MY STAND AND I

The right to rule ourselves

2011-01-27T04:25:00.000-08:00

This article, written by Dr Azzam Timimi in 2005, is as relevant today as it was then. Across the Arab world people will continue to ask for the right to choose their own leaders and despots will be made to pay a costly price. Perhaps, soon enough, the wind of change will blow across Africa and, hopefully, calous rape of democracy will be forced out of vogue.

Arabic-speaking peoples from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf suffer one common chronic ailment, namely oppressive despotism. Most of the states that stretch between the two water basins came into being less than a century ago; many were former colonies of one or other of the European powers. France and Britain in particular were instrumental after the first world war in shaping the entire map of what is today the Middle East and North Africa.

These two ageing imperial powers were also responsible for creating and, until the US took over, maintaining systems of governance in these newly emerging entities - providing ruling elites with moral, material and military support. Little has changed since then, apart from the imperialist master and the fact that the advance in technological warfare has enabled this master, so far, to maintain the status quo with ever greater vigour.

Unlike other parts of the world, and in contrast even to the norm in some neighbouring states, the Arab peoples ruled by these regimes have had very little say, if any, in the manner in which their affairs are run. While some analysts find it convenient to blame Arab or Muslim culture for this lack of democracy, I would argue that it is only the stringent control imposed from outside that denies to the peoples of this region what has readily been recognised as a basic human right elsewhere in the world.

The Algerian example of 1991-92 has been carved in the memory of Arabs and Muslims across the globe. Democracy is not on offer to whoever wishes to have it, and the Arabs - many Muslims too, for that matter - do not qualify to join the privileged club. More than 10 years ago France was horrified at the prospect of an Islamic government in its closest former colony, Algeria. The rest of the western world agreed and coalesced to abort the democratic process before it delivered the reins of power to the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front).

The Iraqi people suffered all forms of repression at the hands of the (until 1990) pro-western Ba'athist regime of Saddam Hussein. But it was far from being a unique despotic regime in the region. As far as the democratic powers of the west were concerned, it did not matter what any of those despots did to their own people, so long as their regimes posed no threat to what were seen as western interests - namely oil and Israel - and still better so long as these regimes were loyal allies.

Preparations are now under way for elections in Iraq. But few in Iraq or the region believe these elections are aimed at producing a truly representative government. The US did not invade and occupy Iraq to allow a genuinely free election that risked producing a government that might tell the Americans to leave. The purpose of the Iraqi elections is simply to try to bestow some spurious legitimacy on a regime that is as unrepresentative and as oppressive as Saddam's.

Does anyone really believe that former Ba'athist Ayad Allawi, America's stooge in Baghdad, who gave the orders for the total destruction of Falluja, has the interests of Iraqis at heart? How different is this from what Syria's President Hafez al-Assad did to the city of Hama in the early 80s or from what Saddam himself did to the Kurds or the Marsh Arabs?

This weekend the Palestinians are to be given the right to elect a new leader, they say, for a change. However, if peace-making is to be resumed and if Israel is to agree to talk to the Palestinians, they can only choose Mahmoud Abbas - hence the international pressure to eliminate the popular Marwan Barghouti from the race. The fact that many Palestinians do not see Abbas as representative of their aspirations or willing to defend their rights does not matter to Israel or its western allies. Nor is it of any concern to the US and the EU that Hamas has increasingly strong support among Palestinians (as highlighted by their recent performance in municipal elections); they still will not talk to its representatives. It is fully acceptable for Israelis to elect whomever they deem fit to lead them, even a war criminal like Ariel Sharon. No Arab people are allowed the same luxury.

Who would free Arabs be likely to choose to speak for them? President Mubarak of Egypt is reported to have said to some western guests "don't talk to me about democracy; through democracy the Muslim Brotherhood will rule Egypt". The Arabs have experienced all sorts of political and ideological groups over the past century. But there is little doubt that if free elections were held today in the Middle East, Islamic movements would reap the fruits. It is not of course that these Islamists are anything like the media usually portray them: fundamentalist, backward or even terrorists. It is simply that they are honest, serious and more interested in the public good than personal interests. Thus democracy is denied to the Arabs.

And who is the real victim in all of this? It is none other than democracy itself, whose name has been tarnished and whose values are increasingly associated in the minds of many Arabs and Muslims with military invasion to replace one corrupt despotic secular regime with another more willing to bend the knee to US and western diktat.

· Azzam Tamimi is spokesman of the Muslim Association of Britain and director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought.

(Culled from the Guardian) http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jan/07/iraq.comment

OBJ’s last laugh, PDP’s funeral...

2011-01-19T11:58:00.000-08:00

by Aliyu O Musa on Monday, 17 January 2011 at 22:01

An unprecedented wind of change is now blowing across the Arab world and power is being swept off the feet of unrepentant dictators. The ordinary people, the downtrodden of the society, are taking their destiny into their hand and reshaping it according to their taste and needs. Tunisia’s dictator for 23 years, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, is the first to make a giant tumble from Olympus courtesy of the now famous people’s revolution and many more may follow, sooner than later.

In the dying days of Nigeria’s Second Republic a monster that went by the name National Party of Nigeria (NPN) had perfected its rigging expertise to the point that it irreverently took the battle to opposition strongholds and vanquished them. Unknown to it, however, it was dialectically weeding itself out of power and into the trash bin of history. Or so we thought.

A principal outcome, yet one of the ugliest, of our experience under military dictatorship is the emergence of a new class of stupendously wealthy power brokers. And because politics in Nigeria is not as much a game of figures as it is one of money the former military dictators now appointed themselves custodians of our democracy and decide who becomes what and when. At the beginning of the Third Republic another monster they created and, today, it is the main medium via which politicians are imposed on us, in spite of our choice; our destiny is remoulded not for our benefit but for those in power and their friends in or out of power, home or abroad; our future is mortgaged irrespective of how badly we feel about this etc. That monster is the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) – the so-called biggest political party in Africa and an assembly of agents of imperialism.

The PDP has had its fill all at our expense and in utter abuse of our collective tolerance and generosity. Between Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, on the one hand, and the late Umar Musa Yar’Adua and Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, on the other, they have had almost 12 years of arrogant ‘rulership’ and banditry. In civilised societies, when a party has been in power for an extended period of time and becomes too arrogant, it gets shown the way out, usually by the power of the ballot. In some extreme cases, the ‘Ben Ali’ option becomes highly inevitable.

In my last piece on this 2011 issue I mentioned that the coveted trophy of the polls was GEJ’s to lose. The situation has not changed considerably except that the incumbent president’s subscription to divisive politics and shunning of all voices of reason is an ill wind that will blow no good to either him or his party. At the moment it’s not clear what will happen after the elections in April. If GEJ wins it will not be because he has done anything particularly genius or exceptional to deserve it. And even then he would only breast the tape badly bruised and limping. If he loses it will be because he has failed to listen to the cries of his people across the land.

On assumption of office last year he had the goodwill of all, save for a few discontented politicians who feared losing certain privileges. He had inherited an amnesty programme, although controversial, through which it was hoped the crisis in the Niger Delta would be resolved conclusively. Up until now the situation remains as precarious as ever. In a desperate gamble the military are continuously used to terrorise the innocent. It is still a wonder that his honeymoon with some ex-militants has endured. Or is it the largesse that is keeping the romance seemingly intact?

Security in the country has seriously declined as religious extremists, ethnic bigots, kidnappers, armed and highway robbers, assassins and even bombers take control of little, little enclaves and collectively hold the nation and everybody in it hostage. Take the issue of Jos as an example and contrast its handling to the Obama/McCain response to the US economic crisis in 2008. At the peak of their campaign it was shockingly realised the American banks badly needed a bailout and it seemed unlikely to be easily agreed. John McCain, then the Republican flag bearer, immediately suspended his campaign and proceeded to Washington to shore up support for the bailout. Although President Barack Obama, the candidate for the Democrats then, did not suspend his campaign he pledged to multitask in order to give equal amount of support. In the aftermath of the series of bombings in the troubled Jos on Christmas Eve last year Mr Jonathan’s response was as wobbly as his previous promise to make the violence in the city the last of its kind. Then came another explosion in Abuja barely a week after those in Jos, killing innocent people and our president is yet to find an answer. He, instead, went about his campaign, casually wishing away the problems while blaming it all on Islamic militants. This was the same president that, rather than appropriately act, refuted the MEND claim to being behind similar explosions in Abuja on October 1, 2010. If GEJ can not handle the hideous Jos crisis, is unable to address the Niger Delta issue appropriately, does not have the capacity to respond to the ruthless kidnappings in the South East etc. one wonders if he has any clue on how to deal with the hydra headed Boko Haram monster.

From an impeccable source I heard that Boko Haram will soon be targeting prominent Muslims in government and the government is aware of the hit list. Rather than being genuinely proactive they have resorted to secrete negotiations with the group. Meanwhile, the same government is putting the lives of other ‘less important’ Nigerians at risk by not tackling or even negotiating with the group to get them to stop attacking and killing innocent people.

In the run up to the polls in April it is not unlikely that the whirlwind reshaping the Arab would abrade Northern Nigeria and the most likely first casualties could be politicians that have taken advantage of people’s assumed gullibility. With the mass protests that greeted the outcome of PDP’s presidential primary in some Northern states, it is manifest that some prominent politicians are facing real threats and could lose their seats. And the biggest gainers are opposition politicians from the region like Gen (rtd) Muhammadu Buhari, Malam Nuhu Ribadu and Gov Ibrahim Shekarau. However, there is a danger of splitting votes amongst them and some acting as spoilers while GEJ emerges winner. This will, again, depend on how well he plays his wild cards, if he has any, between now and April. A greater danger is if he, as was previously the case, opts to rely on PDP’s notorious rigging proficiency. This could inflame the tense situation in the North and make the ‘Ben Ali’ option happen much sooner than expected. And the PDP monster would, like its doppelganger NPN, be tamed and put out of action, at least for now. The biggest worry of all is whether, if this comes to be the only way out, it would not lead to an implosion. Again, it all remains to be seen and will depend on the general temperament.

2011: Between Resolve and Reluctance

2011-01-19T11:55:00.000-08:00

By Musa Aliyu
Monday, 13 December 2010 at 20:20

I am not a pessimist, although with the current chain of unpalatable happenings in Nigeria one does not have much choice as pessimism becomes the closest thing to reality. Around this time last year we had no president and no one could act as one in the absence of the incumbent. A constitutional crisis, deliberately created by a handful of greedy politicians, lingered while the country steadily ground to a halt. That crisis was only resolved when the president died months later and the vice president was, as constitutionally required, sworn-in. If anyone had hoped that was the end of the melodrama events preceding it and several ones afterward have, to say the least, given a lie to that delusion.

One of the biggest yet not so shocking revelations since the charade of April 2007 that saw another Peoples Democratic Party government imposed is the realisation that we had been saddled with a government that was doomed to fail - a sickly president, who was bound to be incompetent, and a politically naive vice president, that has confessed his naivety to former US Ambassador Robin Sanders.

In the trove of cables leaked by Wikileaks recently, which has incidentally confirmed even America’s vulnerability in an increasingly changing and rapidly globalised world, Nigeria featured prominently. And, again, for the wrong reasons it made news headlines in some of the world’s most respected media. The exposé, if anything, further validates our awareness of the obvious. That Shell’s boss bragged about the extent and manner of the multinational oil company’s grip on our country does not shock most Nigerians, albeit it smacks of utter contempt! Yet, we brought it upon ourselves.

Not that I care about zoning a hoot; I, however, find the debate about who becomes Nigeria’s next president on the basis of zoning irking. Here’s an issue, least of all worries, dominating discourses within and even outside of the country. But nowhere, not even in the media, is there any serious talk about competence; the most important factor. From the incumbent to all other candidates no one is asking what each candidate has got to show for all the years they are or were in power. Ordinarily, the coveted trophy would be President Jonathan’s to lose if only he had done things differently since he stepped in. But he toed the line and, like his predecessors, brazenly mocked his country and people.

Much more annoying is the ruling People Democratic Party’s (PDP) arrogance. Though, they are successfully exposing themselves as the biggest fraud yet seen by Nigerians. Their handling of the zoning issue and the mudslinging between their two main camps betray their disdain for Nigerians; they conclude that the general elections are won and lost at their primaries. Truly, there is history to cite as reference but they cannot rewrite it. Graphic pictures of how they bullied their way to victory and conscripted much of the judiciary into a cheerleading role are glued to our memory. But again, we, by timidly accepting their verdict, brought all this upon ourselves. And, if all that has happened cannot now joggle us back to soberness, I don’t know what else can.

The much talked about 2011 polls are at the door but there is little cause to be optimistic. The opposition is in disarray as always. The electorate are largely unenlightened and emasculated. The electoral body, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), despite having the astute and thorough Professor Attahiru Jega as its boss has had a faulty start already. The media are polarised and, therefore, compromised. There is simply nothing to hang on to as a tonic for hope, except our imagination that it will be alright.

Lately, to sweeten the mind, we began deluding ourselves that either General Muhammad Buhari who’s hoping to contest under the platform of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) or the Action Congress of Nigeria’s (ACN) Malam Nuhu is the candidate to beat. The reality on ground, however, suggests otherwise. The last time I checked the PDP still has a much larger share of states under any single political party’s control. Governors have, over the years, hugely transformed politics into a game of anything but fairness. As the chief executives they make sure no other political party thrives under their nose. General Buhari quite remembers his very recent experience in Bayelsa State.

In a normal democracy and where polls are held freely and fairly any of the opposition parties has a reasonable chance of winning. But our brand of democracy is a fraud. Despite swelling their ranks with decamping PDP members there is no strong evidence that, at the minute, either the ACN or the CPC is capable of constituting any real threat to the PDP. What none of the opposition parties is seriously pursuing is how to defeat the PDP at their own doorstep and in their own game. People are doubtlessly tired of the same old wine repeatedly put in a new bottle and would not mind a complete change.

The long awaited alliance between the ACN and CPC needs to be agreed and plans fashioned to take on the PDP headlong. If, however, this does not happen and either of the opposition candidates thinks he can successfully go it alone then he is mistaken. At the very best each will make isolated impacts in some parts of the country and still be unable to unseat the ruling party. We would then have four more years to worry about callous pilfering and ridiculous clowning that have characterised the system.

As Mortgage Rates Further Take Flight

2008-08-21T09:50:00.000-07:00

By: Musa Aliyu
In another week of turbulence in the mortgage market, borrowers watched helplessly as rates on loans for the purchase of homes rose dramatically, with at least 14 lenders raising their rates. Halifax and RBS were among those whose decision would largely affect the faith of many people dreaming of getting on the mortgage ladder – especially those eyeing the fixed rate deals range.

