(A Paper Presented at the 5^th NATIONAL DIASPORA CONFERENCE, 2011 Diaspora Day Held at the Congress Hall, Transcorp Hilton Hotel, Abuja, 25-27 July, 2011)

1. PROTOCOL

Mr. Chairman, Your Excellencies, Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen.

1. PREAMBLE

It is a great privilege and honour for me to be part of this historic intellectual harvest and I would like to thank Ms Lola Visser-Mabogunje of NIDOE, for inviting me. Hopefully, my contribution and our collective efforts will provide new insights to enhance the transformation of our dear country.

C.    INTRODUCTION

The topic of this paper, INFRASTRUCTURE CONCESSION IN NIGERIA: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES, is one that should ordinarily elicit interest. All over the world, the demand for infrastructure is outstripping supply and new strategies are being devised to address the deficit.

In Nigeria, the situation is pathetic. Decades of poor maintenance, underinvestment and outright roguery have left the country with an outrageous infrastructure deficit. Indeed, if there is one fundamental impediment standing between our economic growth or, more specifically, the realization of the Transformation Agenda, of our President, it is the excruciating shortage of infrastructure.

The abysmal infrastructure deficit in Nigeria is, basically, a direct consequence of leadership failure – successive regimes failed to take proactive action to march the boom in our population growth over the years with corresponding development in infrastructure and allied services. Current estimates of Nigeria’s infrastructure deficits put the figure in excess of $200b (over N30trillion).

Given this scenario and given the constraints on the public budget of financing the ever growing infrastructure needs and in keeping with the practice in other nations with similar predicaments, the government has sought to shift part of the burden of new infrastructure development and investment to the private sector ss part of Public Private Partnerships (PPP or P3) policy. The philosophy behind this policy is to meet the challenge of developing and maintaining critical infrastructure by attracting massive private sector led investments beyond the means available to government.

E.    INFRASTRUCTURE CONCESSION IN NIGERIA

Background

Modern P3 is held to have begun in Britain in 1992 when the Conservative government of John Major introduced the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) which became the first systematic programme aimed at encouraging public–private partnerships. This innovative programme focussed on reducing the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement. The Labour government of Tony Blair, elected in 1997, persisted with the PFI but sought to shift the emphasis to the achievement of “value for money,” mainly through an appropriate allocation of risk.

Since then, PPPs have been used to develop large electric power projects, transportation Infrastructure networks including roads, railways, transit systems, seaports and airports. They have also been used in the water, wastewater and gas sectors, as well as for asset-based projects in health care, education, borstal facilities and defence. Examples of such projects abound in the United Kingdom, Australia, Ireland, the province of British Colombia, Canada, India, USA and countries of Latin America and Caribbean (LAC).

Concessions – Definition

A concession, simply put, is a government grant for specific privileges. As defined in the ICRC Act 2005, infrastructure concession means

“a contractual arrangement whereby the project proponent or contractor undertakes the construction, including financing of any infrastructure facility and the operation and maintenance thereof and shall include the supply of any equipment and machinery for any infrastructure and the provision of any services”

Basically, infrastructure concession allows participation of the private sector in financing the construction, development, operation and maintenance of public infrastructure, development project or network for a stated period. The concession process allows private investors and operators to inject much needed capital into upgrading and maintaining infrastructure. In some types of infrastructure concessions, the cost of using the service is borne exclusively by the users of the service. In other types (notably the private finance initiative), capital investment is made by the private sector on the strength of a contract with government to provide agreed services and the cost of providing the service is borne wholly or in part by the government.

In practice, a private sector consortium forms a special company called a “special purpose vehicle” (SPV) to develop, build, maintain and operate the asset for the contracted period. In cases where the government has invested in the project, it is typically (but not always) allotted an equity share in the SPV.

Legal Framework

The legal framework for the operation of infrastructure concessions in Nigeria is principally the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (Establishment, etc) Act 2005 and the Public Procurement Act 2007. These laws set out the requirements for competition and private sector participation in all public procurement as well as specifies requisite approvals for all PPP contracts.

Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC)

ICRC drives and regulates infrastructure concessions in Nigeria. The Commission was set up in 2008. Engr. Mansur Ahmed, serves as pioneer D-G of the ICRC. The ICRC Board consists of one member from each of Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones. By the provisions of the ICRC Act, ex – officio members that also serve on the Board include the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Attorney General of the Federation, the Minister of Finance, the Governor of the Central Bank and the D-G of ICRC.

Powers of the ICRC

Essentially, the ICRC is empowered to

• Provide general policy guidelines, rules and regulations for the operation of P3 projects in Nigeria.
• Take custody of every concession agreement entered into by the Federal Government and any of it’s agencies
• Ensure efficient execution of concession contracts
• Ensure strict compliance both with the Act and with the terms of the concession contract.

Scope of Concessions

Under the ICRC Act 2005, the scope of opportunities for investment in infrastructure in Nigeria exist in virtually every sector of the economy:

• power plants
• highways
• seaports
• airports
• canals
• dams
• hydroelectric power projects
• water supply
• irrigation
• telecommunications
• railways
• land reclamation
• environmental remediation and clean up projects
• inter state transport systems
• industrial estates or township development
• housing
• government buildings
• tourism development
• trade fair complexes
• warehouses
• solid waste management
• satellite and ground receiving stations
• ICT networks and database infrastructure
• Education facilities
• Health facilities
• sewerage
• Drainage
• Dredging
• and other infrastructure and development projects as may be approved, from time to time, by the Federal Executive Council

Types of Concession

There are several types of contractual obligations that may be entered under infrastructure concession contracts. These include:

• Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT)
• Build, Operate and Own (BOO)
• Build, Transfer and Operate (BTO)
• Build, Own, Operate and Transfer (BOOT)
• Design, Build, Finance, Transfer (DBFT)
• Design, Build, Finance, Manage (DBFM)
• Etc

Some of these are pure concessions (concessions stricto sensu) while others are hybrids. The key difference between various concession arrangements lies in the nature and extent of the risk they transfer from the public agency to the private concessionaire.

Dispute Resolution

The settlement of disputes is an important element in infrastructure concession contracts. The confidence of private parties (concessionaire, financiers and contractors) is boosted and they are encouraged to participate in concession projects when they know that disputes arising at any point in the transaction would be resolved fairly and efficiently.

Opponents and Sceptics of Concessions

Of course, not everyone accepts concession as the panacea for resolving infrastructure deficiencies. Some sceptics think that the burden of providing infrastructure rests squarely with the government which husbands public resources and, consequently, that the role of any private interest should be marginal.

Generally, most objections simply reflect a sincere desire to protect the public interest and get the most value for taxpayers.  However, some of the concerns often raised by sceptics seem to be driven by a misunderstanding of PPPs, or, in many cases by fallacious reasoning based on defective data or information.

Notable PPP Transactions in Nigeria

• Murtala Mohammed Airport (MMA2) Airport Concession BOT contract agreement between the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and Bi-Courtney Limited (BCL)
• 1^st Toll Road PPP in Nigeria signed in 2006 – 30 year concession between Lagos State (LSG) and Lekki Concession Company (LCC)
• DBOT Toll Road agreement between the Federal Ministry of Works and Bi-Courtney Consortium, signed in 2009

Others in progress or in the pipeline would include:

Federal Capital Territory

• FCT Light Rail Project LOT 2 (OBC).
• Kuje Water Works – supply and reticulation (OBC)

Federal Ministry of Works

• Shagamu to Benin and Benin to Asaba highway rehabilitation and upgrade
• Abuja to Kaduna and Kaduna to Kano highway rehabilitation and upgrade

Federal Ministry of Transport

• National Inland Waterways (NIWA)
• Kirikiri Lighter Terminals 1 and 2 concession, and
• The Nigerian Railway Corporation (NRC)
• Concession I: Western Railway: Lagos to Kaduna to Kaura-Namoda and Nguru,

• Concession II: Eastern Railway: Port Harcourt to Kafanchan and the Northern line to Maiduguri;

1. INFRASTRUCTURE CONCESSION IN NIGERIA

– CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

A.    THE CHALLENGES

Infrastructure concession in Nigeria is fraught with challenges. Some of these are systemic being products of the socio-political environment. Others arise from lapses in the legal framework and operational environment. A few instances will suffice:

• Lack of Basic Infrastructure

The statistical realities of the investment environment are unnerving. A few examples will suffice:

• Out of Nigeria’s 198,000 kms of roads, less than 20% are paved and over 65% are in bad condition compared to South Africa’s total of 362,099 km with 73,506 km paved (2002) and the rest in good motorable condition. The cumulative investment of the Federal government in the road sub-sector since independence is mind boggling. Yet the net asset value of Nigerian roads has continued to decline embarrassingly.
• Out of 40,000 mw (megawatts) of electricity required to power the nation, less than 10% (ie less 4,000 mw) is being currently generated. In consequence, many urban based Nigerians are forced to live with epileptic power supply even when they are prepared to pay more for the service. Even that is a luxury: most of the 65% or so of Nigerians who are rural dwellers live from day to day with no electricity at all! Our economy is virtually powered by generators. The estimated cost of running innumerable generators of various makes and sizes polluting the atmosphere across the nation is put at over $15b PA.
• Nigeria’s telecommunication system with a teledensity of 65% or 91 million subscribers virtually subsists on mobile phones. Nigeria is probably the only country in the world where business is carried out, not with land phones that attract lower tariffs, but mobile phones that incur maximum user charges!
• The Nigeria Railway Corporation (NRC) which was established in 1955 exists in name only. The 3,798 km Nigerian rail network comprising of 3,505 km obsolete narrow gauge rails and 293 km standard gauge carries less than 1% of freight traffic compared with a global average of 46%!
• With a population in excess of 150m, not up to one dozen of Nigeria’s 54 airports are functioning as standard airports properly so called compared to South Africa which has 146 fully functional airports with paved runways to service it’s 45m population or Libya that has 137 airports serving a population of 7m!

