THE FUTURE OF KADUNA STATE

While presenting a memorandum at the Presidential Panel investigating the post-election violence led by Sheikh Lemu in Kaduna, Mr. Bulus Bello Labesa who is the President of the Bajju Development Association made a case for the creation of another State from the southern part of the State to ensure rapid development for that part of the State. Mr. Labesa was reported to have noted that most of the evidence for economic development was concentrated in the northern part of the State, and that the southern part cannot develop and bridge the gap with the north unless the two unequal parts are separated. Mr. Labesa also said that there has been massive movement of Christians from the northern to southern Kaduna State following the post-election violence. With regards to the inter-tribal and inter-religious violence itself, he said Christians from southern Kaduna acted purely in self-defense.

          The call for the creation of another State from the present Kaduna State to conform with the general ethno-religious characters of the north and south is not new. So it could be said that Mr. Labesa raised the right issue in the wrong forum, because the case for splitting Kaduna State has much credibility, but the context in which it was raised has done much injustice to it. Both the elites of the northern and southern part of the State have built up solid cases over the years for splitting Kaduna State. There were even a number of unsuccessful efforts to achieve a consensus from both sections on the issue, to make the case easier to sell to the National Assembly and other Nigerians, who will have the final say on the credibility of the case of the citizens of this large State to be split. The Governor of Kaduna state, Mr. Patrick Ibrahim Yakowa himself had pledged his government’s full support for the movements making the case for the split, and had even extended financial assistance to both sides.

          The case made by Mr. Labesa at the Lemu Panel would have been obvious, given the obvious religious and ethnic dimensions which the violence took, from an apparently political trigger. But it is likely to create the impression that the demand for splitting Kaduna State is being made by the horrific loss of hundreds of lives and losses of billions of Naira in property; as well as the total breakdown of harmony and trust among different communities. Those who will receive the request for splitting the State under the present circumstances are likely to think it is the product of the recent violence, and may be tempted to think a solution to what happened in April does not necessarily have to entail the creation of a State from the Southern part of the State. This will be very unfortunate, because there has not been a stronger and more genuine case for splitting any State than the one for splitting Kaduna State.

          At present, Kaduna State is the fourth largest State in Nigeria in population and one of the largest in land mass. It is potentially one of the richest States in the country, but most of its citizens, particularly from the south, the far north and the eastern and western fringes have standards of living equal to the poorest parts of Nigeria. The State has the most pronounced evidence of uneven development, and virtually every major economic activity or facility with multiplier effect for economic growth is located in or around Kaduna. The southern part of the State is quite possibly the most underdeveloped part of Nigeria. The only tangible economic investments in the entire region are institutions of government and skeletal infrastructure. 80% of its active population lives on the margins of peasant agriculture. Almost 90% of those of its citizens who are employed are engaged by the public service of the State and the country. Its productive population is scattered all over the State seeking any form of employment or income, and whole communities have only the very old or very young living permanently in them. Its young people are marginalized, frustrated and angry, and they, like all other young people, periodically resist what they see as oppression which is rooted in social injustice and lack of economic opportunities. The concentration of people from southern Kaduna State in Kaduna South and Chukun Local Government areas, partly as a result of the many ethno-religious conflicts in the state since 1987 is providing a fertile ground for the development of bitter and destructive perceptions that Hausa-Fulani Muslims are the enemy, and they must be fought and resisted at all cost. 

          The northern part of the State is economically better-off than the south, and even though this has a solid historical basis, it has itself suffered as a result of the States’ uneven development. Zaria Town has paid a huge price for the development of Kaduna, which itself largely developed by sucking off the potentials and assets of Zaria, one of the only two old Provincial Headquarters in the old north which has not been made a State capital. Except for educational institutions, the economy of Zaria has collapsed. It has become completely de-industrialized, and its economic infrastructure has decayed, in spite of massive expansion in its population. Its elite have abandoned it for the comfort of Kaduna city, and its young people struggle daily to acquire education and skills without much success. It has, predictably, produced a widespread perception among its inhabitants that politics is a battle in which its many enemies change. Government, the establishment or people of other religious or tongues are all targets in a community which had a proud history of learning and tolerance.

          The small towns and villages in Kaduna State, outside Kaduna and Zaria are occupied by huge populations living with shrinking economic opportunities. The greatest asset of the people, agricultural potential, has not developed beyond peasant levels, because government has failed to provide basic economic and social infrastructure, and an environment which will encourage private capital to invest in agro-allied industry in the State. The State has one of the richest solid mineral resources, but again no major investment has been made to make it possible for sustained, private-sector led exploitation. So the vast majority of the citizens of Kaduna state cannot develop on the basis of the current disposition of their government and the state of the economy. It is easy therefore to create enemies, and fight them at every opportunity since the prevailing poverty provides a breeding ground for the scapegoating.

          There is a strong case to be made for splitting Kaduna state, and it is not just to make it possible for southern Kaduna to develop faster. All sections of the state will develop faster if two States are created from the north and south. But much work needs to be done by the citizens of the two parts themselves to sort out some sticking points, there. One obvious sticking point is which of the two States will have Kaduna city. Another is the security and progress of the ethnic minorities in both States, such as the Hausa-Fulani and other Muslim communities in southern Kaduna state, and southern Kaduna State citizens who have made their homes in northern parts of the state and the environs of Kaduna. Yet another is on the sharing of assets and liabilities.

          There are also many hurdles to cross before this valid case is successfully made. The elites from both sides of the State must mount a solid and effective campaign to convince the National Assembly and the rest of Nigeria that the case for Kaduna state is both credible and urgent enough to be handled on its own, and not be swamped with many other, less-deserving and opportunistic cases. It is also important that ordinary citizens across the entire State adopt and push the idea that the case being made is not to create boundaries around old enemies and issues, but to afford citizens of one of the largest States to ursue progress and peace under an environment which is more amenable.

