Nigeria: Can we radically rethink our political machinery?

Resisting the laughable

I was not surprised when I heard on BBC Radio 4 in the very early hours of this morning that just 5 hours before the polls opened in Nigeria, they were postponed for a week. [BBC]

It would be convenient for me to write from the western comfort of my abode to rant and rave about the systemic dysfunction that bedevils Nigeria and runs counter to the words of Sir Abubakar Tafawa-Balewa on the day of independence, when he said, “We are called upon immediately to show that our claims to responsible government are well-founded, and having been accepted as an independent state we must at once play an active part in maintaining the peace of the world and in preserving civilisation. I promise you, we shall not fail for want of determination.” [AkinBlog][Dawodu]

The courage of reality

In that assertion at the dawn of independent Nigeria, the claims and the want are no more the subject of debate, the conclusion is an everyday indictment of a nation that is full of potential and that is all we have, potential.

Yet, for all accusations by the main political parties that the postponement could presage the manipulation of the vote in favour of either, I must commend the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for having the courage to realise they were not ready and taking the difficult but necessary decision to postpone.

The pressure to carry on regardless would have been immense but having recognised that certain locations would be denied suffrage and appreciating the logistical problems of getting election materials to the various places that might have been sabotaged, this was the only reasonable option.

The saboteurs gaming the system

The problem with Nigeria is myriad, we have a rentier class of political jobbers who have no occupation apart from peddling influence, they suck the oxygen out of every other viable and productive sector of the economy, society and government, such that things can only work with their agreement.

Then, amongst them, because the remuneration within politics far exceeds that which can be acquired out of qualification, hard work or merit, they employ every means to disrupt and sabotage the electioneering process that represents the will of the people in order to entrench themselves in positions where they can control the commonwealth arrogating to themselves untrammelled fiat over the helpless masses who are best kept in the vassalage of only having begging bowls, living hand to mouth and driven by survival by the belly.

That is the failure of Nigeria that has resulted in postponing the elections for a week. There are people who have a vested selfish interest in what they can usurp to the detriment of others and without any scruples as to whether anyone gets hurt or killed in the process.

Rethinking our political machinery

Sometimes, I wonder what it is that can fix Nigeria in the state that it is, but we can start with one thing, slash the remuneration of the political class to just basic allowances for board, meals and transport. If they need additional income, they should earn it like everyone else.

Nigeria cannot afford a fulltime legislature, at the exorbitant cost at which it is run today, there is no reason to feather the beds of the legislators when ordinarily the middle classes on their earnings cannot afford the basic things without the temptation to malfeasance, corruption or fraud.

The legislature should have a term time with a clear agenda like a syllabus of activities and bills to debate, run with the efficiency of a principal of a secondary school, clearly with objectives and penalties for not producing results. An Office for Government Accountability having the independence to review and sanction the executive and the legislature when they fail in their responsibilities.

As a consequence of this

Taking the remuneration surplus out of politics would immediately divert the eyes of the heretofore political jobbers to other honeypots and troughs, whilst hopefully allowing Nigerians with a sense of altruism and commitment into politics. At least, they would not be politicking for the money but for the opportunity to serve.

Then, reduce all political terms to one term, none should seek re-election without having been succeeded once, within that, cascade the elections such that the executive branch is not elected in the same year as the legislative branch. This is radical, but I think it would go a long way to taking the leeches out of the decision-making framework of Nigeria.

There is still hope

There is a likelihood with this rethinking of Nigerian politics, we might come close to the what Sir Abubakar Tafawa-Balewa dreamt was possible in Nigeria, “that our claims to responsible government are well-founded.”

In the meanwhile, I hope that when Nigerians do finally get the opportunity to elect their political leaders and representatives in a week, INEC would be ready, the people would have chosen wisely and their express will be presented in the validated results.

Long live Nigeria and God bless Nigeria.

The UK: Asserting rights and affirming status by minorities in our courts

Somewhere in England

A quietly deliberated and adjudicated event a few weeks ago requires some pertinent commentary, in which abused entitlement was found wanting by the assertiveness of the knowledge of right, privilege, history and the law.

After #Brexit, the government of the day went into an overdrive of assumptions of what they thought the referendum meant to the exclusion of the views of the almost divided nation that voted 52% to 48% in favour of leaving Europe.

Unravelling the Brexit conundrum

What ‘Taking Back Control’ meant was completely undefined, it was not a question in the referendum and if the government was not going to return to the people to determine the detail of what their desires for #Brexit were, one would have thought the final arbiter would be with the representatives of the people in the Parliament of Westminster.