But a discerning investor would also see that each infrastructural lacuna is also an investment opportunity waiting to be harnessed.

• Corruption

Corruption is a major problem in Nigeria. As a respected elder statesman once lamented, it is not just that officials are corrupt but corruption has almost become official. However, much has been made of the issue of corruption. Corruption is not exclusive to Nigeria. Many monumental corruption cases making headlines around the world today do not involve Nigerians. Two agencies (EFCC and ICPC) are also combating corruption in Nigeria full time. Thankfully, many Nigerians in the public and private sectors exhibit high ethical standards in their personal and professional interactions.

• Bureaucratic Inefficiency

Another challenge inherent in our investment environment is bureaucratic bottlenecks. Contrary to the media claims of Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), processing of business documentation in Nigeria still progresses at snail speed. Conducting a business name availability search, for instance, is expected to take a few minutes. But I have been trying to do one for almost one week at CAC and I am yet to get any result.

Similarly, anyone trying to obtain basic information (such as say a tourist guide or an investment guide) from a ministry or agency that ought to have such material in stock may find himself or herself being directed back and forth from one ministry or agency to the other in an endless ding dong mostly because some people are unable to know what they ought or to do what they should.

• Multiple Taxation

A curious tax regime, internal revenue generation competition, and the multiplicity of Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MNAs) in Nigeria often result in multiple taxes which take a heavy toll on business and investment.

• Political Instability

Political instability was more prevalent in the period before 1999. This raises the risk of administrative expropriation by successive governments. It also often results in fear of the ability of government to honour it’s contractual obligations or counterpart funding obligations. This discourages private investors. Fortunately, the polity is more stable today.

• Economic Instability

Economic instability which is the cumulative effect of political instability, inflation and/or policy inconsistencies for which our country is known also raises the red flag in the minds of serious investors and constitutes a bad advertisement for prospective investment in a capital intensive area like infrastructure.

• Insecurity

Insecurity remains a major challenge. Nigeria is a huge country with a turbulent political history. Although the country has enjoyed relative stability since 1999, religious intolerance, intense competition for political power, Niger Delta militancy, kidnapping for ransom, road safety issues and, more recently, terrorist-style bombings have led to substantial unease among the citizens and consternation among prospective investors. However, contrary to popular opinion, Nigeria is certainly no more dangerous than most African countries and substantially safer than many.

• Negative Perceptions and Stereotyping

Nigeria and Nigerians are often victims of negative perceptions and stereotyping by foreigners. Every country has within its population the good, the bad and the ugly. Unfortunately, bad eggs in Nigerian communities at home and abroad create an image problem for the nation which is foisted on the silent majority of law abiding citizens who, as a consequence, are exposed to harassment and hostility..

Nigerians are also guilty of self condemnation. We easily say negative things about our country in self-righteous indignation. In many online forums, Nigerians write revolting things about Nigeria without caring about who reads it. This trend is unknown among the citizens of any other nation who are circumspect about what they write or say about their country no matter the circumstance. Really, should we be highlighting our strengths or our weaknesses?

• Lack of Access to Financing

Nigerian banks are in the main not investor friendly. Interest rates are high and even to access loans with the high rates involves excruciating processes and hard to meet conditions.

• Lack of Investment Awareness and information

There is lack of international awareness of investment opportunities in Nigeria. The ICRC Act 2005 only allows the Commission to publish the list of projects eligible for infrastructure concession contracts “in the Federal Gazzette and three national newspapers having wide circulation in Nigeria and such other means of circulation”. Invariably, the international media on which most prospective foreign concessionaires depend for information are ignored.

• Crime

Nigeria has a record of violent criminal activity and poor crime detection for which it is classified as unsafe by foreigners. However, the crime rate in Nigeria relative to the population is not higher than the global average. The crime rate in Nigeria may in fact not be as high as the crime rate in South Africa but Nigeria receives more negative publicity. The vast majority of visitors to Nigeria have a safe and crime free experience.

• Budgetary Inconsistencies

Federal Budgets often do not reflect the most critical points of need. Of the N4.4 billion appropriated for 2011, 54% would be expended running the government, 24% on infrastructure and development projects under the capital programme, while 9% and 11% respectively was allotted to debt service and statutory transfers respectively.

There are many challenges alright which is not unusual in any emerging economy but there are opportunities too even within these challenges.

B.    THE OPPORTUNITIES

A close look at Nigeria’s fact-file shows a bouquet of opportunities which supports Nigeria’ position as a viable investment destination:

 Nigeria Fact File

• Nigeria is vast with 36 states and an active population of over 150m growing at 3.5% per annum which means that one out of every six Africans is a Nigerian!
• Nigeria offers an abundance of skilled and unskilled labour (50m strong labour force) at an economic cost as well as in production costs which are among the lowest in Africa.
• With it’s large population, Nigeria offers an incredible market and is the gateway to ECOWAS – an additional 250m people in 16 countries of West and Central Africa
• ·        Nigeria is one the 6 Fastest Growing Economies in Africa which are among the 10 Fastest Growing Economies in the world
• Nigeria is predicted to have the highest GDP growth in the world over the next 40 years
• Nigeria’s GDP as at 2008 was $141.7b and GDP per capita income now stands at $2,500
• Exchange rate has stabilized around N150/$1
• Investors are guaranteed attractive incentives and tax reliefs both in Nigeria and the rest of West Africa
• Nigeria enjoys robust trade relations with most countries with annual trade turnover in millions of dollars
• Several multinational companies operate in Nigeria – Unilever, Diageo, Waitrose, GSK, Vodaphone, Coca Cola, Glanbia, Guinness, PW, Shell, Virgin, HSBC, Standard Chartered Bank, KFC, etc
• Nigeria has substantial foreign reserves of over $45b (May 2009)
• Strong and Fast Growing Financial Sector with global branch networks – thanks to early capitalization and consolidation of the banking sector and an investor has easy access to working capital and other credit facilities.
• Abundant Resources (mineral, agricultural and human)
• Diversity of the economy

–      oil and natural gas

–      abundant solid mineral resources (tin, iron ore, coal, limestone, niobium, lead, zinc)

–      telecoms

–      energy

–      tourism

–      infrastructure

–      arable land

• Enormous oil and gas reserves and high production capacity – Nigeria is the 13^th largest producer of petroleum in the world with the 10th largest reserves and Oil price is $118 per barrel ($75 budget benchmark)
• Concerted anti-corruption drive powered by EFCC and ICPC. Nigeria recently secured the global standard for transparency in oil, gas, and mining which is an affirmation that MNCs publish what they pay and government publishes what it receives – a vital step in making the oil, gas and mining sectors accountable and transparent
• Reform in critical sectors: Energy, Transport, Financial, Civil Service, and Judiciary
• Diversification in agriculture (cocoa, carrot, groundnuts, palm oil, yams, etc)
• Nigeria has invested heavily in key priority sectors – critical infrastructure (power, aviation, works, transport, petroleum resources, etc), food security (focusing on agriculture and water resources) and the development of the Niger Delta
• Nigeria offers stable political environment – the building blocks of democratic culture have been put in place: rule of law, independent judiciary, open and accountable government, active civil society, free and unfettered press, free, fair and credible electoral process such as was witnessed in the 2011 General Elections conducted by the Prof. Attahiru Jega led INEC.

Clearly, Nigeria is a land of opportunities – an attractive investment haven with great potentials and one of the highest rates of return on investment in the world. These unique selling points (USP) of Nigeria present a cornucopia of marketing tips for a concerted investment drive. And of course, the global economic recession makes it inevitable that investors and business leaders must look elsewhere for new markets and fresh investment opportunities.

H.    THE ROLE FOR NIGERIANS IN DIASPORA

Diasporans remain the most portent force in the promotion of trade and investment. Diasporans are also a strong mechanism for economic stimulation, job creation and empowerment in their home countries. Chinese, Indian and Mexican Diasporans have proved this point beyond doubt. World Bank estimates of remittances by Nigerians in Diaspora in 2009 amounted to $18.2 billion. Beyond fiscal contributions, Diasporans also have invaluable knowledge and expertise which they have acquired. By their exposure and locations, Diasporans also have access to invaluable contacts and new markets which makes them natural middlemen in the structuring of business alignments.

The need of the moment is for a new era of constructive engagement between Nigerians in Diaspora and the Government. This can be achieved through collaboration with the appropriate agencies involved in investment promotion and regulation – principally, the Ministry of Trade and Investment, Nigeria Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), etc.

Diasporans should initiate a scheme to identify and build a database of investors and investment consortia in their countries of residence. This will create a critical global pool of prospective foreign investors who could be invited to partake in economic missions to Nigeria or to investment fairs.