          The citizens of Kaduna state will hope that the Presidential Panel on Post-election violence will accept and make the case for creating another State out of the present Kaduna state. But the Panel needs to be told that although the deep wounds which the violence left in the State are symptoms of the unavailability of the present State, the creation will not simply relocate old hatred and enemies into new States. The people of Kaduna state will always have many things in common. If another state is created, it should be done so that all communities will live in peace and achieve rapid economic progress. Even when a new State is created, the citizens of both states will have to work hard to live in peace in their States, and across borders. Otherwise, nothing will change. In the meantime, the citizens of Kaduna state must continue to explore all avenues to reclaim peace for all communities. The Lemu Panel will not do this for them.            

NASIR EL-RUFAI ENTERS THE RING

Nasir el-Rufai was arrested last week returning home from the United Kingdom by officers of the State Security Service and was later released. It is understood that he may appear in Court this week on charges of sedition and publication of falsehood. As is to be expected, the arrest of Malam Nasir el-Rufai made news, as just about every issue surrounding him in the last few years made news. It is also without doubt that this arrest of el-Rufai will generate intense public interest, not least because it is related to issues he raised in his new column in the newspaper, This Day: matters related to national security and accountability of the leadership. The nation will watch to see his arrest as an impetus to make bigger waves; and an administration which has been offended, but is not reacting strictly in a manner which will limit the damage to itself.

          Malam Nasir el-Rufai has acquired a solid reputation as a Nigerian with a massive ego and personal courage, a combination which took him to places very few have been, and landed him in more trouble than many other Nigerians in the public domain. He was both a close confidant of Atiku Abubakar when he supervised quite possibly the largest disposal of the assets of Nigerians under the Privatization Programme, and a very important member of President Obasanjo’s kitchen cabinet as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory. His tenure as Minister of the Territory was both hailed for its achievement in restoring a substantial portion of the Abuja Master Plan; and condemned for its assumption that removing Nigerians who are poor or destitute from the FCT will make those who are well-off in it feel safer and more comfortable. El-Rufai was an active soldier in Obasanjo’s imperial rule, and stepped on as many toes as his obligations in this respect demanded. He was consequently involved in many battles, not least with the Federal legislature. The nation will recall his trenchant and damaging dismissal of the national assembly’s posterings and integrity, and the manner he was made to eat his humble pie when it became clear to his boss that he had crossed the line in his bid to serve him. 

          Predictably, el-Rufai was targeted by the legislature and a whole army of aggrieved individuals and organizations the moment he left office. Although he must have expected some vicious fight back from the many enemies he made as a Minister, even el-Rufai could not have expected the venom and the speed with which his adversaries fought him. Once he was out of the comfort of his office as Minister, and without Obasanjo to protect him, el-Rufai was exposed to attacks over his administration of land in the FCT, by threats and attempts to prosecute him by the EFCC now under a new leadership; and by his old adversaries the legislature which went as far as passing an illegal resolution to stop him from ever holding a public office.  He spent considerable time outside the country, fighting one battle after the other, and sometimes simultaneously fighting many battles at the same time. Even his family was hounded and harassed. His return to Nigeria was not without its drama and political insinuations.

          El-Rufai was still fighting court cases over his conduct as Minister of the F.C.T when he parted ways with his old Party, the PDP, and pitched his tents with the C.P.C. Some people said it was an unheard-of foolhardiness, to leave the relative comfort of the PDP and a government which is prosecuting you and run to the enemy, or the opposition. Others saw it as a shrewd move which will buy el-Rufai political protection and relevance. He had tapped into the huge avenues for cultivating the popularity of especially young people through the social media, and had established an extensive network of relationships as a critic of government, and a pseudo-intellectual with some claims to the emerging leadership in the north and Nigeria.

          But when el-Rufai took up a column in This Day newspapers, and commenced a virulent criticism of the government and a rendition of history as he saw it, he knew he had properly entered the ring. The newspaper which he accepted to write a column for, This Day is itself positively disposed towards the Jonathan administration, and both the paper and el-Rufai must have seen as opportunity to be useful to each other. The paper gave him a national platform, and he in turn brought to it a high profile critic with a solid background in public controversy, who can guarantee wider readership. 

          Last week, el-Rufai’s column took up the nation’s defense budget, and made revelations which the Federal Government said are fabrications and lies. He was arrested on his return to the country, and it is possible that el-Rufai himself knew that he was likely to provoke the Federal Government with his column. As is to be expected, he has said that his arrest will only make him more resolute as its critic, and General Muhammadu Buhari has condemned his arrest as high-handed intolerance. The government says it will prosecute him, and it now remains to be seen who will blink first in this confrontation. 

          Whichever way this latest foray by el-Rufai into public controversy is resolved, a number of facts would have been established. First, el-Rufai’s popularity as a columnist is now more solidly guaranteed, and more Nigerians will now read him with greater interest. Second, his profile and standing in the opposition will rise, and his claim to some leadership position in the CPC will receive a boost. Three, his legal battles will now acquire political undertones, and it will be difficult to prosecute or convict him without massive political quarrels. Finally, the administration has boosted the ranks of its opposition, and would appear to have played into the hands of a rather wily opponent.

          National security is now a matter of the highest concern for Nigerians. Just when it appears that the insurgency in the Niger Delta is being contained, at great cost to the nation, we are being confronted with the effects of the post-election violence, and even more worrisome, with the violence being unleashed by the Yusufiyya Movement, or Boko Haram. Nigerians want to feel safe and secure, but they also want to know how much it will cost to make them safe and secure.

          The Federal Government has every right to take el-Rufai to court if it believes that he is deliberately peddling falsehood around national security. No individual has the right to compound our worries by distorting facts about the cost of our security. Government could have taken up el-Rufai by disclosing the exact cost of securing Nigeria, and showing him up as a liar, which is what it says it will do before the Courts. That it chose to prosecute him instead indicates that it believes he has sinister motives for misrepresenting facts, or misleading the public. It is important that this issue is handled with the sensitivity and responsibility it deserves, so that our security does not become another issue over which politicians will fight.                       

