By Douglas Anele
Nevertheless, the key issue is that, as chairman of PTF, the buck stopped on his table, which means that (1) it was his duty to make sure that funds allocated to the trust fund were used judiciously, and (2) he must ensure that any of his staff and contractors guilty of financial malfeasance faced justice. On both counts, Buhari was unsuccessful, which implies that he may not be able to fight high-octane corruption effectively if he becomes President in 2015.
Nevertheless, the key issue is that, as chairman of PTF, the buck stopped on his table, which means that (1) it was his duty to make sure that funds allocated to the trust fund were used judiciously, and (2) he must ensure that any of his staff and contractors guilty of financial malfeasance faced justice. On both counts, Buhari was unsuccessful, which implies that he may not be able to fight high-octane corruption effectively if he becomes President in 2015.
As adumbrated earlier, Buhari’s biggest selling point is the anti-corruption legend that has grown around him due to the uncompromising manner his regime dealt with corrupt prominent Second Republic politicians.
BUHARI DECLARES: General Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) declaring his intention to seek the All Progressives Congress, APC, nomination to contest next year’s presidential election.
Moreover, according to media reports, unlike other Nigerian leaders he has no mansions, oil blocks, and costly assets and investments. But Nigerians should not allow Buhari’s anti-corruption swagger becloud their critical acumen. In 1984 as military head of state, Buhari was about forty-two years old. Therefore, he was relatively young and idealistic, with enough energy and youthful enthusiasm to prosecute the War Against Indiscipline with active support from Idiagbon and other members of the Supreme Military Council.
In addition, Buhari led a military dictatorship, which could promulgate decrees and implement them speedily without the cumbersome, delay-prone, processes of parliamentary debates.
If Buhari and the hypocritical politicians leading him on think he can replicate the draconian anti-corruption programme of 1984 when he becomes President in 2015, they are living in a fool’s paradise. It should be clear to any reasonable person that Buhari at seventy-two cannot be exactly the same Buhari who was forty-two in 1984 – advancing age and changing circumstances engender profound changes in world outlook and behaviour.
More importantly, the 1999 constitution grants the President enormous powers that, in most cases, must be exercised lawfully in concert with the National Assembly, which exercises oversight functions on the executive arm of government. From experience, we know that members of the federal legislature, since the return to civilian rule in 1999, have distinguished themselves as cash-and-carry or agbata ekee politicians motivated in the discharge of their functions mainly by bulimic materialism.
Thus, it is not just enough to flaunt and exaggerate Buhari’s anti-corruption antecedents: it is also essential to think about the kind of National Assembly he would work with in case he is elected President next year. If carpetbaggers who see politics as business investment for maximum returns dominate the legislative body, Buhari’s diminishing reputation as tormentor-in-chief of corrupt politicians would be ineffectual.
It is easy to imagine scenarios where federal legislators would employ sleight-of-hand tactics to frustrate or stall measures by President Buhari to curb corruption and indiscipline in governance, or in which corrupt prominent politicians supporting him now turn their backs against him for blocking access to lucrative contracts and easy money.
I am not surprised that APC stalwarts have continued to project Buhari as a man of his words inspite of evidence to the contrary – politics in Nigeria is about lying and deception. Of course, matching action with words is very difficult for most human beings, especially among political leaders constantly challenged by the imperative of balancing conflicting interests and capacity to deliver good governance.
Trustworthiness is an important quality that Nigerians should take into consideration when choosing their leaders. Sadly, members of the ruling elite have repeatedly betrayed the trust Nigerians reposed in them. Now, it would require voluminous textbooks to detail contradictions between the pronouncements of our leaders and their actual performance from the time of Yakubu Gowon to the incumbent President, Goodluck Jonathan.
Suffice it to say, however, that if our leaders have kept their promises with regard to pulling Nigeria away from economic black hole and fighting corruption, the country would have become a great nation and the pride of black people worldwide. Unfortunately, Nigerian leaders oftentimes speak from both sides of the mouth making promises they cannot keep or never really intended to keep.
For example, during campaigns for the 2011 presidential election, Buhari pledged not to seek the post of President in future. In the front page of the April 14, 2011 edition of Daily Trust, he was quoted as saying that “This campaign is the third and last one for me; since after it I will not present myself again for election into the office of the President.” Buhari’s statement is quite definitive and unequivocal.
Yet, less than four years later, in October 15, 2014, at the Eagle Square, Abuja, Buhari “humbly” presented himself “to all Nigerians and to God, seeking to be elected as APC’s presidential candidate.” Now, the question is, why did Buhari change his mind – overweening personal ambition, hyperbolic sense of self-importance, egregious misreading of the political barometer, or patriotism? Whatever the reason might be, it seems to me that Buhari’s decision to contradict his earlier solemn promise is a serious mistake which has further dented his relatively manageable but drooping reputation.
Largely, Buhari has the mentality of a soldier. In the military, loyalty is a preeminent virtue. But loyalty is scarce in the treacherous terrain of Nigerian politics, where an ally today can mutate into an arch enemy tomorrow based on Machiavellian calculations. If Buhari really believes that all the prominent APC politicians proclaiming his virtues publicly are completely loyal to his presidential ambition, he should think again.
Majority of them that have held (and still hold) public office are irredeemably corrupt, notwithstanding their hypocritical lamentations about the high level of corruption in Jonathan’s government. Thus, if the military coup of December 31, 1983 that brought Buhari to power happened in 2003, 2007 or 2011, most of these politicians would have been declared guilty of corruption by anti-corruption tribunals. Has Buhari ever wondered how many of the APC politicians he is hobnobbing with right now would have fallen into the category of disgraced public officials if the scenario was 1984?
As a corollary, by presenting himself as a possible President under APC’s platform, Buhari has compromised his capacity to deal with corrupt politicians in the party, especially if the latter are instrumental to his being elected President. Assuming that Buhari becomes President, would he bite the corrupt APC fingers that fed him?
This question leads us to the contradiction in the whopping sum of N27.5 million demanded by APC for picking its presidential nomination papers and Buhari’s acquiescence to the outrageous fee without protest. To most Nigerians, including myself, N27.5 million is a gigantic amount that can transform their lives forever; but for politicians it is an investment that would yield handsome returns when they get into office either by election or through appointment.
APC chieftains constantly excoriate PDP for corruption. Yet, the nomination fee charged by their party demonstrates that it is already wallowing in the same cesspit of financial rascality as the ruling party, that APC’s promise to fight corruption if it wins in 2015 is a hoax meant to deceive Nigerians. In my opinion, APC, like the ruling PDP, is a party of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.
To bolster his public image as a disciplined and honest leader, Buhari claimed he paid the nomination fee with a bank loan. But who is he trying to deceive, anyway? As a politician who wants the electorate to vote for him because of his anti-corruption stance, Buhari should have opposed the huge nomination fee and insisted on its drastic reduction.
However, by taking a loan to pay it, he not only endorsed the questionable decision of his party leaders but also supported extreme monetisation of politics in Nigeria. Consequently, Buhari is staking a claim for the presidency again in the shadow of serious contradictions.
Concluded.
Concluded.
No comments:
Post a Comment