₦airaland Forum

LadyAmaka:
For those of you who lack proper sense of reasoning and think that ruling Nigeria is like controlling your younger siblings thereby using all manner of insultive and humiliating words on the president of this country, when you will get to a position of leadership(if the curses you incure upon your life will allow that), may you be mocked and ridiculed a million folds the way you ditched it out to GEJ. May people never see nor appreciate anything good about your lives in Jesus name, Amen!!!

^^^
What words would you classify as 'insultive and humiliating'?

I want you to educate me in case there is something I have missed. Though I have said nothing on this thread, I have at some point termed the GEJ administration as corrupt and inept in general, despite some good things it has done. Would you say that my words are insultive and humiliating and I am therefore deserving of curses, mockery and ridicule?

agabaI23:
Can you mention the ones that are worth your time?

^^^
Sure.

1. The alleged release of PVCs to persons (traditional rulers, politicians etc.) other than the voters themselves.
2. The alleged meetings and correspondence with, and collection of equipment from the NEF. In these charged times, INEC cannot afford accusations of questionable association with partisan interest groups.
3. The alleged non-delivery of caravans and other hardware necessary for polls holding in a week's time.
4. The alleged lack of training of INEC staff for an election which holds in a weeks time.

Its getting hot in here.

The only thing I am waiting for is INEC's response to these allegations. Remember: there are always two sides to a story.

Some of the comments in the write-up by Messrs Clark and Co. were just a waste of reading time. But some of them were troubling enough to cast some doubt on INEC's impartiality as the umpire . And yet once again, the write up casts grave doubts on INEC's readiness to conduct these elections next week.

As I said on another thread -INEC has to issue a statement within 24 hours stating whether or not it is ready for the elections. That is the immediate task requiring attention. And after that, the allegations by Mr. Clark and friends have to be addressed. (That is, the ones worth addressing).

ARES:
its ok..... i wont resort to name calling with a kid. GEJ win or GMB win, it has absolutely no effect on me or my status. everytime i speak to you so called youths in Nigeria, you all amaze me in a very negative way.

let me educate you a little about centralized data bank.
Because you have a unique finger pint and face structure, dont you think it will be possible that you relocate from Enugu to abj and when you want to pick up your PVC, you give your name, and put in your finger print, that way Inec can print out a new one for you and automatically send a message to void your card in Enugu

Is this really that hard to phantom. but like i said earlier, GEJ or GMB win or lose, get hit by a bus or wins the lottery, it has no effect on me.

you kids need to enter the 21st century..... it has been running for almost 15 years now

^^^
Interesting viewpoint.

Akainzo:
You really have to stop all this your talk about 21st Century if you cannot apply that advancement to think things through.

A PVC is not just a data in a centralized database as elections are Location based. No one or country does what you are advocating as it will make nonsense of the voting system.

Number of registered voters in a particular location is used to determine the winner of that election. For example, if 3 Million Register in PH, 500 cannot decide to go and vote in Owerri as it would distort the data and affect the decision on who won and who lost.
Remember that outside of getting the highest number of votes cast nationwide, a President must also get 25% of votes cast in 2/3 of the states. This implies that the location of the votes matter.

This is why even though the database is centralized, the data is localised.

^^^
Interesting arguments from all sides.

I do think the poster you cited has a point. Some voters (for any number of reasons) will be in a different location (different from the point of registration) on February 14th. What happens to them? I can imagine drivers, transporters, and any number of migrant, mobile workers will find themselves in this position. And it may be difficult for such people to predict their movements with a measure of certainty before election day. The system has to protect such people.

But your point about Nigeria's electoral rules on spread and how it decides the winner is also crucial. A middle ground solution (for future elections - it is too late for our election next week ) can be found. I would imagine that the majority of voters in countries worldwide (Nigeria included) will indeed vote in places where they registered. For future elections here in Nigeria, the minority of voters who find themselves away from their point of registration (for whatever reason) should be accommodated by the system and allowed to vote wherever they find themselves. After all, they are not likely (as a proportion of the total voting public) to be statistically significant (and thus distort the rules on voter spread). The technology to make it happen smoothly does exist, as one poster has pointed out.