Diasporans should spearhead (in collaboration Nigerian embassies abroad and appropriate Ministries and Agencies in Nigeria) the organisation BIG investment Expos and Infrastructure Concession-specific fairs in major global economic hubs to promote Nigeria as an investment haven as it relates to infrastructure development.

Generally, there are no restrictions on foreign nationals or foreign entities doing business in Nigeria.  However, in consonance with local laws, they must incorporate a local vehicle before commencing business. Since prospective foreign investors will necessarily need to find the right partners in Nigeria, you should assist them to achieve that goal in order to ensure that they do not fall into the wrong hands which could further dent the image of the country and, by so doing, corrode your credibility and hard earned integrity.

Shine your eyes!

I.     RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

Recommendations

More steps which should be taken to ensure the success of the vision of national transformation via accelerated infrastructure development include:

• Devising an Infrastructure Concession Master plan
• Profiling approved concession projects to make them readily available and accessible to prospective concessionaires
• Reviewing the ICRC (Establishment, etc) Act 2005

-        to expand the powers of the Commission and, in particular, to empower ICRC to impose necessary sanctions and

-        to providing for unsolicited proposals from prospective concessionaires in areas covered by the ICRC Act.

Conclusion

The Nigerian moment has arrived, the Nigerian dream is within our grasp. As the real ambassadors of this country, Nigerians in Diaspora who have experienced the best infrastructural facilities, who have been nurtured on global best practices and steeped in the best traditions of the rule of law are best placed to lead the new drive to transform Nigeria. The challenges are before you. So are the opportunities.

Thank you for listening.

Key players in Nigeria’s private sector are getting set to troop to Dublin, the languid capital of Ireland for an annual summer forum intended to forge closer ties between them and their Irish counterparts: the International Gateway Economic Partnership Summit (I-GEPS). I_GEPS is organised by the Embassy of Nigeria in Dublin in conjunction with the African Business Roundtable and Applied Consulting to promote direct foreign investment. I-GEPS is the brainchild of Dr. Kema Chikwe, Nigeria’s Ambassador to Ireland and Iceland.
Ireland
Ireland is a scenic island country of slightly more than 4 million people hemmed in between the Atlantic Ocean and the Irish Sea. A visual delight with beautiful flowers, flowing rivers, unending greenery and ubiquitous pubs, Ireland is a hodgepodge of old and new: ruins of castles dot the country, ancient buildings, old churches and pubs, narrow roads that originally served horse-drawn carriages co-exist with ultra modern airports, new multi-lane motorways, glass towers, gigantic malls and other emerging land marks.
Nigeria and Ireland
Relations between Nigeria and Ireland date back more than 200 years. To Ireland more than any other country belongs the credit for pioneering western education and Christian evangelism especially in Southern Nigeria. Aside from schools and churches established by Irish priests and religious bodies, Irish nuns set up the earliest medical facilities. One such hospice, the Holy Rosary Medical Complex is located at Emekuku in Owerri North Local Government area of Imo State which happens to be the hometown of Dr. Kema Chikwe. Today, Chikwe has taking another kind of mission to Ireland: a mission of economic evangelism.
The Vision
Since her appointment in 2008, Dr. Chikwe has shown unflagging commitment to expanding economic relations between Nigeria and Ireland. I-GEPS was conceived as a strategic response to the prevailing trade imbalance between Nigeria and Ireland/Iceland which stands at about 112 million Euros for Ireland alone as against a mere 65,000 Euros for Nigeria. The strategy for I-GEPS was formulated in July 2008. I-GEPS was premised on the projection that as an oil producing country located in the epicentre of West African commerce and industry with a vibrant population of more than 150 million and foreign reserves exceeding $US50b, Nigeria offered colossal investment opportunities.
The First Summit
The premier I-GEP Summit took place between June 2 and 6, 2009 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Blanchardstown, Dublin 12. Anchored on a well–articulated programme, it was well organised with an Opening Session, a technical session, and Bankers/Financial Forum before the main conference.
Interaction
The summit provides a forum for interaction between Nigerian and Irish investors in various sectors. Issues pertaining to energy production, solid minerals development, communications, agriculture, banking, aviation, transport, mines, steel, science, technology and tourism enjoy prominence.
Speakers
Among Nigerian speakers at the first I-GEPS were the President of African Business Round Table, Dr. Bamanga Tukur, the Chief Executive of Bank of Industry PLC, Evelyn Oputu, the Group Managing Director of Afribank Nigeria PLC, Mr. Sebastian Adigwe, Special Adviser to the President on Petroleum Resources, Dr. Emmanuel Egboga, former Honourable Minister of National Planning, Dr Shamsuddeen Usman, the Managing Director of Nigeria Export Import Bank (NEXIM Bank), Alhaji Yusuf Baba Ahmed, etc. Organisations from Nigeria represented included TINAPA, LNG, Zenox, etc
Key Irish participants included the Irish Minister of State with special responsibility for Science, Technology/Innovation and Natural Resources, Mr. Conor Lenihan, Chief Executive of Industrial Development Authority, Barry O’Leary, Deputy Chairman of ANP International Finance Limited Dublin, Clive Carpenter, Director Chambers, Ireland, Ian Talbot, Ray Langton of Guinness Diageo Ireland, Mr Brian Phelan of Glanbia, Eugene Brennan of Shannon Development, Limerick Kevin Cuthbertson of Bactec International U.K, CEO Dublin Chamber of Commerce, P.J. Timmins, etc. Irish organisations visible at the exhibition stands included Carey Glass, Tullow Oil, Advantage Resources, etc
The second I-GEPS summit
The 2nd I-GEPS with the theme “Beyond the Crisis: Emerging Opportunities for Business Partnership between Nigeria and Ireland” comes up from June 21 to 28, 2010 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Dublin 4. Planned to build on the gains of the last summit, the 2010 summit will also feature sessions on a wide range of investment opportunities and businesses.
Chikwe’s Mission
Where does she get her energy? How is she able to power on despite widespread negative perceptions of Nigeria and Nigerians? Dr. Kema Chikwe seems to operate on an inbuilt dynamo in her relentless resolve to attract investors to Nigeria. Her sales pitch is consistent. Her voice is strident. Hear her: Nigeria is a diverse economy with opportunities in oil and natural gas, solid minerals, telecoms, energy, tourism, infrastructure, agriculture and a strong banking sector with global branch networks. Nigeria is investing over N5 trillion naira ($35b) in key priority sectors – critical infrastructure (power, aviation, works, transport, petroleum resources, etc), food security (focusing on agriculture and water resources) and the development of the Niger Delta. The message is simple and persuasive. Irish investors are turning their gaze towards the Nigerian economy.
Business and Leisure
Participants to the first I-GEPS were taken on excursions to such places in different counties of Ireland. Many participants also stepped out on their own personal excursions.
Ireland is full of interesting places and historical monuments. Many of these are in Dublin. The River Liffey runs through the middle of Dublin effectively dividing the City into two: the north side and the south side. Several bridges across the River Liffey link north Dublin to South Dublin. The O’Connel Bridge on O’Connel Street is popular with tourists who often stand on it to take photographs. Trinity College, the oldest university in Ireland is also in Dublin City centre. It was founded in 1592. The General Post Office stands inscrutably down the road. Unlike Nigeria where text messaging has practically killed letter writing, the Irish are great patrons of the post office. The postman carrying out his duties on a bicycle from house to house is still a regular daily sight in most Irish cities. The amazing Spire of Dublin at the site of the former Nelson’s Pillar on O’Çonnel Street is a major landmark. Standing at 121.2m (398 ft) in height, the large tapering stainless steel monument is touted as the world’s tallest sculpture.
At every turn, there are strings of pubs and clubs that have booze flowing round the clock. Temple Bar, perhaps the most popular pub in the city, was established in 1840. The Guinness Storehouse located at St. James Gate Brewery in Dublin City provides a virtual museum of Guinness history on seven floors. On the seventh floor which houses the Gravity Bar, a visitor may get a complimentary pint of Guinness and enjoy a 360 degree view of Dublin City. There are shopping arcades all over the city and there are gigantic malls such as Blanchardstown Shopping Centre, Dumdrum shopping Centre, etc. All over Ireland, there are rivers, lakes, mountains and parks to satisfy anyone with great attraction to the outdoors. The 700 hectares Phoenix Park in Dublin is one of the largest in the world. The well-manicured St. Stephen’s Green in Dublin City Centre also stands as a testimony to Irish love for the outdoors.
Still, the most popular hangouts for visitors from Nigeria seem to be the African restaurants in Dublin especially the ones that stock Nigerian food such as Decency Restaurant, on Mountjoy Street in Dublin 7, City Centre. After the initial thrill of feeding on potatoes, an Irish staple that goes with virtually every meal, it is a delight for Nigerian visitors to savour chunks of fish, meat, soup, garri, amala, tuwo and the assortment of spicy soups common in Nigerian culinary culture.
I-GEPS is a forum for networking. Beyond that, the summit provides a blend of business and leisure with a whiff of Irish tradition. An exciting package of has been put together for participants at the 2nd summit with Amb. Kema Chikwe as host and Ms Grace Egbagbe as Anchor. Irish traditions lay emphasis on strong family values, warmth and hospitality. The Irish like to share a drink and a laugh. They don’t also mind a little gossip. Who does? Dublin is an enchanting city with memorable sights and antique structures. Participants to the second summit in Dublin may find at the end of their mission to Dublin a picture that they may wish to paint for Nigeria. (uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050)