CHALLENGES AND LEADERSHIP:SOME THOUGHTS ON THE POST ELECTION VIOLENCE, AND A WAY FORWARD

It takes some courage for media people to attempt to make sense of a problem for which it is a major part. The Nigerian media failed to keep its head above the waters when everyone else was dooming in the senseless and destructive pandering to the lowest elements of our national character. When politicians went beyond all the safety zones in order to acquire advantages over opponents, the Nigerian media proved a perfect cheerleader. When leaders’ politicians acted in a manner that deprived them of the vestiges of all dignity, honor or respect, the Nigerian media dug deep into its considerable reserves of language and influence in an inglorious effort to rationalize and justify their actions. When the laws of the land were being cynically manipulated under the guise of amendments; when leaders quarreled violently over the rules they themselves made; when members of the national political elite put on tribal and religious toga(s); when  the game of politics was being played in a manner that suggested that even the nation can be wrecked in the course  of acquiring its leadership, the media took its place as an active player, a dangerous game that involved everyone else and took no prisoners.

_______________________________________________________
TEXT OF THE REMARKS OF DR. HAKEEM BABA-AHMED,oon,YARIMAN JAMAA, EXECUTIVE CHIARMAN, D.I.T.V/ALHERI RADIO, AT THE ROUNDTABLE ON POST-ELECTION VIOLENCE: THE WAY FORWARD, ORGANIZED BY THE NIGERIAN  UNION OF JOURNALISTS, KADUNA ON 4^TH OF JULY,2011. 

If this represents a harsh critique of the Nigerian media, it may be the case that its place and importance in determining or

influencing the Nigeria’s political process has always been exaggerated. Personally, I subscribe to this position, but one has to place on record the fact that in the history of Nigerian politics, the media has never wrecked more damage to the nation that it did in the period leading up to the 2011 elections, and beyond. If this audience is curious why I should start this contribution with a criticism of the Nigerian media, it is because I am hoping that in spite of its fundamental structural weaknesses, which include being hostage to increasingly-narrowing ownership and constituency, it will find its mission to shape a future in which peace and economic progress are guaranteed.

The most pronounced problem in finding the way through the post-election violence is the apparent failure or absence of a will to ask the most basic question: what just happened in April, 2011? We all know that there were riots, burnings, mass killings and now, in Kaduna State and possibly in one or two other areas of the north, there is total breakdown of community relations, trust and confidence. We also know that the Federal and Kaduna State Governments have set up Panels to investigate the post-election violence. It is also a fact, but perhaps less appreciated, that these Panels will provide the new battlegrounds for the parties in dispute; and the huge expectations which they will generate may end up creating more problems than they will solve. What is beyond doubt is that Panels will not provide the framework for lasting and sustained peace, and they can never meet the demands of all parties for establishing acceptable thresholds of justice and security.

The search for answers to the question, “what happened in April 2011?” will have to go deep into the run-up to the elections. It is vital that the background is understood, if any sensible step will be taken towards dealing with the huge problems which the 2011 elections have thrown up. It is also very important that the leadership and the nation do not behave as if the problems which created the environment for the violence and the consequences of the violence will just go away if the nation attempts to move away from them. I have provided what I see as some of the challenges before President Goodluck Jonathan in an article titled “A difficult past; a challenging future”, which was published in the Daily Trust of 28^th of May, 2011.

Anyone who had observed political developments around the north before the elections would have been hard put not to expect some form of explosion. Ordinary citizens and millions of young people living on the margins of existence had hoped that 2011 elections will make a real difference in their lives. The President’s public commitment to conduct free and fair elections, and the appointment of Professor Attahiru Jega as INEC Chairman were taken as welcome evidence that the nation will have credible elections. But the disputes over zoning in the PDP and the dangerous exploitation of primordial sentiments among Nigerians created huge integrity and credibility gaps around the actions of politicians. Violence was all around us: violence to laws of the land; violence to rules and traditions; violence to the hallowed standing of traditional and religious leaders who were all thrown into the fray, many of them kicking and screaming in protest, but many others as willing tools in a game which recognized no neutrality. In a commentary which we carried on our D.I.T.V and Alheri Radio news bulletin of 1^st of February 2011, titled “Descent to Anarchy”, we drew attention to the escalating levels of violence around political issues:

Slowly but surely, the circle of widespread violence with heavy political and religious undertones is spreading in many parts of the North. Old flashpoints such as Tafawa Balewa are merging with the dangerous fires which have burned in Jos for more than two years, as well as the creeping insurgency on two wheels which has made Maiduguri a most dangerous place to live in, especially for soldiers, policemen, and politicians from a particular Political Party Primaries or conflicts between political parties will provide additional fuel for these crises.

There is no doubt that politics has a major influence over the escalating violence in many parts of the north….. unless decisive steps are taken in the next few weeks to deal with the deteriorating security situation in Plateau and Borno States, places like Bauchi, Gombe, Kaduna and Kano will live on dangerously high tension and it will only take a small trigger… to start major conflicts. Political competition will worsen the situation, and many politicians may seek to achieve their own goals under the cover of existing conflicts.

The prospects that the April 2011 elections will be conducted under a secure atmosphere are very poor. President Jonathan must go beyond routine condemnation of bombings, killings, riots and a creeping sense of national insecurity, and act with courage and firmness to deal with this dangerous decline into anarchy. If Governors are the problem, either directly because they cannot handle the security situation in their States; or because they represent major targets of the conflicts and cannot therefore isolate their offices from the conflicts, there are legally prescribed procedures for dealing with them. Major breaches of security that go unpunished merely encourage others to cause more breaches. Prolonged assault on the capacity of governments to protect lives and property erodes their legitimacy in the minds of citizens and encourage people to assume responsibilities for their own security and safety. This is the perfect recipe for chaos and anarchy.

