Welcome to Ope Onayemi's Blog

Wednesday, 2 July 2014

France's ex-President Sarkozy put under investigation

Ex-French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been placed under formal investigation over alleged influence peddling. He appeared before a judge in Paris late on Tuesday after 15 hours of questioning by anti-corruption police.

This is thought to be the first time a former French head of state has been held in police custody.Mr Sarkozy's lawyer, Thierry Herzog, and a magistrate, Gilbert Azibert, were also placed under formal investigation over the same allegations.

A second magistrate called in for questioning, Patrick Sassoust, had not appeared before a judge as of Tuesday night. When a suspect is placed under formal investigation, he or she is then examined by a judge, who determines whether there is sufficient evidence for the suspect to be charged.

The step often, but not always, leads to trial. Influence-peddling can be punished by up to five years in prison and a fine of 500,000 euros (£400,000; $684,000).

'Not a lot'

Mr Sarkozy was released from custody around midnight (22:00 GMT) after appearing in court in Paris. He had been brought to the court from the judicial police office in Nanterre, west of the French capital, where he had been interrogated.

Paul-Albert Iweins, the lawyer representing Mr Herzog, said the case rested only on "phone taps... whose legal basis will be strongly contested".

"There's not a lot in this dossier, since none of the material elements of what I've seen, and what we could contest, support the accusations," he added.

The inquiry arose out of a separate investigation into whether Mr Sarkozy had received illegal funding for his election campaign in 2007 from the late Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi.

Mr Sarkozy is hoping to challenge again for the presidency in 2017 and the inquiry is seen as a blow to his hopes of returning to office.

Investigators are trying to find out whether Mr Sarkozy, 59, who was president from 2007 to 2012, had promised a prestigious role in Monaco to Mr Azibert, in exchange for information about an investigation into alleged illegal campaign funding.

They are looking into claims that Mr Sarkozy was warned his phone was being bugged as part of the Gaddafi inquiry.

Mr Sarkozy's predecessor, Jacques Chirac, was given a suspended prison sentence in 2011 for embezzlement and breach of trust while he was mayor of Paris but he was never questioned in custody.

Source:BBC

France's ex-President Sarkozy put under investigation

The step often, but not always, leads to trial. Influence-peddling can be punished by up to five years in prison and a fine of 500,000 euros (£400,000; $684,000).

'Not a lot'

Didier Deschamps

France coach Didier Deschamps has explained what he believes gave his side the advantage over Nigeria in the last quarter of the second round match which his team won 2-0 on Monday.

The former France international told reporters in Brazil that he depended on speed to outrun the Super Eagles at Estadio Naicional in Brasilia. Deschamps said as soon as they observed that the Nigerians were using a lot of energy he allowed the Eagles to tire out before making his substitutions.

“At that point we sent in (Antoine) Griezmann for (Olivier) Giroud because he would be fresh and he is a naturally faster striker than Giroud. That speed became a major factor as we noticed that the Nigerians were tired and their midfield had collapsed. And so speed made a lot of difference,” Deschamps said.

He added, “Count the number of saves the Nigerian goalkeeper (Vincent) Enyeama made in the game. Also count the number times we hit the bar and then compare to our own side of the field. How many real goal shot did our goalkeeper stop? What it means is that the real pressure on the Nigerian side and those saves with less prepared goalkeeper could have resulted to more goals.”

Source: Punch

How we beat Nigeria – France Coach

Didier Deschamps

France coach Didier Deschamps has explained what he believes gave his side the advantage over Nigeria in the last quarter of the second round match which his team won 2-0 on Monday.

Source: Punch

Patients groan as doctors strike continues

Patients at the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan and some other hospitals across the country have started feeling the negative effect of the ongoing nationwide strike embarked upon by doctors in public hospitals under the aegis of the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA).

However, Chairman of the NMA in Kano State, Dr. Sharfuddeen Mashi, said the doctors would suspend the action to attend to patients in the event of any natural or man-made disaster such as bomb blasts or terror attacks.
Most of the patients, who came to the UCH yesterday were not attended to by the striking doctors.
With the exception of the accident and emergency units of the hospital, all other sections observed the strike.