A direct fall-out of this development is that the average cost of a two-year fixed rate for a 90 per cent loan has shot up to 6.75 per cent. And with this happening amidst increasing withdrawal of deals and the refusal by lenders to give out loans to borrowers, house purchase rate has declined sharply. This in turn has had a major toll on house prices and mortgage brokerage as an industry. Mortgage brokers Chase de Vere confirmed this, as Aaron Strutt said: “Things have not been this busy with the withdrawal of deals for a month or so.”

While figures from the Council of Mortgage Brokers (CML) said that fixed rate mortgages have recently become more popular with borrowers, the sad tale is that the deals are increasingly getting too expensive for borrowers to afford.

Although the CML revealed they accounted for 59 per cent of all new loans in April, which is the highest seen this year, the rising costs of this range of home loans gives a serious cause for concern. Analysts are wont to blame the rises on the cost of borrowing funds on the market. For example rates on the Swap market have continued to rise and lenders have had to struggle with this in addition to the scarcity of funds as the demand for home loans increases. In the space of 10 days swap rates rose from 5.80 per cent to 6.3 per cent. This prompted experts to predict that two-year fixed rate mortgages could hit 7 per cent very soon.

“If the recent rise in swap rates is sustained, two-year fixed mortgage rates could approach 7 per cent in the next few months. With demand in the market already so weak, that would represent another huge blow to the housing market outlook,” said Ed Stansfield, a property economist at Capital Economics, a forecasting house.

Mr Standsfield’s suggestion, a reflection of the reality as it is, would send cold shivers down the spine of many intending borrowers and even lenders. Yet it is the simple truth that must be acknowledged, somehow.

While borrowers are busy bemoaning their predicament, lenders are, however, fine-tuning strategies that would help them overcome the impacts of the credit crisis on them. Interestingly, one approach is to make sure they are not dragged down by risky borrowers.

Recently, the CML advised them to make sure they protect themselves in case the trend, as determined as it is, leads to further collapse in house prices. This would, obviously, have a number of implications. Lenders, perhaps heeding the warning, have been hitting back at suspected risky borrowers by introducing increases in borrowing costs as far as borrowers with small amounts of deposits are concerned.

This situation is best understood if the conditions imposed on borrowers with smaller deposits are compared to the ones those with larger deposits face. An example of such differential treatment is that those wanting to borrow 75 per cent or less of the value of their property, and who are considered a lower risk to lenders have, sometimes, had the cost of new loans reduced for them.

This is just one of the travails of borrowers in the midst of credit crunch. Many more may unveil as the crisis protracts.

Musa is an author of several articles pertaining to Mortgages. He is known for his expertise on the subject and on other Business and Finance related articles.
(This article was originally posted on http://www.articleclick.com/Article/As-Mortgage-Rates-Further-Take-Flight/1014414)

Kibaki, Odinga and the Old Kikuyu-Luo Rivalry

2008-01-15T14:58:00.000-08:00

Five years ago President Mwai Kibaki was the darling of nearly every Kenyan as the opposition National Rainbow Coalition (Narc) swept power off the feet of the ruling party, Kenyan African National Union (Kanu). Sweet victory, as it were, many saw it as the dawn of a new era for a country that had been plagued by a litany of problems, including the cancerous corruption that has eaten deep into the heart of much of Africa. Also, it was a chance to try out new sets of policies to move the country forward and finally severe the cord that had been firmly entrenched by the then incumbent President Daniel arap Moi. More importantly, the attempt by Mr Moi to ‘install’ Uhuru Kenyatta, son of the country’s first president, as his successor had been effectively defeated as Kenyans loudly said they wanted no more of Kanu, which had ruled for nearly 40 years - Mr arap Moi, himself, had 24 of those. Indeed the elections were free and fair, and for Kenyans Mwai Kibaki’s victory marked the fresh beginning they had long waited for.
With the above pedigree, in addition to the fact that he had twice contested and lost elections when President Moi’s sit-tight drunkenness was at its peak, Mr Kibaki’s inception of office enjoyed the goodwill of all and sundry. And in turn he came with loads of promises, chief among which were to see the end of widespread corruption and revamp the country’s ailing economy. But like his big brother in Africa’s sleeping giant Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, his fight against corruption which took off well was soon accused of being one-sided and John Githiongo, the chief anti-graft officer of the regime was frustrated into quitting his job.
In an interview with the East African Standard over the controversy that trailed his resignation and conduct in office Mr Githiongo said: “If I am a traitor for fighting corruption so be it. I cannot apologise for that. A thief is not a lesser thief because he comes from your own tribe.” Turning to his Kikuyu kinsmen he warned that a few old men, courtesy of their arrogance and corruption, were fast turning them, Kikuyus, into a sort of pariah tribe in the country. Although many might have taken his words not as seriously as they should, his prophesy is fast becoming the reality.
One of the early signs that things were falling apart for Mr Kibaki’s government was the misunderstanding between him and some of his ministers and key figures in the coalition that helped defeat Daniel arap Moi. Particularly, Raila Odinga and some loyalists accused the president of betrayal following what they said was his failure to honour a pre-elections memorandum of understanding in respect of power-sharing. This tore through the coalition pitting the Odinga-led group against the president and his men. In what was to become a final straw in 2005, Mr Odinga, then a minister in President Kibaki’s government, took the battle too far when he, supported by his comrades, openly campaigned against and massively defeated his boss during the constitutional referendum in the country. And as if further daring him the rebels formed the Orange Democratic Movement – a new platform for waging opposition battles. Vexed by their action President Kibaki vindictively relieved the men of their positions. Thus, the rivalry took a new dimension at this point.
Whereas the ordinary onlooker sees this, possibly, as a normal rivalry between politicians seeking to win the mandate of electorate, the keen observer is, however, forced to look beyond the surface. Some analysts are of the opinion that the vicious opposition between President Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga is a revisitation of the old rivalry between the Kikuyu and Luo tribes in the early 1960s. Then President Jomo Kenyatta, in spite of his charisma, yielded to tribal politics and fatally dealt with Odinga Odinga, a former ally, and even threw him in jail. He also declared the country a one-party state and outlawed opposition. It was his legacy, and by extension Kikuyu’s, that was carried on by Mr arap Moi until 2002 when, by some twist of faith, he was constitutionally barred from contesting the elections. Although his exit marked the end of Kanu’s sit-tight leadership, it also ushered in another Kikuyu politician, Mwai Kibaki.
Like Odinda Odinga in the first Kikuyu-Luo alliance that hastened the withering of colonial authority in Kenya, Raila Odinga’s contribution in the Narc alliance crucially helped in ending Kanu’s dynasty. And like the first alliance, the second also collapsed because politicians’ personal interests were elevated over and above those of the country and millions of its citizens.
Sadly, whereas in the days of the Kenyatta-Odinga bitter rivalry no blood was so heartlessly shed, this case is sharply different. The violence rages unabated. By conservative estimates nearly 1000 lives have been lost and more than half a million people displaced from their homes.
However, the multi-million question is will Kenya go the way of the Sudan, Uganda, Somalia, Congo etc? Will Africa ever get it right, especially if the Kenya that was once referred to as Africa’s most stable democracy collapses in this manner? Certainly Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, regardless of their past contributions, would never be absolved by history if they let this happen at their behest.

Politicians Will Always Defeat You

2008-01-06T13:21:00.000-08:00

Simon Kolawole Live
Email: simonkolawole@thisdayonline.com
ThisDay Newspaper
After writing on the fate of Mallam Nuhu Ribadu as EFCC chairman last week, I got loads of responses from readers. Most of the comments aligned with my argument, but there were those who disagreed with me, some very sharply. For those who disagreed, I could trace different lines of argument. One line argued that Ribadu started well but later missed his way by being selective and going after only those pointed out by the former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. Ironically, this was also my view, especially before the April polls. I had written then that Ribadu had diluted his credibility by allowing Obasanjo to use the EFCC to whiplash his opponents.
There were also those who said Ribadu had been lawless in the anti-graft war. He failed to abide by “due process” and “rule of law” and was therefore deserving of his fate, they argued. Ironically, again, I was one of those who criticised Ribadu for sidestepping the rule of law, even though at the back of my mind I was arguing with myself if unusual ailments could be cured with normal dosages. But I just couldn’t stand the way the EFCC went about the impeachment of Joshua Dariye in Plateau State. How could six lawmakers out of 24 impeach a governor? I vividly remember severely criticising the EFCC over these issues on this page then.
However, while I shared most of the anti-Ribadu sentiments, I differed on one point: I advocated “reforming” Ribadu rather than throwing the baby away with the bath water. I believed EFCC became lawless because that was how the government of the day behaved. After all, Ribadu was “created” by Obasanjo. I noticed, however, that with the coming of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua and his “due process” talk, the EFCC too changed its mode of operation. So why should I still be judging EFCC by its pre-Yar’Adua failings when there was a new reality on ground? On this point, I disagreed significantly with many anti-Ribadu lines of thought.
However, a key issue that was raised by many of those who disagreed with my article was that “Ribadu is not indispensable and the anti-graft war can continue without him”. One person even asked: “Why are you saying we cannot fight corruption without Ribadu?” I was forced to read my article again. This is what I wrote: “I have not heard a single person say Ribadu is the only Nigerian who can fight the anti-corruption war. (And I stand to be corrected.) But the timing of Ribadu’s sack, and the tricks that have been played by this government since May, suggest that there is more to the removal than we are being told.” Dear readers, how on earth does this suggest that I was saying Ribadu was indispensable? I may have to engage interpreters to help translate my articles into local languages because, even though I think I write simplified English, it is still a bit too difficult for some people to understand!
On a serious note, the issue of the supposed indispensability of Ribadu needs to be discussed. I have heard people say the fight against corruption should not be personalised; rather, we should focus on building institutions that endure. This is a perfect argument. I support it with the whole of my heart. The only snag, however, is that the sidelining of Ribadu doesn’t look like an attempt to build any institution. If Ribadu is being sidelined just to prove a point that we need to build institutions, then my family and myself are all for it! But you and I know that it is not as simple as that. The undercurrents are too glaring for anybody to play games on our intelligence.
Those who say we should build institutions and not “cult personalities” inadvertently support my view on Ribadu. For as long as the leadership of the anti-graft body – and other government institutions – is subject to the whims of politicians, you can never build enduring institutions. For any institution to be strong and enduring, it must not suffer political interference. It needs independence. For as long as the president or the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) can wake up one day and send the head of an anti-graft body on course under any pretext, it means, essentially, he is at the mercy of someone. How do you now expect such an agency to hurt the interests of the president or his IGP?
One of the reforms being canvassed for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is that the chairman would not be an appointee of the president. He should emerge through a neutral and fair process so that he will not be beholden to the president. His appointment can be terminated only by the National Assembly, it is suggested. Interestingly, many people who are canvassing this argument for INEC are on the other hand saying it should not apply to the EFCC. Institutions will never be strong for as long as the heads can be removed through a press statement from the president. The message is clear to the next occupant of the office: step out of line and I will sack you.
Heading an agency like EFCC is guaranteed to bring you enemies, of course. With competing interests in the society, you can never win on all fronts. You have to contend with the two big divides: the political class and the public. You are appointed by the top echelon of the political class, and naturally, you are beholden to them. Obasanjo appointed Ribadu. How could Ribadu fight corruption in a way that would hurt Obasanjo and his political associates and still hope to remain EFCC chairman? That is one dilemma. If he goes after Obasanjo’s friends, he could be sent to Kuru. If he doesn’t go after Obasanjo’s friends, he would lose out with a section of the public who will accuse him of being selective. This is a big dilemma for anybody, not just Ribadu.
He could damn the consequence and go after Obasanjo and friends and risk losing his job without achieving anything. But he could choose to pick his fights so that he could achieve some results in the meantime. He would then hope that one day the man who appointed him would leave office and set him free. But with this option, he would lose out with a section of the public. It’s a win-lose situation. And I am not referring strictly to Ribadu in this instance – I refer to anyone who is appointed by a politician to fight corruption. I don’t expect, for instance, that Ribadu’s successor will investigate Yar’Adua’s campaign funds or how Yar’Adua ran Katsina for eight years. Therefore, the same accusation that Ribadu was pelted with – that he was protecting Obasanjo – will bounce back on his successor who will be accused of protecting Yar’Adua.
After the exit of Obasanjo on May 29, the EFCC moved against some former governors – Rev. Jolly Nyame, Chief Orji Uzor Kalu and Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani, to name a few. Some sections of the public were not satisfied. They shouted: “Go after the big ones! Go after James Ibori! Go after Peter Odili! Stop beating about the bush!” The EFCC must have felt challenged by this. Perhaps Ribadu wanted to prove a point that nobody was above the law. That was his mistake. He failed to read body languages. After the Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Michael “I Don’t Care”, had applied all the tricks in the book to stop the prosecution of Ibori, EFCC finally went for the “big fish”. Two weeks later, Ribadu found himself on the way to Kuru so that the war against corruption would not be “personalised”.
As I was saying, if Ribadu had gone after Andy Uba when Obasanjo was in power, he would have gone to Kuru since. (“Going to Kuru”, by the way, is not necessarily about the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS). It means, henceforth, being sidelined for stepping on big toes.) If Ribadu’s successor steps out of line, he will find himself in Kuru too. It is all about self-interest. It is not about Nigeria. It is not about building institutions.
However, it is very sad that the whole work of EFCC is being rubbished on the altar of politics. It has fought gallantly against economic and financial crimes. The Nigerian banking sector is a major beneficiary of the work of EFCC. Nigeria had been blacklisted in the international financial community as a “419” country – a status that denied Nigeria big investments and certain levels of financial interactions. Today, the situation has improved. The entrance of Mastercard and Visa into Nigeria is a product of this fight. Even the restoration of direct US-Nigeria flights is partly as a result of EFCC’s relentless war against money laundering as it relates to drug trafficking. There are now five airlines designated for this route.
When Ribadu took on well-known 419 and drug barons who were being celebrated in those despicable society magazines, he was not sent to Kuru. The moment Ribadu began to take on politicians, his end was nigh. You cannot win with politicians. They put you there. They will crush you if you want to go after them. In the early days of this democracy, governors were stealing blatantly. They were wiring monies abroad with impunity. They were carrying loads of dollars across airports. They were stealing across the counter. Nigeria was being rubbished abroad. But EFCC came and put a stop to it. How could the political class be happy with this? They had to react. However, to rubbish all this work because of one person will be disastrous for Nigeria. The politicians may be gloating, but it is not Ribadu that has lost out – it is every Nigerian. The signals are sad. The world is laughing at us.
The Ribadu saga has set me thinking again: it will be very, very difficult – but certainly not impossible – to bring about a fundamental change in Nigeria. The system is controlled and serviced by those who benefit and profiteer from its deficiencies. When a change agent comes along, displaying all kinds of zeal and skills, promising to change the way things are done, you can only wish him good luck, tongue-in-cheek. He can only go as far the top echelon of the political class wants him to go. If he steps out of line, he will go to Kuru. Quote me: the political class will always have the upper hand in the struggle for the soul of Nigeria.

