning. Members of their ruling class made the following calculation: With the discovery of oil, this country will become very wealthy. It should return to civilian rule. And the only guarantee against the return of the military is to elect a northern president especially from the Hausa-Fulani stock because he has a massive support in the North. Northerners would mobilize more than southerners to uproot the military. What remained was who would be the candidate.

At that time, the southern leaders objected to the candidature of Sola Saraki, Adamu Ciroma, Danmasanin Kano, etc. They said these are our intellectual equals. So they preferred someone from the emirate system. That is how Shagari was brought in. This was the Shagari who once said he did not see himself becoming anything better than the local government chairman.

(Unfortunately, the battery of the camera ran down as he was making this last point.)

Is it not quite obvious to people that, this abominable creature--Sule Lamido, is himself a FULANI? Now, this heartless, self-loathing neanderthal is trying to placate the Southerners against his own fellow Fulani, all for his own personal (albeit) un-realizable ambition. I tell you, if you consider the fact that, the four people arrested recently in connection with the bomb found in a Mosque in Kano are northerners themselves, then it will be easier to see how the likes of Sule Lamido could go to any length to chase their illusionary goals. A man willing to malign his own brother for his personal goal is REALLY THE ONE TO WATCH.

For those who view the North with derision, something to ponder:

On the one hand, Northerners have been portrayed as backward, illiterates, ‘Almajirai’—Sons and Daughters of beggars, and on the other, they have arrogated to themselves the right, and the ability to rule Nigeria. How do the educated, enlightened Southerners reconcile these apparently conflicting portrayals of the Northerners? If the arguments are true, how could backward ‘cattle herders’ rule erudite, sophisticated Southerners for so long, even if achieved by the barrel of the gun?

The rest of the article here: http://www.issues-nigeria.net/2012/02/northerners-born-to-rule-manifesto-them-are-fighting-words/

If this is true, once she has fully recovered, I say, replace the Local Government Chairman with her, WITHOUT ANY ELECTION!

I came upon this site and wanted to share:

http://www.issues-nigeria.net/

Just wondering, has anyone stopped to think about the differences in the targets/victims of the different attacks? For instance, in the Kano attacks, the three main targets were "Nigerian" Police Force, "Nigerian" Immigration Service, "Nigerian" SSS. Therefore, the victims were technically/potentially Employees of the "Nigerian" government. So, if Nigerian government, via CBN rises to take care of its Employees victimized in these attacks, it is wrong? And, don't come out claiming that those Federal Employees and their families were all Hausa/Fulani.

By comparison, the targets/victims of Adamawa, Borno, Abuja, etc. were "mostly" private citizens. In Nigeria, at least, the government is not obligated to come to the aid of victimized private citizens.

Secondly, wouldn't simple common sense suggest that SLS couldn't possibly single-handedly write out a check, without the authorization/knowledge of his superiors? Are we just so blinded by tribalism that we can't even engage the use of common sense?

I suppose one can say that, when Murtala Muhammed and Buhari engaged in that war against indescipline, they must be trying to restore Nigeria's glory to what these pictures have shown.

HERE WE GO!

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LAGOS 000767

SIPDIS

NOFORN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/07/2014 (what is this date ??)
TAGS: EPET EINV EFIN PGOV NI
SUBJECT: SCANDAL BREWING OVER NIGERIAN FUEL IMPORTS


Classified By: J. GREGOIRE FOR REASONS 1.5 (B), (D), AND (E).

¶1. (C) SUMMARY. A scandal is brewing in Nigeria over prices
paid by the government for imported fuel. International fuel
traders have been falsifying the dates of bills of lading to
reflect particularly high market prices, overcharging the
Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) by $300
million or more. END SUMMARY.

¶2. (C N/F) On April 2, Chris Finlayson, Chairman and Managing
Director of Shell Petroleum Development Corporation of
Nigeria (SPDC), told Consul General and Econoff that a
scandal is brewing within the NNPC over payments made to
international fuel marketers. Finlayson said some marketers
have been changing the dates when fuel shipments bound for
Nigeria were loaded in order to take advantage of
particularly high market prices. He said the total
overpayment by NNPC may be as high as $330 million.
Finlayson noted that Shell is not one of the marketers in
question, but is becoming a leading fuel supplier for NNPC.

¶3. (C N/F) On April 6, Femi Otedola, President and CEO of
Zenon Petroleum and Gas, the largest supplier of diesel fuel
in Nigeria, essentially corroborated Finlayson's report.
Otedola said over $300 million has been overpaid by NNPC for
fuel imports, and that many leading international traders are
involved. According to Otedola, NNPC contracts to pay its
suppliers the market price on the day a ship is loaded with
fuel. He said NNPC recently discovered, however, that bills
of lading were altered to reflect loading on days of high
market prices. Discrepancies were found when comparing dates
on the bills of lading with dates of landing in Lagos.

¶4. (C N/F) Pointing to examples, Otedola said that while a
tanker loading fuel at a refinery in Bahrain usually takes
four weeks to arrive in Lagos, comparisons between the bills
of lading and dates of arrival of some shipments reflected
only a four-day difference, and in other cases, if taken at
face value, indicated the journey took nine months. Otedola
said 73 shipments from refineries in the Persian Gulf,
England, and Venezuela listed delivery times of only one day.
NNPC is attempting to get compensation for the over-charge.
Otedola went on that most of the fuel traders supplying
Nigeria are implicated in over-charging NNPC, and showed a
list of 17 companies that supplied fuel in the first quarter
of 2004, several of which, he said, are significant players
in international markets, such as Trafigura and Vitol.
Otedola added that three companies clearly not involved in
the scandal are British Petroleum, ChevronTexaco and Shell.