Should Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, contest in the 2011 presidential elections? This is one question that has been on the front burner of national discourse particularly since the Presidential Assistant on National Assembly (NASS), Cairo Ojougboh, reportedly let the word out that the President was going to throw his hat into the ring. Even after Ojougboh was compelled to literally eat his words, the question has continued to hang in the air like a lugubrious cloud. Hairs are being split and feathers are being ruffled by Nigeria’s largely self-serving political elites who have elevated the issue to a national debate.
Ordinarily, the decision as to whether to run for a public office or not rests with the individual and, of course, with the political party to which he belongs. The question in Jonathan’s case is made more poignant by the exigencies of Nigeria’s weird leadership selection process which lays emphasis on geographical considerations rather than competence and capability.
The major plank of the argument against Jonathan’s candidature is that, being of southern origin, he stands disqualified by virtue of some zoning arrangement structured by the founding fathers of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to which he belongs. This gentleman’s agreement is supposed to maintain political balance between the nebulous north and the disparate south but even the existence of such an agreement is in dispute.
Some leaders of the party argue that Nigeria’s political equation always rested on a tripod (north, east, west) and that any power rotation arrangement not based on that equation is a defective one. Others like the Chairman of PDP Board of Trustees, former President Olusegun Obasanjo outrightly deny the existence of any such agreement.
One of the proponents of rotation, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar stated in a recent interview which he granted to BBC that Jonathan’s candidature would cause “some political instability” because it would violate the agreement on rotation of the Presidency. But it was the same Atiku that schemed to unseat his principal, former president Obasanjo in 2003. It is a notorious fact that the indignities that he was made to undergo in a bid to placate and dissuade an ambitious Vice President from derailing the 2003 Presidential re-election campaign train made the dour faced general so implacable in his subsequent onslaught against Atiku.
In any case, if Obasanjo had joined his ancestors before the 2003 election (God forbid), would anything or anyone have stopped VP Atiku from assuming office as President or from contesting and winning the 2003 presidential election? So much for Atiku’s specious rotation argument.
Polemics aside, arrangements put in place for purposes of political expediency are not unusual in a democracy particularly in a developing country like Nigeria. But they ought not to be held so fastidiously as to impede the growth of democratic practice. Even with the presidency “zoned” to the south or west in 1999 and 2003, no zone was excluded from putting forward candidates in the PDP Primaries. Chief Barnabas Gemade and late Alhaji Abubakar Rimi contested against Obasanjo in 2003.
For Nigeria’s democracy to thrive, it’s facets must be allowed to blossom. One feature of democratic practice that is evolving in the Nigerian polity today is the concept of a “running mate” or “joint ticket”. The relationship between substantive office holders and their deputies or “running mates” whether at the level of the presidency, the governorship or even the local government is often mired in distrust and suspicion. A joint ticket presupposes unity of purpose and unanimity of a shared vision. So a running mate is like an alter ego.
Recent experiences of vacated offices – Atiku’s governorship in Adamawa State, Alamieyeseigha in Bayelsa, Dariye in Plateau, Ladoja in Oyo, Sambo in Kaduna and even YarÁdua’s presidency – demonstrate clearly why a running mate should be chosen with circumspection: a joint ticket endures even if the principal, for whatever reason, vacates the office. Even in the United States after which our outrageously extravagant presidential system is modeled, vice presidents that have had the (mis) fortune of their principal abruptly vacating office have gone ahead not only to assume the office but to seek to renew their mandates. The YarÁdua/Jonathan regime (now Jonathan/Sambo regime) cannot possibly have a stronger defender, a better advocate or a more logical successor to see their shared vision through to it’s conclusion at the demise of the principal than the deputy chosen by him – his alter ego.
Jonathan may have no choice than to contest the 2011 election. What would be his explanation to the international community if he fails to run? Do we need a global advertisement of our federal character, zoning, rotation, quota, and all other undemocratic and inequitable principles that have combined to facilitate the elevation of mediocrity and sectionalism in our polity? Are these not the aberrations that have worsted Nigeria over the years and reduced the celebration of our 50th independence anniversary to a commemoration of 50 wasted years of profligacy?
All said, Jonathan’s eligibility for the 2011 Presidential Election should be hinged on his performance in the next few months not on any other fortuitous consideration. Enhanced power supply, a new Electoral Act and improved security for instance, are enough to sway the electorate.
If Jonathan runs and wins freely and fairly, to God be the glory. If on the other hand he runs and looses, he should be magnanimous enough to accept defeat and congratulate the winner. Then he would ascend to the vacant position of the everlasting Nigerian hero or what the late man of timber and caliber, Dr. K.O. Mbadiwe would call an “immortal” on the Nigerian firmament.
Should Jonathan contest in an election over which he would also superintend? By nominating a dye-in-the-wool radical like Prof. Attahiru Jega as INEC Chairman Jonathan is making good his vow to ensure that our votes count in 2011. Will Jega, a northerner, rig out a victorious northern candidate to favour Jonathan? Very unlikely. Nigerians have confidence in Jega’s integrity and in his ability to conduct free, fair and credible elections. The president cannot and should not be seen to ‘superintend’ over any election. That would amount to interference with the statutory duties of INEC.
For most Nigerians, zoning, rotation, candidates whose only qualification border on geographical or ethnic considerations are not the issues of the moment. Proper preparations, credibility, capacity, integrity, vision, inspiration and ensuring that votes count. These are of greater interest to Nigerians now than PDP’s convoluted rotation or whether Jonathan should or should not run in the 2011 general elections. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050

Parade of Culture: Memories Of Arondizuogu Day 2008
By Uche Ohia

Saturday, December 27, 2008, will go down in history as a remarkable day in the annals of Arondizuogu – a sprawling cluster of communities spread in three Local Government areas (Ideato North, Okigwe and Onuimo) in Imo State of Nigeria. It was a day indigenes of the community and their well-wishers turned out en-masse in resplendent attires to mark what is known as ‘Arondizuogu Day’.

Instituted in 1948, ‘Arondizuogu Day’ which is held every December 27 is an annual end-of year convention of people of Arondizuogu descent resident in Nigeria and the Diaspora. It is a day set aside to celebrate achievements, review challenges, and generally keep the flag of patriotism flying in the community. For the culture – loving people of Arondizuogu, the day is a special annual homecoming which they celebrate with much aplomb comparable only to their popular Ikeji Festival held annually in April which is touted to be “the greatest carnival of masks and masquerades in Africa”.

To mark the 60th anniversary of this historic event, Arondizuogu Patriotic Union, (APU), the umbrella organisation of the communities that make up Arondizuogu in Nigeria and the Diaspora, organised the ceremony as a special carnival with the theme: REKINDLE THE FIRE OF PATRIOTISM. Given the poor state of local, state and federal roads which has made Arondizuogu almost inaccessible, the moribund state of the economy which had made UBA PLC – the only bank in the community – to suspend it’s services, and the high level of general infrastructural decay affecting even the two educational institutions (National High School and Iheme Memorial Secondary School) constructed by the APU in it’s heydays, it was an apt theme for a community yearning for restoration of it’s waning glory.

Coming barely two months after the October 25, 2008 election of a new National Executive Committee of Arondizuogu Patriotic Union, the 2008 Arondizuogu Day was planned with dexterity and executed with precision. By the first week of December 2008, well-branded glossy invitation cards of the event had started making the rounds. Two weeks before Christmas, local radio stations began to air jingles promoting the event. A week before the Yuletide, big colourful posters bearing the legend ‘2008 ARONDIZUOGU DAY Celebration’ and containing the highlights of the event appeared in the streets of Owerri, Aba, Enugu, Abuja and Lagos complemented by thousands smaller flyers that were circulated more widely. By Christmas Eve, five giant banners heralding the event were hanging across the road at two points along the Okigwe – Arondizuogu – Uga – Nnewi Road, two points along Onuimo – Okigwe road, and at Amazu Ikpaocha on the road to Umunze in neighbouring Anambra State.

On the day of the event, banners of various types fluttered in the wind at the roadside entrance of Arondizuogu Civic Centre site venue of the event beside Ojike Memorial Medical complex. Gaily dressed men and women, boys and girls, students, youths, dance groups, masquerade groups, caterers and vehicles of various types began to pour into the venue before the scheduled time. The arena was elaborately decorated with colourful canopies, chairs and tables with drapery in gold, royal blue and white. Another big banner marked out the main entrance. All the canopies were clearly labeled with one canopy reserved for each of the twenty towns of the community. Canopies were also reserved for students, exhibitors, dance troupes, special guests, traditional rulers, VIPs and honorees. Exhibitions were mounted at the entrance to the arena by some publishers, the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria, First Bank PLC and motley of traditional musicians whose audio cassettes, CDs, and DVDs were displayed for sale. There were also water and food vendors with Aba based ‘Sweet Fast-Foods’ occupying a prime location. Souvenirs including mugs, golf shirts, T-shirts, caps, pins, stickers and so on were on sale. Also on display for sale were copies of the glossy 90-page colour programme/ brochure of the event as well as the book, ‘A History of Arondizuogu Patriotic Union’ by yours truly.