Nigerian Journalists as Blackmailers

The Ribadu saga has again brought Nigerian journalism into the spotlight. The press, which, predominantly, is traditionally radical in its approach to issues that have to do with the struggle between the state and the society, was accused by the federal government of being a tool in the hands of the EFCC. FG believes we were tools of media intimidation, blackmail and propaganda while the saga lasted. To be sure, those are familiar accusations, from the colonial era through military regimes and now a democratic dispensation.
You can accuse Nigerian journalists of arrogance, corruption, ignorance and incompetence, but ultimately, I think we still have the interest of the larger society at heart. This may sound like self-praise, but we mean well for Nigeria. We are patriots, most of us. The fight for EFCC was not a fight for Nuhu Ribadu. It was a fight for the preservation of an institution that is doing well. Allowing political intrigues to determine the fate of an anti-graft Czar can never be in the interest of the public. Yes, you can call that blackmail and intimidation, but there is no personal interest involved.
In fact, when the president’s brother, Shehu, was arrested by Gen. Sani Abacha over the phantom coup of 1995, the media took up the battle. We fought and fought and fought for him, such that some of our colleagues were arrested, jailed or killed in the process. The Abacha government, as well, accused us of “blackmail, intimidation and propaganda”. Eventually, Shehu was eliminated in prison. Blackmail is not always a negative word then. It may soon become a compliment.

(http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=99722)

Democracy is more than just fair elections -Benazir Bhutto

2008-01-01T13:19:00.000-08:00

This interview, conducted by me and Tadaferua Ujorha with late Mrs Benazir Bhutto in March 2003, was published in the Daily Trust newspaper of Friday, March 28, 2003.

Democracy is more than just fair elections -Benazir Bhutto
Recently, H.E. Benazir Benazir Bhutto, two-time Prime Minister of Pakistan, was in Nigeria for the recent Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Memorial lecture. This exclusive interview conducted by Musa Aliyu and Tadaferua Ujorha, coursed around the contemporary political struggle in Pakistan, women in Islamic societies, Al-qaeda, as well as the stormy situation in the Middle East and the Gulf. Benazir Bhutto made the insightful remark that democracy is much more than the occasional conduct of fair elections. Excerpts:
You recently said that Islam brought democracy into the world long before any western country, yet today democracy is championed by the West. At what point did the reversal of roles take place, and who or what encouraged it?Now, one would have to look at Islamic history, and how roles started changing, but certainly in the modern era, we had a long period of colonial rule, we found ourselves in a bipolar world and I think it was the superpower rivalry that encouraged dictatorship in most countries.
With the end of the bipolar world the dawn of democracy began again. Democracy is still in its infancy and there are still many chances ahead to strengthen it as part of a process of ensuring a pluralistic society. But I do feel when I look around the world today that the developed countries, the countries that are at peace with each other, are the democratic countries, and I think that is very important for us for the sake of peace, as well as human dignity, and the rule of law, to go back to the elements of democratic society based on consultation and consensus.
It seems to me that over the years, the context of democracy has changed in terms of its definition.
It depends on the various ways people look at the situation and that certainly is different, and sometimes paternalistic society is the same as the democratic society, and each one of us must make our own ways for a democratic structure. I think the basic element of the democratic society is the empowerment of the ordinary people, and of course the world belongs to God, and God appointed his people as agents, and for us democracy is very much the ingredient as well as the basic political concept, and for us this is the best form of government. For me, democracy is certainly fair elections held by an independent election commission. But democracy is much more than a fair election, it is a pluralistic society in which different parties get hold of power in different districts or states or regions.
As the first woman Prime Minister of an Islamic country, can you reflect on your tenure in power?
The first time that I became Prime Minister, there was a huge hysteria that a woman could not be elected Prime Minister, and we did not have any example on the world scene of a woman ever being elected Prime Minister. I remember when I was elected Prime Minister of Pakistan, a fatwa was given by the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia against me, saying that Pakistan’s position in the Islamic world was now endangered. Yemen gave another fatwa saying that the Holy Quran has made reference to the Queen of Sheba.
So, there was a big debate within the Muslim world during my election. But after we crossed the barrier, other Muslim countries also followed suit. We had the election of a woman Prime Minister in Bangladesh, and the election of a woman in Turkey.
Then there was the election of Mrs. Megawati of Indonesia, and now for the first time in some of the states, some of the women are coming out to participate. So, I believe that in a very short time, within the Muslim world, a transformation began to take place following my election, and it is an important transformation. For me, it now promotes gender equality, and I think it’s wrong that the Muslim society should be judged by the state of their women. There has been this continuing question relating to whether the state of the woman is contrary to Islamic principles.
What is the particular agenda your party is following in terms of seeking power in Pakistan?
My party is fighting both inside the parliament and outside, to promote democracy, and we are in discussion with other groups and so on.
Our goal is to get fresh elections, and the election commission is constituted of human rights activists, because the judiciary has been intimidated and pressured by the military regime, and it is important for us for fair elections to have an election commission which has human rights activists, and which should hold elections which ensure a prompt vote count and announcements, and not just to count, but the announcement of their count. Because what happened in the last elections was that the count was not announced and it’s the delay that took place that allowed the results to be changed. We would like to see a transfer of power from the military to the civilians. In the two times that I became Prime Minister, we lacked the transfer of power from the military to the civilians. The military did have enormous power though the president who could sack the government, and therefore not a single government of Pakistan since 1985 has completed a term.
So the military must stop being the arbiter of the state of the nation. The people of a country must be the arbiter of their fate, and I know that there are many young officers who share this vision, who would also like to see a professional military, and it’s only a handful of ambitious generals that sometimes act contrary even to the desires of their own institution strive to be in power.
In 1977, as a young woman, you watched your father being hanged, and later in your life you became a Prime Minister, and watched your government being overthrown. What would you say about these experiences?
My father’s government was overthrown, and twice my government was overthrown. We faced either imprisonment, torture, exile or assassination. So in the military almost the same thing happens after each overthrow. Sometimes I feel that unless democracy takes root it’s going to happen again and again. And now we are calling for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, because crimes that are committed have never been recorded, they’ve never been exposed, and the public is unaware of what happens when a government is overthrown. There are some little bits that come in the newspapers, but it is too little, and to protect future generations, I would like to see a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I think that your government took a very bold stand when the president retired all those officers who had been involved in political activities, but in Pakistan no civilian government has had the power to retire military officers, because the constitution has been made in such a way that it simply lacks the power to do so. You see there are military officials who have got enough money to buy people to switch sides. Some of my people have refused to switch sides. This is not the job of the military. The military must be a clean, good, professional institution.
Earlier you referred to the referendum in Pakistan, and it seems to me that it has certain ridiculous aspects.
You see, under the constitution there’s a procedure of how the president can be elected by the House of Parliament, and there is a procedure that the Army Chief cannot be involved in politics, and that the army chief cannot run for the office of the president. General Musharraf wanted to give himself the level of legitimacy or level of democracy without having it. So he announced a referendum at polling stations without polling agents. When he saw that the political parties were boycotting it, and the turnout was going to be low, then he decided he’s going to have mobile polling stations, and over 93 of these stations were in colleges, hospitals and mobile work, and the television screen will show it that these polling stations were all empty. Without any check it was a very expensive public relations exercise that cost our poor people so much money. The New York Times called it a deeply flawed exercise.
One of the reasons General Musharraf accepted the overthrow of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was that the Palestinian issue was next to be resolved. But the contrary has been the case. If you were in power would you have seen that as an opportunity for revenge on the Taliban?
If I had been the Prime Minister of Pakistan the people of Afghanistan would have been saved the bombing. Their lives would not have been destroyed, but the people of Pakistan after my overthrow, became hostages of the Taliban. During my entire time due to my foreign policy, al-Qaeda never appeared. I know that if they take on the west, the west would take on the Muslim world, and I wanted to save the Muslim world. If I had been Prime Minister of Pakistan, Pakistan would have played a role that could have promoted the brotherhood and understanding between the western and the Muslim world. Unfortunately, the dialogue has broken down and the situation that is now developing is one of great crises. We Muslims need to transform our own society so that we can have leadership and representatives that can conduct world affairs. General Musharraf and his men supported the Taliban till the last minute. They only broke this link when there was an ultimatum to stand up and be counted as friend or foe. But my party in 1998, three years before the World Trade Centre bombing, broke relations with the Taliban.
There is no sympathy today for the Palestinian people in the World community and that pains my deeply when we see casualties. I want to tell you I don’t believe in revenge. I believe in Bismillah-Rahmani-Raheem, which means" In the name of Allah, the compassionate, the merciful." I think that what we ought to always show is compassion and not revenge.
You mentioned that there should be a distinction between terrorism and Islam, perhaps you could explain this point?
From the media and the public response, we hear a lot of talk about Muslim terrorists. We hear about militant Islam, and I think that this is a misunderstanding about Islam. Islam is not about terrorism and there is an important need for us to distinguish them. For example if there is a problem in Northern Ireland you do not start condemning a religion because some people are using religion as the basis for their political ideals. And I think it is important for us to distinguish between those who use violence to promote their politics, and those whose lands have been occupied, who have a right to fight for their freedom.
How would you assess the political situation in Pakistan now, compared to when you were in power?
Well, my concern and worry about Pakistan is that my exile has led to the rise of religious parties. They could control more of Pakistan in the future, and I think that there is a danger that if this situation continues, then there will be a showdown between the military and the political parties. I say this because it is the military that created these groups. The time has come for those groups to turn on the military, and that confrontation between these parties and the General would be highly explosive. This is because religious parties also have warriors for them. They have irregular trained fighters with them, unlike political parties who don’t. So unless the strength is reversed, the situation in Pakistan will degenerate further, and I hope that it can be avoided because the people of Pakistan are hardworking. The people of Pakistan have made sacrifices and struggled to create a homeland of their own, and the people of Pakistan deserve a better future.
How would you assess the current face-off between the US and Iraq vis-à-vis the position of Pakistan?
Right now, Pakistan is very much against the war. General Musharraf would probably prefer to abstain, and I am not sure how much pressure he could withstand, because Pakistan also needs America. We have a dispute with India and each time there is conflict, America has intervened. So, it is a difficult situation, and I think that the present regime would do its best to try and abstain and resist the pressure.
How would you describe yourself?
I describe myself as a mother, a sister, a daughter, a wife, someone struggling to make our society better, so that our children can live in a safer world with more dignity.
Women are increasingly being segregated and subjected to unfair treatment in Pakistan, like the case of a woman councillor who was paraded naked, and another raped in a village square on the orders of some powerful men.
After my overthrow, there have been incidents where women have been subjected to the most barbaric treatment and it is tragic that the regime has refused to act. I think government has to protect the life, liberty, and honour of the citizens and women must stop being neglected. If men think that they can get away by committing such crimes, they would continue to do so. In my time the government stepped in whenever there was such a situation, and because we stepped in the women felt protected. We have a handful of men who feel that by committing such crimes that they would be punished, and so it was better for them. I feel very sad when I see my own government unable to protect the women of Pakistan who are the daughters of our land.
Do you think there is a link between terrorism and the issue of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?
The ongoing violence in the Middle East is one that causes great pain and anguish to us in the Muslim world. The Palestinian issue is a matter that has continued for more than half a century, and it has radicalised the Muslim youths. There was a brief halt during the time of the Oslo accord, and there was a brief period of hope that a peaceful resolution would be found, but an assassin’s bullet cut down the life of Prime Minister Rabin, and after that the situation of the Palestinians and the Israelis deteriorated. Ever since the Second World War, international law has recognised the principles of the rights of the occupied people to resist oppression by any means possible including military rule. However, after the bombing of the WTC, the world community was unable to make a distinction between terrorism and occupation. After the inability of the community to make that distinction in the case of the Middle East, the case of the ongoing violence between the Palestinians and the Israelis, is a destabilising factor in international politics. The Muslim people certainly condemn and criticise the suicide bombings that claimed the lives of innocent civilians. Since then, we see a lack of equal condemnation of the repeated Israeli incursions into Palestinian territory, and the Israeli demolition of homes.

(http://news.biafranigeriaworld.com/archive/2003/mar/29/0170.html)

Ribadu, Nigeria and the rest of us

2008-01-01T08:27:00.000-08:00

A couple of months ago I attended a lecture delivered by an astute scholar and expert on Gulf States, Professor George Joffe in Oxford on the future of Gulf States and their economies amidst America’s growing interests. The most important thing I took away was the story of UAE’s (Dubai) success, which, adopting the Hong Kong strategy of investment in property in addition to tourism, has been transformed into a modern economy that even Westerners envy. Mind you, of these countries Dubai has the least oil wealth. All through the lecture I kept asking myself why we have missed it all in Nigeria and why we are so devoid of visionary and patriotic leaders and even the complimentary followers to joggle our sleeping leaders to action. I am raising this issue because time and again we have had some Nigerians talking of our leaders’ patriotism and the zeal to transform Nigeria. Curiously, they have failed woefully after nearly 50 years of independence in one of the most endowed parts of the world. Instead, we have seen them metamorphosing from little known impoverished politicians to super-rich rogues who still can’t control their kleptomaniac hands. Take the case of Ibori, for instance, or even Dariye. I find it painfully curious that these same men, who have even been indicted by the police in the UK, are still being seen as saints. And activists are dissipating so much energy, wasting precious time advancing arguments in support of this. Ibori’s case, I was told by an old acquaintance and currently a PDP chieftain, is central to the removal of Ribadu. Not because anyone cares to ensure he, Ibori, does not remain in jail, but because there are too many oxen to be gored if the case is logically concluded, including Obasanjo, Yar’Adua himself, many former PDP and ANPP governors etc. The issue is, according to my source, in addition to what Ibori’s allegedly diverted from Delta’s fund, many of those governors were bullied into contributing to the Yar’Adua/Jonathan campaign fund. In some Northern states ANPP governors were said have been forcibly made to decamp to PDP overnight. Or, at the very least, they were compelled to sign an undertaking to deliver their states. In the end PDP won the elections long before votes were cast. What I am driving at here is that those governors were bullied, using the EFCC, simply because their cupboards were filled with skeletons, the advantage of which Obasanjo and PDP took.
I agree with those who argue that Ribadu is, himself, not a saint. But I also do no think he made no impact as EFCC chairman. At least there were instances when corrupt politicians were genuinely brought to book and many others were deterred. At a point, clearly, he acted as Obasanjo’s lap dog in that those dealt with were either adversaries or erring henchmen. Yet we can’t simply sweep his achievements under the carpet.
There’s no better time for Malam Nuhu Ribadu to prove his sincerity in tackling crippling corruption in Nigeria than now - a time when grounds on which Obasanjo, his family members and loyalists could be probed and possibly prosecuted are emerging.
By sacking him to shield Yar’Adua’s sponsors and their sponsors (past military and political leaders who looted our treasury) the president or whoever is responsible for this act is mortgaging our collective interests as Nigerians.
Like the robbery that was coldly perpetuated in the name of elections in April last year, this is tantamount to another war declaration, which, if we fail to respond to, would lead to more spiteful provocations. If the man who stole tubers of yam, to eat and survive, is prosecuted and put in jail, it’s a complete travesty of justice to let corrupt public officers walk the streets as free men, smiling happily to the bank.