¶5. (C N/F) Otedola recommended that NNPC stop contracting
with international fuel traders and negotiate purchases
directly from refineries worldwide. According to him, such a
move would have two positive effects. Otedola calculates
that NNPC would save some four billion dollars a year in
expenditures on imported fuel. (Note: Prior to deregulation
in October 2003, NNPC, then the sole importer of fuel, lost
two billion dollars per year because it sold stock to
retailers below purchase price. After October 2003, NNPC
initially stopped subsidizing fuel sales, letting marketers
import fuel to be sold at market prices. However, sources
agree that NNPC is back in the business of subsidizing
gasoline sales while it maintains a facade of deregulation by
encouraging private marketers to import fuel that NNPC
purchases at market price. NNPC then sells the fuel to
marketers and retailers at a reduced price to ensure that
those companies maintain a profit margin while holding
consumer prices to informal caps set by the Department of
Petroleum Resources. End Note.)

¶6. (C N/F) Otedola added that by cutting out the
international traders, NNPC would also enhance the
environment in which Nigeria's refineries could be restored
and operated. Otedola said he believes international fuel
trade "mafias" are behind the failure to bring Nigeria's
refineries back on-line and to capacity. Otedola is
convinced these traders arrange for the vandalization of
crude oil feeder pipelines, which keep the refineries at Port
Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna closed or under-capacity. He said
the international traders generally receive at least one
million dollars per shipload of fuel to Nigeria and have
grown accustomed to the easy money Nigeria offers as long its
refineries remain down.

¶7. (C N/F) As an example, Otedola described an arrangement
the National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) had with Sahara
Energy for the provision of diesel to an emergency power
generation plant in Abuja. He said that while a pipeline was
under construction to deliver fuel to the main power plant,
NEPA paid some five billion dollars to Sahara over four years
for diesel to the back-up plant. It was later discovered
that NEPA had received only about one billion dollars worth
of fuel, according to Otedola. Otedola said that he, too,
was contracted to deliver diesel fuel to the plant on
occasion; however, he petitioned the president to investigate
the matter after becoming suspicious of NEPA's ongoing
contract with Sahara and the fact that the pipeline for the
power plant was never finished. He said his intervention led
to an investigation that ultimately resulted in the
cancellation of NEPA's contract with Sahara.

¶8. (C N/F) COMMENT: The allegation that international
traders bilked NNPC of hundreds of millions of dollars is yet
another example of the poor management of Nigeria's energy
sector, and highlights the complex links between crude sales,
fuel importation, refinery maintenance, and energy production
here. Otedola is probably right in suggesting that
long-standing sweetheart deals between the NNPC and a variety
of fuel traders is keeping the system inefficient. That may
also explain why the GON just can't seem to get its
refineries running even after spending a billion dollars or
more on maintenance contracts over the last four years.
Otedola said he initially bid to purchase the Port Harcourt
refinery offered for privatization, but he recently told
President Obasanjo he will not invest in the refinery so long
as NNPC purchases fuel from traders instead of negotiating
directly with refineries in other countries and leasing ships
itself to deliver fuel to Nigeria. It is not clear if
Otedola's assumption that the international traders' stake in
Nigeria's current fuel market is the main driver behind the
country's refinery woes. But it is clear that the

fundamentals of infrastructure security, interim supply
stability, and transactional transparency must still be
addressed if the GON is to be taken seriously about its
efforts to deregulate and largely privatize Nigeria's
downstream petroleum sector. END COMMENT

That ‘Tam David-West’s metamorphosis:’ Pedestrian, puerile, ignorant, disinformation
By TAM DAVID-WEST
Sunday, January 01, 2012

Let me begin by ‘congratulating’ Tony Egbulefu for his attempt at being a Jonathan government apologist on the ‘subsidy’ question, which he himself rightly described as “subsidy conundrum” in his pro-‘subsidy’ article “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (Compass 08 December, 2011 page . The article even carried his pix smiling for a job well done. Well done? No! Rubbish.
However, if he had taken some more time to do better and painstaking research, especially being a self-vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst,” he would have saved himself the monstrous embarrassment of manifest ignorance and inaccuracies on the one hand and the palpable disinformation on the other hand, which I intend to highlight presently under the above caption of this rebuttal.

I apologise for the longish caption. But each of the selected words has its own particular import to my theme or discourse. On a rather light note my caption could be said to be ‘pygmy’ when compared to the ‘giant’ 40-word caption of the controversy-laden Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB).
Tony Egbulefu, “Abuja-based policy analyst,” joined what looks to all the world as the team of government-sponsored “pro-‘subsidy’ removal” hatchet writers who in the past few months have surfaced in different guises and with varying doses of disinformation to the public: Paid multi-page colour adverts e.g. “Fuel Subsidy Frequently Asked Questions” by a said “Campaign Against Waste (CAW)” The Nation On Sunday 16 October, 2011 and The Guardian Sunday 23 October, 2011 “No (2)” (I missed the earlier No.1).

The very elaborate 6-page colour advert, “Let’s Change The Equation Remove Oil Subsidy…” This Day 21 October, 2011 Front Page Sensation! by a said “Mass Interest Project (MIP)”
Altruistic? Voluntary? No. Never. A page of colour advert costs between N300 to N400 (sometimes even more). Even a child can see through the cheap veil of government sponsorship. And these programmed propaganda adverts ran for some weeks. Who picked up the colossal bills? Santa Claus government.
In addition to the above there were many pro-‘subsidy’ articles with varying display of sophistry and spins. Some of them were broad-sides against me, an obdurate, implacable unapologetic “ANTI-‘SUBSIDY’.”