Instead, the government was on a course of excluding the legislature out of the final determination and direction apart from the courtesy of a rubber stamping the decisions. This is where we are introduced to Gina Miller.

Standing up to convention

Gina Miller, born in British Guyana, long term resident of Great Britain, a successful investment management expert thought the government, the executive was going about #Brexit by excluding the legislature, by that the Parliament and so with other parties sought judicial clarification as to how to go about #Brexit and in the end won the case at the Supreme Court.

What Gina Miller did which was to assert the rights that any indigenous British-born person with generational lineage and knowledge of the Constitution, history and the law could have done. That it fell to someone else to do this is not particularly unfortunate, it had to be done and Gina Miller did it.

Then a lawless peer wrote

However, this opened Gina Miller to splenetic opprobrium, abuse, death threats and violations of her person and standing, chief amongst the purveyors of this abusive onslaught was a Rhodri Philipps, the 4^th Viscount St Davids whose aristocratic lineage stretches as far back as 1299. In him was the embodiment of entitlement and privilege along with a sense of aristocratic hubris that tempted him to consider himself above reproach and beyond sanction.

Railing against Gina Miller on Facebook, he placed a bounty with the words, “£5,000 for the first person to ‘accidentally’ run over this bloody troublesome first generation immigrant.” His tirade then descended into the utterly reprehensible by calling Gina Miller a “fucking boat jumper” and further questioned her status with this atrocity, “If this is what we should expect from immigrants, send them back to their stinking jungles.” [Guardian]

The law would not stand for it

This sickening onslaught did not stop with Gina Miller, he seemed to have garnered a penchant to not only be abusive but to suggestively inspire to violence anyone who could be enticed by his bounties to cause harm to others he did not like or agree with.

Whilst Arnold Sube had neither clout nor resource to fight back, Gina Miller was a different prospect. Having challenged the Establishment and the orthodoxy and won, she must have considered taking an uppity aristocrat and peer of the realm to the courts was a lesser challenge with a greater prospect of winning through.

Whilst we might forget that Rhodri Phillips was of mixed nationality parentage, his mother being a Chilean, I have concluded that hypocrisy is a coveted virtue of an entitled class without the ability to reflect before expression. For his show of stupidity, the 4^th Viscount St Davids was on the 13^th of July sentenced to 12 weeks in prison. Not long enough a deterrent in my view, but it is a humbling of an overbearingly offensive miscreant. [The Independent]

Know your status and know your rights

That minorities in the UK suffer so many forms of slight, abuse, threats, menace and attacks is not particularly news, I recently faced abuse on a train journey where the perpetrator pointedly questioned my status in the UK, not knowing that I was British-born despite my race. It landed him in court and I should soon be hearing the verdict.

It is not an issue of political correctness; some behaviours are just unacceptable today and must be vigorously prosecuted to the fullness of the law. At its core is the need to ensure that every law abiding person resident in the UK is not subject to unwarranted abuse in the first place and consequently be free from the threat of harm or the violation of their person.

In Gina Miller, we have found a reaffirmation of status and right, the right to pursue all legitimate means of redress in terms of constitutional law as a private citizen and the right regardless of presumed status to have the law deal sternly with anyone who threatens our safety out of malice, spite, racism or anything bad inspired notion of inciting violence against us.

Nigeria: Arrest Him! He's Homosexual!

The sketch

Alice More (Wife): Arrest him!

Sir Thomas More (England's Lord High Chancellor): For what?

Alice More: He's dangerous!

William Roper (Son-in-law): For all we know he's a spy!

Margaret More (Daughter): Father, that man's bad!

Sir Thomas: There's no law against that!

William Roper: There is God's law!

Sir Thomas: Then let God arrest him!

Alice More: While you talk he's gone!

Sir Thomas: And go he should, if he were the Devil himself, until he broke the law.

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas: Yes!

Sir Thomas: What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?

Sir Thomas: This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down (and you're just the man to do it!), do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?

Sir Thomas: Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Sketch from A Man For All Seasons about Sir Thomas More from What Delicate Balance? by John Loeffler.

Signed in silence

I watched on social media yesterday as word got round that the President of Nigeria had signed into law the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill (SSMPB) which had wide ranging powers to persecute and prosecute Nigerian citizen homosexuals and their sympathisers with threats of jail sentences of up to 14 years. [The Nation] [Wikipedia] [SSMPB (PDF)]

There is no point dwelling on the minutiae of that law, because there is a wider issue at play that we fail to recognise can be the unintended consequence of this type of law.