The outfits worn by many in the crowded arena showed a people in love with their culture: most people were dressed in the traditional costume of the community. While the men were clad in various colours of George wrapper on top of which they wore loose flannel shirts, the women wore George wrappers beneath white blouses of various fabrics. The most common of the George wrappers worn by both men and women was a brown and gold colour with a logo bearing the inscription “Omu Aro”. The Omu Aro cloth was also used to adorn some of the canopies and to drape round the beautiful rostrum at one end of the arena. Some people wore “ukara” cloth – a blue and white tie and dye coarse cotton fabric with traditional symbols designed on it. There were many dance groups including the popular Ikeji Festival music idol, Pericomo, and his group. Upcoming artists like Edingene were also on ground with pulsating rhythms which added variety to the gospel music group in the band stand and various Igba and masquerade groups that kept the arena lively throughout the day.

The occasion was preceded by the hoisting of the twenty flags of the twenty towns of Arondizuogu by the APU President – General, Hon. Barr. Uche Ohia. The event was witnessed by five representatives from each town and many more enthusiastic spectators. One by one, the flags rose: Ndiawa, Ndiuche, Ndimoko, Ndinjoku, Ndiamazu, Ndiejezie, Ndiucheagwu, Ndindubuisi, Ndiawauwaonu, Ndianyakei, Ndiadimoha, Ndianiche, Ndionuoha, Ikpeze, Ndiokonkwo, Ndiogbuonyeoma, Ndiakeme, Ndiukwu, Ndiakunwanta and Ndiekwuru Imenze. As each flag rose fluttering gloriously in the harmattan wind, it was heralded with blasts from a trumpet, loud cannon shots and jubilant shouts. Soon, the flag of each town in Arondizuogu was waving furiously in the wind symbolizing the reawakening of the spirit of patriotism and progress in each community. It was a joyous event that brought tears to the eyes of many. Even as he held back tears of joy himself, the APU President-General was ushered into the expansive arena by a jubilant crowd singing triumphant songs.

Soon after, the Chairman of the occasion, Chief Victor Ngozi Green-Mbadiwe (Osuohia), son of the late gold magnate and West Africa’s first acclaimed millionaire, Chief J. Green–Mbadiwe, arrived with his entourage. With sirens blaring intermittently, prominent guests continued to pour in throughout the event. These included the Guest-of-Honour, Chief Dr. Ikedi Ohakim, Governor of Imo State (who was represented by the Hon. Commissioner for Youth and Sports, Prof. Nnamdi Obiareri); the Special Guest, Prof. Maurice Iwu, Chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), university dons, senior police officers, well known clergymen, prominent politicians, traditional rulers and corporate moguls. Among those in the crowd were the Chairman of APU National Congress of North America, Mazi Emma Kanu, Chairman of the Board of Chief OGB Uche Memorial Health Centre, Dr. Inno Chima, foremost estate valuer, Chief M.I. Okoro, former Imo State Commissioner for Works, Engr. Donatus Muotoh, former Commissioner for Environment, Chief Nnachebe Ojike, Senator Tony Anyanwu, Rev.Fr. Dr. Josephat Nwankwo, Chief John Okoroafor, Chief H.N. Ohia, Chief Oliver Ogbonna, Chief Peter Obiagwu, Barr. Vin Okpareke, Grp. Capt. (Rtd) Charles Orizu, Col. Marshall, Chief Paul Mbadiwe, presidents – generals of various autonomous communities in Arondizuogu, presidents of town unions and chairmen/presidents of various APU branches in Nigeria and the Diaspora, etc. The attendance list could be compared to a “Who is Who in Arondizuogu”.

Even as more guests from far and near continued to arrive in clouds of dust and blaring sirens, opening formalities for the occasion proper commenced with opening prayers which was said by the Bishop of Okigwe Anglican Communion, Rt. Rev. Dr. AIS Nwaizuzu. After prayers, all the towns in Arondizuogu, major branches of the APU, students, clubs, associations and groups took turns to march round the arena and past the podium in a colourful parade to the accompaniment of Igba music. The President – General, Uche Ohia, the traditional rulers present, HRH Eze Dr. M.O. Kanu (Ochiriozuo Ejezie Izuogu), HRH Eze Prof Green O. Nwankwo (Eze Ohazurume Aro Amuro), HRH Eze Dr. Mike Nwosu (Ugocha Ndiakeme), HRH Eze Ezeana Enekwa (Ezennia Aro Ofe Imo) and Chief Victor Ngozi Green-Mbadiwe, the chairman of the occasion, took the salute atop the richly decorated podium. It was a picturesquely captivating parade. The masters-of-ceremony, Prince Charles Okoli, Hon. Chukwunononye Irouno and Dr. Cy Maduabuchi Nwankwo (Konkiri) took turns to capture the unfolding scenes in lavish imagery as the LOC Chairman, Mazi Okey Kanu held forte as Chief Usher.

Some towns came with large numbers of their members; others came with lesser numbers. Some towns came prepared with dance groups and banners; others seemed taken by surprise. Among the branches of the union that turned up for the parade, Aba branch led by Comrade Uche Ugbaja stood out: it’s massive green banner held aloft and it’s members spilling over in all directions. Among the organizations in the community that participated, Lagos based Movement for Arondizuogu Progress (MAP) led by Eric Ikoro (Atiku) gave a good account of itself with a large contingent. One of it’s members was decked out handsomely in the regalia of an Arabian Sheik to the delight of the crowd. So exciting were the processions that some eminent persons already seated in the VIP canopies even rushed out to join their towns in parade. It was a very touching scene that reminded many of their great historical heritages.

After the parade, the presentation of kolanuts followed. Opening remarks were made by the Chairman of the occasion and a welcome address was presented by the chairman of the Local Organizing Committee (LOC). The President-General of APU, Uche Ohia, then presented a thought-provoking ‘state of the union’ address titled “Rekindling the Fire of Patriotism” in which he decried the state of neglect and infrastructural decay in the community. He called upon indigenes who loved the community not to sit on the fence but to stand up and be counted.

The Arondizuogu Day 2008 was used to accord a Grand Civic Reception to some eminent members of the community vested with public office. Among these were Clement Owunna (MFR), member of the board of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC), Chief Benbella Anachebe (SAN), Chief Leo Okereke, National President of the National Association of Technologists in Engineering (NATE), Prof. Anezi Okoro, a popular novelist and former chairman of Universal Primary Education Commission (UPEC), Right Rev. AIS Nwaizuzu, Bishop of Okigwe North Anglican Communion and Amb. Greg Mbadiwe (MFR), former Chairman of Federal Road safety Commission (FRSC). Others were Dr. Catherine Okpareke, Group Managing Director of NICON, Chief Okey Ikoro, Chairman of Owerri Chamber of Commerce, Industries, Mines and Agriculture (OCCIMA), Onyeka Onwenu, Chairman of the Imo State Council for Arts and Culture (ISCAC) and Chief Barr. Julian Okpareke Commissioner of Police of Bayelsa State.

The occasion was also used to bestow honours on some ‘Icons of Excellence’. These included Prof. Anezi Okoro, (a popular novelist, professor of medicine, consultant dermatologist and respected authority on tropical skin diseases), Prof. O. C. Nwana (an accomplished educationist, teacher of teachers, author of many books and tireless contributor to educational policy formulation in Nigeria), Chukwuemeka Oforeh (a respected scholar and author of several volumes on quantity surveying), Dr. Mrs. Catherine Okpareke (a seasoned technocrat, a former President of ICAN, a former Commissioner of Finance in Imo State and a distinguished lady with an unwavering commitment to fiscal responsibility), Jullian Okpareke (a respected lawyer, career police officer and acting A.I.G), Clement Owunna (a renowned pharmacist, corporate mogul, philanthropist and industrialist), Ben Anachebe, SAN (a distinguished legal luminary with an exemplary commitment to advocacy and a reputation for successful case management), HRH Eze Prof. Green O. Nwankwo, OON, (doyen of finance and banking education and renowned authority on fiscal and monetary policy), Mazi Sam Ohuabunwa, MON, (an accomplished pharmacist, esteemed leader of the organized private sector, role model and mentor) and Mr. Alex Otti (first class banker and Executive Director, South, of First Bank Plc).

Prominent Indigenes of Arondizuogu decorated with awards for Outstanding Patriotism included Chief H.A.P. Nwana, a pioneer activist, trade unionist and writer whose father Pita Nwana wrote Omenuko, the famous first Igbo novel, O.C. Nwana, professor emeritus of Imo State University, Dr. Emmanuel Udogu, former Minister of Culture and Tourism, Chidi Marume, a former Commissioner for Health in Imo State, HRH Eze Dr. M.O. Kanu, Chairman of Agura Hotel, Abuja, Onyeka Onwenu, a multi-talented artiste, Dr. Marcellina Okereke, a rural development catalyst, Chief Mike Obioha, an industrialist, Hon. Chief Ralph Obioha, a politician, Rev. Fr. Prof. Jerome Udoji, a university don, Mrs. Nwaka Laeticia Akinlami, Director General of the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria, Engr. Ndubueze Enekwa, Dr. E.E.J. Okereke, Chief L.I. Okoro, Dr. C.C. Modu, Chief E. Chux Okoro, Chief Osita Oruche, Chief V.N. Green-Mbadiwe, Amb. Greg Mbadiwe (MFR), Chief Barr. Mrs. Ijeoma Uche-Okoro, and the famous traditional music exponent, Pericomo.