Of all of them, Egbulefu’s contribution was easily the cheapest, the most bereft of substance, the most careless (ad hominem and libelous) the most jejune, the most replete with inaccuracies and disinformation. The most flagrant display, nay parade of crass ignorance. It was also the most widely circulated. All of these will be addressed later on in this rebuttal. Certainly, not edifying for a vaunted “Abuja-based policy analyst.”
His “Tam David-West’s metamorphosis” (The Nation 06 December, 2011); “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of David-West” (This Day 09 December, 2011) “Fuel Subsidy debate and the metamorphosis of Tam David-West” (Compass 08 December, 2011 page are all replete with all the above listed negatives.
He was apparently so pleased with himself for a splendid job of being Pro-Government and “Pro-‘Subsidy’ Removal” his “metamorphosis” ‘thesis’ was widely circulated in the media both print (some half a dozen) and electronic (internet). I seem to wonder how much was paid for this job. Shoddy job as will be seen later.
It is therefore my humble expectation and respectful appeal that similar gesture of robust generosity be extended also to me. “Balancing the equation” so to say. Equity. All for a balanced public good.

Before I take up the specifics, I must state categorically and with some measure of satisfaction and refreshing vindication that NONE of the “Pro-writers” have faulted me on the CRUCIAL FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE that THERE IS NO FUEL SUBSIDY. NONE. NEVER EXISTED.
The number of hatchet writers and commentators assembled against me is redolent of the situation of Albert Einstein and his ground-breaking “Relativity Theory.” The anti-Einstein even published a book, “100 Authors Against Einstein.” Einstein’s reaction? “If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!” Not “100”! (In: “A Brief History Of Time” by Stephen Hawking).
And so similarly on my well-considered position, which is buttressed with facts and figures and cogent argument that any talk of “Fuel Subsidy” is FRAUDULENT. LIE. CORRUPTION. DECEITFUL. NEVER EXISTED. All what is needed to humble me, disgrace me, expose me to public opprobrium is for the Jonathan government, especially his “de facto prime minister” (Wikipedia), Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, to accept my challenge for an Open-Space Public Debate on ‘SUBSIDY’ simpliciter. This is the ONLY way the public interest would be served.

No amount of government-sponsored adverts, articles, campaigns, lobby, threats, blackmail, bribing or “settlement,” economic Armageddon, doom prophecy on the Economy can change the fact of the NON- EXISTENCE of fuel subsidy.
If 99 people out of 100 (99%) claim that the sun rises from the West and sets in the East; and only one person holds the opposite position, it does not ever mean that the 99 are right and the lonely one is in error.
In their frustration to muster effective counters against me they resort to totally irrelevant and sterile diversionary red herring that being a Virologist, I may not fully understand the subsidy controversy.

My reaction? Arrant nonsense. I was oil minister. It was the annus mirabilis for the nation’s oil business. The records are there!
Besides, their Minister of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Allison-Madueke, is B.Sc, Architecture, Howard University Washington DC. I am MSc (Yale) PhD (McGill) in Virology.
The most celebrated oil minister in the world, Sheikh Ahmed Zaki Yamani, Saudi Arabia oil minister for some 25 years, is a lawyer.
Juan Pablo Perez Alfonso, the famous oil minister of Venezuela, who initiated the formation of OPEC is a doctor, MD Johns Hopkins.
Virologist, yes. So why not accept my challenge to a public debate on your so-called ‘subsidy’ and disgrace me. Why lily-livered. Why chicken-hearted.
It is outrageous for government to misappropriate huge public funds (multi-millions) to sponsor and ‘merchandise’ lies and disinformation about their phantom fuel ‘subsidy’ through their hired hatchet writers. It is corruption plain and simple. “Corruption is the use of public powers in order to achieve private goals” (Christopher Clapham). The “private goal” here is ego trip, the massaging of one’s sense of self. Jonathan, especially Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, his obtrusive ‘guardian angel.’
“Proponents of the removal of petroleum ‘subsidy’ are aflush with millions of Naira as indicated in the flood of advertorials in the media.” In “Again, the petroleum ‘subsidy’ bogey” by Ojo Olorunleke, News Star 19 October, 2011. Back page.

Let me now debunk seriatim Tony Egbulefu, the great “Abuja-based policy analyst. The government apologist. I do this not because I am worried about his piece. Not even a bit. Truth is like cork, unsinkable.
However, first, I want to set the distorted records and disinformation straight for now and for posterity.
Secondly, I wish to put him on notice (a fascinating legal phrase) on where he carelessly overstretched himself with actionable distortion about my integrity, which is pivotal to my very life. Because one’s good name is so much more superior to all the silver, gold and diamond in the whole world.
Thirdly, among the eight President Abraham Lincoln’s “LINCOLN PRINCIPLES” are the following:

One - “It is not entirely safe to allow a misrepresentation to go uncorrected.”
Two - “Remember that truth is generally the best vindication against slander.”
Three - “If you yield to even one false charge, you may open yourself up to other unjust attacks.” In, “Lincoln On Leadership” by Donald T. Phillips.
•To be continued

•David-West, a professor, writes from Ibadan, Oyo State

Link http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/columnists/guests/2012/guest-jan-01-2012.html

Came across this nice site with good articles on events in Nigeria:

http://www.issues-nigeria.net/2012/01/as-subsidy-goes-3/

Resign or not, who cares? This woman must be suffering from an exagerated sense of self. Does she think that a person's intelligence is determined by the circumference of his/her head. She can take her humpty-dumpty self back to her masters.