The vast majority of Nigerians want to live in peace. They are looking forward to the April elections when they believe they will make a difference. They are terrified that the creeping violence in some parts of the country may reach and affect them. They need firm and decisive assurances that the Federal and State Governments will protect them from death in the hands of rampaging mobs or assassins. Those with responsibility for peace and security in our nation need to sit up and do their jobs before the whole nation is engulfed in an irreversible conflagration (posted on www. baba-ahmed.blogspot.com).

        Nigerians watched leaders and aspiring leaders take our nation to the brink. People who had no respect for the laws of the land, who were willing to subvert every decent standard of civilized existence, who used frightening amounts of money to buy off opposition, or hire  thugs to fight it off if it cannot be bought, or buy their own positions in their Parties, were asking Nigerians to trust them. When Politicians lost the high moral ground, they resorted to peddling their religious beliefs. This was the most dangerous pitch, but one guaranteed to touch the most sensitive and largely uncritical nerve. Again, as far back as January 25^th, this year, we commented on the dangerous incursion of religion into the political campaigns, carried principally through inciting text messages:

Since the PDP Convention, and even long before it, campaigns on religious grounds have assumed frightening dimensions. Before the PDP Convention, the campaigns were low-keyed, and they centered basically around creating the impression that President Goodluck Jonathan represented Christian interests, and Atiku Abubakar represented Muslims. After Atiku Abubakar lost the nomination to President Jonathan, [the messages] became bitter and more abusive, and inciting. Muslim Governors from States which overwhelmingly voted for Jonathan were abused with titles for Christian clergy, and Christian [messages] celebrated Jonathan’s victory as the victory of Christianity over Islam.

The battles moved from Eagle Square to Churches and Mosques; and our telephones. More and more people were seeing the forthcoming elections in purely religious terms. Political Parties other than PDP were fuelling this dangerous trend by appealing to Muslims to vote for their own candidates, because the PDP is fielding a Christian candidate. The cumulative effects of these messages will be to sow the seeds of deep hatred and future conflicts in our hearts and our actions. Nigerians will be completely polarized along two religious lines before, during and after the elections, Muslims, particularly those from the North, will be made to believe that their faith is under attack, and the elections will be like a war they have to win to defend Islam. Christians are being made to believe that they are on the verge of destroying the dominance of Hausa-Fulani Muslims, and Northern Christian minorities are about to achieve a historic victory for freedom.

Tensions will rise, and the inevitability of conflicts and widespread violence around campaigns and the elections and post-election issues will put the nation’s unity and security to a severe test….. some people are sowing dangerous seeds of hatred and conflict in our nation, and all of us will pay the price for it. No election in this country has exposed our weaknesses as a nation as much as this one, and no election has used religion and other dangerous propaganda as much as is being used.

The point of the lengthy quote from our commentaries on the issues relating to the build-up to the elections is not to say we told you so. The point is to warn against complacency, and an attitude which will inform a strategy of ignoring a problem and hoping that it will go away. The issues which may have precipitated the post-election violence are very much with us. They are, basically, an irresponsible leadership and a section of the citizenry which was largely primed to expect radical change in their lives from a past which made them paupers in the midst of plenty; and who are powerless in a political system which is supposed to give them powers to choose and change leaders.

       When we commented on the globalization of the values that citizens elect and remove their leaders, or rise up against them as in the Arab world; and the globalized media opportunities for every part of the world to see this, we warned the nation over ignoring the impact of events in North Africa. An the 18^th of March, 2011, our Commentary titled” How we see the world” said:

Our young people see and hear and admire what happens in Tunisia, in Algeria, in Libya and Egypt, and while many Nigerians think events there cannot be replicated here, Nigerians need to pay attention to the lessons which our young people are drawing from them. Culturally and politically Nigeria differs substantially from North Africa; yet a major dispute around elections or disputed results will have a devastating effect on our country’s peace and unity. Our young people may be tempted to think that a massive protest against disputed results will result in a just and fair settlement, the way they see leaders flee or resign in some parts of Africa. They may even think that sustained violence may redress electoral grievances. They may be tragically wrong, but the nation will have to pay a huge price to prove them wrong.

         The nation is now paying a huge price for the tragic reaction of some of its citizens following the elections. What will be more tragic, however, will be to ignore the fact that all the key factors and actors who combined to act out that tragedy are very much around us; and there is no guarantee that the violence we saw in April 2011 has worked itself out. In brief some of these factors are:

A).    The desperate clamor for elective offices in Nigeria, and the dangerous linkages between public /elective offices and personal wealth and political influence. The linkage between political power and widespread corruption has made politicians more desperate to acquire or retain power; and their opponents equally desperate to remove them by all means necessary. Citizens have neither faith nor expectation that elected leaders will lead with integrity and competence, or use public resources to make differences in their lives;

B) An electoral process which progressively delivers less than it promises, and which has been stubbornly vulnerable to the cynical manipulation of corrupt politicians. Most Nigerians do not believe that the democratic process will change their lives, so long as the electoral process continues to produce widely- disputed or questionable results. One of the worst legacies of the 2011 election-related violence is that millions of Nigerians now live in fear over what will happen in 2015 if fundamental flaws in our political and electoral processes are not fixed. Millions more worry over the question “who will fix it”?

C) Unacceptable levels of poverty in a country which should do much better in this area. In the minds of most young Nigerians, they owe this nation nothing, because it gave them nothing. Those who go to school are not educated. Those who don’t, or have no skills either, have no encouraging future to look to. The economy produces more for the few rich, while our towns and cities are bursting with restive populations who have no respect for laws, leaders or legions of security personnel. Politics represents only an avenue for raising expectations which will not be met; and with no faith in any process, many choose to take their pound of flesh when told that their candidates have lost elections;

D)  Leaders who have very little clues on how to respond to the manifest anger and frustrations of many of their citizens who are disappointed with them. The post-election violence was limited almost entirely to the far north. There ought to be a lesson in this for any discerning leadership. Northerners do not love free and fair elections more than other Nigerians. And rigged elections are a national past time. So why did the far north react in the way it did? The phenomenon of the April 2011 must be understood in its political, economic and social context.