At no time was Nigeria under the threat of sweeping homosexual matrimony invading the sanctity of temple or place of worship for solemnisation, the majority of the population is well schooled in the revulsion of homosexuality from a sexual perspective, that they would willingly gather in mobs to lynch in the name of whatever deity they worship to mete out just justice without repercussion.

Stones in hand

At tip of the tongue and with means to act, they have chapter and verse from any religious tome of your choosing to commit the homosexual instantly to the abyss of infernal perdition. We need no encouragement in what is innately our natural disposition.

Homosexuals in Nigeria have no pride marches, society takes no pride in them, the family can’t have pride for them and in essence the person so afflicted in the minds of the assailant is not proud of who they are. They are stuck in labyrinthic closets or acquiescing to societal pressures fulfilling the rites of passage of marriage whilst satisfying a deeper need on the down low.

Yet, we have a law for what does not exist, which can never get popular and has little chance in this generation of becoming acceptable, in our statute books. An exercise in legislative indolence signed off to the hysterical mesmerisation of the people who think this is the best thing the government ever did.

Now they've come

They have come for the homosexual with the Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill and because many are not homosexual they like the crowd that gathered at the trial of Jesus before Pontius Pilate have been excited by the leaders to cry out loud until they are hoarse – Crucify them!

One cannot be oblivious of history, for the persecution of the minority, the different, the castigated, the powerless and the other has allowed tyranny to lay hold until there is none to stand true for justice.

The words of Martin Niemöller come to mind in all its contexts and ramifications and for this piece, may I prefix it without necessarily changing the whole premise to the Nigerian setting, because there would be people to eventually fill those cadres of offence when sufficient momentum is gained for a new moral law on dressing, on sayings, on actions and much else, in what is becoming a sham of a democracy.

First they came for the Gays, and I did not speak out—because I was not gay.
Then they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

No business of the state

For the state has deviated from civil law to moral codes as much of the debate that fuelled support for this law had nothing to do with civil coexistence of the diversity of humanity and human nature, but some selective affinity to Mosaic rules designed specifically to differentiate the Israelites of the times of Exodus from other tribes. I digress on this essential matter of conscience above all else.

Where this becomes a problem is whilst in general, we have agreement amongst religious beliefs, we have no consonance of systems of worship and essentially do not believe the same.

For each person to their level of adherence can decide that they subscribe to their understanding of God’s law to do whatever they will or think is God’s mind about issues, even if others do not so subscribe to that system of beliefs or believe in any of that stuff. Yes, to some, stuff is article of faith and to others, it is just stuff.

Thinking for ourselves

When a man suggests he is only answerable to God or his religion, the state loses the power to provide the impartiality of justice to all its citizenry. For God’s law when taken to the street imposes sanction without appeal, empowering abuse without redress, yet self-justifies the presumably self-appointed custodians of those laws.

This was well argued in the submission of Lord Justice Laws on the issue of separation of religion and state.

“The law of a theocracy is dictated without option to the people, not made by their judges and governments. The individual conscience is free to accept such dictated law, but the state, if its people are to be free, has the burdensome duty of thinking for itself.”

In other words, these laws whilst appearing to be founded on firm moral principle, they offer no protections for the people in a democracy when they are caught on the wrong side of it, either by reason of being criminalised or by the abuse of process to persecute the innocent.

Blog - The case for State law over religious guidance

Arrest him, he’s homosexual

This takes us back to the sketch at the beginning of this blog on the use of the law, the misuse of the law and the abuse of authority.

The Lord High Chancellor had his family appeal to his sentiment to arrest a man because he was dangerous, and in terms, the homosexual in Nigeria is deemed dangerous not for anything that affects us personally, but for the satisfaction of our moral sentiments.

And by God’s law in the arguments proffered when debating the bill in the legislature, we have created something to ensnare people by criminalising the bedroom of others who do not subscribe to what is our norm or our normality.

In the voices of Margaret More, Alice More and William Roper, we seek to persecute, prosecute, impugn, damage and criminalise deploying every fallacy available to justify our stance (against everything different, unusual, misunderstood, reviled, especially homosexuality), by appealing to every sentiment to suborn the objective assessment of the facts, but there stands amongst us a Sir Thomas More.

This is a very bad law

He brings down every fallacy from hysteria to tradition, upholding the primacy of man’s law and its purpose for justice and fairness to all. For our wider humanity which easily finds ways to exacerbate difference and punish the same is better served in finding unity of purpose, in according fundamental human rights to each existence, to every expression and to the pursuit of happiness.

The Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Bill whichever way you want to look at it is a bad law, it is odious, inhuman, unconscionable, contemptible and celebratory of the worst of our human expression in the name of some presumed morality – the fight for its repeal has begun.

Every Nigerian homosexual in the 21^st Century should have a right to exist and thrive in their own country, fulfilling their potential without hindrance of the state through the criminalisation of who they are.

For all the sentiment we might have about what is the reason for homosexuality, science and psychology has gone beyond that to prove it is natural, sticking to the age-old religious acceptance that the earth is flat does not change the scientific fact that the earth is round, and it is the earth that revolves around the sun rotating on its axis to make night and day. 

I stand for the diversity of humanity expression, the protection of the rights of all, similar, different, powerless, powerful, heterosexual, asexual, celibate and homosexual, old and young, the many and the few. Repeal the law!

Other notes

Blog - Human Rights Day 2011: Gay Rights are Human Rights

Blog - Homosexuality in Nigeria - Condemning bigots who seek death

Blog - Editorial: Legislating for the Unforeseeable of Same-Sex Marriage

Facts About Homosexuality and Mental Health - UCDavis

Homosexuality – Wikipedia

Blog - Decade Blogs - Editi Effiong - Dear religious people, let's kill all the gay people

Nigeria: That Finance Minister and House Committee Meeting

The video showing the beginning of the proceedings before the committee. 

Courtesy of Premium Times. The news story.

The video that sensationalised the proceedings and attracted much commentary. 

Courtesy of Channels TV.

Update

These are two additional video Courtesy of Channels TV where the Chairman of the House Committee on Finance was interviewed.

   
Part 1

Part 2

For the time he was allowed to talk beyond the biased obstreperous interviewing technique of Harriet Agbenyi, a better picture of the reasonableness of the committee to the unreasonableness of the Finance Minister playing to the gallery exploiting the subjectiveness of Nigerians is evident.

Videos unlimited

When the second video was released in December, many jumped on it and excoriated the chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Finance, Dr. Abdulmumin Jibrin for disrespecting the honourable Federal Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

Whoever stitched together the second video was no doubt up for mischief and enough mischief was wrought by it. However, from the get-go, I was of the opinion that the Minister was haughty, wrong and troublesome, whilst the committee gave all due consideration before they came to the ruling that she should leave to return on another day.

This new video [The topmost one on this blog] corroborates my views, and I hope that viewers of both videos [The first showing the beginning of the engagement and the second showing how it ended.] which offers a more complete view of that engagement would review and reflect dispassionately and without sentiment.

Once we extricate ourselves from the gender and age politics, yes, the Minister is female and 22 years older than the Chairman, which could mean a lot in the Nigerian setting, and concentrate on institutions, process and procedure, we would be better informed of the fundamental issues.

The synopsis

The Minister was invited to appear before the House Committee, she was given the floor and with excuse seeking pity and whatever else, she said she was very ill, implied her colleagues might be fatigued, for they had not slept for days and offered to tackle the questions from the Committee almost half-heartedly because of her condition.

The committee sympathetically considered her condition, gave her the questions they were to ask her and advised her with all due courtesy to return at another time, two weeks hence.

The Minister took umbrage at this and questioned process and decorum of the Committee as the Chairman containing his exasperation and possible anger, told her she cannot face a gruelling grilling by the committee in her condition.

This after earlier letting her know that the Committee was as flexible as to make the maximum allowances for understanding that the Minister’s health was paramount, and they would have postponed in consideration of that.

The exchanges degenerated, the Committee ruled, the gavel came down, the session should have ended there and then but the camera kept rolling and that was theatre for Nigerians.

Separation of Powers

Broadly, we have a system of government in Nigeria that practices Baron de Montesquieu's theory of the separation of powers. An Executive presidency with a cabinet of ministers, a National Assembly – the Legislature comprised of the Senate and the House of Representative and the Judiciary.

Again, somewhere between the theory and the practice, the Legislature has oversight of the government and has powers into invite or summons the Executive about issues relating to governance, budgets and much else. The graphic below captures the general idea of what we should expect of the arms of government.

Source Wikipedia.

Now the event

That lays the groundwork into the how and the why of the Minister appearing before a committee of the House of Representatives.

As far as the video is concerned, the Minister was late in appearing before the committee, that is the first slight and show of disrespect to the House Committee that the Chairman overlooked without comment, and the Minister did not apologise for.