Buhari is more presidential than GEJ, the president.  Buhari has pulled the carpet from under his feet for his idleness.  He now has to follow the dictates from up there.   It will be a grave mistake for the nation if the Northern elites succeed in overpowering boko before the FG does.  Talk about political ransome!

To the bolded, didn't we see a glimpse of that when the merchants of death (BK) took their killing machines into Kano, only to soundly beaten back?  You have to wonder how the JTF could not do in several months what the civilians in Kano did in a matter of days.

They say Buhari did not win the election, Jonah did.  Then why is Buhari calling the shorts, in fact, setting the agenda.  A few days ago, after stating the obvious, that Nigeria is in a state of emergency, Buhari went further to outline his idea of the way forward for Nigeria.  Suddenly, here it is two days later, Jonah has declared a state of emergency.  Could it be that the "loser" is teaching the "winner" how to run a government without charging for the expert advice?

http://news.yahoo.com/nigeria-president-declares-emergency-north-164323735.html

The question has been asked many times, but it shall be asked again. When are they going to stop putting this country to shame?


http://dailytimes.com.ng/article/nigerian-ambassador-searched-drugs#.TvyCxffXnkY.email

http://thewillnigeria.com/politics/11492-Nigerian-Ambassador-Searched-For-Drugs-Venezuelan-Airport.html

By comparison, here is what Tam David-West related about his experience with Buhari as Head of State:

"One day I went to visit him, and he asked me what I would like to drink. I told him I wanted Fanta. He called his steward and said: “Please bring Fanta for the Professor.” The steward left, and for good five, ten minutes, he didn’t come back. Finally, he came back, shaking, and said: “Commander-in-Chief, there is no Fanta.” So Buhari laughed and said: “Professor, there is no Fanta in Dodan Barracks, so let’s go on with our interview.”

Source: http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/achebe-foundation/the-foundation-interviews-7-professor-tam-david-west.html

“Have we forgotten that evil thrives when good men are silent?"

Ha ha ha, this coming from Colonel David Alechenu Bonaventure Mark, the anointed IBB boy!. David Mark can be described as many things but "good" is not an adjective I would use.

This is the same David Mark, who was appointed Governor of Niger State by Buhari, only to turn around and worked with Babangida to overthrow Buhari. If he ever truly believed in Buhari's idea of responsible governance, would he have been so comfortable inside PDP? His often elitist remarks is enough for any right thinking person to see this character for who he really is--an opportunist, any day.

“I want also to seize this opportunity to assure Nigerians that we will fight corruption very seriously. Corruption has been a cancer that has gone into the marrow of this country and Insha Allah we will address it and do away with it in this country.’’

Okay, Let's look inside his marrow and see what we find.

<quote>

Otherwise I swear with Almighty Allah who created heaven and earth; who sent prophet upon prophets right from Adam (AS) to Muhammad (SAW); who sent down Attaurah, Al-ingil, Azzabur and the Holy Qur’an we may be force (sic) to deploy our men to your state, Kano, and make it worst (sic) than Maiduguri by the grace of Allah,” it warned.

</quote>

This is serious! Allah said do not swear by name or anything sacred in vain.

These people swore by all the prophets, the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Psalms of David and the Quran.

This is the extreme, this is the mother of all their declarations yet.

Kano and particularly this Emir has gone through the cycle before with maitatsine and I can't wait to see how they respond to this. I can predict that the Emir and Maitama Sule will use back channells to address this and get them to stand down from this threat. 

I am dumbfounded that they went this far with their oath.

I suppose a more important question to ask is that if they swear by all these prophets and the revealed books, then why do they go around killing the followers of those prophets /books.  This is where you will know that these blood sucking hoodlums are not only unintelligent, but also lack comprehension of the religion they purport to be fighting for.

For detailed information about this matter, you can visit this site:

http://www.omoigui.com/2004/09/strongleaked_po.html

Make sure you read or download the pdf copy of the report.

Have they really be silent?  How about this:

http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2011/nov/19/national-19-11-2011-09.html

very old article, 2005 to be precise if I am not making a mistake! omo, this one ' na to pass on'

Old article yes, but still relevant. Consider the issues raised therein:

Petroleum/petroleum subsidy Issue-- relevant today.
Corrruptiong-- relevant today.
Sovereign National Conference--relevant today.

History exists for a reason, not the lease of which is knowledge that can shed lights on often cloudy or distorted events.

Is he not among the people who made Nigeria what she is today?

How did he do that? Please inform the forum with any abundant and substantive information you can muster.

Be forewarned. 
This is rather long, but then again, it is like history.  In this interview, Professor David West is quite professorial on the bitter truth about Nigeria.

http://www.nigeriavillagesquare.com/articles/achebe-foundation/the-foundation-interviews-7-professor-tam-david-west.html

Given the way things turned out in the presidential election, is anyone willing to hazard a guess as to whether or not Tinubu even voted for Ribadu?

Looking at this from a different angle, since we know that ACN had met with PDP, what could they (ACN) have been promised by PDP that bolstered their bargaining position with CPC (aside from seats already won in the NASS)?  Is it possible that Jonah himself signed a certain “Post-dated paper”?