The awards were presented by Prof Nnamdi Obiareri (representing the Imo State Governor), the INEC Chairman, Prof. Maurice Iwu, a well-known daughter of the community, Barr. Mrs. Udeaku Shaldas Obioha and by HRH Eze Ezeana Enekwa. Many of the awards were carry-overs from the last three years when the annual event could not be held on account of the indisposition of the former President-General, Chief Oguguo Okereke.

The climax of the Arondizuogu Day 2008 Celebration was the lighting of the patriotism torch. At the end of the presentation of awards, the awardees and honorees lined up behind Prof. O. C. Nwana (whose late father, Rev. Chima Nwana was the first President of Arondizuogu Patriotic Union) to symbolically rekindle the fire of patriotism. It was a dramatic moment. As all the eminent men and women stood in a single file behind Prof. Nwana, each placing a hand on the shoulder of the person in front of him/her, there was pin-drop silence. With the aid of a wooden pole held by Nwana at whose tip a wick had been attached, the patriotism torch mounted beside the podium was set alight. As the flame burned like a gas flaring pipe, fireworks positioned in the centre of the arena went off to the delight and applause of the fascinated crowd. It was a magical moment that left no one in doubt about the determination of the new APU National EXCO to rekindle the fire of patriotism in the community. It also served as an eloquent testimony of meticulous organisation. The crowd rose in a standing ovation.

Then, it was time for the guests and honorees to respond. Speaker after speaker poured encomiums and expressed confidence in the new APU President General, the new national executive officers and the LOC of the 2008 Arondizuogu Day. At the end, almost fifteen million naira (N15m) was raised in support of the new APU administration and, in particular, in support of the APU National Headquarters Building Project Fund which was flagged off at the occasion.

It was a very memorable occasion. As HRH Eze Dr. M. O. Kanu made the closing remarks, it was obvious from the rueful smiles on the faces of the people in the teeming crowd that surrounded the podium that memories of the Arondizuogu Day 2008 Celebration would linger for a long time to come.

The topical issues about which the most strindent and repeated calls were made by state governments, political parties, professional bodies, traditional institutions, religious groups, trade unions, security agencies, NGOs, and individuals that appeared at the various venues of the ERC sittings included the issue of the autonomy of the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) and the appointment of it’s helmsman. Many presenters harped, quite rightly, on the need to take the institution saddled with the responsibility for the conduct of the election away from the influence of the executive arm of government. To do this, the general opinion was that the funding of INEC should be charged direct to the consolidated revenue fund. This would release the commission from the whims and caprices of an executive arm of government that is at all material times an interested party in electoral combats.

An amendment of the laws with provisions for INEC to be headed by a retired justice of the Supreme Court, for membership of the commission to be reserved for non-partisan persons of impeccable integrity, for independent candidates to be recognized, to peg political parties to a minimum of two or a maximum of five and for the adoption of “Option A4” (modified open/secret ballot system) were also widely canvassed. While, some argued that delimiting the number of political parties would constitute an infringement of constitutional rights of citizens, many averred that a great percentage of the political parties in Nigeria exist in name only – and are virtually kept alive not by any membership commitments but by the largess which the unnecessary fiscal grant by the federal and state governments to political parties constitutes.

Another issue of widespread concern was the interminable duration of election petitions. While petitions linger, impostors occupy public offices – and eventually use it to legitimize their position. Worse still, the statutory provisions for uniform conduct of particular elections contained in S. 48 of the Electoral Act 2006 and S. 180(2) (b) of the 1999 CFRN have been blasted because by virtue of the landmark decision of the Supreme Court in Peter Obi v INEC, the tenure of Governors who were sworn in the aftermath of elections nullified or ordered by the Court of Appeal will now end at varying times. Elections thereto cannot, therefore, be held “at the same time and place in the federation”. The way out, for many, is to ensure that general elections are conducted three to six months before the prescribed date of swearing in so that all election petitions and appeals can be disposed of before the swearing in of elected persons. And any person howsoever elected after the swearing in date should be considered to be serving out the term as if they were sworn in on the prescribed swearing in date.

Concerning the so-called State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIECs), the general opinion was that these contraptions be scrapped and legislated out of existence having failed to meet the vision behind their establishment. The SIECs were found to be vulnerable to manipulation by the appointing authority – the Governor and the ruling party in their various states. To restore the integrity of the electoral process at the grassroots levels, the consensus was that the duties of SIECs be reverted to INEC which, not being under the apron strings of state authorities, is better placed to provide a level playing field for all candidates.

The absence of internal democracy in the political parties was also placed on the chopping block. In particular, the predilection to “consensus candidates” was seen as an abbreviation the democratic process which facilitated the imposition of candidates and the subordination of the will of the people to the wishes of those who control the party. Given the provisions of S. 133(a) and 179(a) of the 1999 CFRN, which stipulate that even when one candidate emerges for the office of President or Governor prior to an election, the popularity of such candidate must be determined through the ballot box, the general view was that the only acceptable “consensus” should be the consensus of the ballot box.

Of course, some of the problems identified as hamstringing the electoral process and some of the recommendations made at the ERC sittings will require constitutional amendments to implement. But it must be clear that in matters of elections, the process is as important – if not more important – than the outcome. If, therefore, it becomes necessary to amend the constitution in order to ensure that the desire of the people to have sustenable democracy is realized, public expectation will be that the members of the National Assembly see that the requisite amendments are made expeditiously. Afterall, the reason why they are in congress in the first place is to effectuate the wishes of the people.

As the ERC begins to sieve the grains from the inevitable chaff in the myriad presentations which it has received, there is reasonable apprehension in the polity: Nigeria has a poor record of utilizing the recommendations of panels or committees which are set up to investigate one national malady or the other. The presidency is generally regarded as a burial ground where painstakingly written reports the pages of which hold the proactive solutions to national challenges are allowed to gather dust. This fate must not befall the report of the ERC. The countdown to the 2011 election has already begun. If there is any legacy that the Yar’Adua administration can leave for the nation, it is to adopt whatever measures and institute whatever framework that is necessary to ensure that in 2011 and all subsequent elections, the wishes of the people prevail.

All said, how much any electoral reform in Nigeria will succeed will depend on how far the attitude of the people can also be reformed to see the ballot box as the ultimate arbiter in electoral matters. It will also, to a great extent, depend on how far the members of the national assembly will be prepared to go in order to put a statutory restraint on the illogical activities of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission which has transformed public office in Nigeria into a lotto that guarantees instant wealth. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050

Through it’s public sittings, the ERC seeks to pool ideas and strategies aimed at breaking the vicious cycle of electoral disorder, to produce an electoral framework that will result in elections that are free of violence, bigotry, rigging, corruption and all other vices that are stultifying the growth of our nascent democracy, and possibly, to initiate a better and more profound legislation that will fast-track electoral best practices in our country. The envisioned reforms are targeted at strengthening our institutional capacity for conducting transparent elections inorder to restore intergrity to the process.

In this onerous duty, the Committee will need to identify the fundamental defects in the existing electoral legislations which provide the axis on which the vicious cycle of electoral delinquency revolves. The first, for me, is that electoral offenders are not punished in this country. Although the Electoral Act 2006 makes ample provisions for punishment of electoral offenders in its various parts and particularly in Part VIII Section 124-138, our experience in practice is that the civil dimension of electoral petitions are emphasized to the diminution of the criminal aspects. Incidentally, the root of this problem is embedded in the Act. Whereas the Electoral Act 2006 in its First Schedule provides rules of procedure for election petitions in their civil nature, the criminal aspect without which the civil may not have arisen in the first place is left open ended. For one, the Act vests all prosecutorial powers under the Act on INEC by specifying in S.158 (2) that “prosecution under this Act shall be undertaken by legal officers of the Commission or any legal practitioner appointed by it”. For another, the Act vests the critical duty of determining whether to and who should be arraigned for electoral offences on INEC and the Tribunals and makes prosecution of electoral offenders mandatory by providing in Part X, S.157 that INEC “shall consider any recommendation made to it by a tribunal with respect to the prosecution by it of any person for an offense disclosed in an election petition.” But INEC carries on as if the prosecution of electoral offenders is a discretion which the Commission is at liberty to choose whether to exercise or not. And, who makes this recommendation? By virtue of the 6^th schedule of the 1999 Constitution which expressly provides that the chairman and members of Election Tribunals shall be serving judges, it is their lordships that will recommend to INEC! Does INEC act on the recommendation? It does not! And the reason is obvious.

By it’s impractical provisions, the Electoral Act 2006 creates a lacuna, a window for electoral offenders to evade justice. As if to provide more cover for perpetrators of electoral infractions, the Act goes further in S.41(1) (2) (3) and (4) to stipulate that a certificate of indemnity be provided to any witness at an Election Petition Tribunal seen to have exhibited a level of honesty. The purpose of this immunity is to prevent the testimony of such witness from being used in evidence against him or her in all criminal prosecutions for electoral offences except perjury in respect of the testimony. Such a certificate acts as ground for the court to stay proceeding against such a person or even to award costs to him!