Then when the Minister was given the floor to speak, rather than address the serious matters of the days head-on, she had a more important human limitation, she was unwell and her colleagues were seriously fatigued, she would do her best, but implicitly, the Committee should have consideration and not grill her, or words to that effect.

Open book test

The Chairman, by observation decided that the gruelling activity of appearing before the committee should not be taken lightly, they had prepared 50 questions already, but seeing the condition of the Minister, the committee was willing to let her attend to getting well.

Meanwhile, here was an open-book test, take the 50 questions away, answer them and the Committee would invite you at a later date to discuss.

At which point the Minister for whatever reason contemned and impugned the Committee about orderly and respect, as she perked up, she was suddenly well, ready and able to face the Committee.

After the gavel

The Committee Chairman, overruled her, made a ruling and the gavel came down. The Minister should have packed her sheaves of paper and left because the session was at that time over, the Chairman said as much to her but she laid into the committee, suggested she had been disrespected and much else.

In my view, if we are to have strong institutions in Nigeria, it is important that all arms of government appreciate where they stand in the scheme of things. The Minister of the head of her ministry but answers to the legislature on matters concerning her ministry.

In that setting, the committee orders the proceedings and whoever appears before the committee should clearly respect and submit to the primacy of the committee in their deliberations, decisions and rulings.

Once the gavel came down, there was nothing else to discuss, the manner in which the gavel came down of no consequence, the reason why the gavel exists in the committee room is to maintain order, in process, proceedings and rulings. End of story – the rest is idle banter.

This uppity minister

That the minister decided to escalate the matter into a histrionic fit as depicted in that video is unfortunate and the chairman did well to make her understand that she cannot countermand the ruling of the committee.

In the process, it appeared the Minister was badly treated, but when we watch both videos, it is clear that the Minister simply pushed the matter to the point where it degenerated to – that sadly defines the unfortunate mess of a jumble of separation of powers we operating in Nigeria.

I stand by my original premise, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala in that setting was unprepared, uncouth, rude, wrong, ill-disciplined, ill-tempered, melodramatic and disrespectful, and all that as someone unwell.

That the executive when appearing before the legislature had to be handled in that way is order that has grown into a storm in a teacup – the committee prevailed, just as it should, anywhere that system of government exists in the world.

Nigeria: The relative cost of our democracy is unsustainable

This is too dear

I have written many times about the exorbitant and probably prohibitively unsustainable cost of the democratic experiment in Nigeria and there are many reasons to be concerned for how much we pay our lawmakers on average. [Nigeria: Our Exorbitant Government]

The graph below published by the Economist is more than just an eye-opener but it is also revelatory about how political office is a parasitic drain on the national resources since politicians cannot be considered part of the economic engine of a country.

What makes this graph worthy of the most righteous indignation begging for public insurrection is not so much about what the politicians earn, but the gap in earning capacity between the citizen and the representative lawmaker.

The comparisons

Australian lawmakers earn the most at $201,200 followed by Nigeria at $189,500 and then Italy with $182,000 and the United States at $174,000 all compared to the people they represent, we find that Australian and American lawmakers earn less than 4 times the average economic activity of their countries divided by their populations (GDP per capita), Italians just about double that and Nigerian lawmakers earn 116 times that.

The World Bank, the IMF, the CIA and the University of Pennsylvania all put the GDP per capita of Nigeria at between $2,661 ranking 137^th in the world out of 180 countries, $2,720 ranking 143/187, $2,800 ranking 148/194 and $1,716 ranking 152/185 respectively.

By comparison Australia is in the top 10 thrice, Italy in the top 30 twice and then the top 35 and the United States of America 4 times in the top 10, it goes without saying that Nigeria has no business paying its legislators in what is purportedly a representative democracy these atrocious amounts of cash that bilk and milk the country without contributing anything to its economic growth.

The consequences of expensive democracies

Worse still, it creates a competition for political office where the rewards far outweigh the commensurate perspiration leading to many situations where power-grabs by every means possible warps every notion of free and fair elections, talk less of representative democracy – it is utterly bad for Nigeria apart from the fact that it is unsustainable.

Looking at the chart again, you also wonder why Sub-Saharan African nations that hog the bottom third of GDP per capita tables are the ones that take the lead by far in the discrepancies between elected and elector besides the fact that only Ghana has consistently rewarded its electorate with the will of its people, Kenya did not in the penultimate election which has the current leadership indicted for crimes against humanity and Nigeria is a travesty in everything but name.