Patients, who sought medical care at the Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH), National Orthopedic Hospital, Igbobi, Lagos (NOHIL), Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Ebutte-Metta and other public hospitals in Lagos State were not attended to.
In Delta State, relatives of patients across public hospitals had a hectic time evacuating their loved ones to private clinics as doctors in the state complied with the directive for a nationwide strike by the NMA.
At the Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Asaba, doctors partially withdrew their services but were sympathetic enough to ensure that in-patients were in proper condition to be moved out of the institution.

Delta State Chairman of NMA, Dr. Uyi Osarenkhoe, confirmed the development to Daily Sun, saying out-patients were being turned back as the doctors had already complied with the directives of the national body.
“We are not taking new emergencies except those cases that were admitted before now. We are attending to them in preparation for them to be taken away by their relatives, maybe to private clinics,” he said.

However, other health workers at the FMC, Asaba were at their duty posts as the strike by NMA did not affect them.
The NMA National President, Dr. Kayode Obembe, said doctors embarked on the painful route because “our silence and gentle approach to these contending issues have been taken for granted. We have to take this action to save the healthcare delivery system from anarchy that is imminent.
“We hereby appeal to all Nigerians for their understanding and to press on government to meet our demands.”

Public Relations Officer of the association, Lagos State branch, Dr. Ogunnubi Peters, said no medical doctor would work in public hospitals from yesterday.
He said the decision by the association was based on the deadlock between the NMA and the Federal Government at a meeting held in Abuja last Wednesday.
Speaking on the strike, the Chairman, NMA, Oyo State, Prof. Adefolarin Malomo, said the association had been pressed to resume its suspended strike.

Malomo said having unsuccessfully explored all necessary ways to make the government see reason, the strike was seen as the last resort.
Meanwhile, National President of the Association of Medical Laboratory Scientists of Nigeria, Dr. Godswill Okara, said the NMA was over-reaching itself, saying it had chosen to first rush to the podium and play to the gallery before doing its homework, thereby ending up embarrassing itself and its sympathizers.

Source: Sunnews

Patients groan as doctors strike continues

The beginning of the end of the Bola Tinubu dynasty by Femi Aribisala

KING Nebuchadnezzar gloried in his kingdom and declared: “Is this not magnificent Babylon, which I have built as a royal capital by my mighty power and for my glorious majesty?” (Daniel 4:30). While the words were still in his mouth, a voice came from heaven to inform him that the kingdom he was boasting about had been taken away from him.

Similarly, Bola Tinubu, “the Ashiwaju of Yorubaland,” surveyed his kingdom and decided to make a boastful proclamation. Speaking of himself in the third person, Tinubu declared: “Nobody, no one under the sun, under the United Nations Human Rights Charter, can stop Bola Tinubu’s ambition.” Famous last words! The voice of the electorate in the South-West has answered Tinubu. His personal ambition is certainly not in the interest of the people.

De-mystification of Tinubu

Tinubu’s claim to fame lies in the strength of his ACN party in the South-West. The only resistance was Ondo State, which was controlled by Olusegun Mimiko’s Labour party. But the assumption was that it was only a matter of time before Ondo too would succumb to the Tinubu juggernaut. However, in the 2012 gubernatorial election in Ondo, Mimiko not only prevailed once again, the ACN candidate did not even come second. He was beaten to a distant third by the PDP.

This indicated that the Yorubas were already getting fed up with Tinubu; determined that they will not be sold into his slavery. In a letter to Mimiko congratulating him on his victory, Reuben Fasoranti, the leader of the Yoruba group, Afenifere, said: “This victory, amongst other things, is victory over god-fatherism, a rejection of political imposition and slavery from outside the state.” “We entered into electoral cooperation with you (Mimiko) in the election to counter an emerging group under the leadership of few disrespectful, snobbish, arrogant, ravaging and power-thirsty politicians.”