The US system does allow voters (under certain conditions) to cast absentee ballots, so there is a precedent to what the fellow you quoted is proposing.

Raiders:
it happens everywhere in the world. I know in the US, you cant register for the election in California and expect to use your voting card to vote in New York. Your vote only count for the county (LGA) and state you register to vote at. If people are allow to vote outside their register ward or state, it would increase the chance of rigging.

^^^^
I'm not sure.

I just checked the US government website: http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Documents/Voter'sGuide_508.pdf

It appears that in the US you can, under certain circumstances vote at a location other than that where you registered. The rules differ depending on whether or not the election is a state election or a federal election. Some states permit absentee ballots (i.e. voting at a place other than your polling place/place of registration) in federal elections only under special circumstances. Other states allow you to cast an absentee ballot (for any reason you may have) for federal elections once you are an eligible US citizen.

The website states: 'You are entitled by Federal law to vote by absentee ballot in Federal elections if you meet qualifications outlined in the Voting Rights Act, Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, and Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act'.


^^^^
I assume the information on this website is current and accurate. . .

Dr. Onunuju,

How much does it cost to drill and refine (locally) a litre of premium motor spirit in Nigeria today? Nigerians want to know how much it is so that it can be compared to the cost of importing a litre of refined premium motor spirit. Is it greater than, equal to or less than the current pump price of 87 Naira? While you are at it, let us have the same kind of information for AGO and DPK.

Nigerians want to know. There is no reason why this information should be known only to the mandarins in the ministries of finance and petroleum resources. Nigerians deserve to know whether or not a subsidy actually exists. Goddamit, I have been asking this question for months now and no one has been able to give me a clear answer!!!

Naijasinglegirl:
1. It took me a whole day to register for a voters card and another three days to get a PVC which I eventually collected yesterday, both in a disorganised queue where the electoral officers hastily attended to people who bribed them with as little as N500. Others like me were told to follow due process. Due process that took them 3 days before they got to my turn.
How would I be encouraged to vote if the process is that tedious and corrupt?

^^^
This is the third report I have received alleging extortion of voters by INEC officials. The first report alleged that voters in a ward (Lekki Area) in Eti-Osa local government of Lagos were also being strong armed by INEC officials before the release of their PVCs. As I write this, my wife is going through the same thing.
Could you give details of your area so that if we intend to file a report with the state REC we will have some details to back up the report? Thanks.


P.S. I am surprised the free market champions among us have not showed up to say the solution to this is privatizing INEC or removing the 'subsidy' on INEC's services. Can anyone explain how a free citizen's right to collect his voters card has turned into an extortion racket by staff of the electoral commission?

Shimog:
Buhari wants to fight corruption, and he told us that he borrowed money to purchase his form, now how did he get money, to throw around nigeria in his campaign, if not money that was looted before? dear Buhari, are. you telling us that you will jail Bola tinubu,Amaechi and others who have sponsored you now, if you find out they have looted public fund during their tenure?

^^^
You make a fair point. You ask reasonable questions which should be answered. But I notice you have said nothing about the issues raised in the article itself. You should be just as concerned (if not far more concerned) with the damning stuff thrown up in this article.

In a manner of speaking, the current administration owes you (and all Nigerians) an explanation on the issues raised in this article. They owe you far more than the so-called opposition parties do.

we deserve an explanation.

These are serious allegations by Mr. Musa's CAA. Particularly the bit about PVCs eventually ending up in the hands of community leaders for distribution to voters (a violation of the rules). INEC has to make a clear statement to Nigerians (within 24 hours) on exactly what the position is about PVCs and their distribution. The stakes are too high for it to fail.


P.S. We can once again see how our national character of leaving things till the last minute costs us time, money and sometimes lives. These elections didn't just spring up upon us. We had 4 years to prepare for this and on the very eve of the election, we are still running around trying to sort out the basics. When will we learn? When?