Bhutto’s Assassination: A Tragedy Waiting to Happen

2007-12-28T10:41:00.000-08:00

When shortly after her return from exile Benazir Bhutto narrowly escaped death in a suicide bomb attack that killed nearly150 others, something in me told me it was only a temporary near-miss. I had badly hoped she would change her mind about participating in the country’s politics, which had turned extremely violent, with General Pervez Musharraf’s government hardly succeeding in curbing the violence. But she was Benazir Bhutto, the daughter of the late Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, whose government was ousted in 1977 by General Muhammad Zia-ul Haq, a military ruler who also put the prime minister to death in 1979 for allegedly masterminding the death of a political opponent while in power. At the age of 35 Mrs Bhutto was to become the first female prime minister of Pakistan, a largely Muslim country and the first woman to hold such position in any Muslim country. She was, in spite of being a reluctant convert, a vehement adherent to the game of politics regardless of the obvious risks. Although she was twice elected prime minister (in 1988 and 1993) and on both occasions her reign was marred by controversies leading to her sack, she remained confident and resolute in her bid to return to power in the interest of her supporters, Pakistan’s commoners, the down-trodden majority, whose support never wavered. Asked by a CNN reporter barely a week to her killing if she knew the risks she was taking, Mrs Bhutto replied that she was more concerned about Pakistani children than her own safety, whom she said were as dear to her as her own children.
I met Benazir Bhutto five years ago when she visited Nigeria. I was working with the Daily Trust newspaper and we had the singular honour of interviewing her. Tadaferua Ujorha, now a deputy editor with the newspaper, and I had a remarkable discussion with her that lasted nearly an hour. She, even though had been out of power nearly seven years then, was as obstinate as ever, insisting on continuing with the political march started by her father. She told of her experience as a young woman, in whose presence her own father was executed and how she coped with the trauma, which reached its climax with her tragic death yesterday. That trauma, worsened by her husband’s incarceration after her removal from office, was to toughen her and straighten her resolve not to be cowed even in the face of death. “Before we got married my husband was just an ordinary business man, who went about his business with a carefree attitude”, she said as she quickly added that Asif Zardari’s life changed completely after their marriage, particularly due to her political leaning. Time and again he was punished for her alleged crimes and was on several occasions offered a reprieve if he agreed to persuade her to give up politics. He, like she, remained defiant and chose, instead, to suffer it all with his beloved wife. Together, they lived in exile in far away Dubai with their three children. There they lived, although hundreds of miles away from their millions of supporters, in safety and shut away from the maddening fears of attack, including the kind that wrenched life out of her. But Mrs Bhutto risked it all and returned to serve her people.
Even as she defied her adversaries never once did she believe it was going to be so tragic an end. She once said she thought it was impossible for any true Muslim to want to kill her, a woman politician. “Islam forbids the killing of a fellow Muslim and Muslims know if they kill a woman they’ll burn in hell.” That was her belief and, in fact, an erroneous assumption as her killers thought nothing of this.
No one is sure who did it, but the slain politician had repeatedly warned of threats on her life from radical groups and forces aligned to Pakistan’s government, including the country’s intelligence organisations. Following the October attack on her convoy in Karachi she criticised the government’s handling of investigation on the matter without categorically accusing Genera Musharraf of any complicity. “The sham investigation of the October massacre,” she wrote in a commentary for CNN.com, “and the attempt by the ruling party to politically capitalise on this catastrophe are discomforting, but do not suggest any direct involvement by General Pervez Mushsarraf.” More than the government’s failure to properly probe the assassination attempt, she was outraged by its refusal to accept international help in tracking down the perpetrators.
General Musharraf was, himself, a target of attack by assassins in Rawalpindi, where Mrs Bhutto was shot dead. Her plan to take her Pakistan People’s Party campaign train to the troubled garrison city was forced to be postponed by General Musharraf, citing security reasons. As she stood before her teeming supporters yesterday, with death a few moments away from her, perhaps betraying premonition she warned that she knew all was not well. “I put my life in danger and came here because I feel this country is in danger. People are worried. We will bring the country out of this crisis,” she said with a sense of conviction. No one could discourage her, yet no one could stop the assassins, as shortly afterwards she was felled by their weapon.
Today not only Pakistanis mourn her death, but also all lovers of democracy and peace worldwide, and particularly all those who believe women are equally at liberty to aspire to and win any political position.
While it will be too hasty and even counterproductive to blame or even suggest the government of General Pervez Mussharraf was directly involved in her assassination, there’s no denying that relations between them had been anything but cordial since her return. She returned to the country only after they had agreed a deal, widely believed to have been brokered and or encouraged by the US and Britain, to form a power-sharing government in which the two would lead the country. General Musharraf was to become the president and she the prime minister. As a gesture the general, who had faced increased uprising and criticisms from various interests in his country, granted her amnesty on all the corruption allegations levelled against her, paving the way for her safe home coming, at least.
Soon she joined forces with other opposition stalwarts making life miserable for the belligerent military ruler who’s hell-bent on clinging on to power. She was in the vanguard of calls on him to quit, which he found not only uncomfortable but equally very disturbing and, maybe, treacherous. Barely three weeks after the attempt on her life in Karachi, his government’s bid to clip her wings assumed a new dimension when the police, acting on orders from above, threw barbed wire around her house to stop her from attending anti-government rallies. She had been extremely outspoken, condemning the emergency rule imposed by the general. Thousands of her supporters were rounded up by security forces to forestall violent reactions from them. This cat and mouse relationship continued as she was put under house arrest twice in one week. But she remained her real self and refused to be browbeaten. She even went the extra-mile to, at one time, consider boycotting the January polls and, at another time, seriously ponder forging an alliance with the opposition, including former Prime Minister Nawaz Sherif’s party. Either of these posed a real threat to General Musharraf.
Now that Benazir Bhutto is out of the way, does it mean any relief for the military general who, incidentally, seized power from Nawaz Sherif the same year she went on exile? Methinks not. Reasons are Mrs Bhutto’s exit will create a very big leadership vacuum in her party, considered the largest political party that identifies with the grassroots in Pakistan. More so, her supporters believe the government has a hand in her death. At the moment they have gone on rampage and the violence has already claimed dozens of lives. There’s a chance that death toll will massively increase as the crisis escalates and spreads to other parts. Peshawar, Karachi, Lahore and Multan etc are notably flashpoint areas. It is only hoped it won’t degenerate to a civil conflict in which there will be complete loss of control by General Musharraf’s government, which at the moment is merely struggling to contain the violence. If it does, analysts argue that it will tear the entire fabric of the nation apart. Pakistan, which remains the biggest loser in the midst of all this, could very well be on the brink of collapse. Clearly, there’s nothing more dangerous than having a nuclear-armed Pakistan all out at war against itself, especially in a region with a long history of precariousness.
One final thing that could serve as a fuel to the whole crisis is former Prime Minister Sherif’s decision to boycott the polls. If he makes good his promise then General Musharraf will be left all on his own, battling for credibility for a lame-duck government that can’t even serve as Washington’s proxy in fighting al-Qaeda in their stronghold.
Lastly, as Mrs Benazir Bhutto is laid to rest in her home village in Sindh, Rawalpindi’s Liaquat Bagh Park will go down in history as the place where two former prime ministers of the country were assassinated. It was at this same location, named after him, that Pakistan’s first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan was slain in 1951. And 56 years later history repeated itself with the killing of the country’s first female prime minister.
She will sadly be missed. Adieu.

End of the Road for Ribadu?

2007-12-26T14:09:00.000-08:00

Although considered a brute of the highest order Major General Musa Bamaiyi was a torn in the flesh of Nigeria’s ‘bad guys’ - fraudsters, drug peddlers and barons and indeed anyone whose source of sudden wealth defied any reasonable explanation. It was during his reign as the boss of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency that Nigeria had its image, darkened by the crimes of some of its citizens, laundered. It was then that there was a real effort to tackle the get-rich-quick syndrome that had eaten deep into our hearts like a virus and rendered young men and women too lazy to labour for success. But General Bamaiyi had his weaknesses, one of which was that he was a principal officer in the regime of General Sani Abacha, who until Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s 8 years of misrule and wasted opportunity, was considered Nigeria’s worst ruler. Another of his big crimes was that he made life unbearable for the lazy, get-rich-quick Nigerians, many of them very influential and powerful. So, no sooner than Abacha had been flushed out of Nigeria’s system Bamaiyi was shown the way down the trash bin of his history too, where he has since remained, enjoying the sort of obscurity that characters like him ‘deserve’.
In a few months from now, perhaps weeks, one other man who has caused so much trouble for politicians and past public officers and all those whose lives depend solely on ‘business as usual’ may get the boot. He is regarded by many, within and outside Nigeria, as the most dynamic and incorruptible man from a country that was voted twice in a row as the world’s second most corrupt. He rose from obscurity to international limelight by waging a courageous battle against fraud and corruption in Nigeria. Since the inception of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s government in May this year, Malam Nuhu Ribadu, a very senior police officer, has been under pressure from all fronts. One important reason for this is his promise to chase and bring immediate past state chief executives and other corrupt politicians to justice. He has been doing just that and many of them, panting with fear, have in turn put pressure on the presidency to do something about him before he brings down the whole edifice of corruption – their shelter.
If this story by the Nigerian Tribune is anything to rely on, then it’s time to say farewell to Malam Ribadu, a ‘Jolly Good Fellow’.

IG orders Ribadu to proceed on 1-yr course
(http://www.tribune.com.ng/25122007/news/news3.html)
IG orders Ribadu to proceed on 1-yr courseTHE battle to sack the Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, may have been shifted to his immediate constituency where fresh plot to ease him out of office is allegedly coming from the top hierarchy of the Nigeria Police Force.
While politicians who are not comfortable with his activities are said to have been pressurising President Umaru Yar’Adua to sack the anti-corruption chief, the leadership of the police force, which is reportedly uncomfortable with his profile, is said to be spear-heading the new angle of “the war against Ribadu” project.
Nigerian Tribune gathered that the plot was designed to ease Ribadu out of office without raising any suspicion in the public. According to sources, Ribadu’s journey out of office, according to those behind the plot, would start with a year course in the Nigeria Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies, Kuru, in Jos, Plateau State.
While away in Jos, where he is expected to be fully engrossed in the course on a full-time basis while an acting chairman would be appointed from the police, with a commissioner of police from the SouthWest, already penciled in.
Sources further revealed that the leadership of the police moved to give vent to the plot when the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Mike Okiro, wrote to Ribadu, seeking a meeting with him on the planned course.
Ribadu reportedly got the letter on Thursday, December 13 and he reportedly honour-ed the call the same day, where Okiro was said to have told him of the plan to send him to a full-time course in Kuru, while at the same time enumerating the accruable benefits of such course to the EFCC boss.
The police boss was said to have hinted Ribadu that he was being picked for the course as a way of preparing him for eventual ascension to the post of the Inspector General of Police.
A senior police officer, who spoke with the Nigerian Tribune on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the development, but said that it was not a ploy to ease Ribadu out of the EFCC.

Ibori: London Court Action Turns Heat On Two Nigerian Banks and Media House

2007-12-01T01:57:00.000-08:00

Saharareporters, New York

A recent decision by the UK Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, to re-freeze the worldwide assets of former Governor James Onanefe Ibori of Delta State, has turned the heat on two Nigerian banks, Oceanic Bank and United Bank for Africa (UBA), known to have aided and abetted the former governor’s money laundering.

Our investigations reveal that Oceanic Bank, owned by the Ibru family, has been more directly and deeply affected by the after-shocks of Ibori’s legal travails.

Some of the bank’s major customers, fearing that anti-corruption investigators across the globe looking into Ibori’s money laundering activities, may indict the bank for its role in assisting the governor to move funds out of Delta State to designated foreign accounts, have started panic withdrawals.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) once arrested two officials of Oceanic Bank, including the son of Cecilia Ibru, the bank’s CEO. The Ibru family used its media contacts to press local newspapers and magazines not to report on the arrests and the bank’s involvement in Ibori’s massive graft.

The EFCC has also named Oceanic Bank as one of the banks that assisted the former governor to procure questionable loans to purchase Willbros Nigeria Limited using a front, Henry Imashekka, who used Ascot Nigeria Limited to seal the deal.

Willbros Nigeria Limited was sold to James Ibori for $155 million in a cash transaction that has now attracted US investigators. The EFCC indicated in an affidavit that Oceanic Bank played a despicable role in granting loans to entities involved in the looting of Delta State treasury. Other questionable transactions include the purchase of the National Fertilizer Company (NAFCON).

Also hit hard by the ongoing investigations and restraint order on Ibori’s assets is the United Bank for Africa (UBA). Sources told Saharareporters that Mr. Tony Elumelu, the MD of UBA, served as a front for James Ibori. The former governor reportedly diverted monies from Delta State treasury through Standard Trust Bank, Mr. Elumelu’s former bank.

Metropolitan Police sources told Saharareporters that Nigerian banks involved with Ibori's money laundering remain subjects of interest in their continued investigation of the former governor whose worldwide assets remain frozen on the order of the High Court in London.

One officer revealed that they interrogated “one Elumelu” over his role in moving funds out of Nigeria on behalf of James Ibori, but the Mets would not reveal the full identity of the Elumelu they interrogated in the course of their investigations. However, other sources told Saharareporters that Tony Elumelu was the likely suspect owing to his close relationship to Ibori.

UBA, which are bankers to James Ibori's newspaper outfit, Daily Independent, has recently refused to extend a loan facility to the Lagos-based newspaper citing British Police investigations against the former governor.

The bank’s denial of a loan facility to Daily Independent has put the newspaper in dire straits, as the management has been unable to pay reporters and other workers at the newspaper for two months running.

Our investigations revealed that the current Delta State administration, run by Ibori’s cousin, Emmanuel Uduaghan, was making efforts to funnel money to the newspaper for the payment of staff salaries.

Governor Uduaghan has been making high-gear plans to scuttle the investigation and prosecution of his cousin and predecessor.

An authoritative within the state told Saharareporters that Uduaghan may have given Ibori back the N5 billion naira the EFCC recently recovered from the former governor and returned to the state’s coffers. “I can tell you that Dr. Uduaghan gave the money back to Chief Ibori,” said our source. “The governor’s argument is that Chief Ibori invested billions in the Yar'adua presidential elections and should recoup his investment.”