Much has been said about General Buhari's tears, however, hardly anything has been mentioned about the speech that lead to those tears.  Now we can peruse and ponder.

source:http://newnigerianpolitics.com/2011/04/13/buhari-weeps-as-presidential-campaign-winds-down/

Buhari weeps as presidential campaign winds down
Posted by adminElections 2011, Muhammadu Buhari (1983-85), National Politics, NNP Elections 2011 Updates, PresidencyWednesday, April 13th, 2011


Presidential standard bearer of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), General Muhammadu Buhari (retd), shed tears while presenting his speech on the occasion, marking the end of his presidential campaign at the International Conference Centre in Abuja yesterday.
Buhari, who was honoured as the ‘Noble Father of Nigerian Youths and the Icon of Nigerian Democracy’ by the Nigerian Youths Organisation (NYO), regretted that the 12 years of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) administration in the country had witnessed a painful and unforgettable look of dejection and despondency on the faces of Nigerians, adding that it had left Nigerians without hope of respite in the near future.
Moved with emotion, Buhari, who continuously wiped away tears from his eyes as he read his speech, said that Saturday’s presidential election would be the last time he would offer himself for election into the office of the president.
He reminded Nigerians that he never touched any kobo belonging to the public throughout his involvement in the management of public funds, challenging all the presidential candidates to make the same claim before the Nigerian public if their conscience was clear.
Buhari said: “The suffering majority of Nigerian citizens have witnessed the systematic raping and pillaging of the country’s economy by parties and individuals without much thought for due process or care for tomorrow.”
He noted that the process had turned a potentially-rich Nigeria into an international basket case, turning all golden opportunities in the country into an intractable problem. Buhari also said he was seeking to replace the PDP government because it has done so much havoc to the Nigerian people and their reputation, stressing that he joined the presidential race out of personal conviction and concern for the welfare of the Nigerian people.
In his statement, the NYO chairman, Ebenezer Oyetakin, said t he youths of Nigeria decided to give the two awards to the former military head of state because the group has followed his proven integrity, as well as his antecedents since his engagements in public office as an incorrupt leader who has relentlessly insisted that democracy should be practiced constitutionally.
-Sun

While I can not tell anyone why Buhari wept, I will like to offer some points to ponder.  Any sane, thoughtful person who can remember what Nigeria looked like between 1960 and the middle of the 80s and compare it to Nigeria today, will weep for Nigeria.  Any politician who truly believes in the potential of Nigeria, who also tries to make conscious effort to help Nigeria reach its goal of growth and development will cry out of sheer lamentation when he/she reflects on the life of the downtroden in Nigeria today.  If a politician is not callous by design, not heartless by upbringing, he/she will weep when reflecting on the series of death and destruction, the mayhem unleashed on the country by those who believe that they have to win an election by all means.  Think of the Youth Corpers—the Emekas, the Mohammeds,  the Adewales—who were either killed on injured simply because they showed up to do their part to help their country.   Think of those people in rural areas of Jigawa, Akwa-Ibom, Zamfara etc., who as a result of depth of abject poverty did not hesitate to sell their votes for mere pittance.  They will rather take the 1,000, 2,000, even 10,000 naira now than wait for a better tomorrow.  Consider all of the concerted efforts made by INEC to render a fair election, and yet, Politicians who apparently detest fairness and certainly loathe the poor, were willing to finance thugs and hoodlums to go about snatching away the legitimate rights of Nigerians.  Yes it makes sense to weep.  Even long before now, in South Africa there was “Cry The Beloved Country”!

Now, admittedly, this may be didactic, but please, permit yourself an opportunity to learn something.


Muhammadu Buhari,  between imagination and reality
Who Really Is General Muhammadu Buhari?; Tam David-West; Agbo Areo Publishers; Ibadan; 2009
By Kingsley Osadolor

PROBABLY the best description of the book I am about to review is to say that, Who Really Is General Muhammadu Buhari? is an extensive, robust, engaging and illuminating rejoinder to the series of views and opinions which over the past 25 years have created in the public imagination a persona that is at variance with the real Gen. Buhari. The author himself is a prominent, articulate and irrepressible player in the public space. For several decades, he has taken on a broad range of issues and persons, never tiring, never despairing, until he believes that the last iota of the particular or ancillary matter has been exhausted. He is not only a renowned scholar as a Professor of Virology, he is also a highly regarded public intellectual. It is certainly not impolite to say that Professor Tam David-West is a controversial figure. Indeed, that would be a trite remark to make, for as he acknowledges in his new book, "I never, ever run away from a fight, especially for a good cause." (p. 117). And he has served notice already to those who will pick issues with him on matters arising from the book. "I naturally expect that the wounded will snort and even roar and, of course, come around charging. No problem at all. I'm ready and prepared to take them on in 'open space'." (p,

I know Prof. David-West well enough. Fifteen years ago while I was Editor of The Guardian on Sunday, he was one of my regular contributors. If he felt constrained by the restrictive editorial space, or that the subject matter could not be conveniently accommodated in the op-ed section, he never hesitated to take out a paid advertisement to fully ventilate his views. Two years ago, as he discloses in the book, he deposited the certificate of occupancy of his developed property with the Editor of the Daily Sun, as a guarantee that he would pay for the advertisement of an extended article he wanted published. That compilation was General Buhari: In Defence And Categorical Positives. The Sun newspaper graciously serialised it for him over a three-day period in April 2007. And, of course, he got his C of O back. That publication has now morphed into the current effort, Who Really Is General Muhammadu Buhari? Nor was the serialised article in The Sun his first outing in praise and defence of Gen. Buhari. He had granted interviews and published pieces on Buhari, Nigeria's seventh Head of State, who came into office on the heels of the military coup that sacked the Second Republic on December 31, 1983, but was himself overthrown in a palace coup led by his erstwhile Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, who assumed office on August 27, 1985. On January 18, 1984, Gen. Buhari swore in Prof. David-West as Nigeria's Oil Minister, combining the cabinet post with being the Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). Gen. Babangida retained him as Minister of Mines and Power, until the author was removed unceremoniously in 1986.