Even if somehow, the PVCs are made available to voters before election day and no one is disenfranchised, Mr. Jega should be taken to task for his Commission's inability to deliver on time and on schedule. The PVCs should have been ready and available for distribution long before now, no ifs, no buts. I repeat, even if these problems are solved before next week, Nigerians want to know why INEC keeps repeating the mistakes of the past. Can't we organize ourselves for once?

sbaks:
Wetin concern me? The last time I checked, I was never voting for a vice president but the PRESIDENT HIMSELF! (like I care much about this abokis sef? ).

^^^


You may not care about them but GEJ needs their votes to win. That is where your problem lies.

What is the way out?

Qiewz11:
Thanx for the info

^^^^
No problem.

Qiewz11:
Thanx for the info

^^^
Anytime.

Qiewz11:
Nope. Educate me bro.

^^^
A public declaration of assets by public officials is not the only thing required to stop corruption, impunity and misgovernance. But it would be an excellent place to start.

A public declaration of assets (or at the very least, easy access to information about these assets by any interested voter) is a hallmark of mature democracies. Before president xyz goes into office, voters are made aware that he has abc assets and liabilities. If there is a significant change in his financial position at some point in the future then voters are entitled to an explanation.

As things stand in Nigeria today, this information on the net worth of our leaders is hard to come by. The average voter cannot access this information with ease.

ooshinibos:
Thank you for the clarification and the education
Kind regards

^^^^
No problem. Cheers.

obaayo2:
ure right bro...Nigeria has the power and capability to ruin these terrorist, but since there is no good leadership...with this now..chadian and cameroonian troops will be comparing themselves wt nigeria army..whereas we are far superior to them.

^^^
No you are not far superior to them.

ooshinibos:
was that king wearing an ear ring ? , naija don spoil ..king wearing ear ring

^^^
The traditional ruler you see there is the Attah Igala, the paramount ruler of all Igala sons and daughters.

Piercing of the Attah's ears (and studding the ears with rings) upon ascension to the throne is part of the coronation ceremony once a new Attah is installed. It is a practice dating back hundreds of years, done in honour of some of the earliest Attahs who were female.

This topic is an issue that has not been given the prominence it deserves.

This is one of the reasons I have always been against GEJ. Despite Umaru Musa Yaradua's faults (and they were many) he set a standard with his public asset declaration in 2007. Unfortunately, GEJ did not share the same view with his (now late) running mate. OBJ also did not believe in running an open, transparent government with high ethical standards set by principal officers.

If a party other than the PDP wins the election at the federal level next month, it is up to Nigerians to immediately mount a campaign for a public asset declaration. If the PDP wins, then we know what to expect.

February and the months beyond will be interesting.

Qiewz11:
Declaring their assets won't stop massive corruption, impunity, failure of governance.
What Africans need governance and accountability. They can save their asset declaration.

^^^
Surely you can see the contradiction in your post?

There's nothing that says we can't have town hall debates AND a televised presidential debate. Nothing whatsoever. Those posters claiming Mr. Buhari's decision (not to participate) is a masterstroke are simply being dishonest.

Unlike some posters here, I actually watched the NN24 debate in 2011 where Messrs Buhari, Ribadu and Shekarau all explained to Nigerians what they intended to do as president. (The debate Dr. Goodluck refused to attend ). Farida Waziri? moderated that debate and she did a fair job. There were two areas in which things could have been done better in that debate of 4 years ago:

1. The candidates should have been given a lot more time to respond to Farida's questions. The allotted time for responding to questions was simply too short - politicians should be discouraged from treating answers (to questions on policy) as soundbites. Voters shouldn't be forced to make a trade-off between brevity and depth.

2. The candidates should have been given the opportunity to directly engage and challenge one another with pointed questions or statements about performance or non-performance. That's the way it is done in mature democracies.


A few other posters before me have given excellent reasons why a presidential debate serves the public good. I have nothing more to add to those reasons. Mr. Buhari's team may have legitimate reasons for doubting the impartiality of debate organisers put forward this time round. But that risk can easily be mitigated. NN24's Farida Waziri is alive, isn't she? And if she isn't available or considered suitable, surely out of 160 million Nigerians we should be able to find a few men and women who can organise a presidential debate worthy of the name?