The obvious reference here was to Bola Tinubu and his ACN colleagues. In many respects, Tinubu has become the most hated politician in the South-West. Association with him is increasingly as politically contagious as leprosy. The emerging consensus in the South-West is that Tinubu has overreached himself with his heavy-handedness. It is past time to cut him back to size. Thus, Fasoranti added to Mimiko: “There is a need for the exhibition of fair play and justice to all and carry the banner of progressive politics into national politics now that the eclipse of the ACN is unavoidable.”

Ekiti Waterloo

This prognosis has proved to be prophetic. The defeat of Tinubu’s party in Ondo has now been followed by its trouncing in the just-concluded gubernatorial election in Ekiti. Ekiti was presumed to be one of Tinubu’s South-West strongholds. The incumbent governor, Kayode Fayemi, is one of the darlings of Tinubu’s new-fangled APC. Indeed, some have been touting Fayemi as a possible APC vice-presidential candidate. However, rather than confirm that Ekiti is firmly in Tinubu’s camp, the people of Ekiti decided to send a loud and clear message to Tinubu. They no longer want to have anything to do with him and with his party.

Tinubu’s Fayemi did not only lose the Ekiti election, he lost it by a landslide. He obtained 120,000 votes to Ayo Fayose’s 203,000. Fayemi lost in every local government area of the state. Coming on the heels of its defeat in Ondo, the APC rout in Ekiti is conclusive proof that Tinubu’s fabled stranglehold on South-West politics has ended. Indeed, Tinubu is now a political liability in the South-West. Rather than bring votes to the APC in the region, he is now more than likely to lose them.

This accounts for the confused reaction of the APC to the election. Local and international observers declared it free and fair. The losing local candidates readily accepted defeat, including Fayemi, the APC candidate. But Tinubu and his APC cohorts from outside the state are challenging the defeat in a pathetic attempt to make excuses for such disgraceful trouncing in putative APC territory. Only the gullible will believe this face-saving charade.

On the contrary, a prescient observer of the APC debacle in Ekiti made this observation: “Tinubu is no Awolowo and that illusion is being put to test. He doesn’t have the gravitas of Papa Awo and in fact, many of these South-West state governors will soon discover that they are more electable without Tinubu’s name. Tinubu cost Fayemi the election and if he knows what is good he should stay in the background if Osun State (whose election is due two months hence) is not to fall in a domino.”

“Useless” Yoruba Obas

It was a long time coming, but Yorubas in general are now fed up with Bola Tinubu’s arrogance and with his determination to rule the South-West as his fiefdom. A politician is supposed to be subject to his people. However, Tinubu believes the Yorubas are subject to him. The over-bearing influence of Tinubu in Ekiti politics was one of the major issues of the campaign. The message of the electorate is that this would no longer be tolerated. This message was superbly championed by Fayose who presented himself as a man of the people, determined to stop the hemorrhage whereby Ekiti money was routinely shipped to Lagos.

A smart politician does not broadcast his contempt for his people. However, with the arrogance of power, Tinubu derided Yoruba Obas as “useless.” He declared “ex cathedra:” “The good Obas in Yorubaland who are forthright, firm and stand by the truth are not up to five, they are just three.” With these words, Tinubu drove a nail firmly into his own political coffin. While he derided Yoruba Obas as “useless,” he went up North to Kwankwaso to engineer the installation of a “useful” Emir of Kano. Therefore, the Ekiti people decided to tell Tinubu that they have no use for him and that their Obas are not useless.

The success of Fashola in transforming the face of Lagos was sold as the ACN/APC template in the South-West, and this had some traction for a while. Fayemi too presented himself as a “performing governor” with major projects right across the state. But when asked why he did not build low-cost housing in Lagos, Fashola replied contemptuously that he could not find any low-cost cement to buy. But as its defeat in Ekiti now demonstrates; the elitist high-cost APC needs low-cost voters in order to win elections. What the PDP did mischievously in Ekiti was to capitalise on the electorate’s cynical preference for pounded-yam over tarred roads.

