Connect with us


Another Interim Goverment plot by Military apologists



Share this story

By Ehichioya Ezomon

Military apologists – in and outside of Government – are conniving to take advantage of fallouts from the February and March Federal and State elections – to foist an illegal contraption of an Interim National Government on Nigeria.
This comes barely 56 days to the May 29, 2023, swearing in of President-elect Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress, to replace outgoing President Muhammadu Buhari.
In attempting to abort and supplant an elected government, the anti-democratic elements plan to undermine the amended 1999 Constitution, which’s foundational to existence of Nigeria as a Nation.
Section 1(2) of the Constitution states, unambiguously, that: “The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the Government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.”
For good measure, section 1(1) states that: “This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
And section 1(3), reinforcing section 1(1), states that: “If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”
As interim government is unknown to law, its planners will have to suspend section 1(1)-(3) of the Constitution for a soft and safe landing, to impose themselves and their will on Nigerians.
In the February 25 presidential election, Tinubu, a former Lagos State Governor, defeated 17 contestants, including three leading opposition candidates.
They’re former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of Peoples Democratic Party, former Anambra State Governor Peter Obi of Labour Party, and former Kano State Governor Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso of New Nigeria Peoples Party.
But Atiku and Obi claim they each won the poll, and should’ve been declared President-elect, instead of Tinubu, who won in 12 states, scored 8,794,726 votes and secured one-quarter (25%) spread in 27 states.
Atiku, who won in 12 states, polled 6,984,520 votes, and secured 25% in 17 states; and Obi, who claimed 11 states, scored 6,101,533 votes, and secured 25% in 15 states, disagreed with INEC’s returns.
They argue in their petitions to the Presidential Election Petitions Court (PEPC) that Tinubu didn’t meet the requirements of the law, viz: the 1999 Constitution and Electoral Act 2022.
While they’re in court, Atiku and Obi’s supporters and members of their parties have found their ways into the streets, and laid siege to the offices of the Independent National Electoral Commission in Abuja, and several States, in attempts to reverse the declaration of Tinubu, and cancel or annul the poll.
The other day, members of the PDP, led by its “stepped-aside” National Chairman Iyorcha Ayu, and the party candidate, Atiku, protested to the INEC office in Abuja, demanding cancellation of the election, and a second exercise organised “that will be credible and acceptable to Nigerians and the international community.”
Members of ObIdients Movement – supporters of Labour’s Obi – also stormed Abuja streets, with a call to annul the poll.
They pleaded with Buhari to practically breach the Constitution by declining to hand over to Tinubu on May 29, but to form an illegal Inerim National Government – made famous in 1993, after the Military regime of retired Gen. Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida annulled the June 12, 1993, poll won by Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola.
Due to intense pressure, both home and abroad, Babangida decided to “step aside” on August 26, 1993, but not before he empanelled an Interim National Government headed by boardroom great, Chief Ernest Shonekan, who lasted only 82 days in power.
Then Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Sani Abacha, took advantage of a November 10, 1993, ruling of a Lagos High Court Judge, the late Dolapo Akinsanya, that illegled the Interim National Goverment.
Justice Akinsanya said: “President Babangida has no legitimate power to sign a decree after August 26, 1993, after his exit, so the decree is void and of no effect.”
Abacha then sacked Shonekan, and established a draconian regime that hunted and eliminated many pro-democracy activists, including Abiola’s wife, Kudirat, gunned down on June 4, 1996, by Abacha’s goons in Lagos.
And five years after annulment of June 12 on June 23, 1993, Abiola died in mysterious circumstances in detention on July 7, 1998, as he strugged to regain his mandate that Justice Akinsanya’s ruling had literally restored in November 1993 sans Abacha’s seizure of power.
It’s President Buhari, who posthumously recognised Abiola on June 12, 2018, as the legitimate winner of June 12, and awarded him the highest National Honour of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic (GCFR) – as an attestation of Abiola as President-elect, though not sworn-in accordingly.
Among those that survived the Abacha killing spree is President-elect Tinubu, who escaped into exile on the Intel that he was marked for elimination by the Abacha hit squad.
Tinubu returned to the country following the political transition programme that retired Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar’s regime initiated to usher in the Fourth Republic in 1999. He vied for and won election as Governor of Lagos, and was re-elected, and served out his eight-year tenure in 2007.
The foregoing are the tales and horrors that signposted Nigeria’s first Inerim National Government – birthed from a duly appointed and conducted election – but hijacked by the very Military that ordred the election in the first place.
Save Military apologists parading as pseudo-democrats, Nigerians – including Individuals, Ethnic Nationalities, National Association of Nigerian Students, Civil Society Organisations, the 36 State Governors and Senior Lawyers versed in constitutional matters – are genuinely alarmed by the unfolding development.
Amid the economic and social dislocations in the society, can Nigerians face another apparatus imposed this time through the machinations of politicians and supporters that lost elections, in cahoots with cliques within and outside the government?
Can Nigeria withstand aftermaths of annulment of Tinubu’s election, as happened to Abiola of the same ethnic stock 30 years ago?
On the back of uninterrupted 24 years of democratic practice since the return of civilian governance in 1999, Nigerians have delivered a resounding and an unequivocal no to the crusaders and purveyors of an interim government.
And they demand that the Department of State Services (DSS) that blew the whistle on the plot should expose, arrest and prosecute the plotters and backers of the illegal scheme, no matter how highly placed, and wherever they are.

Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Tinubu’s Cabinet Of Controversy




Share this story

By Zainab Suleiman Okino

In all ramifications, it appears the euphoria and excitement that greeted President Bola Tinubu’s assumption of office are gradually ebbing away. Quite expectedly, having started with the tough decisions of fuel subsidy removal and floating of the forex, the President now needs to do more and urgently too.

Both policies have since worsened the woes of the Naira and Nigerians. From accusation of being surrounded by “Lagos boys”, (his cabinet as Lagos State Governor between 1999 to 2003), to policy somersaults to somehow nepotistic appointments (and vengeful dismissal of some CEOs), questions are being asked about Tinubu’s pro-people and pan-Nigerian credentials.

He started with politically correct appointments. The geographical spread of his service chiefs was received positively. His swift policy statements, though criticized, were timely, compared with the sordid silence of his predecessor.

The misnomer became apparent during ministerial nominations flip-flopping into high-wire politics that led to a ministerial nominee in person of former Governor Nasir El-Rufai being dropped at the last minute over a so-called security report after screening. We also witnessed how a nominee from Kano State, Maryam Shetty was refused screening by the senators after she was already seated at the National Assembly lobby, which showed clearly a scene from the playbook of Ganduje’s dirty politics under Tinubu’s government.

Two former governors were appointed to man the Ministry of Defence; former Governor Bello Matawalle of Zamfara State, was downgraded to serve as a junior minister under his colleague, Mohammed Badaru Abubakar, former governor of Jigawa state. Looks so incongruous. Some MDAs were “reorganized”, and we expected a more compact arrangement. But what did we get? Some ministries were boosted and some downgraded. To which end, except to favour some ministers and appoint others to less juicy or relegated ministries, just to satisfy constitutional provision. Tokenism? Maybe.

The result was a boosted aviation sector renamed Ministry of Aviation and Aerospace Development under the supervision of an equally controversial figure, Festus Keyamo, while the Ministry of Transportation was debased and can safely be called ministry of railway, after the removal of everything maritime like NIMASA, NPA, Shippers’ Council etc now under the Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy.

Indeed, inconsistency in pronouncements came too early in this administration. Tinubu made history when he reshuffled a cabinet that was yet to be inaugurated. Engineer Abubakar Momoh was redeployed from Ministry of Youth to Ministry of Niger Delta that the president hitherto ignored.

Imagine the embarrassment that followed the declaration by the UAE government, that they are yet to resolve and reverse their visa ban on Nigerians, after the President’s spokesman, Ajuri Ngelale went to town to announce same. Propaganda should have limits. Why the hurry? To impress who? The disinformation has since taken the shine off the president’s diplomatic engagement with his UAE counterpart. So, after the UAE denunciation, where exactly are we now?

Tinubu does not seem bothered about over-bloated personnel costs or reducing the cost of governance. For the first time, Nigeria now has almost 50 ministers under its low per capital income of 5,200 PPP dollars in 2021 compared to USA’s 25 ministers and per capita income of 70,480 PPP dollars as at 2021.