A presidential debate is in the public interest, pure and simple. Dr.Jonathan cut and ran 4 years ago and he was roundly (and justifiably) criticised for doing so. There is no reason why Mr. Buhari should turn around to do the same thing this time and some people on here are calling his decision a masterclass in strategy and tactics. Do you think we are children?

bukjam:
I admit I made a mistake rating it. But even with that, madam adichie's assessment of the situation of light in the country isn't true. And if she truly experiences that when she's in the coutry, I believe she's one of those who suffer the extreme cases. Generally, in the country, the power supply isn't as bad as that, quantity and quality wise. Hers is an extreme case. No be this country we dey?

^^^
Facts are stubborn things. We may not like them but they simply don't care.

I have gently suggested that you get evidence (freely available online in a google search) that will prove to you once and for all whether or not Adichie is exaggerating. It seems you would prefer that I instead engaged you in an endless back and forth argument on semantics. Do you realise how much time we could waste here arguing about the meaning of 'poor' versus 'not so poor'? .

There isn't much left for me to say. Nigeria has 160 million souls and she generates less than 6000MW. South Africa has a population of 53 million and she generates over 200TW.

The truth will indeed make us free.

hermesprogidy:
go and read on the Enron and Arthur Andersen scandal and you will realise that even international auditing firms are not incorruptible.

^^^
Well said. Worth noting by all.

bukjam:
Are you talking about the quantity or quality of power supplied? Coz with the article she wrote, she rated both 1 on a scale of 10. I think its 2.5. Both are poor, but its def not as poor as she made it out to be. Its nothing to be proud of but the article looked so 2005.

^^^


As far as I am concerned, any debate about 'quality' vs 'quantity' of power supplied is splitting hair strands. The point the writer is trying to make is clear: she gets electricity only a few hours a day and when she does get it, the voltage is low and it ruins her valuable equipment! What more is there to say?

Pardon me but I didn't see any ranking by the author of the article on the quality and quantity of power supplied. Where did you get your 2.5 on a scale of 1 to 10 from?

Sir/madam, please do not attempt to defend the indefensible. I will urge you to do the same thing I urged other posters to do: compare Nigeria's per capita power figures with South Africa for example. Vague phrases such as 'it is poor but not as poor as she made it out to be' won't cut it here.

When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science. - William Thomson, First Baron Kelvin

ceejayluv:
So much venom... Well, as I said, I'll look for details of the memoranda signed by the new Genco and Disco firms. I can't conclude if there's such clause or not now.

^^^


You started an exchange with someone who clearly knows at least as much about the industry as you do.

We are waiting for you to come back with reinforcements. Don't be long...

Tedman:
While I do admire Chimamanda Adichie's literary prowess, this article here to me is an overkill, as the picture she painted of Nigeria's power supply is but a few shades darker than what it really is. A non-Nigerian, upon reading this article would think we were using streams and ponds to generate electricity for our daily usage.

^^^
As I advised another poster who shares your views - please find out how Nigeria's electricity generation/distribution/consumption per capita figures compare with those of her peers. (Peers whom by the way, we routinely try to deride and put down ).

You may not know it but there are thousands of communities and settlements in Nigeria that do not have electricity at all, or at best, they make do with low voltage that destroys electrical appliances and imposes additional costs on those who are least equipped to bear the burden.

We have to stop worrying about keeping up appearances. I am more interested in making sure our leaders solve problems than I am in how non-Nigerians perceive us. (in this matter at least).

The truth shall make us free.

bukjam:
Yeah it happens.. But only in extreme cases. Generally, its bad but def not as bad as she painted it. That doesn't mean the power supply is sometn to be proud of. Its annoying, to say the least

^^^
You are equivocating. As someone pointed out earlier, power distribution in Nigeria is effectively a zero sum game. Find out more about the average power per capita of our peers and then tell us if its 'not as bad as she painted it'.

texazzpete:
Who cares if it started with GEJ? It is a PDP scourge that tens of billions of dollars have been invested in that sector yet we are still battling to generate 4500 MW at a peak, for a nation of 180 million people.

next you will say it is not a PDP thing because it did not start in 1999. If all other leaders reject that it 'started' in their tenure, who will we now hold responsible? tafawa balewa?

^^^
We can't hold Tafawa Balewa solely responsible. Most of the blame should go to Mungo Park and the Lander brothers. And before them, Mansa Musa.