Lessons from Obasanjo

The rejection of Bola Tinubu today in the South-West also lies in the very betrayal of his earlier success. Tinubu championed South-West resistance to Obasanjo’s determination to sacrifice Yoruba interests on the altar of a contrived alliance with the North. While that alliance clearly served Obasanjo’s interests, independent-minded South-West voters saw nothing in it for them. Foolishly, Tinubu is now presenting himself as yet another architect of the same rejected alliance with the Northern caliphate, for the sake of his own personal political ambitions.

Following the crisis that ensued after the annulment of M.K.O. Abiola’s victory in the 1993 presidential election, there emerged a general consensus that the 1999 election should be zoned to South-West Yorubas in the interest of national reconciliation. However, Northerners decided they would determine who the Yoruba candidate should be. Obasanjo was fished out of prison and anointed as PDP presidential candidate.

This Yoruba choice by Northerners was rejected by the Yorubas. Although Obasanjo went ahead to win the election nationwide, he lost woefully in the South-West. Thereafter, he was derided as a president without coattails in his own backyard. Obasanjo’s response as president was to make a play for PDP victory in the South-West in 2003 by hook or crook. Every trick in the book was employed to bring South-West states under PDP control.

Failure of success

The PDP rigged the 2003 elections masterfully and wrested back power from every ACN-controlled South-West state except Lagos. Even in Lagos, the INEC went ahead to proclaim a fictitious PDP victory on its website, before this was belatedly withdrawn with ignominy. The brilliant South-West answer to this PDP treachery was Bola Tinubu.

Tinubu drew a line in the sand, held on to Lagos, and struck back from this stronghold to win back all the lost South-West states in 2007. He won because the people of the South-West refused to mortgage their future to the political interests of Obasanjo and his allies in the North. It is therefore surprising that, with the arrogance of power, Tinubu is now following the same failed footsteps of Obasanjo.

Instead of learning from Obasanjo’s blunder, Tinubu too has now decided to unite his ethnic ACN party with the Northern caliphate. With the contempt for the people that has come with years of monarchical control over the ACN, Tinubu presumes South-West people will follow him sheepishly into this alliance with the North, just because his burning ambition to become the vice-president of Nigeria now demands it. But what this has achieved is to show that Tinubu’s ambitions are anathema to South-West interests.

Anybody who thinks Tinubu’s APC will succeed in the South-West does not understand South-West politics. The Yorubas are too proud and fiercely independent to agree to play second-fiddle to anyone because of a man called Tinubu. S.L. Akintola tried the same gambit in the 1960s, and the South-West rejected him. The same rejection has befallen Bola Tinubu.

Lagosians are disgusted that Tinubu has privatised their politics. His wife, daughter and even son-in-law have been steam-rolled into vantage political positions. The state’s finances are tied to Alpha Beta. Tinubu has even gone ahead to anoint Akinwunmi Ambode as the next governor of the state without the benefit of any election. This is asking for trouble. If Tinubu is not careful, a big implosion is likely in APC Lagos State over the issue of the choice of the next governor.

Every which way in the South-West, the message is crystal clear: “Tinubu’s imperious dynasty is over: long live the sovereignty of the people.”

The beginning of the end of the Bola Tinubu dynasty by Femi Aribisala

De-mystification of Tinubu

I thank all of you for participating in this maiden Freedom House lecture on democracy. I want to express special appreciation to Professor Larry Diamond for honoring us by accepting to deliver this inaugural address. It is my fervent hope that what we embark on today shall become a perennial institution, a permanent feature of our democratic landscape.

Such lectures are needed because our nation needs a broader, deeper appreciation of democracy in all of its complexities and ramifications. To state it bluntly because I know of no other way to state it, we do not understand enough about democratic governance and practice.

What we practice is often not democracy. How this nation is governed is a hybrid process where democracy is often the junior partner and minority attribute.

As such, the system of governance we practice has not yielded the desired results – the dividends of democracy have been painfully elusive. How could it be otherwise? It would be wrong to anticipate a pear to grow from apple tree or a dog to give birth to a goat. Thus, it is wrong to expect this current form of governance to produce the fruits of democracy when it is the wrong type of tree.