Consequently, Nigerians have resigned to fate that they may never have pro-people government in their lifetime, since most of the policy initiatives of the new government favour only the rich, the haves, high-end businesses and high class of people and interests. It is obvious that the president must have made many commitments to friends and associates, who in his own estimation must be fixed, regardless of an ailing economy like ours.

Still smarting from all these came the issue of lopsided appointments, which we thought we had seen the last of after Buhari. The protests over Tinubu’s skewed appointments started from “home”, when a group from the Southwest accused him of appointing only people from Lagos contrary to the notion that Yorubas had an edge in his government.

Last weekend, evidence of such slanted appointments went viral. Critics reeled out at least 20 consequential appointments from the Southwest including MDAs like Justice, Finance, Customs, Police, FIRS, Immigration, NIMC, CBN, Power, Digital Economy, COAS, Maritime, Interior and Communications in the president’s kitchen cabinet. Muslim groups like MURIC have also cried out complaining that Christians hold key economic positions. The cry of marginalization has always been part of governance and politics in our clime, and Tinubu is not in a hurry to end it.

In addition to his hard-to-swallow economic direction, Tinubu’s choice of appointees is somehow causing concerns among the elite too. Without a semblance of inclusion and symbolism, the people feel let down by a president they thought was going to be pan-Nigerian, gradually becoming provincial, in deeds, even though appointments only enrich the beneficiaries while the conditions of ordinary people remain unchanged.

I believe competence and capacity should be uppermost in considering people for appointments, but I also know that all regions or ethnic groups harbour such competent people among them. Going forward, the president should be more circumspect, and look elsewhere instead of his “household” in a delicate balancing act that Nigeria needs, and which will surely give him (Tinubu) more support and goodwill. No matter how inconsequential he thinks these issues are, they have already got tongues wagging. As a minority myself, I can’t help but notice this potentially damaging and divisive subject in our polity.

Already an internal revolt is brewing in APC over Tinubu’s style of leadership and appointments. In what a group called “yorubanization of the current APC government”, the “APC members in Coalition for a United Nigeria (CUN)”, said “86% of the critical appointments made so far have been people from your (Tinubu) geopolitical zone, the Southwest.

Moreso, to our greater bewilderment is the fact that 90% of these people are your “Lagos boys”, imploring the president to “drastically balance this prejudice by giving attention to other regions outside the Southwest”. If members of the party are disappointed in their government, what do you expect from the rest of the country?

Okino, is the chairperson of Blueprint Editorial Board, a fellow of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (FNGE), her syndicated column appears on News Point Nigeria newspaper on Thursdays. She can be reached via:

Continue Reading


Essentials of institutional effectiveness, transparency and accountability as panacea for good governance




Share this story

Why would I think I can PROFFER A CURE FOR the ailing systems in the governance of our great nation? At least a good man can try, I have for over period of time now perused the thought —consistently- of the possibility of good governance, at least good governance, not great or excellent governance- even though that is easily achievable using the same principles for good governance- but at least we would do well to appreciate good governance in our good homeland of Nigeria, before I go on ranting about my thoughts, my people let me be quick to return to the subject of our discuss; “the essentials of institutional effectiveness, transparency and accountability as a panacea for good governance”.

Let take a deep breadth as we explore this topic, the irony of the truth is that The Panacea for good government is good governance, there is no hard and fast route about it, here we have a few of its components in institutional effectiveness, transparency and accountability, Good governance is like the proverbial good deed you give it and it comes right back at you, what is governance? Governance is simply the manner or style of government practiced in a particular location; in this case (our case) it is democratic government, which is a government of the people for the people by the people so good governance would be a complete cycle of the being a government elected by the people and then the delivery of the goods of its governance for the people (who duly elected the ones in governance), which would have to take us back to an even more important question for good governance to be anticipated, are the people in government democratically elected?

This question alone helps us to see that institutional effectiveness is first of all key in attaining good governance, as the question poised above is in reference to institution the Electoral Body, in our case INEC.

So what are the essentials of effectiveness for institutions to live up to expectation?