Its only a few days now...We will soon see if Nigerians have truly had enough...

gratiaeo:
Nice article. I don't know whether to blame our leaders or witches and wizards on our epileptic power supply. The thing don de 2 much

^^^
This has nothing to do with sorcerers, shamans or mediums.

This is simply 'men at work'. Deeply flawed men who have failed and failed again.

Leave witches and wizards out of this. Power generation is not a paranormal activity.

Dmentor:
Beautiful article for Nigerian people. But why on NYTimes? Washing our dirty linen in public? Is that a solution?

^^^
Don't focus on 'saving face'. If we spent as much time solving problems as we did on 'looking good' to outsiders, we wouldn't be where we are now.

I do not necessarily agree with all of the things Miss Adichie says most of the time. But her write up here is accurate.

One more thing: the 'solution' lies with you and I - ordinary Nigerians with voting power. We can demand performance from our leaders or we can suffer from their failure to deliver. The choice is ours to make.

Curlieweed:
It's a good thing you didn't get into the fuel subsidy issue. I'm ideologically opposed to the subsidy and government control of the energy sector.

I wasn't talking about hard here when discussing "political capital". Realistically, can you imagine the social and political fallout of firing about 50% of the Federal work force? I think a gradualist approach is more prudent especially when you realize that government spending (and revenue) as a percentage of our GDP is one of the lowest in the world. Increasing this take while keeping personnel costs almost constant will correct the imbalance in the long run. This will take a longer time to achieve but is a less disruptive alternative.

I don't honestly understand your question about legislative reform but I believe that GEJ attempted a wholesale review of the 1999 fraud constitution. However, it's actually the Legislature not the GEJ that's responsible for laws in this country. Sorry, that's the law of the land. Unfortunately, our inheritted Yankee constitution is not designed for radical, unilateral action by the President. We need to deal with that.

Regarding the reports you mentioned, I believe actions were taken on most of them. For example, some people are currently undergoing trials because of the "fuel subsidy" report.

^^^^
Somehow I missed your post.

We should meet on one of the many subsidy threads to thrash out this matter once and for all. You state that you are ideologically opposed to subsidies. That's fine but my question is whether there actually is a subsidy. That's a key point for me which is yet to be resolved. As I said, we must take this issue on at some point on another thread.

I'm not sure I fully understand the point you are making in the second paragraph of your post. I guess there's a word that should come after 'hard' and I don't want to speculate as to what it is. I guess there's also a word after 'take' in the same paragraph which was also omitted?

In my comments about legislative reform I emphasized the inability of this administration to advance signature legislation on its party's platform despite said party possessing a majority in parliament. That's the point I was making. You countered by saying that it is the national assembly and not GEJ that is responsible for legislation. I put it to you sir, that it is to GEJ's peril if he cannot point to at least one example of significant and far reaching executive-sponsored legislation at the end of his tenure. Banal homilies about separation of powers simply won't cut it then.

You claim our constitution does not permit unilateral action by the president. I put it to you that this administration has no qualms about violating the provisions of the constitution once the administration's own interests (which may or may not be aligned with the national interest) are threatened. You are no doubt aware of the repeated abuse of process by the executive at the federal level through so-called anticipatory approvals for supplementary budgets. I do not need to say more on this.

Last and perhaps most troubling, you casually waved away what is perhaps the biggest albatross on the neck of this administration: clear evidence that bringing corrupt individuals to justice is not a priority for this administration. What excuse will be tendered to counter this? Will the judiciary be blamed for this failure instead?

Seun:
It happened by mistake. A Iraqi economist created the structure at a time when politicians and voters did not appreciate the value of the oil:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/99680a04-92a0-11de-b63b-00144feabdc0.html also it's easier to save when your citizens are not very poor.

^^^
That article should be required reading for all of us on this thread. Particularly those of us who believe that regulation is a dirty word and that state owned enterprises are irredeemable and doomed to fail from the get-go.