Nigeria is awash with oil money in the wrong hands which is used in acquisitive, ostentatious, hedonistic and wanton display of power, wealth, influence and mischief, it exacerbates a pressure cooker of ethno-religious and regional tensions, none of which the leadership have had the wherewithal to grapple with or understand that the consequences as it holds together with threadbare allegiances of snouts in trough might well be dire for the 2015 election year.

Enough is just enough

In my humble opinion, this democracy is neither representative nor working if the people we choose to represent us are so far removed from the reality of the citizenry that they literally live in a parallel universe, there ought to be no reason for Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana to be democratic outliers compared to the economic activity within their regions in comparison to their people, it calls for reform and this must be urgent, radical, far-reaching and deeply examining of the culture of corruption and influence-peddling we have allowed to become the raison d'être of political life.

This is the one time when the chorus from the village to the city and from the homes to the marketplaces of the country should ring loud – Enough is just enough.

Other reading

Nigeria: Our politically immature systems

Nigeria: Percentage Allowance Legislators

Review: Wole Soyinka on The Sexual Minority and Legislative Zealotry

The Nobel Laureate

Now, Professor Wole Soyinka is not really the easiest literary genius to read even though I did have some of his texts in my secondary school curriculum.

He has for a long time been a prolific intellectual who has spoken and written about oppression, misgovernment, corruption and the lack of accountability in leadership in Nigeria.

At 78, the man has not diminished in his critique of events and ideas whilst still retaining a considered voice of reason and deep analysis of issues especially in Nigeria.

26 years after being awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, I still find his writings difficult to access but full of meaning and objective discourse.

Consenting adults, the crux

This time the professor sketched his piece on the matter of homosexuality in Nigeria with an article titled – The Sexual Minority and Legislative Zealotry.

Wole Soyinka lays the groundwork for his thinking by stating that the legislation on sexual conduct between consenting adults is interference.

Then he posits that whilst foreign commentary on the activities of the Nigerian legislature in this regard is hysterical, hypocritical and disproportionate that foreign criticism should not deflect from the fact that as rational beings and particularly rational Nigerians this issue should primarily be about “the right to private choices of the free, adult citizen in any land.”

He suggests that the legislative fervour that has accompanied this matter is a distractive ploy to obscure actions of the government when out of their depth because of the economic crises or to inject unpopular policies that might catch the public unawares.

Conflated issues

Taking no prisoners, he addressed the legislators to attend to the numerous and urgent businesses for which they were elected and take their noses out of sexual practices of consenting adults whilst warning that the said bill is redolent of legislative fascism which has no place in a democracy.

The bill in his view conflates two separate issues, the first being homosexual practice and the other being same-sex marriage, something he considers deliberate.

Throughout the article, it appears the professor is stridently against the encroachment of the law on the private practices and choices of consenting adults whilst acknowledging that the law does protect minors from abuse and adults from harassment.

Biology trumps faith

Attempting a broad definition of sexuality, he pitches tent in the nature rather than nurture camp of sexual preference by suggesting some people are born with an imprecise gender definition even if the said people do have sexual organs that suggest they are either male or female.

This is probably one of the more archaic arguments for sexuality definition but it is in a language that the more sententious of Nigerians might understand.

Tackling the morality views that are used to promote support for such legislation, having averred the issue of biological truth he is categorical in saying articles of faith are no substitute for scientific truths.

Democracy or theocracy

The democracy we have in Nigeria is being tested, in that we must “choose either to create a society that is based on secular principles, or else surrender ourselves to the authority of – no matter whose – theocratic claims.”

A theocracy should go the whole hog with all beliefs and doctrines adopted and enforced regardless of whether the other person is of similar or different faiths, the idea that where scriptures agree is compulsory and where they do not is optional is a recipe for chaos.

“The national train must run either on secular rails or derail at multiple theocratic switches. No theology can be privileged over another in the running of society.  This means, theology and its derivates cannot be privileged over material reality and its derivatives.”

A law against nothing

On the issue of same-sex marriage, the professor says there is no evidence of anyone attempting to legally enter in such contracts requiring the state to honour such liaisons at a court registry nor has any religious organisation or the clergy been compelled to perform such a ceremony.

People have of their own free will the right to privately ostracise or embrace such relationships but the state overreaches itself in attempting to criminalise such liaisons.

Moralists are advised to have a sense of proportion and embrace objectivity, that being the preponderance of biological fact over moral sentiment, avoiding the tendency to incite to mass hysteria and manipulation.