In October 1989 at the NEWSWATCH summit, Prof. David-West granted an interview in which he contrasted the styles of Buhari and Babangida. He was arrested and detained without trial. Subsequently, he was arraigned on trumped-up charges that, while he was Oil Minister, he drank tea and received a lady's wristwatch as bribes, to compromise the nation's economic interest. The tribunal jailed him for life, but was freed on appeal, after he had spent nine months behind bars at the inhospitable Bama prisons in the country's north-eastern fringe. The author refers to these incidents in the book, extolling Buhari, while firing broadsides at Babangida and Prof. Jubril Aminu, a task he achieves briskly and then returns to his polemic pre-occupation with Buhari's defence.

Who Really Is General Muhammadu Buhari? was unsolicited by the subject of the book. The author tells us that Gen. Buhari was kept completely in the dark about the project, making no contribution whatsoever. But the author leaves no one in doubt that the immediate instigation for the writing project derived from the barrage of attacks on Buhari on the eve on the 2007 presidential elections in which Buhari was the candidate of the All Nigeria People's Party (ANPP), running against the incumbent People's Democratic Party (PDP), and Action Congress (AC). By the author's reckoning, in January 2007 alone, there were, on Buhari, over 14 media articles and three editorials, which were decidedly negative with hardly any redeeming features. "I've never come across such unrestrained hate, such denouncement, such repulsive verbiage against a fellow human being, a compatriot, all because these Buhari haters want to hoist themselves as super-patriots of Nigeria." (p.50). He notes, for instance, the title and text of the press conference addressed by Prof Wole Soyinka, "The Nigerian Nation Against Buhari". According to David-West, "It should have been more appropriate to say, 'Wole Soyinka Against Buhari', because Wole is no spokesman for Nigeria at all." (p.60).

But what qualifies David-West to be Buhari's defender, considering the differences between them, which the writer itemises? The author is an Ijaw from the South, the subject a Fulani from the North; the author an Anglican from Rivers State, the subject a Muslim from Katsina State. Former Head of State Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar points out in the Foreword that, in fact, with these differences, "the credibility of his testimony will, even for doubting Thomases, appear to be irreproachable and with cast-iron guarantees." But there is indeed more to the sterling qualifications of the author to handle his self-assigned task. He describes himself as "a dyed-in-the-wool pro Buhari" (p.53), adding that, "I write as an insider, not as an outsider. I write from first hand, not from second hand. I write with copious authentic documents, not speculations or histrionics spiced with prejudice and bias." (p.114). A meticulous record-keeper, Prof. David-West should alternatively have been a librarian or an archivist. He is reputed with a prodigious talent for research and analysis. He argues that there are at least two reasons why Buhari is one of Nigeria's most misunderstood and maligned leaders of our time. "One, laziness to study the 'Buhari phenomenon'. The real Buhari. This laziness often expresses itself in 'lazy scepticism', rather than 'rational scepticism' (Russell) or 'virtuous scepticism' (Dudley),  The second reason which makes for the Buhari-phobia is implacable negative mindset suffused in negative stereotypes" (pp.42-43).

Clearly, the persuasion for the author in writing the book derives from his personal encounter with the subject, who left a remarkable impression on him when he served as Oil Minister. Buhari's impact must have been quite telling, for David-West was no first-timer in public office when he assumed headship of Nigeria's oil industry. From 1975-1978, he was Commissioner for Education in old Rivers State; he also served on the Constitution Drafting Committee that prepared the 1979 draft Constitution. And, in any event, he is a man of great intellect and exposure. But Buhari won him over with the essential attributes of integrity, probity, discipline, reliability, thoroughness, patriotism, stoicism and self-effacement. (p.26). Besides, the author acknowledges that Buhari, a former Military Governor of the old North-Eastern State and erstwhile Chairman of NNPC and Oil Minister (or Federal Commissioner as they were called in the 1970s), was his first tutor in matters of hydrocarbon.

Prof. David-West's defence of Gen. Buhari is fiery, hard-hitting, argumentative, and occasionally sarcastic. The reader has much to make him laugh, as David-West crows each time he believes he has delivered a knockout punch to the opposing view. The reader gets the impression also that the author is holding court, and he is the sole judge. So that when he clears Buhari of a long-standing allegation, he pronounces the verdict with a gavel. This is evident, for instance, in the matter of the Oputa Panel on Human Rights abuses over which Buhari declined to honour the Panel's invitation to testify. After blaming the Obasanjo government for not fast-tracking the appropriate legal instrument that would have empowered the Panel to issue subpoenas, and recalling President Bill Clinton's retort not to help the Senate Committee define the meaning of sexual intercourse in the Monica Lewinsky scandal, David-West concludes: "Verdict: Buhari/Oputa Panel: Not guilty. Discharged and acquitted simpliciter." (p.156).

To identify the real Buhari, the author has first to rescue him from the clutches of the band of Buhari-choppers, Buhari-phobics and Buhari-haters, as he describes them. In his view, Buhari's image has been maligned by some 16 'sins'. Among the 16 'sins' are human rights abuse, Islamic fundamentalism, Decree 4 and repression of the media, Decree 2: State Security (Detention of Persons ) of 1984, the 53 suitcases saga, suspension of the Ooni of Ife and the Emir of Kano, the N2.8 billion 'missing' oil money (which was probed and dismissed earlier by Justice Ayo Irikefe), the siege laid to Chief Awolowo's house, lack of democratic credentials, the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF), among others. In coming to Buhari's defence, the author's duty is to perform the absolution.

To achieve this, the book has five chapters, excluding the preliminary pages as well as the epilogue and annexure. The work is dedicated "To all who are sincerely and obdurately committed to lofty ethical principles and values. Persons of rock solid principles." (p. vii). The Foreword is written by former Head of State Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, who praises Buhari as an extraordinary Nigerian in or out of uniform, and "a leader of rare qualities and even rarer attributes". (p.ix). The book has a Prologue, which is like an extended abstract, although it does not suffice for a reader who wants the meat of the author's contestation of Buhari's vilification.