It would be recalled that the EFCC in a sworn affidavit said it had recovered N5 billion in Afribank shares bought in the name of Delta State but which Ibori converted to his personal account. The anti-corruption agency declared that the money had been returned to the state’s account. Our source, who works in the Delta State Ministry of Finance, told us that “it appears the governor (Emmanuel Uduaghan) has returned the money to his cousin (James Ibori), since we can't trace it in our state accounts anywhere.”

Adebayo, Olanrewaju, Others Named in 10m Euro Bribe

2007-11-17T09:45:00.000-08:00

A Munich court has named four past Nigerian ministers of communications – Messrs Cornelius Adebayo, Haruna Elewi, Tajudeen Olarenwaju and Bello Mohammed – as well as other officials, an immigration officer and Senator Jubril Aminu, Chairman Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, as having received bribes of about 10 million Euros from the German engineering conglomerate, Siemens AG.
In a court document obtained by the Wall Street Journal the German multinational was indicted by the court for paying millions of Euros in bribes to cabinet ministers in Nigeria, Russia and Libya as it sought to win lucrative contracts for telecommunications equipment.
According to the court ruling that depicted a pattern of bribery by one manager, Mr Reinhard Seikaczek of Siemens, the scandal offers the most detailed picture to date of the scandal that has ensnared one of the world’s biggest conglomerates in investigations across the globe.
The Oct. 4 ruling, according to the Wall Street Journal, by a Munich court named four former Nigerian communications ministers as well as other officials in Nigeria, Libya and Russia as recipients of 77 bribes totaling about 12 million Euros, or about $17.5 million.
Siemens accepted responsibility for the misconduct and agreed to pay a 201 million Euro fine decreed by the court, but it has declined to identify those named as bribe givers and takers in the ruling's text, which wasn't disclosed.
The court focused on bribes between 2001 and 2004 connected to Siekaczek, a former manager in the telecommunications-equipment unit who spent 38 years at Siemens. Siekaczek has been indicted on embezzlement charges in the Munich court, and his lawyer said he is cooperating with prosecutors in their investigation of bribes at Siemens. He is expected to face trial early next year.
Siekaczek has told prosecutors that he knows about bribes beyond the three countries that were made with the knowledge of senior managers, according to separate court records. That testimony could serve as a springboard for other criminal investigations and additional fines in countries where Siemens is active, including the U.S.
Siemens, Europe 's largest engineering company with revenues last year of 72 billion Euros, manufactures everything from light bulbs to high-speed trains. When they carried out a dramatic raid on Siemens headquarters a year ago, German police focused on just 20 million Euros in the alleged fraud. The investigation quickly mushroomed into one of the continent's biggest bribery cases, triggering high-level arrests including Siekaczek and the resignations of the chairman and chief executive earlier this year.
Siemens is still being investigated on several continents. The company said last week it has identified 1.3 billion Euros in suspicious transactions world-wide between 2000 and 2006.
The Munich court ruling, viewed by The Wall Street Journal, lists bribes from 2,000 to 2.25 million Euros steered by Mr. Siekaczek and colleagues to dozens of government officials in the three countries.
It says most of the money, about 10 million Euros, went to Nigerians, including an immigration official, a senator and four former telecommunications ministers: Bello Mohammed, Tajudeen Olanrewaju, Cornelius Adebayo and Alhaji Haruna Elewi.
An official at Nigeria 's Information and Communications Ministry said the government needed to look into the allegations before commenting. The former ministers, said the Journal, couldn’t be located for comment.
Siemens has sold telecommunications equipment in Nigeria , but the ruling doesn't specify what contracts Siemens was seeking when its employees paid bribes. It also doesn't say what, if anything, the recipients of Siemens's money did in exchange for it.
The three-judge panel said its ruling was based on information from interviews with Siemens employees and extensive files of documents. Many of those documents were seized in the Nov. 15, 2006, police raids of Siemens offices in Germany .
Anton Winkler, a spokesman for the prosecutors in Munich , said prosecutors haven't interviewed those who were named in the court ruling as bribe takers. The prosecutors aren't pursuing action against these people because German courts usually don't have jurisdiction if a non-German receives a bribe outside of Germany .
Winkler declined to discuss the precise nature of the evidence, but said, "The names and other information in the decision were carefully checked for accuracy."
In Russia , according to the court findings, 38 bribes totaling about 2 million Euros were funneled to senior managers at nearly two dozen regional state-controlled phone companies stretching from Petrozavodsk in the west to Vladivostok in the east.
The ruling also lists six bribes totaling about 300,000 Euros to two officials at Libya 's state-run General Post and Telecommunications Co. The two officials named are Ramadan Negita, a general manager at the company, and E. Swei Emhemmed Jamel, a project manager.
The Libyan company didn't respond to written questions, and the two managers couldn't be located. A spokesman for OAO Svyazinvest, the state-controlled parent company of Russia 's regional telecommunications companies, said it won't comment on a ruling it hasn't seen.
In some cases, according to the Munich court, bribes were funneled by Siekaczek to government officials through outside consulting firms. In other cases, Siekaczek directed the money from company headquarters to other Siemens officials who acted as intermediaries. Sometimes bribes were deposited in recipients' bank accounts. At other times, the recipients were handed cash.
According to Siemens, many of the 1.3 billion Euros in dubious transactions it has identified lie outside the telecom unit where Mr. Siekaczek was employed.
Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, the U.S. law firm hired by Siemens last December to investigate wrongdoing at the company, flagged 65 countries for scrutiny in an internal document.
(http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=95479)

Asuni, Co-accused Regain Freedom

2007-11-12T13:44:00.000-08:00

Mrs Judith Asuni, the American-born Nigerian facing trial in Nigeria for espionage has been set free and told to go home. The peace worker was set free along with her co-accused German journalists, Florian Alexander Opitz and Andy Lehmann, as well as her Nigerian colleague, Danjuma Saidu.
Their release was announced in the court earlier today by Justice Binta Nyako after the country’s minister of Justice filed a nole prosequi and withdrew the charges against them.
They were seized by men of the State Security Services in September and put in detention because the two German journalists had been found taking photographs in the turbulent Niger Delta region. Although Asuni insisted on her innocence, she was accused of bringing the men into Nigeria by using false claims to obtain visa for them and that they were all spying for some international interests.

A tribute to Cyprain Ekwensi

2007-11-06T10:16:00.000-08:00

Several years ago, as a beginner in the high school, one of the stories that affected me so much and helped in shaping my life afterwards was that told of Akin, the Drummer Boy in one of Cyprain Ekwensi's novels.
It helped in bringing out the reality in a society made up of different people with different needs and capabilities or incapacitations as the case may be. It, more importantly, helped me understand how people, when they are disable, feel about their disability and how they often feel threatened and would rather isolate themselves. Growing up, I experienced this on a number of occasions with handicapped persons.
Recently I was with a couple, friends of mine who told me of their son's disability and how out of frustration he sometimes explodes and would prefer to be on his own almost all the time. My mind went back to Cyprain Ekwensi's novel and I recommended that they read it.
I ran into Pa Ekwensi a few years back in Abuja, where he told of his daughters care for him, which has kept them quite close to him, and choosing to remain in their father's home rather than getting married. This way, he said they argued they could give him the best of child's love to parent, as a compensation.
I wonder how they feel today without him. It must be a very painful loss, not only to them but to Nigeria as a whole. We shall miss a great mind in Cyprain Ekwensi. Adieu.

Cyprian Ekwensi dies at 86

One of the nation’s greatest literary writers, Chief Cyprian Odiatu Duaka Ekwensi, has died at the age of 86. Ekwensi died on Sunday November 4 at the Niger Foundation in Enugu where he underwent an operation for an undisclosed ailment, his son, Georges Chiedu Ekwensi, said in a statement yesterday.

Ekwensi was born in Minna, Niger State in 1921. He attended Government College, Ibadan and Achimota College, Ghana. He later studied Pharmacy at the Yaba Technical Institute, Lagos. He read Forestry at the School of Forestry, Ibadan and worked for two years as a forestry officer. He also taught for a couple of years at Igbobi College, Lagos. He graduated from the Chelsea School of Pharmacy, UK in 1956. Ekwensi later went into the literary world where he stood as an outstanding Nigerian novelist.

He wrote his first novel, "When Love Whispers" in 1948. He followed up with "An African Night’s Entertainment" in the same year.

Other works were The Boa Suitor (1949), People of the City (1954), Passport of Mallam Iliya (written in 1948 but published in 1960), The Drummer Boy (1960), Jagua Nana (1961), Burning Grass (1962), Iska (1966) and many more titles in a writing career that spanned about six decades.

He has also authored hundreds of short stories and radio and television scripts. He was a columnist with DRUM magazine and later MONTHLY LIFE magazine.

He was Nigeria’s first indigenous Director of Information at independence. In 1968 he won the Dag Hammarskjold International Prize for Literary Merit. Ekwensi was honoured with the chieftaincy title of Osi Baarohin of Ibadanland in 1996 and was inducted Fellow of the Nigerian Academy of Letters in 2006. He was also a recipient of the Nigerian National Honour of Member of the Order of the Federal Republic, MFR.

(http://dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4253&Itemid=45)

Nigeria: Still a Case of Slipping Opportunity

2007-11-04T07:30:00.000-08:00

The current collapse of all sectors in Nigeria is continuing at an unprecedented pace. So appalling is this collapse that Nigerians are choosing to accept every abnormality as normal; electricity which is perpetually elusive, pipe-borne water which remains a mirage and even healthcare which, as essential as it is, is far, far beyond the reach of the ordinary people, are among the features of this decay. However, more annoying is even the fact that politicians keep down-playing the importance of this issue and reducing discourse to rhetoric.
Imagine the sad tale of healthcare particularly in northern Nigeria, which now compels poor and helpless Nigerians to seek refuge in poorer countries like Cameroon, the Niger and Benin Republic? Ponder the flight of the ‘middle class’ to a now more prosperous Ghana? This is not to talk of those migrating to the West in search of greener pastures, including some of those who shamelessly participated in dragging Nigeria to its present prostrate state. Again and again you hear stories of these unpatriotic characters escaping to Europe or America with their loot and stashing them in their foreign accounts. Until recently, when the British system makes it hard for some of them to successfully cart away public fund, criminally stolen while in office, and lavish after retirement or while on holiday, it was always ‘business as usual’. While this is a welcomed development and a necessary disincentive to corrupt public officers, it comes only after precedents had been laid down.
In the early 1980s, following the military coup that ousted the Second Republic and sacked the civilian government of President Shehu Shagari, many politicians that had been clearly indicted ran off to the UK and other countries of the West. Rather than told to go back home and give account of their stewardship, they were easily and hurriedly granted political asylum. Notably, the case of Nigeria’s foremost fugitive then, Alhaji Umaru Dikko, who himself was a former transport minister and a prominent figure in the collapsed regime, stirred so much controversy leading to strained relations between Nigeria and Britain.
In fighting corruption, which is the main cause of the collapse of our economy, Nigeria can hardly succeed if it remains selective in pursuing indicted persons, serving or retired. In the same vein it cannot be successful unless countries like Britain, Switzerland, Germany and America etc lend a helping hand. One way to do this is by ensuring that stolen funds are repatriated home and politicians are refused asylum whenever they loose official immunity. Although Britain is already doing this and at least three former governors are being investigated, more needs to be done and examples should be made of those found wanting. Perhaps this may give us some hope and not only discourage corruption, but to also lay a proper foundation to revive the economy.
More importantly, our collective effort at home needs to be doubled, if we are doing something, or must be started now. The EFCC, the ICPC and all those in position of trust need to re-examine their roles in this respect and reassure Nigerians that the era of selective punishment or docility is over. On our part, Nigerians, if we must win this fight we must learn to stop clowning and singing the praises of ‘thieves’ – people whose wealth we know is ill-gotten. A thief is a thief irrespective of the power of his wealth or social status. And whoever is responsible for or encouraged the looting of our funds is a thief and must be treated as one.
One last thing, remember you can aid or abet crime by being silent in the face of its perpetuation. Often this is the case in Nigeria and we are all complicit in this.
The story directly below, culled from the Daily Trust, tells us of the situation in a country as richly endowed as Nigeria. More so, it tells of the plight of people from whom some of the richest persons in the world come. Yet any talk about corruption can hardly be logically concluded without someone coming out to say his part of the country is deliberately targeted. I wonder why politicians always succeed in tearing us apart along ethno-tribal or religious divides?