To think otherwise is not to be optimistic. It is to engage in unproductive wishful thinking that precludes us from doing the heavy and hard work needed to transform “what is” into “what ought to be.” This lecture series is a modest contribution toward this benign change.

Since the 1999 transition from military to civilian rule, we have effectively limited our definition of democracy to the holding of elections with little regard to the quality thereof. There are two jarring problems with this self-imposed constraint.

First, most members of the Nigerian political class was weaned on the rancid milk of dictatorship and the imperial mindset upon which it is based. Fairness and openness of process and outcome discourse and debate, and compromise and conciliation have no place in this realm. In this authoritarian world, the ends justify the means and the only ends pursued are those that increase the power and wealth of the people wielding them. It is a top- down world where the top dictates the tune and everyone dances to it or gets kicked into the shadows.

Most adult Nigerians have spent the majority of their lives under military, or its antecedent, colonial rule. Neither one is a good primer for democracy. Nigerians are smart people and learn fast. Too bad, our history has presented bad governance role models to us. We have learned much. Sadly, most of it has been the wrong lessons from the wrong textbook.

Thus, the conduct of elections during the past fifteen years has been basically an unbroken trail of malpractice and connivance to steer Nigeria to a contrived result with scant connection to the popular will.

Instead of being the periodic celebration of democracy, elections in Nigeria have generally mocked the very notion of democracy they are supposed to uphold.

Worst has been what comes after elections. Since the winner often is not chosen by the people but by some subterranean process, he continues to dishonor the people while resorting to that subterranean process in how he rules. Generally, these office holders believe they have the inborn right to rule instead of have been given a duty to govern.

For the most part, elections have become a perverse form of modern coronation. Instead of choosing public servants, elections in Nigeria have been basically to select a new aristocracy, an elected royalty.

Government is run like a medieval court, full of intrigue and an excessive number of jesters and unproductive courtiers whose only reason for being is to use their proximity to power to extract rents from the improper operation of government.

One can only find rhyme and reason in governance to the extent one can decipher or anticipate the whim and caprice of the man in power.
Thus, we call ourselves a new, growing democracy yet we retreat further into the old ways. We slip into authoritarian darkness.

Faced with a growing number of state governors in the opposition party, the federal government arbitrarily has reduced the revenues flowing to the states in order to punish the political opposition. In effect, the federal government has imposed economic sanctions simply because some political leaders have the temerity to belong to another party. That the people are made to suffer means little for the people are not why they entered into governance. Power and privilege are.

This is why they shut down newspapers recently and restricted freedom of movement by prohibiting key APC members from travelling into Ekiti state prior to elections. This is why they deployed more security people to hover over the elections in Ekiti than they do to protect the people and tackle the security challenges in Borno state. The Minister of State for Defence has spent more time in Ekiti than he has in Chibok. This is not responsible democratic governance. It is a hoax.

This brings me to the point where I would like to say a few words about the topic of today’s lecture: Poverty, Terrorism and Democracy. In my view, the first two concepts have intertwined to form a terrible union against the third, against democracy.

Some claim the rise of Boko Haram has nothing to do with poverty. They blame it all on ideology. Some go as far as implying that Islam is at fault. Those who say this can be excused to some extent for they are as ignorant about Islam as Boko Haram is. However, Boko Haram cannot be excused. They are violent murders of both Muslim and Christians. There is not one word in Islam that supports the evil they do.

It is obvious that Boko Haram terrorists have lashed themselves to a dangerous and desperate ideology. But we must ask who does such a thing and why do they seem to have so many adherents and supporters?

Poverty is a big part of the answer. Poverty often distorts a person’s humanity. The destitute and the ignorant, casting about on their last strand of hope, are susceptible to a mean and wicked interpretation of the world that labels everyone not in that group as expendable sacrifices and objects of terror.