I wouldn't call the Norwegian experience a mistake. Yes, there was an element of fortuitousness about how Mr. Al Kasim's path just happened to cross those of Norway's bureaucrats at that particular point in time, but remember they sought him out to provide the guidance they needed. And they made good use of his expertise - their country has a multi-billion dollar nest egg to prove it. Norway could just as easily have left the oil majors to shape the direction of their industry - and if they did, maybe Norway would be another Nigeria today. Or something close to it.

Norway chose wisely. It was also helped by strong institutions and a healthy skepticism by key decision makers. Nigeria chose poorly and is paying for those poor choices.

Luck had little to do with it. Reasoned thought and action were the key factors at play in Norway's decision to hire Farouk Al Kasim half a century ago. If it wasn't Mr. Al-Kasim it would have been someone else with the expertise they needed. (However, this is not to say Mr. Al Kasim should not receive the recognition due to him for several years of service to his adopted? country).

This article by Mr Atedo Peterside is a controversial one. He fires off the first salvo by proposing that, in line with his submissions at the national conference, past military rulers who toppled democratically elected governments should be tried for treason. Fair argument there.

The writer then goes on to describe Mr. Buhari as a vicious and wicked dictator who retroactively decreed death sentences on youths and who jailed journalists who dared to publish the truth. Again, I concede that this is a fair point to make. Mr. Peterside goes further to say that Mr. Buhari’s ‘wickedness and callousness are a reflection of his real persona’. An opinion, but one that Mr. Peterside is definitely entitled to.

The next issues raised are what the writer describes as Mr. Buhari’s unguarded comments about Islamic law being instituted nationwide. There is some merit in that argument. However, after this point, Mr Peterside’s commentary begins to unravel. His criticism of the infamous ‘baboon and dog drenched in blood’ comment has less resonance than his previous points. Those who understand Hausa state that Buhari’s comments were idiomatic and were not meant to be interpreted literally. This point by Mr. Buhari’s supporters should have received more attention by Mr Peterside because it is a plausible explanation..

Mr. Peterside goes further to then describe Mr. Buhari’s persona as ‘unelectable’, hence his search for Christian patsies as running mates. (This is stretching it a bit. It is strange to describe the election as ‘too close to call’ in one breath (see the first paragraph of the article) and then term Mr Buhari as unelectable in another breath. But I digress.)

The gloves are completely off by this point in the article and Peterside concludes his assessment of Mr. Buhari with a scathing description of Buhari as a 'torturer' in chief and an economic illiterate whose economic policy (while in power) was an unmitigated disaster.

Strong words. With the fiery baptism (deserved or not) of Mr. Buhari so early in the write-up, the coddling of Dr. Jonathan in the next few lines simply provokes consternation. Dr. Jonathan is described in mild mannered tones as being ‘unliked’, because of a ‘perception’ that he is weak and unable to rein the excesses of his party chieftains. Inexplicably, Mr. Peterside then goes off on a rant against public enemy number 1, Mr. Obasanjo (a man who for good reason everyone loves to hate, ). But again, I digress. Back to the main business.

The spin doctoring (because that is what it is) continues in the article, full speed ahead. More excuses are made for Dr. Jonathan’s failures - party chieftains, dodgy aides, incompetent service chiefs, inept security personnel etc. are all blamed for the failure to contain Boko Haram. Not once is the buck placed where it belongs on the Commander-in-Chief’s table – it is somehow forgotten that the president has a clear responsibility (along with his powers) to reward success or punish failure. The man with the power to hire and fire in the name of the Republic is conveniently absolved of any blame. Its everybody else’s fault.

Mr Peterside then goes on to describe a so-called paradox facing presidents aspiring towards a second term in Nigeria: stand up to vested interests and effectively commit political suicide at the party primaries, or succumb to these interests and alienate swing voters while limping into irrelevance. This paradox of course, does exist. But its proper resolution is what separates politicians from statesmen. The moral direction of this resolution is clear to all people of integrity. And Mr Peterside knows this. What Mr. Peterside presents as some kind of Sphinxian conundrum facing Mr. Jonathan is nothing more than a failure by Jonathan to resist state capture, accompanied by his inability to hold his subordinates, staff and appointees responsible and accountable for success or failure. Whose side is Jonathan on? Party chieftains, governors and service chiefs? Or ordinary Nigerians in their millions who stood in the sun to vote for him?