In Chapter One, the author recounts his first meeting with Gen. Buhari, which was at his swearing-in as a Minister. He describes the process of his unsolicited nomination and the dispatch with which letters were treated as unmistakable signs that it was a serious-minded government. In Chapter Two, he explores Buhari's biography, noting his huge appetite for reading and recalling that it was not unusual for the former Head of State to return to him his memos as Oil Minister with extensive comments only a few hours after receiving such memos. As a student, Buhari had been outstanding both in academics and in sports; but his schoolmates already noticed that he was strong-willed, principled and that he always stood his ground. Considering his military ancestry, it seemed to have been no accident that young Buhari enlisted in the army, where he had a glittering career, including being a Civil War veteran, GOC, and later military Head of State and Commander-in-Chief.

Chapters Three and Four are easily the heart of the book where the author enumerates and responds pointedly to Buhari's critics and their catalogue of allegations. In Chapter Three, titled, 'Buhari's Critics', the heat which the author generates is as intense as that of the anti-Buhari squadron whom he wants to shoot down. The chapter easily passes as a scathing review of Prof. Wole Soyinka's memoirs, You Must Set Forth At Dawn, as well as of the text of his press conference address referred to earlier in this review. Prof. David-West takes on Prof. Soyinka, whom he calls his friend, for the latter challenging Buhari's competence to seek election on account of his unfavourable antecedents, and for the vitriol of his language. The author is livid at Prof. Soyinka, pointing out his inconsistencies in ignoring the unfavourable antecedents of another presidential candidate whom David-West accuses Soyinka of endorsing only as an after-thought. In a sense, the chapter conveys the distinct impression of a shouting match. Thus, where Soyinka referred to Buhari as "Somebody like Buhari", David-West leaps in with his acerbic response: " How rude. How intemperate, Honestly, I'm so upset with this indecency in language especially from someone I have respected. What does Wole Soyinka really think he is to warrant such cheekiness from him against a fellow compatriot"? (p.57). Then he adds, "the cavalier manner with which General Buhari is being dismissed as a presidential candidate or aspirant falls short of decency, intellectual or moral, especially from the heights it emanates." (p.54).

Chapter Four is the longest in the book, running from page 69 to page 224, that is, 156 pages in all. It is in this chapter that the author addresses the Buhari 'sins'. It seems to me that the chapter could have conveniently been broken into three separate chapters. The first could have tackled some of the 'sins' such as those on human rights abuses, media repression, Decree 2, and the trial of politicians of the Second Republic under Decree 3. Another suggested chapter could have addressed 'sins' emanating from Buhari's economic management, including his tenure as Oil Minister in the 1970s and the N2.8 billion saga, while using the section to highlight Buhari's successes in economic management which a dispassionate reading will show were quite impressive. Another chapter could have been devoted to Buhari and Idiagbon as the Quintessential Pair.

In rebutting the allegations of human rights abuses, the author draws attention to the fact that the draconian decrees, some of which he personally had reservations about, were drafted by civilian lawyers. This in my view bestirs the question of whether the principal did not get what he requested of the agent. David-West also uses antecedent and subsequent history as a major plank for the revisionism of the alleged human rights abuses of the Buhari administration. Thus, he argues that Obasanjo as a military leader established a gulag at Ita-Oko, and even as a civilian President the human rights record of his government was appalling. Ditto other military governments after Buhari. But he omits to recognise that none of those governments, for example, Obasanjo, Babangida, and Abacha have been spared of blistering criticisms in the public arena.

Understandably, because of his long-standing relationship with the media, as a preamble to addressing the Decree 4 issue, the author establishes his credentials cogently as an adjunct member and supporter of a free but responsible press. He claims that The Guardian journalists who published prematurely the ambassadorial list should have exercised better discretion, because the story indicated security lapses in government and simultaneously embarrassed the regime. Did that warrant a jail sentence? Journalists who read the book will wonder whether the author forgot that in the early days of the regime, even when no one had irritated it, Gen. Buhari granted an interview to the National Concord newspaper in which he declared deadpan that he was going to "tamper" with the press. As with the revisionism of human rights abuses, the author claims that whereas only one Decree 4 was promulgated under Buhari, between 1984 and 1994, there were 11 anti-Press Decrees. Journalists would definitely retort: who knows what might have been if Buhari's regime had lasted more than 20 months?

On the other hand, David-West blasts those who accuse Buhari of Islamic fundamentalism, because he had urged Muslims to vote for a Muslim leader. The author draws a parallel with the exhortation by a former President of the Christian Association of Nigeria that Christians should vote for a Christian leader. Besides, he charges that some of those who are most vociferous in maligning Buhari with fundamentalism are either atheists or agnostics, some of whom wine and dine with tyrants. He notes further that as Governor of Katsina State, President Yar'Adua introduced Sharia law. Nevertheless, the book recounts a number of actions taken by Buhari, which clearly did not portray him as a fundamentalist. He bulldozed mosques that were constructed illegally, arrested and detained a number of Islamic preachers for their violent sermons, raised the fares for the annual hajj, and throughout his command duties in the military, there were no complaints that he discriminated against anyone on the basis of religion.