Again to put it bluntly because I know of no other way, Boko Haram is an extreme manifestation of the chronic and acute misgovernance that has spread gross injustice and mass poverty across the face of our beloved nation.

All nations have their wayward souls. However, in better governed, more prosperous societies, the number of anti-social actors is much less and even their extremism is somewhat muted. Because of their low numbers, they are confined to being a law enforcement problem.

But here, abject poverty swells their ranks. Here, they have become a small army. With that, they are a national security threat and a political challenge to a free and open society.

We must deal with them decisively yet wisely. Also, government must also be cautious in not using the fight against terrorism to truncate otherwise legitimate political activity by a legitimate and peaceful political opposition. Also, government must restrain itself from striking indiscriminately against people in the affected areas, in the process committing human rights abuses that undermine democracy and that become a recruiting tool for the terrorists.

As such, poverty and terrorism are truly a compound threat to democracy. Not only do those who manufacture terror undermine democracy through their direct actions. We also must take care that government’s response is not such a heavy-handed and indiscriminate one that it undermines civil liberties and chases people into the camp of the terrorists.

I shall end here that we may soon come to the meat of this gathering; Professor Diamond’s address.

Again, I thank you all for coming today that we may use this lecture to take a step toward the democracy we truly seek.

(The speech was delivered as opening remarks by Bola Tinubu, former Lagos State governor, at the inaugural lecture of the Freedom House democracy lecture series held at Muson center, Agip hall, Lagos on June 30).

Boko Haram, poverty and threats to Nigeria’s democracy, By Bola Tinubu

What we practice is often not democracy. How this nation is governed is a hybrid process where democracy is often the junior partner and minority attribute.

The Director, International Centre for Energy and Environment Development, Mr. Ewa Eleri, has said about 100 million Nigerians have no access to electricity.

He disclosed this in Abuja during a one-day workshop on renewable energy, organised by Winrock International.

The event was held under the theme ‘Renewable energy and energy efficiency project’ where stakeholders in the power sector called for an improved policy that would encourage the development and marketing of renewable energy in Nigeria.

Eleri said only about 18 per cent of the Nigerian population had access to power.

He also shared the view of other stakeholders on renewable energy, stressing that it was to actualise the government’s 75 per cent connection target by 2020.

He regretted that unlike Kenya and South Africa where government policies had promoted the development of renewable energy, Nigeria had yet to put in place policies that would work towards the actualisation if its 75 per cent target on use of renewable energy.

According to him, the sector needs policies that will create players who can promote renewable energy.

A representative of Winrock international, Mr. Segun Adaju, who gave an overview of the project, said apart from providing technical support to stakeholders, it (the project) would also benefit the agricultural sector, banks as well as providing alternative sources for the fight against HIV AIDS.

Adaju also urged banks to key into the project by doing business with the clean energy sector.

He said, “With our 75 per cent target for the use of renewable energy in Nigeria, a well improved government policy would be required to actualise this project.

“There is a need to have policies that would help to develop the sector and promote the efforts of renewable energy in the country as it is done in countries like Kenya and South Africa where duties on technology has been abolished.”

He said the team was currently discussing with the General Hospital at Abaji in the Federal Capital Territory to introduce solar energy.

“Also, we in talks with some Nigerian banks to finance and do business with the clean energy sector,” he added.

The Director of Economic Growth, United States Agency for International Development, Ms. Sharon Pauling, while declaring the workshop open, said that USAID’s renewable energy project would among other benefits facilitate the development and financing of the project, as well as promote energy efficiency market.

According to her, it will also enhance the capacity of key stakeholders, including financial institutions and universities.

Pauling noted that Winrock would through the project provide technical assistance that would contribute to its broader goal of developing renewable energy in the Nigerian market.

The representative of Nigeria Independent Power Company, Aminu Takuna, said it was regrettable that many Nigerian banks were reluctant in financing renewable energy projects.

He disclosed that there was an ongoing policy reform in the renewable energy sector, adding that the NIPC would soon forward it to the National Assembly.

Source: Punch

‘100 million Nigerians have no access to electricity’