MEDICARE: NIGERIANS TROOP TO NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES
Faced with a crumbling public health sector with its concomitant worsening health services, many Nigerians who cannot afford the high medical fees charged by private hospitals now troop to the neighbouring countries of Cameroun, Benin and Niger Republics for medical attention. Investigations carried out by Sunday Trust reveal that thousands of Nigerians with ailments ranging from tuberculosis, malaria and other diseases are fleeing the country to neighbouring countries for medical attention.
Poor Nigerians living in Jigawa, Katsina, Sokoto, Kebbi, Yobe and Borno, among other states, according to investigations by Sunday Trust, now prefer to go to Maradi in Niger, Benbereke in Benin Republic and Kolofata Hospital in Cameroun to find solutions to their ailments.
In Maradi, Medicine Sans Frontiers, (Doctors without borders) (MSF), a Non-Governmental Organisation based in France has been involved in providing medical services to Nigerians fleeing the deplorable health sector of their country to different border states of Northern Nigeria.
A female doctor with MSF, who requested not to be named, reveals that Nigerian patients on admission constitute 20% in the Maradi MSF centre and another 40% as out-patients, especially on malnutrition related cases for children. The official says the MSF which operates in areas of extreme poverty, natural and human disaster areas has been involved in giving food and money to the patients to combat their health problems.
A source tells our reporter that patients coming to the Maradi MSF centre use two border routers. The borders are Dan Issa and Quanni Border in Niger Republic. Those from Katsina, Kano, Jigawa and eastern part of the country, the source adds, come through Jibia/Maradi border and stopped over at Dan Issa boarder which is about 20 kilometres from the main Nigerian Border in Niger Republic from where an ambulance from the MSF Hospital centre is officially sent to transport them to avoid hurdles placed by Custom officials, the police (Gendarmes) and other law enforcement agencies in Niger.
Patients from Sokoto, Kebbi and Zamfara states, the source continues, are being picked at Quanni, a border town in Niger. Sunday Trust witnessed how a large number of patients were packed into an ambulance to Maradi.
Salamatu Bature, a Nigerian from Maiturmi village in Jigawa state once visited Maradi when she could not manage the health condition of her son, Sa’idu. He was diagnosed of malnutrition and with the help of MSF Bature made it to the Dan Issa Border. At the MSF centre, besides drugs that are given free of charge, money and food, among others are the benefits of patients who come to the centre. Our reporter noticed long queues of mothers holding their babies and presenting their cards to the security operatives who in turn gave them sacks containing plates, bed nets and other materials to be used at the centre.
Mohammed Abba Malam, a staff in neighboring Jibia local government confirms to our reporter that it is daily a routine for people to travel to Maradi centre for medical treatment. A Katsina based nurse, Babangida Isiyaku says, "Look, it is not only the Niger Border which is only few kilometers away from here that our people are ready to go to; they are prepared to go to Niamey or even France if that is what it takes for them to get sound health for their children.
"There is poor health services provided in Nigeria. Even when the Federal Government is spending billons of Naira to construct and renovate hospitals, there are no competent professionals to provide the required services. Go to the rural areas and see how our health sector has collapsed completely and people are dying," Malam said.
Katsina state commissioner of Health, Alhaji Danlami Garba dismisses allegations that Nigerians living in Katsina state cross over to Niger Republic for medical treatment due to the poor health services provided by the state government. Proximity, Garba argues, is the overriding factor.
In the commissioner’s words: "People residing in Katsina state receive medical treatment in Niger Republic due to proximity and not the collapse of the health sector in the state,"
Garba explains that the cross border movement in search of medication is not new to the state, as investigations indicate that 40-50 per cent of the patients admitted at the Jibia general hospital are from Niger Republic.
Kolofata is a village in Cameroon and located about 23 kilometers away from the border town of Banki in Borno State. Considering the influx of Nigerian into this village which is famous in treating people with eye diseases, the large number of patients laying on straw mats under trees in the premises of the hospital shows that hospital workers are finding it difficult to cope with the number of patients.
One of the surgeons who gave his name as Omar told our reporter that out of every 10
patients that come to the hospital, seven are cataract patients. According to the surgeon, the Kolofata Hospital operates over 50 patients daily.
"The operation lasts between 10 to 15 minutes, depending on the age and the condition of the patients," Omar explains, adding that the eye section of the hospital was established in 1996. The surgeon confirms that the daily influx of patients, particularly from Nigeria, has greatly overstretched facilities at the hospital.
"Most of our patients are foreigners and we cannot keep them here for long because of limited facilities," Omar says.
Malam Ahmed Idrisa from Jigawa state says he was operated the previous day and is preparing to go back home immediately. Another Nigerian, M. Ali, who is a retired Assistant Superintendent of Prisons in Maiduguri narrates how he had to travel a long distance to Kolofata when the Molai Hospital in Maiduguri and other hospitals in Borno state proved incapable of handling his eye problem.
Some ophthalmologists spoken to in Maiduguri by Sunday Trust allege that many of the complications from Kolofata patients do end up in their clinics for review treatments. The conveyor-method, where patients have to leave immediately after they are treated and receive post-operation services from another hospital, according to Dr. Bala Askira, a consultant ophthalmologist with the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital (UMTH), leads to post-operation complications. But Omar is quick to debunk such claim, insisting that the method of discharging patients 48 hours after operation minimises the risk of such complications.
The Borno state Commissioner for Health, Mr. Ayuba Pindar Iza, says he is aware that Nigerians patronise Kolofata for eye and other treatments but adds that, "the Borno state Government has concluded arrangements with the government of Saudi Arabia to provide facilities of international standard so that our people don’t have to risk their lives to travel such a long distance for treatments."
Investigations by our reporter reveal that while an eye patient requires only N6000 for a cataract operation at Kolofata Hospital, the same operation costs N20, 000 at UMTH. Hadiza Isa who is in Kolofata with her mother from Mubi, Adamawa state, ASP Ali from Maiduguri and Mrs. Beatrice Ojile from Lagos claim that they were not satisfactorily treated in the several hospitals they visited in Nigeria.
"But with less than N6, 000 and about N4, 000 in feeding and transport fare to Kolofata, I no longer feel the pain and the fear of losing my sight," notes retired Sergeant Shuibu Inuwa who says he will always encourage patients to go to Kolofata for medical treatment. Whether Kolofata Hospital is a leader in treating eye problems or not, each year continues to witness an explosion in the number of patients coming to the medical centre for attention.
Benbereke Hospital in Benin Republic is another medical centre for some Nigerians suffering from Tuberculosis. The hospital was established by Christian missionaries from the United States of America (USA), with the sole purpose of helping the poor overcome their health problems.
Director of Administration for the hospital, Mr Orou Yorou Mere, told Sunday Trust that the medical centre started with 43 beds and now has 125 beds across different wards. The most common services offered by the hospital include major and minor surgeries, radiology and laboratory services, obstetrics, consultation, community health services, among others.
Mr. Mere reveals that Nigerians account for 60% of TB patients that visit the centre. He says there are variations in ratio concerning other diseases like Malaria and HIV which are more prevalent with other citizens of other countries.
Police Sergeant Umaru Garba and Muhammadu Bunza hail from Kebbi state and are among the Nigerian patients Sunday Trust interviewed. Garba who says he had suffered from TB for a very long time until he came to Benbereke and was charged only N6000 for treatment that lasted three months. Bunza who was treated of TB at the Benbereke hospital insists he had a good attention to his problem.
Statistics show that between January 2005 to December 2006 the hospital treated 386 TB patient; carried out 2,243 surgeries and offered 1,978 obstetrics services. In 2006, the hospital offered 16,990 consultancy services and admitted 6,198 patients while 34,219 people were registered as outpatients. In the ophthalmology department, 2,718 consultation services were offered out of which 111 operations were on cataracts. On laboratory tests, the hospital made 47,810 test analyses last year, 1,713 radiographies and vaccinated 8,841 patients through its community health services.
The director of medical services, Kebbi state, Dr. Jibril Yeldu attributes the exodus of Nigerians to hospitals in neighbouring countries to stigma of their diseases and the psychological feeling that such hospitals can cure them.
He says the success recorded at Benbereke in the treatment of TB is as a result of strict adherence to the Direct Observation Treatment (DOT), by the hospital, a process most patients flout when admitted into Nigerian hospitals. The director claims that the state has adequate drugs for TB and Leprosy but patients don’t come to receive them either because of ignorance or fear of being stigmatised.
Attempts by Sunday Trust to get official comments the Federal Ministry of Health proved abortive. A director who pleaded anonymity confirmed to Sunday Trust that health conditions in some of the states are appalling.
"You know we run a federal system and the states are in a position to provide their health services. The states are in the best position to answer all queries concerning the state of health services in their domains," the official explains.
(http://dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4162&Itemid=45)

Ibori’s Wife in Police Net in London

2007-11-02T13:28:00.000-07:00

Wife of former Delta State governor James Ibori has been arrested by the Police in London, reports say.
Mrs Ibori was arrested Thursday night at Heathrow Airport as she attempted to board a Lagos-bound flight.
Her arrest is not unconnected with the corruption allegation levelled against her husband, which is currently being investigated by the London Metropolitan Police.
The 39-year old woman, reports say, will remain in detention pending further investigations into her husbands corruption case.
Mr Ibori is being investigated for corruption in London and much of his asset, worth over USD $35 million, has been confiscated.

End of the Road for ‘Thieving’ Etteh?

2007-10-30T14:34:00.000-07:00

Good news as Nigeria’s embattled House of Representatives speaker Patricia Etteh and her deputy Babangida Ngoroje stepped aside today, pending the outcome of investigation of allegations of corruption leveled against them.
Although they finally bowed to pressure, it comes very late. At least one life was lost on the floor of the house when a session to debate the crisis turned chaotic. The deceased, I hear, was a staunch supporter of Madam Speaker Etteh. He was a medical doctor and a former secretary to President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua’s government in Katsina State. Well, Dr Aminu Safana is gone, but Patricia Etteh and Babangida Ngoroje live to answer questions regarding their alleged sins.
However, a pertinent question is what will become of them? Will they be pardoned and told to go and sin no more? Or will they be made to face the dreaded EFCC? They may have immunities as serving legislators, but will that be enough to save them? Given that they have allowed so much time to be wasted and nerves frayed for too long before they agreed to take the path of ‘honour’ will there be any justice for them?
What remains to be seen is how those who staunchly called for their heads will handle unfolding events in the house. After all even Hon Farouk Lawan, the man behind the Integrity Committee which insisted on and successfully pulled Etteh and Ngoroje down, was the same person who nominated her for the post. Was he not aware of her credentials when her vouched for her? Why was he so vehement in ‘whacking’ her. It’s all politics for you. Now let’s see who he’s going to nominate for the job? Or he may chose to stand aside and look, which I sincerely doubt. He’s a political animal and politics must he play. God help Nigeria.

Nigeria speaker goes in graft row
The speaker of Nigeria's House of Representatives, Patricia Etteh, has resigned after weeks of pressure.
An inquiry found her guilty of breaking house rules in awarding contracts worth $5m to refurbish houses and buy cars.
But she had repeatedly refused to step aside and allow a temporary speaker to chair a debate into the findings.
Parliamentary business, including a debate on Nigeria's budget, has been held up for weeks as a result of the affair that has gripped the nation.
The affair has become a major embarrassment for President Umaru Yar'Adua who promised zero tolerance on corruption but failed to intervene, despite increasingly angry protests.
Mrs Etteh, a former beautician and ruling party member, is accused of irregularities in spending $5m of government money to buy 12 cars and renovate two official residences - her own and that of a deputy.
She had consistently denied any wrongdoing but opponents argued forcibly that she should step aside temporarily to allow someone else to chair the debate into the findings of the panel of inquiry, chaired by David Iroko.
The row became so heated that a brawl broke out in parliament earlier this month, during which one pro-Etteh MP collapsed and died.
Mrs Etteh's aides told the BBC that the speaker had decided that she could no longer continue and that her deputy, Babangida Nguroje, has also resigned.
The lower house elected Terngu Tsegba, an opposition politician from central Benue State, as the acting speaker.
Mr Tsegba will now preside over the Iroko debate, which is expected to take up to a week.
Parliament will then have to elect a permanent replacement to Mrs Etteh.
The BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/

Study: Journalists jailed around the world for Internet work on the rise

2007-10-29T14:24:00.000-07:00

When Iranian journalist Mojtaba Saminejad was sentenced to two years in prison for insulting the country's Supreme Leader, it was not for an article that appeared in a newspaper. His offending story was posted on his personal Web blog.

Nearly one-third of journalists now serving time in prisons around the world published their work on the Internet, the second-largest category behind print journalists, the Committee to Protect Journalists said in an analysis released Thursday.

The bulk of Internet journalists in jail -- 49 in total -- shows that "authoritarian states are becoming more determined to control the Internet," said Joel Simon, the New York-based group's executive director.

"It wasn't so long ago that people were talking about the Internet as a new medium that could never be controlled," he said. "The reality is that governments are now recognizing they need to control the Internet to control information."

Other noteworthy imprisoned Internet journalists include U.S. video blogger Joshua Wolf, who refused to give a grand jury his footage of a 2005 protest against a G-8 economic summit, and China's Shi Tao, who is serving a 10-year sentence for posting online instructions by the government on how to cover the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown.

For the second year in a row, CPJ's annual survey found the total number of journalists in jail worldwide has increased. There were 134 reporters, editors and photographers incarcerated as of Dec. 1, nine more than a year ago.

In addition to the Internet writers, the total includes 67 print journalists, eight TV reporters, eight radio reporters and two documentary filmmakers.

Among the 24 nations that have imprisoned reporters, China topped the list for the eighth consecutive year with 31 journalists behind bars -- 19 of them Internet journalists.

Cuba was second with 24 reporters in prison. Nearly all of them had filed their reports to overseas-based Web sites.

The U.S. government and military has detained three journalists, including Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, who was taken into custody in Iraq nine months ago and has yet to be charged with a crime.

CPJ recorded the first jailing of an Internet reporter in its 1997 census. Since then, the number has steadily grown and now includes reporters, editors and photographers whose work appeared primarily on the Internet, in e-mails or in other electronic forms.

The increase is a testament to the increasing attention of government censors to the Internet, media experts say.

"I refer to the freedom of the press as the canary in the coal mine," said Joshua Friedman, director of international programs at Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism. "It's a barometer of the insecurity of the people running these governments. One of the things that makes them insecure these days is the power of the Internet."

The rise in jailings of Internet journalists is also an indication that reporters in authoritarian countries are increasingly using the Web to circumvent state controls.

Shi, the jailed Chinese journalist, could have published his notes on state propaganda in the Chinese magazine in Hunan province where he worked as an editorial director. He chose instead to send an e-mail from his Yahoo account to the U.S.-based editor of a Chinese language Web forum.

Cuban journalist Manuel Vasquez-Portal said he posted his articles on a Miami-based Web site for a similar reason.

"Without a doubt, the Internet provided me an avenue. It was the only way to get the truth out of Cuba," he said through an interpreter.

Vasquez-Portal, who was jailed for 15 months in 2003, said he had to call his stories in to the operator of the Web site, though, because Cubans are not allowed access to the Internet.
AP (http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=2224217810696587890)

THE DETENTION OF AP PHOTOGRAPHER BILAL HUSSEIN

The U.S. military in Iraq has imprisoned Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein since April 12, 2006, accusing him of being a security threat but never filing charges or permitting a public hearing. "We want the rule of law to prevail," says AP President and CEO Tom Curley. "He either needs to be charged or released. Indefinite detention is not acceptable." Military officials say that Hussein was being held for "imperative reasons of security" under United Nations resolutions. A Pentagon spokesman reiterated that stance Sept. 18. Hussein is a 35-year-old Iraqi citizen and a native of Fallujah. AP executives said an internal review of his work did not find anything to indicate inappropriate contact with insurgents, and any evidence against him should be brought to the Iraqi criminal justice system. Hussein began working for the AP in September 2004. He photographed events in Fallujah and Ramadi until he was detained.

Bilal Hussein is one of an estimated 14,000 people detained by the U.S. military worldwide -- 13,000 of them in Iraq. They are held in limbo where few are ever charged with a specific crime or given a chance before any court or tribunal to argue for their freedom. In Hussein's case, Curley and other AP executives say, the military has not provided any concrete evidence to back up the vague allegations they have raised about him. More information is contained in the news stories and press materials below.

AP (http://www.ap.org/bilalhussein/)

OBJ Not Quizzed by Mets, says Nigerian High Commission

2007-10-28T09:09:00.000-07:00

The Nigeria High Commission in London has debunked an Internet-based story that former President Olusegun Obasanjo was questioned by the London Metropolitan Police during his recent visit to the UK.

A statement signed by Nigeria’s Acting High Commissioner to Britain, Amb. Dozie Nwanna, said the report posted on the Web had provoked ‘’wide public interest in Nigeria and abroad’’.

The statement, made available to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), said Obasanjo was in Britain between Oct. 17 and Oct. 22 and was accompanied on the visit by officials of the High Commission ‘’from beginning to the end of his visit’’.