E)  A widening leadership vacuum in the north particularly, and in the nation in general. Anyone familiar with the relatively rigid social structure of the far north, and in particular, with the assured places of the clergy, traditional rulers and sundry persons who embody authority will recognize the fundamental shift in the perceptions and actions of many people regarding this layer in the structure during the violence. The April 2011 violence did not expose or humiliate the traditional layers of authority in the far north: it merely exposed how badly it has been eroded. Students of power, who see leadership as a major element in social cohesion and economic progress, will observe a palpable absence of another layer which may appear to have supplanted the traditional layer. Which forces the very worrying question: who calls the shots in northern Nigerian politics?

F.) In a way, the issues I have raised above represent both the questions and the answers to the theme of this Roundtable. Fundamentally it is very important that the leadership of the country and in the north understands exactly the genesis, dimensions and implication of the violence. Scapegoating and the search for easy targets will not do. They will only create new enemies, while the old ones wait to strike again.

      It will also be very dangerous to think that the April 2011 elections were flash-in-the-pan events. Serious efforts need to be undertaken to understand their root causes and deal with them. All our leaders should share the blame for stoking the fires that burned in April 2011. Now they have to, each in his own way, find a way to prevent a situation where our elections are worse than wars for our people.

      Even though the electoral battles have now moved to the judiciary, we need to undertake a serious review of the elections and the electoral process. In simple terms, the violence was linked in some ways to the elections.  INEC needs to do some serious soul-searching, if only to establish why an election which it and some Nigerians say was free and fair could also generate so much bitterness and violence. The judiciary has the added responsibility of being even more of the guardian of the public interest than it has ever been. Every disputed election must be heard fairly, and judges and the judiciary as a whole must avoid a situation where millions of Nigerians lose complete faith in the democratic and electoral process, which includes the role of judiciary in settling election disputes.

      The rest of Nigeria is moving further and further away from the north in economic terms. The region risks being seen as a major liability for the rest of Nigeria. New thinking and an honest management of its resources to rebuild its economy around its people is needed. In real terms, only Governors of the Northern States represent any tangible value as leaders. This group has either pocketed all others, or has severely compromised them. New initiatives to engineer the growth of northern political leaders are needed, but it is doubtful if the current political dispensation will do this. A combination of the reduction of the visibility and influence of the old guard, a commitment from many professionals and technocrats to move into the political sphere, and a major effort to build bridges and reclaim a substantial part of the north’s old unity must be adopted. The north without political power is completely irrelevant in Nigeria, and its strength lies not just in numbers but in the successful management of its heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

      The April 2011 election-related violence was a major breach in the history of Nigeria. Attitudes which dismiss its outward manifestations as reactions from an ignorant and spoilt people who lost out politically, and who should be contained will seriously damage the possibilities that it can be put behind us permanently. So will be attitudes which suggest that the violence represents a permanent threat around our neck, and all political activities in future must be tailored around it. We will need an enlightened, forward-looking and pro-active leadership, particularly in the north, to come to terms with it. A useful starting point is for all States in the North and the Federal Government to rally around the people and government of Kaduna State to help us deal with the huge refugee problem; to rebuild trust and confidence among ethnic and religious communities; to reclaim the peace and security we all worked so hard to build for many years; and to move beyond April 2011. Because if you do not fix Kaduna’s problems, you will not fix the problems which the post-election violence has thrown up for Nigeria.  

                                                                                                 

.

                                                                                                      

   

RE-OPEN KADUNA POLYTECHNIC

If a word can be appropriately used to describe a situation in which the Kaduna Polytechnic, the largest Polytechnic in sub-Saharan Africa will be closed down since January this year, and with no prospect for re-opening in sight, that word would be unbelievable. The Kaduna Polytechnic has a population of 18,000 students, and        staff strength of about 3,000. It is the oldest institution of its type in the north, and admits students from all over Nigeria, in spite of the existence of Polytechnics all over the country. It is the property of the Federal Government, and has one of the best academic reputations in the country. It is one of the largest investments of the Federal Government in Kaduna State, and represents a productive unit in the economy of the State. Much of the security of the State is sensitive to events and developments in and around the Polytechnic. Yet this institution was closed down twice last year, and has been shut down again since January this year after the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnics (ASUP) resumed its strike.

So much has happened since the resumed strike in January without, however, the institution being opened. The Rector and the Bursar have been on compulsory leave over allegations of mismanagement and corruption. There have also been many allegations against the Council and the entire management over mismanagement and corruption. A Panel of Investigation has been set up by the Federal Government, and a White Paper has allegedly been prepared, but has not been released. Recently, students of the institution have become restive, and on a number of occasions, they have come close to embarking on large scale violent.  Activities With every new day this stand-off continues, the resolution of the many problems of this premier institution gets worse. The tense security situation in the State makes it even more vital that the problem is resolved without further delay. The Government of Kaduna State, the Emir of Zazzau and the Governor of Niger State have all attempted to intervene and resolve the problem, without any success. As things stand, the relationship between the Unions on the one hand, and the Council and Management on the other is getting worse by the day. Students who have been at home for the last six months have been caught in a messy crossfire, and their respect for authorities, including that of the Federal Government, is being eroded by the day. Any further delay in resolving the issues which have led to the closure of Kaduna Polytechnic will make the achievement of sustained, long term peace impossible.

In plain terms, there cannot be any acceptable excuse for the length of time it is taking the Federal Government to resolve this issue. The Federal Ministry of Education cannot claim that it does not have the facts around the problem, or the solutions to them. Even making allowances for the fact that much of the period during which this institution was closed was one of active politics and elections, there is no reason why an institution of this importance can remain shut for six months.