The debate

This is in my view that first time a highly respected and globally renowned Nigerian figure has addressed the matter of homosexuality and same-sex marriage with an open mind, if not objectively.

The issue is one of rights, it is about sexual conduct between consenting adults, that our democracy should be superior to the tendency to be swayed by disparate belief systems that do not essential agree on all elements of doctrine to be adopted as a constitutional reference point, that the state should not interfere and that our legislators should get on with the job they were elected to perform.

Nigerians are asked to be more objective, less moralistic, adopt empirical evidence of science over sentiment and even if they have private animus, it remain their prerogative but to support the legislation of moral laws will have more far-reaching consequences beyond the supposed targets to be used as instruments of persecution, blackmail or even worse, present a licence for jungle justice and mob lynching.

The debate is beginning and the reality cannot be obfuscated with legislative distractions; there are homosexuals in Nigeria and no legislation will exterminate one of the many enduring representations of humanity.

Please read the article in its entirety, there is much sense in The Sexual Minority and Legislative Zealotry.

Thank you.

Nigeria: Reviewing Ms. Arunma Oteh's Allegations

Speaking up and loud

This is the stuff great people are made of, fearlessness in the face of persecution and boldness to speak truth to power.

I have many a time been perturbed by the cost of our democracy and the stranglehold corruption seems to have on every facet of life in Nigeria.

Yesterday brought in a number of interesting revelations, whilst many sanctimoniously concentrated on the sensational, the bigger issue was the insight into the workings of our legislature, the committee system and the bottom-feeding frenzy of rent-seeking legislators steeped in despicable malfeasance playing to the gallery pretending to unimpeachable conduct.

Sensational allegations

The Director General of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Ms. Arunma Oteh was appearing before the House Committee on Capital Markets chaired by “Honourable” Herman Hembe – the title must be in quotes until it is regained by a fair assessment of the allegations made and the man is proven completely innocent of the claims.

During the day we were regaled with tales of the profligate excesses of the Ms. Oteh, that she had stayed in  5-star hotel accommodation for 8 months instead of the regulatory one month, that she has spent NGN 850,000 ($5,391) on dinner and everyone ran to town with it. There some dispute as to whether it was NGN 850,000 or NGN 85,000 ($539.10), in either case, this was piffle, almost of no consequence in the scheme of things, the way the country is bilked and milked by all those in political office.

She stoops to conquer

Nigerian politicians are given to bluster and grandiloquence arrogating to themselves privileges, emoluments and untrammelled fiat to bludgeon people who appear before their committees without due courtesies and respect to the attendees.

Ms. Oteh ran the gauntlet of being questioned about her qualifications to fill her position and her ability to perform, it was an inquisition so disgraceful and unbecoming of anyone who deigns to be recognised in polite society but that was Day One.

When Ms. Oteh appeared on Day Two, she was battle-axe ready, fuming, agitated and shooting all guns with deathly accuracy in what might become the biggest political earthquake of our democratic experiment, I should expect aftershocks of similar magnitude to follow.

Explosive political bombshells

She alleged with dates that the Committee Chairman had received moneys to attend a conference that he eventually did not attend and did not refund the expense. She also alleged that he had asked the SEC to fund the activities of the committee to the tune of NGN 39,000,000 ($247,376) and then another demand was made for NGN 5,000,000 ($31,714.80).

She questioned the integrity of the chairman and his credibility to sit in judgement with unclean hands and his maturity in commenting on issues related to the SEC without first verifying the facts possibly with the view to undermine, discredit and contemn Ms. Oteh.

More importantly, she pointedly accused the chairman of corruption and in the court of public opinion challenged the chairman to defend himself against the claims whilst making the case for fairness and better adherence to democratic principles. The raw emotion was palpable as she trembled and her voice quavered with each forceful statement, the discomfiture of the committee was quite evident.

Noisy body talk

The body language of the chairman was like an open book screaming out the words as he swivelled in his chair in pendulumic consonance squirming with embarrassment as he tried to fend off the allegations, twisting Ms. Oteh’s words and playfully making light of the situation but before the whole world, this was a most uncomfortable moment.

In a display of braggadocio he mandated the anti-corruption agencies to investigate the claims, but we Nigerians have very little confidence in the ability of these institutions to follow through to conclusion any allegations, charges or indictments made on senior politicians in Nigeria – it was both a dare and a moot point, if anything comes of it, we will be in for an unusual surprise.