In Chapter Five, there is an elaboration on Gen. Buhari's contributions to democracy, an issue that was considered in the preceding chapter, where the author had queried which military Head of State ever had democratic credentials. It is contradictory he argues, but points out, citing Kofi Busia's Africa In Search Of Democracy, that what was crucial was the style of the particular leader, that is, "whether the military head of state is an orthodox dictator (despot) or respects the 'moral language' of democracy". (p.150). David-West contends that at the Federal Executive Council meetings, Gen. Buhari did not impose his views, but rather was democratic in pandering to the wishes of the majority. I will quote one encounter in detail. "I cannot forget the day I lost, as Minister of Petroleum and Energy, a memo on Petroleum Tax. Both the Head of State, General Buhari, and his alter ego, General Idiagbon, supported me to the hilt. In fact, General Buhari was so sure of my pulling my memo through the Exco that he had to instruct the Acting Attorney-General, Chief Howard F. David-West (my first cousin), on the section of the NNPC Act that would be amended after the Exco meeting. Howard, in fact, walked across to me to further ascertain the relevant sections to be amended. I confirmed. However, after I presented the memo, a heated debate ensued. In the end, after the democratic voting by ministers, I lost, and this was after both Buhari and Idiagbon had spoken very spiritedly in my support. General Buhari's rounding-up remark: 'One cannot predict this council. I thought the memo would sail through easily.'" (p.226).

But the author falls into a grievous error by charging that were the above-narrated transaction to have been under Alhaji Shehu Shagari's Second Republic or Chief Olusegun Obasanjo's Fourth Republic, they would have lobbied and bribed lawmakers for the passage of bills. The comparable structure and arm of government is the Federal Executive Council, and there is no evidence that either Shagari or Obasanjo had to bribe or lobby their ministers. Even though Buhari's Exco was small, the process of lawmaking under the military is totally different from a civilian democratic setting. Or were there legislators so-called under the Buhari regime? It is also debatable whether as the author claims that, by terminating the Second Republic "parody of democracy" Buhari also contributed to democracy. Indeed, the evidence that the author provides of Buhari's contribution to democracy relates to, not his superintendence over a democratically elected government as such, but in seeking under the current dispensation, to test the legal underpinnings of democracy. This David-West describes as Buhari's "obstinate, inflexible and very strong-willed resolve to run the entire legal gamut in his principled quest for justice, even in the face of the manifest or palpable electoral malpractices and fraud which were visited on us with perverse swank". (p.228). I agree.

The book closes with an Epilogue, which is an anthology of some of the public reactions to the Supreme Court verdict on December 12, 2008, by which the apex court by a split decision of 4:3 held that President Umaru Yar'Adua won the disputed presidential elections of April 21, 2007, and thus ended the legal battle spearheaded by Buhari and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. Using academic metaphors, David-West weighs in on the commentaries on the Supreme Court verdict. On the non-serialisation of ballot papers, the author argues that, "It is like a compulsory subject requirement for a degree in academic culture. A student can score 'distinction' in all the other subjects required for the degree. Once he failed in the compulsory subject, all the impressive scores of 'distinction' are automatically worthless for the award of the degree, President Yar'Adua is very familiar with this, being an academic." (p.256). On President Yar'Adua's confession to electoral irregularities, the author reminds his readers of the harsh penalty meted to a student who cheats in an examination. "In other words," David-West writes, "President Yar'Adua after confessing (to) cheating or electoral malpractice ('flaw' in his own words) in the electoral processes that declared him 'President' had no business continuing to be beneficiary of the very fraudulent or flawed election, "(p.257).

There is no question that, in exploring who the real Buhari is, David-West calls attention to the achievements of Buhari while he was Head of State for 20 months. The record is humbling and thought-provoking. It is a clear message for us as a nation to demand good governance and a wake-up call for public office holders. The media, civil society groups, and policy makers will find the book particularly revealing. Under Buhari, Nigeria was exporting refined petroleum products. Petroleum products were never imported, unlike the bazaar and attendant hardship we experience today. Buhari shunned the IMF; our refineries were brimful of bitumen. His government also stamped out illegal bunkering for which David-West received several death threats and an encounter he relates in the book. An acquaintance even offered him a bulletproof vest which he accepted but never used. He asks: "How many people would remember that, under General Buhari, our refineries never had problems with Turn-Around -Maintenance?" (p.13).

So, when did Buhari commit the original 'sin'? This is a matter for future enquiry, as the author provides no clue as to the genesis of the allegations. It is certainly no longer axiomatic that good wine need no bush. Those who occupy public office owe themselves and the governed a duty to correct erroneous impressions about themselves and their policies. I concede that sometimes a target of persistent disinformation may simply throw his hands up in despair. But the weight of evidence provided by David-West indicates that the subject may have, indeed, been unfair to himself in paying scant attention to image and reputation management. But then, Who Really Is General Muhammadu Buhari? Gen. Buhari hasn't changed. Prof. Tam David-West has provided us with new lenses with which to view a misunderstood patriot.

Osadolor (Esq) is the legal adviser of The Guardian

Link:
http://www.nigerianbestforum.com/index.php?topic=24649.0

Re: Bb Heading For Another Defeat; 80% Of Literate Supporters Dont Know Party Logo
« #27 on: Today at 04:39:44 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OP, you are correct. Yesterday on the news on NTA they actually went asking people to describe the logo of PDP, CPC and ACN, most people knew what PDP (obviously) and ACN were, many didn't know what CPC was.


If the ballot boxes are to include the logo ALONE, many people may not be able to vote for BB if they wish to. Maybe in the North they will be able to spot the logo without having the words CPC in full view.


They really need to think fast.

Isn't it curious that the same NTA that refused CPC air time is now going around trying to assess people's awareness of the party's logo?  Which devil are they serving?

If still in doubt go here:

http://orenga.politics.ox.ac.uk/news/OReNGA_Special_Lecture2010/SpecialLecture2010.asp