It is also inconceivable that the issues which led to the closure of Kaduna Polytechnic can be of such magnitude that it will take all this length of time to resolve. The Rector and the Bursar have been placed on compulsory leave, yet the Unions are demanding that the entire management is corrupt and incompetent too. Council is still in place, yet the Unions are leveling serious allegations against its members, including suspicions that it is responsible for the non-release of the White Paper. The apparent silence of the Federal Ministry of Education and Presidency over the Report of the Panel and the white Paper is fuelling speculation that some powerful interests are in play against a fair resolution of this problem. Even a charitable observer of role of the Federal Government over the Kaduna Polytechnic closure will accuse it of unforgiveable indifference.

The Kaduna Polytechnic should be allowed to resume full and sustained academic activities without further delay. The ball is entirely with the Federal Government. The Polytechnic community and the nation need to know what the thinking and plans of the Federal Government are. If indeed there is a White Paper on the Report of the Investigation Panel somewhere, it should be released immediately or in the alternative, government should make it clear how it wants to resolve this impasse. The failure to communicate the position of government on allegations of corruption, mismanagement and high- handedness, as well as the role of the Unions is singularly responsible for this stand-off.

Once the Federal Government makes its position known on some of the serious problems which caused the closure of this institution, all the parties in this dispute and stakeholders should respect such positions, and allow academic activities to resume. The public will expect that with the length of time it has taken presumably to study the problem, the Federal Government will come up with positions which will not only solve the current problems comprehensively and decisively, but also prevent their recurrence. Too much has been lost by the students, staff and the community in this conflict at Kaduna Polytechnic, and the Federal Government should do the  responsible thing and bring the conflict to an end immediately.   

         

 

BETWEEN PILGRIMS AND REFUGEES

Hundreds of women, children and a few men serve as pathetic reminders of the human cost of the post-election violence which swept most of the States in the far north of Nigeria. They are refugees sheltering at the Hajj Camp in Kaduna city, in a State which received the worst brunt of the violence. They have nothing, and have all lost many relatives, particularly fathers and other male heads of their families. They are mostly from villages in the southern part of the State, and most have been witnesses to the slaughter of relatives. They have no material possessions; no other relations, and no faith and hope that they can relocate back to their former villages in the near future. They are entirely at the mercy of a Government which appears overwhelmed by the sheer scale of the violence and its aftermath; and at the mercy of members of the public and non-state organizations who visit occasionally to drop token symbols of their sympathy on them.

          A few days ago, the committee appointed by the Kaduna State Government to take an inventory of losses in lives and property, and to provide some relief to the refugees gave out some amounts of money to each adult and family to enable them relocate away from the Hajj camp into rented accommodation. Most of the refugees turned down the offer, or collected the money, and stayed put. It would have been surpassing if the refugees had moved out of the Camp with the amounts given to them, and public opinion has generally supported the contempt for the Government’s token offers of about N15,000 per family. Government’s defense is that the amounts given to each refugee family or adult was the best it could do given the huge number of refugees at the Hajj Camp and other locations across the State. In any case, Government claims it is not compensating the refugees, but only extending additional assistance over those which have been made available to the victims by government and non-governmental organizations and individuals.

          Most of the refugees have resolved to stay put in the Camp, not so much as a show of defiance, but out of a genuine absence of anywhere else to go. The failure of the cash-for-space approach of the Government has failed woefully, and has drawn more attention to the plight of the refugees.

          The Kaduna State Hajj Camp which serves as the processing and exit point for tens of thousands of Pilgrims from Kaduna and neighboring States now serves as classrooms for displaced children; a shelter for many families who have lost everything and have nowhere to go; and a symbol of a lingering crisis which will be with the people of the State for a very long time. Ordinarily at this time of every year, the Muslim Pilgrims Welfare Board should be preparing the camp for the annual influx of tens of thousands of pilgrims. But this is not an ordinary year, so some very difficult decisions will need to be taken by the Kaduna State and Federal Governments. Pilgrims must go to Hajj, but the way things are, they cannot use the Camp unless a quick and realistic solution is found for the present situation of the refugees. At this stage, a number of options would appear to be available for the government.

          One option is to find an alternative camp around the present camp or near the airport and prepare it for use by pilgrims by November and December this year. This option will leave the refugees where they are, while new funds are sourced to prepare the alternative camp. While this option may solve the Hajj problem in the short term, it will not address the problem of the refugees. A second option is to use a neighboring camp facility and airport, say Abuja or Kano, to airlift pilgrims who would otherwise use the Kaduna Camp and international airport. Again, this will involve additional costs, and still leave the refugee problems unresolved. A third option is to leave the pilgrims where they are, and still organize the Hajj operations around them. This will cause serious management and image problems for the exercise and the government, and is likely to affect the quality of the exercise. This, too, will not solve the refugee problems.

          All these options outlined do not address the challenging problems of the refugees. These unfortunate citizens are not loafers who want to live off the charity of government and fellow citizens. A few months ago, they were busy earning a living, looking after their families in their homes, or going to school in their neighborhoods. They are tired of living on charity and pity and handouts, and they want to relocate to their own homes. But they cannot go back to many of the places they fled from because their homes have been burnt and demolished. They are demanding that government builds homes for them to relocate into. And they have many sympathizers in the community, but this will be impossible task for the government. Every refugee or citizen who had his or her house or shop burnt, and there are hundreds of them, will demand that his or property is rebuilt. No government has the resources to do this. In any case, the Government Committee responsible for stock taking and advising government on what steps to take will have to address the nature of long-term relief which government may extend to victims.

          The solution to the refugees at the Hajj Camp should be found quickly. By now, government should have a clear idea of the numbers and other statistics of these people who have taken refuge in the camp. The State government should provide each family or individual with a realistic amount to enable them relocate into alternative accommodations. Certainly, the amounts given to them earlier will not enable them find accommodation in and around Kaduna. Government officials can actually also help them scout around for rented accommodation, rather than giving them cash and sending them into strange environments to look for accommodation.