But there is an even more curious twist to the hypothetical provisions in the Act: many of the technical offences listed as electoral offences under the Act can only be committed by staff of INEC or persons engaged as officials by the commission for the purpose of elections. S.130 (1) – (6) contain offences in this category: breach of official duty, failure to report promptly at polling stations on election day without lawful excuse, failure to discharge his lawful duties at his polling station, announcement and publication of election result knowing same to be false or at variance with the signed certificate of return, delivery of false certificate of return, and release of false results to the news media. Thus, although S. 144(2) of the Act allows a petitioner to complain about the conduct of an Electoral Officer, a Presiding Officer, a Returning Officer or any other person who took part in the conduct of an election in his official capacity as an agent of the commission and provides that such a person may be joined in the election petition in his or her official capacity as a necessary party, what happens where the petition succeeds and the conduct of the officer or agent provides sufficient grounds for his or her prosecution for electoral offences?

In such a case, what we have under the Electoral Act 2006 given it’s provision in S.158 (2) earlier cited is a situation where the indictor and the indictee are one and the same person: INEC! Can INEC honestly prosecute INEC? That is unlikely to happen; more so, because the capacity of the legal officer of INEC to prosecute electoral offenders is limited in practice. Generally, where a statute specifies a special prosecutor as the Electoral Act 2006 has done, it is only the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) that can validly institute criminal proceeding in respect of a violation of the provisions of such statute because the authority of the AGF “to institute, take over and continue, or discontinue criminal proceedings” derives from the constitution. A legal officer in INEC, therefore, cannot institute criminal proceedings without the express authority of the AGF. And the AGF is too busy trying to take over EFCC cases to bother about electoral offences. Do you still wonder why electoral offenders are never prosecuted?

By making provisions that make it hard to bring electoral offenders to book, the Act perpetuates electoral misconduct because transgressions thrive whenever or wherever offenders are allowed to go unpunished. Any meaningful electoral reform, therefore, should accommodate the establishment of an Electoral Offences Tribunal and, if necessary, the establishment of an Electoral Offences Commission independent of INEC with powers to monitor, investigate and to prosecute electoral offenders. In any case, critical review of the Electoral Act is required to expunge the sections that hamstring the procedure for prosecuting offenders as well as those sections that reward offenders with statutory protection and unearned immunity. Unless the Electoral Act enables us to go beyond the essential but purely civil matter of restitution of stolen mandates to sanction monitoring and punishment of offenders, the cycle of electoral disorder and impunity may never be broken. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050

 Who is Mike Duncan? If you do not know, you are not alone. Even in his own country, the United States of America, Mike Duncan’s name does not ring a bell. But Mike Duncan is the national chairman of the Republican Party or, by American parlance, chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC). And the fact that US President George W. Bush is a Republican makes Duncan chairman of the ruling party. In Nigeria, the name of the ex-national chairman of the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Ahmadu Ali, rings a giant sized bell and he moved about with equal aplomb. But all that has ended: the purpose of the 2008 special national convention of the PDP that took place in Abuja on March 8 was to replace Ali and other fat cats in the party’s national executive committe.

The (s)election of the national chairman of the PDP has never been a tidy affair since the ouster of the pioneer chairman, Chief Solomon Lar. From Chief Barnabas Gemade to Chief Audu Ogbe to Ahmadu Ali, former president Olusegun Obasanjo spared no effort to subdue the party and to place it under the temperamental apron strings of his presidency. Under Ahmadu Ali, PDP lost all vestiges of a democratic organization. Loyalty to the party became supplanted with loyalty to Obasanjo. Internal democracy within the party was stifled and a military type garrison command structure established. Consequently, PDP rests – not on the state branches but – on handpicked men of brawn across the federation such that the party can best be described as a confederation of powerful warlords.

There are many reasons why the PDP convention attracted so much attention. This was the first time since the party was formed in 1998 that national offices were swapped by the geopolitical zones in accordance with the party’s zoning formula. For President Yar’Adua, the convention was a litmus test for the commitment of his administration to electoral reforms, the rule of law and the sanctity of the ballot. By implication, the party officers elected at the convention would be the ones to organise the general elections in 2011. For this reason, the party was expected to ensure the emergence of credible and capable persons through a transparent process. As the leading party, PDP ought to set a good example in democratic practice for other political parties and for the electorate who accuse the party of evasion of the ballot box even in intra party affairs.

The PDP congresses gave no cause for cheer: they were characterized by bickering, boycotts, parallel congresses, violence, impositions, and litigations. The frequency with which members took the party to court suggests a breakdown of party discipline, and places a question mark on the internal mechanism of the party for conflict resolution.  In Abuja, three members (?) of the party even took out an action at the Federal High Court seeking a court order to stop the March 8 convention from holding! From whichever angle one looks at it, PDP comes across as a party that is perpetually at war with itself or, worse still, a party that has lost it’s soul! This has made many people to ask whether this PDP is the same party that was midwifed by G-34, the great patriots that confronted the despotic Abacha regime at the risk of their own lives. In the political history of Nigeria, no political formation has begun with so much promise or enjoyed so much support and goodwill but lost it all to a progressively undemocratic modus operandi.

Despite the cocktail of reforms initiated by his administration some of which have contributed substantially in restoring Nigeria to the path of economic progress, Obasanjo is rightly seen as the single most destabilising factor in PDP. Much of the intrigues surrounding the 2008 convention bordered on how to curtail his influence which, to consolidate his position as chairman of the BOT, he strove eagerly to maintain. Today, the commonest feature of PDP in most states of the federation is the existence of factions. The undemocratic devises known as “ratification” and “consensus” have become the rule rather than the exception. In most states, PDP operates without standing committees; meetings at all levels are rare and membership drives are out of the question. Because the ward membership registers of the party often serve the purpose of exclusion rather than inclusion, names appear or diappear as occasion demands. The will of party members no longer counts: party ‘leaders’ or ‘elders’ (a synonym for influential members of the party with little grassroot following) take all the decisions including those which, under the party’s constitution, ought to be taken by the party in congress.

Nigerians are watching out for even the faintest sign that PDP is still driven by democratic principles. The rumour in town is that most of the delegates went to Abuja to see who would offer the highest consideration in exchange for their votes. Many were also curious to see the chairmanship candidate that will receive Yar’Adua’s nod. Of course, it is not unusual for a president in office especially in his first term to nominate the chairman of the party. By convention, the chairman of the RNC is nominated by the President when the Republicans are in occupation of the White House. Otherwise, he is elected by the delegates from the states. But such nominees are always die in the wool party men and not hatchetmen chosen simply to execute the president’s agenda. For instance, before his election, Duncan had served the Republican Party at every level from precinct captain, county chairman, state chairman, national treasurer and General Counsel (the equivalent of National Legal Adviser). He had also been a delegate to the 1972, 1976, 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004 Republican National Conventions and had worked in various campaign positions for Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

Regardless, if there is anything that should be crystal clear to PDP and other political parties it is the fact that Nigerians are tired of political parties violating the rules of electoral conduct. Whether it is at the level of party congress, convention or general elections, Nigerians are tired of any manipulation that results in the violation of the right of the people to choose those that they want to serve them. It should be embarrassing to PDP that most of the elections that have been nullified by various tribunals and even by the Court of Appeal are those purportedly won by the party’s flagbearers. The 2008 convention provided the right opportunity for the party to show remorse by ensuring transparency.

Without that, the seething frustration in the polity cannot be assuaged. If the prevalent voter apathy – and disdain for politicians and the political process –becomes higher or voter turn out becomes lower, this democratic dispensation may be stretched to a dangerous limit. As the leading political party, it is incumbent on the team elected by PDP at the convention to do whatever is necessary to remove the name of the party from the register of political infamy. Public expectation is that this team must be capable of reviving the moribund democratic ethos in the party and in the country. All eyes are on PDP – and will remain there in the days ahead. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 109 0050

March is a special month to me. The reason is because my birthday comes up on March 5. But my photograph is unlikely to be emblazoned or eulogies about me published in newspapers. That is the preserve of men in power. I loose no sleep over that because the hoopla peters out when the men leave power or power leaves the men – whichever comes first. Years ago, March 5 was drowned by media publications extolling Pa Awo leader of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) who was born on March 4 or 6. Reading them year after year was fun until they shrunk to the occasional slot in the Tribune. This year, like the past eight years, praise singers will swarm on someone who shares my birthday or, to put it better, someone who has hijacked my birthday: Chief Olusegun Obasanjo.

Ordinarily, I should be happy to share the same birthday with a statesman, retired general, former military head of state, former civilian president and now chairman of the board of trustees of the ruling party. But who can endure this usurpation? A colossal budgetary provision is made annually for entertainment in Aso Rock and for eight years that he lived there he never invited those of us actually born on March 5 to join him in cutting the cake! Or does birthday cake sound like national cake? If he superintended the take over and transformation of democracy to “government of the people, by some people, without the people” must he also exclude us from our birthday? He could make it up to me, of course: not by inviting me to the PDP national secretariat where, I am informed, different lists of delegates from every ward in each of the 774 LG chapters of the party are flying around like unguided missiles; and not by inviting me to his farm in Otta where all the chickens and eggs are probably booked till 2011 but by letting my day be.