It said due to his stature as a former Nigerian President who was traveling with a diplomatic passport, Obasanjo was technically a guest of the mission.

‘’Mission was, therefore, shocked at the muddle of claims, which were immediately recognised as untrue,’’ it said.

‘’The biggest of the lies in the article was, of course, the assertion that the former President had contact with the London Metropolitan Police during the visit.

‘’Mission can categorically state that he was never met by anyone from the police establishment of the UK during the visit.’’
(http://dailytrust.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3635&Itemid=45)

Thousands call for swift end to Iraq war

2007-10-28T03:17:00.000-07:00

Thousands of people called for a swift end to the war in Iraq as they marched through downtown on Saturday, chanting and carrying signs that read: "Wall Street Gets Rich, Iraqis and GIs Die" or "Drop Tuition Not Bombs."

The streets were filled with thousands as labor union members, anti-war activists, clergy and others rallied near City Hall before marching to Dolores Park.

As part of the demonstration, protesters fell on Market Street as part of a "die in" to commemorate the thousands of American soldiers and Iraqi citizens who have died since the conflict began in March 2003.

The protest was the largest in a series of war protests taking place in New York, Los Angeles and other U.S. cities, organizers said.

No official head count was available. Organizers of the event estimated about 30,000 people participated in San Francisco. It appeared that more than 10,000 people attended the march.

"I got the sense that many people were at a demonstration for the first time," said Sarah Sloan, one of the event's organizers. "That's something that's really changed. People have realized the right thing to do is to take to the streets."

In the shadow of the National Constitution Center and Independence Hall in Philadelphia, a few hundred protesters ranging from grade school-aged children to senior citizens called on President Bush to end funding for the war and bring troops home.

Marchers who braved severe wet weather during the walk of more than 30 blocks were met by people lining the sidewalks and clutching a long yellow ribbon over the final blocks before Independence Mall. There, the rally opened with songs and prayers by descendants of Lenape Indians.

"Our signs are limp from the rain and the ground is soggy, but out spirits are high," said Bal Pinguel, of the American Friends Service Committee, one of the national sponsors of the event. "The high price we are paying is the more than 3,800 troops who have been killed in the war in Iraq."

Vince Robbins, 51, of Mount Holly, N.J., said there needed to be more rallies and more outrage.

"Where's the outcry? Where's the horror that almost 4,000 Americans have died in a foreign country that we invaded?" Robbins said. "I'm almost as angry at the American people as I am the president. I think Americans have become apathetic and placid about the whole thing."

In New York, among the thousands marching down Broadway was a man carrying cardboard peace doves. Some others dressed as prisoners, wearing the bright orange garb of Guantanamo Bay inmates and pushing a person in a cage.

Chicago police said about 5,000 people marched through city streets to protest the war.

Police spokeswoman JoAnn Taylor said three protesters were arrested before the march started. They face charges including resisting arrest, failure to obey a police officer, criminal damage to property and aggravated battery to a police officer.

In Seattle, thousands of marchers were led by a small group of Iraq war veterans.

At Occidental Park, where the protesters rallied after the march, the American Friends Service Committee displayed scores of combat boots, one pair for each U.S. solider killed in Iraq.

Associated Press (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071028/ap_on_re_us/iraq_war_protest)

Was OBJ Interrogated By Mets?

2007-10-23T10:54:00.000-07:00

Nigeria’s self-acclaimed messiah and immediate past president Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was recently a guest of the London Metropolitan Police investigating the case of money laundry involving former Governor James Ibori.
Obasanjo, Nigeria Today Online says, was implicated by Ibori who linked his corruption allegation case to the former president’s failed third term plan.
Ibori is not the first to make such connection with Obasanjo’s failed tenure elongation bid. Two former governors, Saminu Turaki and Joshua Dariye, had drawn similar links.

NIGERIA TODAY ONLINE
The authoritative and most widely read Nigerian publication
Daily briefing on key political & economic events affecting Nigeria
Available by e-mail subscription Monday-Friday (Except public holidays).
Tel: 0802 318 6564. London: 07956 416 788 E-Mail: Nigeria2Day@AOL.Com
(Published since 1989)

Monday October 19, 2007

James Ibori implicates Obasanjo in London interrogation

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo is reported to have been quizzed for over two hours last week by the London Metropolitan Police, as part of their investigation of James Ibori, the former governor of Delta State. Ibori is currently being investigated in the UK on charges of corruption. Sources at the Metroplolitan Police in London said Obasanjo was interviewed and was only released after he gave a written statement. Ibori had implicated the former president in a statement he had earlier made to the police, in which he made reference to the massive funding of the third term project. Although it is still unclear what the failed third term project had to do with Ibori's current investigation in the UK, it is however not the first time a former governor will confess to massively funding the ill-fated tenure elongation bid of Obasanjo.

Should There Be Dialogue Of Religions?

2007-10-18T07:11:00.000-07:00

Without recent events happening, many of which we all know, perhaps questions whether there should be dialogue of religions or civilisations would not have arisen in the first place. These happenings, leading to many wrongs of history including the current Middle East quagmire, 9/11 and 7/7 bombings, invasion of Iraq etc, cannot be easily corrected unless the root-causes are sufficiently comprehended.
The document last week authored by 138 Islamic leaders and academics, which was sent to the Pope calling for a dialogue, is not only a threshold to resolving these major wrongs, but is also very timely. All Muslims, of course, are not, in all cases, responsible for igniting and or encouraging violence as it’s often shown by the media. But there were many instances in which the overreactions of a few people, often misguided, were made to look like a general decision by all Muslims. This is not only faulty in generalisation, but also pathetically collectivises blame.
About 11 months ago a documentary set in Nigeria, The Imam and the Pastor, in which a Muslim Imam and a Christian Pastor are collaborating to promote global peace, was produced by a London-based charity film-making group FLTfilms. It showcases a complete departure from vengeance to forgiveness, from hatred to love – something followers of all faiths need to emulate. I have followed this film since it was released and I am totally amazed at the kind of acceptance it has received, so far, from peoples of all faiths, races and cultures. Is this not a signal to the fact that if more efforts are put religious conflict, particularly between Muslims and Christians, will become a thing of the past? Methinks pessimists should give this move a chance. Let’s hope this letter to the Pope takes us back to the good old days when Muslims and Christians co-existed peacefully and even had collaborations.

Emerging voice of mainstream Islam
A total of 138 of the world's top Muslim leaders, clerics and academics have written an open letter to the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury and other leaders of the Christian world.
It warns that world peace depends on better dialogue between them, and points to the fundamental beliefs each have in common.
But the real significance of the initiative lies in the creation of a powerful new lobby in world politics.
It is certainly not the first time that Christian and Muslim leaders have referred to their shared values and traditions.
In the years of tension since 9/11 it has been a frequent accompaniment to inter-faith meetings and projects aimed to mend the fractured and suspicious relationship between some Muslims and Christians.
But the letter, written by ayatollahs, muftis, sheikhs, sultans, professors and ministers, has taken this assertion of cousinly - even brotherly - relations to another level.
That is partly because the signatories have a considerable personal influence, in countries as diverse as Russia, Egypt, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia and Yemen.
"Looking down the list of signatories, there is one person after another with large followings, often numbered in millions," said David Ford, professor of divinity at Cambridge University.
"The fact that they've signed it means it will be taken seriously at the grass roots."
Just what are the revelations that this impressive cast-list has signed up to?
The letter contains a clearly written account of the passages in the Koran and the Bible that illustrate close similarities in the most fundamental doctrine of Christianity and Islam.
For example each of them insists that followers worship only one God, and requires them to love their neighbours as themselves. Other passages strike a note of conciliation, even humility.
For example, there is the Koran's acknowledgement that the truths revealed to the Prophet Muhammad - the founder of Islam - had already been shown to the prophets of the Old Testament (the Jewish Torah) and the New Testament, including, of course, Jesus himself.
The document also picks out the verses in the Koran which tell Muslims that they should treat the followers of these Jewish and Christian prophets with particular friendship and respect.
It also cites the Koran's specific instruction that these "people of the Scripture" worship the same God as Muslims.
But the real significance of this gesture, is that it is the first act of a group that intends to become the "international voice" of mainstream Islam, missing for so long.
It has been one of the problems of dialogue between Christians and Muslims that Islam has lacked a coherent mainstream view.
It has little of the hierarchies that characterise Churches, headed by leaders who can credibly represent the faith.
Not only is there no Muslim pope, but there is barely a single voice, or even group of voices, generally acknowledged to speak for "global Islam".
It has produced a vacuum into which it has been easy for extremists to move, whether locally in a town or city, in a country or in whole regions.
Extremists, from maverick imams to the leaders of al-Qaeda, have found it easy to claim to speak for Islam.
"So often the extremists have been able to use the modern media," says Professor Ford.
"Now finally there is a platform, a mode, for the moderate, mainstream, traditional Muslim leaders to come together and find consensus."
Moderate Muslims have often been criticised for what is perceived to be their failure to speak out on more difficult issues than the shared basics of faith.
As well as Muslim terrorism, they include the lack of democracy in Muslim countries and the often violent treatment of Christian minorities, especially converts to Christianity.
One of the authors of the letter, Professor Aref Ali Nayed, says: "We can't solve all of Islam's problems with a single document."
However he agrees that what the 138 have begun with their statement is a powerful new voice in world politics in the making.
"Now we have the mechanism of getting all these scholars together to speak with one voice really worked out, we shall build upon it," says Professor Nayed.
"You shall see more scholars and more documents, and we shall address other issues, issues that are more difficult. But we must have the courage to face them."
By going back to fundamentals - the authors hope to undermine the fundamentalists themselves.
Reiterating the shared view of a single God and the command to "love thy neighbour", the letter strips away the baggage of history and culture and produces a blank sheet for a new relationship.
In a sense there is a greater potential for agreement across the religious divide than there is for healing the fractures within each religion, because no-one is asking or expecting the other for concessions.
However some have questioned the letter as the basis of dialogue.
The Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, himself born into a Muslim family, pointed out that Christians' view of God - containing Jesus in a divine trinity - is very different to that of Muslims.
Dr Nazir-Ali said: "Dialogue should be on the basis of that difference. They appear to be saying 'this is what Muslims believe... if you agree, then let's have a dialogue'."
Christian leaders do now plan a response to the letter.
Professor Nayed insists that the dialogue must at least take place, arguing that world peace, even the survival of mankind, might depend on it.
He said: "Christians and Muslims make up more than half the world's population... and when you look at the weapons in the hands of those people... and the violence of terrorism, it's easy to see how dangerous it is for there to be so little understanding."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7040774.stm

Democracy on trial in Nigeria?

2007-10-16T09:57:00.000-07:00

I find Judith Asuni’s story very interesting, not because she’s an American-Nigerian thrown into detention on what she terms trumped-up allegations, but because there are millions like her in the same circumstance. Remembering my own experience, with my colleagues in 1994, we were put in jail because we protested against a tyrant who, by some bizarre twist of luck, had been entrusted with heading the only University in Nigeria’s Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. This man, a very morally bankrupt character, known as Isa Mohammed, a so-called professor of Mathematics and who at best was a Chancellor in Vice rather than a Vice Chancellor insisted that we had offended the ‘powers that be’ by rising against his criminality. So be it - we were hunted like some common criminals and held incommunicado for several months. Even after court orders were passed to release us, he, backed by the late General Abacha’s men like Deputy Inspector General of Police Archibong Nkana and some powerful military officers as well as traditional rulers, flouted the orders with impunity. In that manner many of us were made to pay costly prices. Today, Mrs Asuni is alleging the same thing. If the government is hoping to be upright, unlike OBJ’s, which spent the best of its two tenures pursuing real and perceived enemies, it should properly follow due process in dealing with Mrs Asuni’s case. After all democracy does not end in rhetoric; let us see justice done.
If you want to know more about Judith Asuni’s travail. This piece of story I found in the Daily Trust could be helpful. Enjoy.

The family of a Niger Delta activist suspected of espionage, Mrs Judith Asuni, has petitioned President Umar Yar’Adua and the Human Rights Watch on account of the abuse of the activist’s rights.

Judith Asuni is spending her 19th day in State Security Service (SSS) detention after she was arrested along with two Germans over espionage allegation.

According to a petition dated 13th October 2007 and signed by the eldest daughter of Dr Asuni, Dr. Bolanle Asuni-Limahn, Dr Asuni has been denied access to her counsel and family members and provision of medical attention delayed.

"Many of these denials were in flagrant disobedience of court orders on the rights of Dr Asuni as given severally by Justice Binta Nyako," the petition stated.

"As a leader who has made respect for human rights the cornerstone of your administration, we plead with you in the name of God to prevail on the SSS to respect the rights of Mrs Asuni and obey all the court orders given in that respect," the petition pleads".

The family disclosed that the 60-year-old activist has suffered electric shock in SSS detention but was not provided medical attention until 16 hours later in spite of frantic and persistent requests by her.

"She is presently carrying a cut in her hand and has not been provided with medical attention at the time of writing this appeal", the petition added.

The two Germans who were accused with Dr. Asuni have been released to the German Embassy in Nigeria.

The Real Trouble with Nigeria

2007-10-13T13:50:00.000-07:00

Yesterday, I was fortunate to read a fine piece by a Nigerian blogger, Adeola Aderounmu living in Sweden. Vexed by the current situation in Nigeria he wrote this article titled A disastrous Illegitimate Government in reference to the jamboree team preying on Nigeria’s resources in the name of government. I, sharing his opinion, promptly responded below:
The real trouble with Nigeria, I have always maintained and I stand to be corrected, is that it’s largely an assembly of dishonourable people. This, of course, does not mean there are no honourable or honest people at all. What I mean is that almost everyone is easily corruptible. If Adeola says the government is illegitimate, I don’t blame him. Nor do I fault him, outrightly. But I think he’s only being simplistic. The question of apportioning blames really goes beyond that AGF Aondoakaa, who’s actually doing the bidding of his bosses. By the way why are we running away from the fact that there were no elections in the country this year at all? Were the elections not dismissed by all credible observers, from within and outside the country, as a ruse? But didn’t we go ahead to accept those characters imposed on us in ‘good faith’? And that ‘good faith’ has always been our undoing. So from Day One the entire government was (and still is) illegitimate. What we need to think of is how do we right these wrongs. There’s an illegitimate government that robbed its way to power, very much like a ‘coupist’ junta, which we have chosen to accept, all in the interest of peace. Yet officers of the regime take fancy in, without being provoked, declaring war on us via absurd, ruthless, excessive and narcissistic policies. OBJ, the man behind this entire ungodly plot, fired the first salvo a couple of days before he handed power to his stooge, Umaru Yar’Adua. Then there’s a Patricia Etteh whose thieving brain is so dumb that the she expects us to cheer her while she raids our treasury and gets away with everything in a swoop. Now Aondoakaa is on the offensive again. Won’t they let us alone? No, they won’t. That’s why we must take the battle to their doorstep.