Not done yet, the author’s sinister advocacy masquerading as impartial, reasoned analysis then rears its head once more – he then paints a scenario in which so-called swing voters may be convinced to vote for Jonathan on the strength of a mere promise that Jonathan will free himself of vested interests in his second term. Not a word about what Jonathan has actually done in his first term to deserve a second one. No. Swing voters should vote for the man on a wing and a prayer. If I was a ‘swing voter’ I would be very insulted by this.

More scenario analysis: Mr Peterside describes the admittedly very real possibilities that an ageing Mr Buhari, if he wins could very well fall into the same predicament purportedly faced by Mr. Jonathan over the past 4 years in office: being held hostage by vested interests and younger power brokers within and outside his party platform. However, the balanced commentary by the author is again shortlived and the carping and sniping continues with a description of Buhari as not being ‘clever’ enough to understand 21st century economic and financial transactions - transactions through which Buhari’s more sophisticated associates will rob the country blind (if given the opportunity).

The tragedy continues. While Peterside makes assertive, sweeping conclusions about Buhari’s unsuitability for the presidency, Jonathan is given the benefit of the doubt. While Buhari is derided as old and incapable, Jonathan is described as having the ‘potential’ to succeed if he cuts off deceitful hangers- on. While Buhari is blindly ambitious and yet not 'intelligent' enough to run 21st century Nigeria, Jonathan will 'be hard to bully in his second term'. While Buhari will be outsmarted by the roguish hawks and looters around him, all Jonathan needs to do is convince the electorate that he can continue with his 'bold' reforms.

Of course Jonathan isn’t perfect in the writer's eyes. To humanize his preferred candidate, Mr. Peterside backtracks from his partisanship by admitting that GEJ’s greatest failure on the economic front was his inability to reform the federal budget by laying off civil servants and other federal employees. But the author softens the blow by equitably distributing the blame for this executive inertia – we are reminded that state governors and LG chairman also refused to reform their budgets and trim staff. It isn’t just GEJ’s fault, folks. There’s plenty of blame to go round.

Mr Peterside then goes on to express sadness that GEJ did not transform the economy in his first term at the risk of being a first term president. Further grief arises from the failure of an ageing and incapable Mr. Buhari to step down from partisan politics and anoint a younger, more educated successor as candidate. In conclusion: the writer states that if he were to cast a vote for GEJ, it would be because he is less repulsive in the ugliness stakes than Mr. Buhari.

As far as I am concerned, this article by Mr Peterside was a lost opportunity. Because let's face it, this election should be a referendum on Dr. Jonathan's performance after 6 years at the highest levels of decision making (4 of which he has spent as the president and commander in chief). For the author to devote so much time and energy igniting a firestorm on a 20 month old military regime in the 1980s (without any recourse at all to hard data or stats to support his claims) without holding a 48 month old administration (still in power, by the way) to the same standards is simply baffling.

It is instructive to note that Mr. Peterside’s 'treatise' had absolutely nothing to say about the corruption that has defined the Jonathan administration and its predecessors on the PDP platform. Nothing was said about the officially sanctioned graft that has hobbled this country and blighted people’s lives. No reference, (directly or obliquely) was made in the write-up to the incomprehensible accommodation (by the Jonathan administration and the ruling party in general) of grand larceny – a larceny that retards development and costs human lives. Mr. Peterside has absolutely nothing to say about this. Mr. Peterside has absolutely nothing to say about how GAVI’s multimillion dollar funding for immunization of Nigerian children has vanished into a black hole, with very serious consequences for the achievement of development goals. Mr. Peterside has nothing to say about at least 7 government-commissioned white papers of critical importance which to this day, have not been released to the public by the Jonathan administration. The issues which Mr. Peterside willfully ignored in his commentary are legion. And they will not go away.

Mr. Peterside set up and nurtured an investment banking franchise for nearly 3 decades until his retirement. This is not a mean feat. Few people can pull that off. But this article he has penned begs a pertinent question: Would his enterprise have succeeded if it were being run the way the Nigerian Project has been run by this government? Is he just another crony capitalist at heart?