  1. Key and Competent Personnel: – not just getting the competent people but getting the right people for the right places.
  2. Policy Guided operations according to the institutions’ founding principles.
  3. Ethical interpretation of Law and legal processes
  4. Ethical Operations, Management and of all activities
  5. Optimization of standards with International acceptable modus operandi
    In addition to the above with the afore mentioned virtues of Accountability and transparency, good governance is left from aspirations to affirmative reality; Accountability is the act of being held responsible for your actions this helps to hold good governance players responsible for their actions in tandem with institutions, which is why the first factor is very important, and finally being transparent, being frank, firm and open, saying exactly what one means and meaning what one says, this when institutions and people in them say what they mean and mean what they say, not with hidden motives or agenda.

When all the factors described above are bundled to form a complete system of governance; good governance is sure to thrive.

Finally in addition to all these my personal opinion rests upon the afore discussed as already known factors and processes needed for good governance, especially by the Nigerian institutions and people in governance, as we have notable institutions, what i think is that the Nigerian institutions and people in governance should ‘Take Action’ in doing the right thing!

All Nigerian institutions, people in government have knowledge of all this factors, or at least moral inclination to do the right thing, but what we lack is the actual DOING, and if we as Nigerians, can cultivate the habit of DOING; then all our ideas, ideologies institutional effectiveness, transparency and accountability as well as every other factors that contribute to good governance would then become a conscious cultural norm of the Nigerian people which will necessitate the birth and practice of good governance in our nation.


Peter Ameh

-2019 Presidential Candidate

  • Former National Chairman Inter-Party Advisory Council (IPAC)
    -National Secretary CUPP
Continue Reading


Tinubu cannot remove a CBN governor without 2/3rd senate majority




Share this story

By Frank Tietie

The recently announced removal of the embattled Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emiefele and the Deputy Governors of the Bank by the fiat of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is not in compliance with the provisions of the Central Bank of Nigeria Act, 2007. Therefore, it is illegal!

Whereas Section 11 of the CBN Act provides for several grounds for the removal of the CBN Governor or Deputy Governors, whenever such removal is based on the decision of the President, as in this reported case of Emiefele and his deputies, it can only have effect where the President has first sought and obtained the approval of a two-thirds Senate majority.

Clearly, there is no evidence that the President indeed sought and obtained the required two-thirds majority of the Nigerian Senate before announcing the formal removal of Governor Emiefele with his deputies and the appointment of a new Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria.

Consequently, the president is in error, and all his recent actions in removal and appointment of a Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria can be set aside by the courts.

According to the Court Appeal in the case of Olotu v. President of Federal Republic of Nigeria & ors, it held that:
It is a trite point of law that when a statute dictates a certain mode of doing something, then that method and no other must be employed in the performance of that act. Put differently, where a legislation lays down a procedure for a thing, there should be no other method of doing it

Nigeria operates a Presidential-Federalist system of government with a high concentration of political and executive powers in the person of the President. Therefore, this infraction of the CBN Act by the President on the removal of the CBN Governor may pass without any censure of the National Assembly or review by the Judiciary. But it is such disregard for plain provisions of the law by the President who is supposed to set the example of legal compliance, that creates the usual incipient negative impact on constitutional democracy which rests on the rule of law.

Therefore whenever an administration starts glossing over express provisions of the law that serve to guarantee order, peace, good governance and economic prosperity of Nigeria, the culture of disregard for court order and widespread violation of human rights begins to cascade down the various Ministries, Departments and Agencies of the Federal Government together with all the other strata of government across the states and local governments. This has been the bane of Nigeria’s stable development in all spheres and the recipe for corrupt abuse of political power and violation of human rights. That’s why military junta often truncated national democracies. May that be far from us!

The Nigerian state spends huge financial and human resources to maintain its democratic structures. Therefore, the National Assembly and its leadership must stand up at all times to live up to their responsibilities in upholding the principles of democracy and separation of powers to avoid tyrannical acts of the executive by requiring strict compliance to every law that mandates its approval on such matters the President is required to apply for.

Therefore, when the National Assembly indeed discharges its roles in the political equation of checks and balances with the President and the Judiciary, there will be less of interventions by self styled but well-meaning activists and civil society organisations who are often referred to as busybodies but are determined to seek judicial review of executive actions to ensure the rule of law and a stable Nigerian society.

Frank Tietie,
Lawyer, Social Commentator & Executive Director of Citizens Advocacy for Social & Economic Rights (CASER), writes from Abuja, Nigria

Continue Reading