Check out my Slide Show!

2007-10-12T10:52:00.001-07:00

Of Marion Jones and crocodile tears

2007-10-11T08:07:00.000-07:00

Last week marked a complete turning point for Marion Jones, a woman who was once held as the best female athlete America ever produced. Her total haul of five medals at the Sydney Olympics of 2000 shattered Florence Griffith Joyner’s Seoul Olympics four medals record. But like Jones, Joyner, who came to be known as ‘Flo Jo’ because of her incredible speed, had the tail end of her career dogged by allegations of relying on performance enhancing drugs. ‘Flo Jo’ was to die ‘accidentally’ in her sleep 10 years after her Olympics feat. Up until now, no one can say, for sure, if she ever or never used drugs while sprinting or jumping for or in America. That’s that for the once fabulous ‘Flo Jo’.
Marion Jones is the subject of this discourse. Recalling her full confidence when she addressed a press briefing last year denying any involvement with banned drugs, Jones was a mere shadow of herself last week as she tearfully admitted using steroids prior to the 2000 Sydney Summer Olympics. Her case has, over the years, generated so much controversy that at some point it almost truncated her career. Last year, for example, she was forced to withdraw from Weltklasse Golden League meet in Switzerland following the heat generated by a Washington Post report that a sample of her urine, taken at the USA Track and Field Championship in Indianapolis on June 23, 2006 tested positive for a banned performance-enhancer, Erythropoietin or EPO. Even as she claimed her withdrawal was for reasons she termed ‘personal’, Jones was to fiercely deny this drug allegation and successfully fool everyone through her lawyer Howard Jacobs. Spurred by the experience of representing other accused athletes in the past, including her former lover Tim Montgomery and cyclist Floyd Landis, the lawyer effectively cleared her of the charges and announced to the world that her ‘B’ sample had tested negative.
Before going ahead to join in crucifying her lets try to find who she is (or she was) and who she was ‘hanging’ out with. Born on October 12, 1975 as Marion Jones-Thompson, her journey to sporting stardom began in high school. For four years running, it was reported, she held the 100-meter title of the California state championship while she represented Rio Mesa and Thousand Oaks high schools. Although eye brows were then raised leading to doping charges, lawyer-to-the-stars Johnnies Cochran saw to it that her name was cleared of any indictment. Rejecting an invitation as an alternate in the 4x100 relays to the 1992 Olympics, Jones accepted a full scholarship to the University of North Carolina in Basketball, another of her favourite. Her impact was felt full well as she significantly played a role in their NCAA championship victory as a freshman. But she soon dumped basketball to concentrate on track and field, due to an injury that cost her a place in the Olympics team of 1996. Her first major international competition was a huge success as she won the 1997 World Youth Championship in Athens. She was, however, not so successful in the long jump. At the 1999 World Championships, Jones gave a good account of herself. Although her attempt to win four medals led to her ghastly exit from the competition after she sustained an injury, she, nonetheless, won one gold and one bronze in the 100-meter and long jump events respectively.
The Sydney 2000 Olympics was to become the peak of her athletics success just as today it turns out, ironically, to be where the journey of her tumble from ‘Olympus’ began. From the onset Jones made it clear, in the full presence of world media, she wanted every attention she possibly could get when she announced that she was eyeing five gold medals. She instantly became a media figure and one to beat or watch beating others. In the end she had a total haul of five medals – three golds and two bronzes. Even though she was two gold medals short of her dream it was an unparalleled feat. But her story did not end there.
From 1998, long before her Olympics triumph, up until now Marion Jones went through at least three serious relationships with three different men. Two of these men, at different times, married her, while one only had a strong affair with her that produced a child. All three men were (and one still is) in the field of sports. Also, all three but one had had their careers tainted by doping scandals.
Starting with shot putter C.J. Hunter, her first husband, the clock ticked to a full stop for his career after he was banned from the 2000 Olympics when he tested positive for Nandrolone. The final blow for him (even though he was sacked, earlier, by his University of North Carolina employers when he, a coach, opted to marry her, his student) was their divorce in 2002. That sealed his fate in her story, it seemed, until he bounced back ‘letting the cat out of the bag’.
The next year Marion Jones had a baby boy, named Tim Montgomery Jr., with boyfriend Tim Montgomery. He was himself a star sprinter who, as it later emerged, cheated his way to victory. He was sent to the trash bin of history after admitting to using banned drugs. That earned him a ban and his so-called 100 meters world record.
Early in 2004 Jones married another star athlete, Obadele Thompson, a Barbadian who won a bronze medal at 2000 Sydney Olympics. Unlike her two earlier lovers, Thompson is yet to be linked to any drug-use allegation.
Interestingly, it was her ex-husband Hunter that kindled the major controversy that is, today, consuming Jones. He confused to using steroid and swore that he saw her inject herself drugs during the Sydney Olympics. His confession led to, in 2005, a major scandal as her coach Trevor Graham, former boyfriend Tim Montgomery, sprinters Chryste Gaines and Kelli White amongst others were implicated. While most of them accepted their guilt and were penalised Jones was vehement in denying the allegation. And as I recall seeing her on television, she was too confident to be faulted as she repeatedly said “I never, ever used any performance enhancing drugs.”
Apart from affairs with Hunter and Montgomery, two disgraced cheats, the influences of speed coach Graham and Charlie Francis, who confessed to assisting notorious athletics cheat Ben Johnson, need to be examined. Whereas she denied ever using banned drugs Hunter insisted she did and that Graham’s expertise in procuring the drugs for her was nothing but perfect. With his Mexican connection, Hunter alleged, it was always easy. Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative (BALCO) was to become a major source, according to Hunter, as Graham continued procuring drugs for Jones through founder Victor Conte. Conte was to later admit this to journalist Martin Bashir. In addition, BALCO, Conte said, supplied many other athletes including Zhanna Pintusevich-Block, the Ukrainian who caused a major upset when she beat Jones at the 2001 World Championship in the 100 meter race.
Even after being implicated repeatedly by close associates, Marion Jones remained in complete denial of her sins. Although she also trained with Ben Johnson’s trainer, a man responsible for the latter’s total evaporation to insignificance, this evidence, as circumstantial as it was, still could not help in pinning her to admit guilt. Her waterloo came when BALCO was involved in a drug-cum-fraud scandal prompting federal investigations. She, even at the risk of being sent to jail if found out, lied to investigator and continued to do so until recently.
Her sharp u-turn last week came as a shock to everyone. What shocked me most, once an ardent fan, was how that confidence she once arrogantly wore as a trademark in denial completely vanished. She even shed tears proving that she, even, has her soft side. But beyond tears, even crocodiles tears, what does this mean for everyone, including Jones, who today buries her face in shame?
Writing in the International Herald Tribune of Tuesday, 9 October 2007, Christopher Clarey argues that Marion Jones’ apology is insufficient as she fell short of mentioning those she cheated in the competitions she won while using banned drugs. While it was clear she cheated and deceived games organisers, tax-payers who funded the games and even her fans who, in most cases often rose to her defence, and her own friends and family, the real victims, as Clarey argues, were (and still are) her rivals. One of such victims are Bahamas’ Pauline Davis-Thompson, who was seconds behind her at the Sydney Olympics and ended up with a silver medal, and top athletes of today who will no doubt be affected by this scandal rocking sports, especially sprinting. The public, including me, will definitely continue treat, onwards, every top athlete with suspicion until proven otherwise.
One big lesson for Marion Jones, now that she has been intimated by the long arms of the law into admitting guilt after lying for nearly a decade, is that there’s nothing comparable to success earned by means of hard work. It’s so plain and effortless afterwards. It gives one a total reassurance and permanent self-confidence. Most importantly, no one can ever take it away from you or try rewriting history. This is in sharp contrast to stolen success, as it applies to those enjoyed by Ben Johnson and Marion Jones etc that were, in any case, short-lived. Jones, like all others before and after her, had doubtlessly enjoyed stardom and all the glamour it came with. She successfully cheated her way to success, perhaps right from high school, and caused untold grief to people who, possibly, had worked hard but lost to her in different competitions. And worst of all, she only admitted when she knew the threats ‘are for real’. It’s now time for reckoning and she is today not only going to be consigned to such a low ebb in the annals of history as she never imagined, but will bear the knowledge of her crime for the rest of her life. She will remain a reference point for successive generations, like Ben Johnson has been since his 1988 disgrace, and would-be dopes.
Meanwhile, she still has a cause to be thankful to God. Her case is quite unlike that of ‘Flo Jo’, who did not even live to tell her own story and possibly clear her name. She was, in deed, never found out, but even in death it remained a subject of controversy that she used performance enhancing drugs. It was even alleged that it was a catalyst in her death.
Beyond Marion Jones, there’s also a huge lesson to be learned by all: it doesn’t pay to cheat, not only in the field of sport but in all aspects of life.

Marion Jones admitting drug use on the 5th October 2007

2007-10-07T08:01:00.001-07:00

Where Art Thou Our Messiah?

2007-07-07T07:55:00.000-07:00

Two weeks ago I visited my home country Nigeria, where I had not been for nearly eight months. Although I was not expecting much change I had hoped that a few improvements would have been recorded. But I found Nigeria as I left it in November last year. To say the least so much has gone wrong that I thought my country must be one of the worst on this planet. Come to think of it what's so good about a country that the leadership openly and shamelessly robs the people of their God-given right to determine who governs them, and nothing happens? With all the resources that God has endowed us, why are we suffering, and why is the leadership totally unconcerned as millions wallow in abject poverty? That's Nigeria for you, a bloody rat race.
Anyway, I only wish things get better. But with the way President Umaru Musa Yar'adua started does one need to expect any miracle? It's quite unlikely. After all even Baba Iyabo, who rode on the goodwill of the majority of Nigerians that defied late Gen Abacha's tyranny to the exalted position of Nigeria's president, ended up defiling the throne before leaving. Imagine his legacies: acute and uninterrupted power outage; individual and state-sponsored killings and assassinations and general insecurity; mass looting of public fund even when the Economic and Financial Commission is supposed to act as a check and bring culprits to book; shameless protection of sacred lambs, even when, clearly, they are indicted; the criminal sale of public property in the dubious name of privatisation; and finally the charade the was callously unleashed, to the bewilderment of all, on Nigerians as elections. That was, in fact, the height of disrespect, corruption and utter nonchalance from any leadership to its followers. But Nigerians accepted it in good faith and chose to move on.
As if that was not enough, just a couple of days before he left office, Baba Iyabo threw a tough challenge to everyone by hiking fuel pump price and shooting VAT off-limits. This is criminal. Whoever advised him? This a serious sacrilege; provoking someone and spiting him? Anyway the rest is history. President Yar’adua couldn’t even manage the mess properly and for several days the economy was practically shut down. How much loss did we incur? Only God knows. But it will surely take its toll, sooner than we expect. Remember the June 12 debacle when there were endless strikes and Gen Abacha simply turned a blind eye and went mute? That’s what later took its toll on the economy and laid the path, hugely, to our current travail; dead refineries; a prostrate economy whose survival is dependent on a single resource; absence of forward and backward linkages in the polity and much else. One of the biggest legacies of that reign of tyranny is that political sycophancy, and lip service via crowd renting became an acceptable way of life, a norm, and not an exception to the rule. Today even major opposition parties have finally nipped in the bud the quest for justice as they jostle over ministerial and other positions in President Yar’adua hitherto discredited government. In this bid they have systematically forgotten or chose to pretend to forget the entire anomaly, as unprecedented as it were, seen in the April elections. Even the ANPP, which claimed to have suffered most, is in the fore front in joining the government, therefore giving it a big stamp of credence and putting a big question mark on its presidential flag bearer, Gen Muhammadu Buhari’s attempt to fight the alleged malpractices in court. If they no longer believe in seeking recourse in courts how would they support him to get justice done? If they now think all that matters is what they, as individuals, would gain by being part of the government why are they clinging to any national interest as the motive for their action?
The trouble with the Nigerian politician is that he is a big time opportunist, always out to make personal gains at the expense of the country’s interest. Was it not a one time American president, John F Kennedy that said: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”? For Nigerians, especially our politicians it’s always the other way round. Americans made America the ‘God’s own country’ it is because they have selflessly and patriotically worked hard toward that. Nigerians would rather loot public funds and take flight to places like America to stash them away. Our politicians are the biggest culprits in this case.
Has Yar’adua ever challenged himself along this premise raised by JFK? If yes then as his wealth astronomically grew from 1999 to date can he boast of any solid thing he did to move his country forward, or even to improve the lives of his Katsina kinsmen that he governed for eight? What are, by the way, his legacies in Katsina State as a politician and a leader? I think it’s too early to commend him for making his asset declaration public. It makes no difference anyway. It will make any sense if it’s discovered that he never stole any money from public treasury and even if he did, it will only make him a hero if he honourably returns it. Someone said it was the first time any Nigerian leader honestly made such declaration. The big issue here is that we tend allow our memories, sometimes, to be too short to remember some very vital, heroic positions taken at some point in our history. We even forget people’s negative, very negative pasts, and try to rewrite history. Otherwise, what has become of late Gen Murtala Rahmat Muhammed’s contribution to making Nigeria an honest, just and progressive society? Recall that he did not only fight corruption but led by example by forfeiting his loot from the former Mid West State treasury. During his reign, it was for the first time in Nigeria’s history, the economy made progress without any hiccups, bureaucracy was sanitised and public offices became Nigerians friendly; files that had got stuck on greedy officers’ desks began to flow swiftly and corruption almost became a thing of the past. But his regime was short-lived, no thanks to international conspiracy especially given the face-off with the mighty US over Angola and his historic speech Africa Has Come of Age at the OAU summit. Also, what about the Generals Buhari and Idiagbon regime? Needless as it is to keep reminding us of these missed opportunities, it still helps if we joggle our memories back to all the selfless and even selfish feats that have either helped us moved on or dragged us several steps backward.
As a way of conclusion, even though I had chosen to be mute on this, I expect nothing spectacular from a Yar’adua that is a beneficiary of a widely faulted election, a man that found it too hard to reverse a very, very inhuman policy that tightens that noose on millions of Nigerians that can neither decide who governs them or what policies make or mar their very existence. He is certainly not my man, unless he proves otherwise.
Finally, our politicians have always been predictable; selfish, predatory, crafty and opportunistic. They’re joining Yar’adua’s government to participate in milking the economy dry. Simple. If am wrong let them prove it by changing a bit, for once.
And a word of advice for Gen Buhari? Go home and rest, enjoy your retirement. You don’t need all this stress. You may never become a president in a country that’s mainly an assembly of sycophants leading a pathetically ignorant and helpless majority. That’s my stand.