He was obviously rattled that he forgot his manners when he told and not asked Ms. Oteh to turn off her microphone. In a society where character, reputation and integrity matters, where a senior official is besmirched with allegations of corruption, one would expect him to recuse himself and not bring the activities of the committee and the House of Representatives into disrepute, but impunity without consequence is the name of the game in Nigeria, he reasserted his questionable authority and banged the gavel – the seal of authoritative corruption and obvious indifference.

Ms. Oteh – the big spender?

So many things stand out from the events of that day which I will attempt to address one at a time.

Could Ms. Oteh have spent $539 on dinner? Very likely, it would probably have covered a meal with friends and considering the cost of living in Nigeria especially in luxury settings, the prices are unbelievably steep for what we would get at a reasonable cost in Europe. It is quite doubtful that she spent $5,391 at one sitting, it reads like a very tall tale exposed to ridicule and embarrass her – The SEC has asserted the lower figure but why let the truth get in the way of a sensational exposé?

That Ms. Oteh stayed in 5-star accommodation for a whole 8 months is quite beyond the pale but then one can understand that enjoying luxury at the expense of others can be a difficult and herculean task to wean yourself of off, in some ways she was being both a chancer and human – people have done worse, she has been in her position for over two years now, which means alternative lodgings have been arranged for at least 16 months.

Report or proclaim?

Certain people have wondered why Ms. Oteh did not take her allegations of corruption to the anti-corruption agencies. For reasons I have stated before, they have not excelled in their briefs, literally everyone of political clout in Nigerian has gummed up the system and deftly used the judiciary to extricate themselves from the clutches of due process of investigation and administration of justice.

In my view, that public forum was the best place to make those allegations and with it in the open, force many more voices to demand action be taken. If the chairman feels he has been besmirched and libelled he can easily seek redress in the courts but I doubt he has the courage to be exposed to the scrutiny of his cupboard of rampaging skeletons. Compromised legislators grandstanding in public will from now on have to thread carefully.

Estacode abuse

One area of patronage and source of corruption that needs to be reviewed reformed and better regulated is the use and abuse of estacode - funds intended to cover traveling costs by public servants and politicians. Politicians, especially in Nigeria are quite handsomely remunerated; they should not be receiving hand-outs before they have completed whatever missions they embark on.

In the private sector, a modicum of control is exercised on spending because the money first comes out of the pocket and the person is later reimbursed on the presentation of receipts and audited review of the expenses.

Though that process can also be abused, with the presentation of false documents or through collusion, it will not result in profligacy and excessive pre-compensation and the person will be more accountable for their spend. That the chairman received moneys and did not use it for the intended purpose is at best dishonest, if not fraudulent.

Conflicts of interest

The operation of committees needs to be reviewed, the independence of a committee will always be compromised and the perception of its ability to function transparently and fairly will be suspect if the committee and its members receive favours from the institutions they have oversight of. It is befuddling that the concept of conflict of interest has not become part of the framework of the fabric of our democracy.

The legislature has its budget and it must operate within its means without seeking emoluments and sponsorship of external organisations that can exact influence on the probity, transparency and integrity of the committees in some quid pro quo arrangement – this must be deemed illegal, corrupt and outlawed. Perceptions matter, always.

A new breed of public servant

One other interesting point is that Ms. Oteh appeared to be quite combative and it is interesting that on Day One the proceedings were not given a public hearing and then the damaging allegations of living large seemed to set the stage for the committee to embarrass the lady for not playing ball with a live and televised hearing which now seems to have back-fired on the legislators.

If you are called to public service in Nigeria - Do not be assimilated and do not be intimidated. Arunma Oteh is a class act.

There is no doubt that our legislature would prefer Nigerians were not privy to the machinations of corruption, pay-for-play, bribery and other despicable practices that have been rumoured about but never verified. With Ms. Oteh’s very public assailing of these rent-seekers there is very little damage limitation that can be done to restore the public’s confidence in our democracy.

We need to put the feet of these people to the fire and apply more pressure on the system to change, to reform and to root out the atrocious wolves in sheep’s clothing who are selfish, self-conceited and greedily feeding on the system with ravenously gluttonous appetites.

If we are to learn anything from Ms. Oteh, our democracy is in need of an urgent reset.

References

Oteh’s bribery allegation: Reps battle to save face | Vanguard Nigeria

Nigeria: Capital Market Probe - Oteh Accuses Committee Chair of Demanding N39 Million for Members

Nigeria: Ministries banned from funding National Assembly – Written in 2008 about conflicts of interested between the legislature and executive.