          In the longer term, government needs to rebuild community trust and harmony in areas from which these refugees fled, so that those of them who want to go back can do so, and live in peace. Unless the thousands of people who have been chased out of their locations by murderous mobs can go back and live in peace, Kaduna State will be even further segregated along ethnic and religious lines than it has been. It is bad enough that many of the refugees say that they are victims of former neighbors who they lived with and know very well; but the failure to re-integrate them by enabling them to go back if they want, will leave too many wounds open for too long. The existence of refugees in camps in Kaduna State is a reminder and evidence that the State is yet to put behind it the sad events which followed the last Presidential elections. Coupled with rumors of attacks and recurring tensions especially in the Southern parts of the State, the perception that the people of the State are not out of the woods yet is bound to persist. It is time to deploy some imaginative search for solutions, and a strong political will to heal wounds and help individuals, families and communities move away from the terrible events of April 2011.

The refugees who have found a temporary shelter at the Hajj Camp in Kaduna have no rights more or less than those in other camps. All refugees and victims of the violence of April 2011 need all the assistance and sympathies they can get, wherever they are. The refugees at the Camp need to be provided with realistic alternative accommodation so that preparations for the Hajj can commence. Under no circumstances should force or any strategy of causing them further inconveniences so that they leave the camp be contemplated.                           

         

DEALING WITH ORGANIZED VIOLENCE IN THE NORTH

On the occasion of receiving some Armored Personnel Carriers donated by the government of Borno State, the Inspector General of Police, Hafiz  Ringim was reported to have said that the Nigeria Police and other security agencies will now focus on eliminating the creeping insurgency in Borno and neighboring States by a group which  has come to be popularly referred to as Boko Haram.  The Inspector-General said that President Goodluck Jonathan had directed all security agencies to now focus on the issue of violence in Borno and neighboring states.  He promised that the police and related agencies will now exterminate the threat by this group which and appears to have defied the use of military force and the most elaborate security deployment in Borno State.

          The comments of the I.G.P appear to contrast sharply with those of Mr. President during his visit to the U.S, when he said that his administration will adopt a “carrot and stick” approach in dealing with this group. The President also ruled out the option of seeking for the help of the US or other countries in dealing with this frightening phenomenon. He drew examples with the apparent success of government in dealing with militancy in the Niger Delta, as inspiration for this two-pronged approach, without, however, giving a clue as to what he will do specifically.

          A few days before the I.G.P’s comment, an unconfirmed source reported to be related to the group had released a list of demands as a precondition for engaging the government in a dialogue. These included the prosecution of the former Governor of Borno State, the Shehu of Borno and a host of other heads of security agencies and individuals over the unlawful killing of the leader of the group, Malam Mohammed Yusuf, and many of their members. The source also demanded for the release of the report of the leader of the group. The spokesman claimed that these demands are concessions from the earlier demand that the group will fight until all of Nigeria is brought under the rule of Sharia.

          One of the immediate effects of the comments of the Inspector-General of Police was the release of another statement from the group, withdrawing its conditions for a dialogue with the government, and demanding for the resignation of the new Governor of Borno State, Kashim Shettima, who had made the issue of engaging the group and resolving the problems around them a matter of the highest priority for his government. The group cited the collaboration of the Governor and the government with security agencies as its reasons, and reaffirmed its commitment to continue with its campaign on terror. The Shehu of Borno released a statement on Wednesday, 15^th June 2011 denying any role in the manner security agencies related or dealt with the group. A statement from the Sultan’s Council condemned all insinuations over his involvement, and called for restraint, peace, harmony and unity among all communities in Borno and Nigeria.

          It is on record that in the last few months, prominent people including those related to the former Governor and the Shehu have been killed during attacks claimed by the Yusufiyya movement known as Boko Haram. Many other innocent citizens and dozens of policemen, soldiers and other security agents have also been killed by the group in Borno and neighboring States. Almost on a daily basis, bombs are either exploded or discovered in many parts of the North.  Kaduna State in particular appears to be a major target of bombers, and although many of the bombs planted are discovered and disarmed before they do damage, many others have killed and maimed people. It is not yet clear whether the new frontiers for these conflicts are related to the Yusufiyya movement, but this is little comfort to the citizens of the State who now live in constant fear that bombs will explode around them, or be discovered in their neighborhoods.

          It is now obvious that the threat of the Yusufiyya movement to national security is real, and it will require a serious effort on the part of the government to understand its genesis, its dimensions and the options available in dealing with it. The most serious threat at this stage is that the technology for making bombs appears to have become available to many people, whether they are related to the Movement or not. The number, location and motivation of people who have both the ability to make bombs as well as use them have increased dramatically. This is a most frightening dimension of this terror, for which many innocent Nigerians pay a price with their lives, limbs or property. 

          Another frightening angle to this widening specter is the near-total failure of security intelligence. This failure is not limited to the failure to identify the sources and locations of the arms and the perpetrators of this widening violence. A more serious failure is one which cannot even identify the major objectives of the perpetrators of this violence. There are vague linkages with politics in Borno state and the ANPP administration which have not been adequately understood. Could politicians have sown the seeds of this insurgency, and subsequently mismanaged its growth and development? Are there still patently political issues in the manner this group operates?

          There are also unresolved issues and grievances in the manner the group’s suicidal engagement with the security forces was handled, and in particular, the capture and death of its leader. Could there be attempts to cover up some facts, including reports of investigations which have not been released? Could there be opportunistic linkages between the campaigns being waged by the Yusufiyya Movement and grievances around the 2011 elections? Is the Movement spreading its activities beyond the North East into areas such as Kaduna and Niger States; or is it breaking up into factions, with some now taking up new political issues? Above all, how much community or public support and collaboration do these bombers and the terror on motorcycles enjoy? Who protects them? Do the people who know them share their views and ideals, or are they terrified into collaboration? How much sympathy do these groups have from ordinary people?