Anyway, I have made my plans. Who says Obasanjo was born on March 5? Even his children have expressed doubts about his actual birth date! I will petition President Yar’Adua to reverse the purported birthday or to set up a panel to investigate March 5 and make recommendations. I will invite all Nigerians who have March 5 on their original birth certificate (not photocopy) to a meeting – with me as chairman of the board of trustees! The judiciary is bent on redeeming the country from impunity. We will go to court to seek an injunction restraining Obasanjo from appropriating (or misappropriating) March 5. I will depose to an affidavit (yes!). I am even ready to engage militants to kidnap any cows being ferried to Otta this week. This may sound like a case of sour grapes or bad belle but who cares? I want my birthday to be used for sober reflections not for oriki and Owambe. Be my guest. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050

As a young boy, I was fascinated by an outfit in my father’s wardrobe which he never wore in my presence but which I had seen him wearing in one or two photographs taken before I was born. “That’s TOS Benson” he said when I ventured to enquire about the outfit. I was quite perplexed. TOS Benson? With relish, he brought it out, dusted and put it on complete with the matching cap. It was a three piece jumper and agbada. That day, my father told me the story behind the outfit and the name of the legendary fashion pacesetter ‘TOS Benson’ got stuck in my memory. As I grew up, I began to pick up snippets about the man and about his Liberian wife, Opral – the Iya Oge of Lagos. ‘Iya Oge’, I learnt, meant queen of fashion. Like a giant puzzle, I started putting the pieces together.

Born in Ikorodu on July 23, 1917 TOS Benson went to school in Lagos, worked briefly in the civil service, and proceeded to the United Kingdom where he took a degree in law and was called to the English Bar. He returned to Nigeria in 1947 and set up a law office in Lagos. Although he had fraternized with the pan Yoruba organization Egbe Omo Oduduwa as a student in London, TOS was a completely detribalized Nigerian who had great admiration for Nnamdi Azikiwe (Zik). He defended members of the radical Zikist Movement and joined Zik’s party, the National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC). In 1950, he was elected into the Lagos Town Council from where he was elected to represent Lagos in the Western House of Assembly (WHA) in 1951. He emerged Chairman of the Western Working Committee of the NCNC and became Leader of Opposition in the WHA, home ground of the Action Group (AG) led by Chief Obafemi Awolowo.

In 1954, TOS contested election to the House of Representatives in Lagos and won. He was appointed the federal minister for information. His AG opponent in the election, S.O.Onitri, filed a petition and TOS Benson’s election was nullified. It was a trying period. TOS appealed the decision and won. He was lifted shoulder high by admirers and hundreds of NCNC members in the court premises. The drama did not end there: with TOS in the lead, the gay crowd marched straight into a session of the House of Representatives where TOS was received back to his ministerial seat with a thunderous ovation. Those were heady days! The opposition members were stunned at the sheer audacity of it all. But that was TOS – a sensational showman who knew how to seize an occasion.

TOS Benson had a kindred spirit in Alhaji Adegoke Adelabu, the strongman who held forte for NCNC in Ibadan. Who can forget Adelabu – the strategist that rose from relative obscurity to become Minister of Natural Resources and Social Services? Like TOS, Adelabu was an incurable nationalist who refused to cross the carpet from NCNC to Action Group even when most Yoruba political activists were doing so in that infamous era. A self-confessed egotist, Adelabu dazzled both his rivals and admirers. The only thing modest about him was his physical size. But even that provided a good reason to display his sense of humour and penchant for bombast by likening himself to “a small keg of explosives”. His mostly non-literate audience nicknamed him “Penkelemesi”, a Yorubanization of “peculiar mess”, a term he often used. No one can forget Adelabu, the one-man political armada that walloped the AG to emerge as chairman of Ibadan District Council!

 Or can anyone forget Chief Festus Okotie Eboh, an Itsekiri prince and scion of the Warri royal house who was a quintessential show stopper? His trail-blazing attires are still remembered with glee. Or Dr. K.O Mbadiwe, the Agadagbachiriuzo of Arondizuogu? To KO belongs the copyright for such expressions as ‘timber and calibre’, ‘zoning to unzone’, ‘rebirth of the nation’, ‘when the come comes to become’ and other inventive malapropisms that have become part of our political lingo. Ojukwu’s tribute at KO’s funeral said it all: “KO was grand, his actions grandiose, his speeches grandiloquent”. KO’s kinsman, Mazi Mbonu Ojike, was another politician who could never pass unnoticed: a passionate advocate of mental decolonization and rejection of foreign foods and fads which earned him the title the ‘Boycott King’. Since his exit in 1956, Ojike’s name still reverberates.

But TOS Benson was a showman’s showman whose exotic and quixotic style stood him out. Nothing was spared to embellish the act: striking headgear, dapper dresses, flashy automobiles, sensational cases, majestic speeches, horses – the whole works. His office then at Custom Street and his home at Thorburn Avenue in Yaba were said to resemble beehives with admirers always milling around to enjoy his bonhomie and generosity. And he was not averse to offering pro bono legal services. During the 1958 ‘Zik Must Go’ NCNC crisis when Nando born Prince Mofunanya Ifemenam came up with an allegation linking K.O Mbadiwe to a plot to assassinate Zik, TOS offered to defend the prince for free. Although the ignoble prince was eventually convicted for giving false information to the police, it did not stop NCNC members from lifting him shoulder high to spite the opposition. In an era when real men stood up for what they believed in and left no one in doubt about where they stood, TOS kept the faith. He stood by Zik and the nation. And he was a delegate to the Constitutional Conferences in London.

The story of TOS Benson reads like the storyline of a great movie: a man that set the pace in glitz and razzmatazz but remained an unwavering democrat and a committed nationalist. Can such a man ever die? No. Showmen never die! uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050

Since Yar’Adua’s declaration, the debate has assumed a new cadence. Cheer leaders have been enlisting in droves. In supporting the president, the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) averred that he “spoke the minds of Nigerians”. Indeed, the president may have spoken the minds of some Nigerians but he did not speak the mind of all Nigerians: he certainly did not speak my mind. In this country, every arm of government is granted some privileges or immunity by the constitution: judicial officers have immunity over what they say while sitting in their capacity as judicial officers; legislators not only have immunity over what the say in the chambers of the house but are immune from arrest within the complex; in the case of the executive, only a select few (the president and the governors) enjoy any immunity while in office!  The immunity clause is a temporary privilege which ensures that no one is allowed to stop the wheel of governance by holding the president or governor to ransom under any guise.  It is a temporary protection intended to shield the occupant of the office from distractions while executing the duties inherent in that office. And like any privilege, it is subject to abuse. For those clamouring for the removal of the immunity clause, the plank on which their argument rests is that it provides a cover to perpetrate fraudulent acts and to commit atrocities.

One of the problems of Nigerian politics is the supposition that we can short-circuit the process of historical development. For how long has the immunity clause been in our constitution? Given the ominous implications of it’s removal for governance in a volatile polity such as we have, the immunity clause should be seen as a necessary evil. When the term of the officers that enjoy it expires, they become like sitting ducks. Under Nigerian law, there is no time limit for the institution of criminal proceedings. There are only three statutory exceptions to this rule: sedition which has six months time limit, treason which has two years time limit and custom offences which have a seven year time limit. To that extent, the logic on which the clamour for removal of the immunity clause rests simply begs the question. We seem to forget that only 74 public officials at the federal and state levels are covered by immunity during any four-year term. That still leaves 774 executive chairmen at the local government level who are not covered by immunity and thousands of commissioners, ministers, heads of parastatals and other tin gods who also wield executive powers and disburse fat budgets.

The voices of those opposed to the removal of immunity clause may be drowned in the cacophony that has attended this debate but their argument that such an ill-advised move would expose the offices of president and governor to an avalanche of law suits that could distract them from the business of governance cannot be discountenanced. With the way courts in Nigeria grant ex parte motions and injunctions, the danger that the business of government in Nigeria may be grounded in the absence of an immunity clause is real.

If the war against corruption is to be won, it should start with sending corrupt officials to jail and returning looted property to the public till. This can be achieved not by bickering over the immunity clause but by showing demonstrable political will to punish corruption. What stops us from setting up special courts to give expedited trial to public officers accused of abuse of office. Crime thrives when offenders are allowed to evade justice. So long as one public officer is seen to escape with his loot, so long will others be encouraged to abuse their office. We need to publicize the asset declaration forms of public officers. The audit mechanism needs to be strengthened by ensuring that the appointment and removal of judicial officers, the Auditor General of the Federation, State Auditors General, and the Auditors General for Local Governments of the various states are not left to the whims and caprices of the executive.

Since President Yar’Adua reported to the nation that over $10bn was wasted on the power sector by the past administration public expectation has been that some people will be questioned over such a gargantuan squandering of public revenue. But the matter has been left in limbo like all others before it!  What about all the high profile fraud cases involving public officers that have left the nation in shock over the last few years? Or even the cases of some of the 774 LG council chairmen who between 1999 and 2007 received over three trillion naira in allocations from the federation account with little to show for it! The cases of some ex–governors who enjoyed the much talked about immunity are progressing at snail speed in various courts. Is it immunity that has delayed action on these cases? In any case, will an accused person whose guilt is eventually established beyond reasonable doubt be convicted or will he be surreptitiously allowed to escape justice? Will the public suffer the double jeopardy of loosing the public till to an individual and seeing that individual wallowing in the luxury of his criminal acquisitions? These are the questions that are giving the silent majority sleepless nights and not this palaver about what to do with the immunity clause. <!– if (!document.phpAds_used) document.phpAds_used = ‘,’; phpAds_random = new String (Math.random()); phpAds_random = phpAds_random.substring(2,11); document.write (“”); //–> uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050