          The challenge before the Federal and State Governments in dealing with the spate of bombings and shootings in many parts of the north must be met with imagination and a strong resolve. The Niger Delta militancy that almost brought the nation’s economy to its knees, and which is being resolved at great cost to the nation cannot escape being a reference point in the spreading violence in many parts of the north. There are many dimensions to the violence in the north which differ substantially from the Niger Delta campaigns, which have to be understood. Much of the violence in the Niger Delta, from the kidnappings to the sabotage of oil installations were motivated  by a thinly-veiled criminal intent, in spite of genuine grievances around historic economic neglect, political insensitivity and environmental degradation which could have been handled within the political mainstream. Niger delta militants blew up oil installations, but the bombers in the north are blowing up security men and innocent citizens. Niger Delta militants made much money from their activities, and many of them have now been pardoned, and are receiving expensive education and skills. The bombers in the north have only what appear as vague political goals, and do not appear to be interested in making money from genuine grievances. They appear intent on waging a war against the State, and their stated goals are both difficult to comprehend or achieve. Yet they are becoming more active.

          By all means, government must take every step to protect citizens and the security of the State from the widening violence in the north. But the achievement of a sustained security and a resolution of this problem will require a deep understanding of the sources and dimensions of these threats, as well as informed and effective responses to them. It is time for a radical review of the nation’s intelligence system, as well as an imaginative approach to dealing with the very serious threat to the widening specter of violence in many parts of the north.         

ZONING TROUBLE

The leader and founder of the Oodua Peoples’ Congress, (OPC), the most unashamedly tribal organization in Nigeria, Dr. Frederick Fasehun is reported to have described the election of the new Speaker of the House of Representatives, Aminu Tambuwal as a slap to the Yorubas as well as the people of the South West. The leader of the self-proclaimed umbrella organization for the exclusive promotion and protection of Yoruba interests in Nigeria said that the failure of the House of Representatives to return the position of the Speaker to the South West has resulted in not just altering, but in actually destroying Nigeria’s power equation. He described the free and fair election of their leaders, by the elected representatives of the Nigerian people in the House of Representatives, an election which rejected the Presidency’s and PDP leadership’s Yoruba candidate in favor of another from Sokoto State as brazen, and a collective insult to the Yoruba people.

Dr. Frederick Fasehun spoke in true character as a self-proclaimed tribal leader, and one who should have been reminded to celebrate the virtual routing of the PDP in Yorubaland by the reincarnation of the Action Group now masquerading as Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). He also spoke on the same day the PDP reportedly signaled its intention to zone the positions of Senate Leader to the North East zone, and House of Representatives Chief Whip to the South  West, although it is debatable whether even this will assuage the anger of the OPC leader. It is in the character of people like Dr. Fasehun to see Nigerian politics in purely tribal terms, and to define Yoruba interest as superior to all other interests. Nor would it impress him to be reminded that Yorubaland as a whole produced only three members in the House of Representatives for the PDP, and the members, including many from the PDP who elected their leaders had this in mind when they voted for someone else from a zone where the Party made a stronger outing. In any case, the quarrel of the leader of the OPC would appear to be less with the PDP leadership and the Presidency, which together put up an intimidating show of force to get a Yoruba Member elected, and more with the 256 Members of the House of Representatives who felt that the PDP’s zoning arrangement should be sacrificed for the integrity and credibility of the legislative arm of government. Many of the 256 Members who voted against  a Yoruba candidate and in favor of a Hausa candidate are Yoruba whose Party, the ACN, chose to part ways with the PDP on this instance. Perhaps Dr Fasehun is saving some choice invectives for these members in the House for future.

Dr. Fasehun’s outburst represents one more evidence that the PDP’s zoning principles and policies have lost their potency, and indeed, could quite possibly point to an increasing failure of the Party’s leadership to call the shots. The breach which started with the dispute around the legality or propriety of the rotation and zoning provisions of the PDP when President Jonathan was contesting for the PDP’s ticket appears to have developed into a major credibility problem for the Party. The election of Speaker Tambuwal by a House which has 250 PDP Members out of 360 is clear evidence that many members of the PDP are not impressed by the demands of their leaders that they must toe the line on zoning. The reported apology of Speaker Tambuwal to his Party leadership over his victory is a laughable charade. If the Right Honorable Gentleman Speaker is truly contrite and remorseful over his defiance of his Party to contest and win the position of Speaker, Nigerians would expect him to purge himself of the contempt by resigning. Similarly, his Party’s reported generous forgiveness of the Speaker and his Deputy is not going to fool anyone. The facts on the ground is that the House of Representatives have a Speaker and Deputy Speaker who emerged in spite of the vigorous opposition of their Party, and have deepened the dent on the credibility of the leadership. The Party itself has lost face, lost a major pillar upon which it hopes to build a survival strategy, and lost a battle as a result of the concerted efforts of the opposition and some of its members to reduce its space in Nigerian’s politics.

So if Dr. Fasehun feels aggrieved over the failure of PDP’s zoning arrangement to deliver as he wanted, he has to join a long line of the aggrieved. He has to queue behind the PDP leadership which campaigned against a candidate from a zone which stood by it, in favor of a candidate from a zone that turned its back on the Party. He will have to stand behind many party loyalists who feel that their Party’s rules apply only when they suit the interest of their leaders. And he has join those Nigerians who feel that the zoning Policy of the Party has promised more than it has delivered.

  The imperatives and provisions of sharing power in a plural and complex nation such as Nigeria are enshrined in the Constitution, and represent the only certain guarantee for survival of the nation. In virtually every social or political arrangement Nigerians are involved in, it comes into play as the basic rule. It may be time for the PDP to revisit its own arrangement for power sharing, and this time, accord it the power it deserves as binding agreement on every member. This way, people like Speaker Tambuwal and Dr. Fasehun will not remind Nigerians that tribes are our only defining values.