Spokesman of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Presidential Campaign Council, Alhaji Umar Sani has said that the idea of another Northerner succeeding President Muhammadu Buhari in 2023 will not fly among Southerners in the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC unless it wants to perpetrate a foul deed that is not in agreement with democratic ideals.
Sani who was the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Public Affairs to former Vice-President Namadi Sambo also spoke on the vindication of negotiations with bandits by the Inspector General of Police, Mohammed Adamu, the ripple in the presidency over the Vice-President’s functions and the judgement recently delivered by the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, among others.
As someone who has worked in the Presidential Villa, I need to seek your opinion on what is going on in the presidency. Within the past few days, a lot has happened. First, it was that the aides of the president are to operate from outside the Villa…
No. It is not a proper arrangement. The Vice-President’s aides have their offices within the Villa and the offices are enough to cater for all of them; so I do not see why they should now operate from outside the Villa. The Vice-President should have his aides close to him so that anything he wants done, he can quickly have them to do it. So, having his aides outside the Villa is not a tidy arrangement. It means something is wrong somewhere.
What do you think might be wrong?
I believe that there is something between the president and the vice-president which they are not opening up. But so many things have already indicated that there are so many things wrong in the villa. For instance, the Vice-President was allowed to be giving approval in the first tenure and now, all of a sudden, the President realised that his deputy ought to have followed due process when he has to write to the President to seek approval. So, such thing has been brought out now when the matter ought to have started, ab initio, to say the Vice-President should have always been charged to seek approval for every of the parastatals under him. We have so many parastatals under the Vice-President. He is also the Chairman of the Ministry for National Planning. As the Chairman, he plans for both economic and other policies of government. He is assisted by the Minister of Finance and of course the secretariat is headed by the Minister for National Planning.
Let us be clear of certain things. Constitutionally, is the Vice-President not supposed to be the Chairman of the Economic Team or the Economic Advisory Council?
No. Actually, even the National Economic Council which the Constitution has mentioned is an advisory body to the President. They are to advise the President on economic matters. So, the President is actually in charge of that; but the Constitution says the Vice-President should chair and advise the President. So, if the President decides that he wants to get the advice directly, he can form the Council. But the other one is not affected by this function. I think the Vice-President will continue with the function of the National Economic Council. That is because it involves the state governors. The Economic Advisory Council is not the same thing as the National Economic Council. They are not the same. The Advisory Council gives advice to the President. This is a Council of very competent and talented individuals that will give him advice on economic issues. The President can form any committee he deems necessary that would assist him to take firm economic decisions in addition to what the Vice-President is doing. So, what is happening now is not per se a usurpation of the functions of the National Economic Council but a usurpation of the functions of the Economic Management Team.
Let’s take cognizance of the coincidence in the dissolution of the team headed by the Vice-President and the formation of the Advisory Council. Is this mere coincidence?
That is why I am of the opinion that something might be wrong or fishy. The panel which was set up by the Vice-President for the recovery of public property was dissolved almost at the same time. So, it clearly shows that something is fishy. The man, Okoi Obono Obla, was removed but the panel was not dissolved until within the period in question. Within the period, certain key decisions were taken. A new Advisory Council was formed, the Economic Management Team was dissolved, the panel set up by the Vice-President was dissolved and then a memo was sent to the Vice-President to the effect that henceforth, he must seek approval for certain things he hitherto was not seeking approval and then of course, Babatunde Fowler, who is the Chairman, Federal Inland Revenue Service was issued an administrative query to explain the disparity in the revenue generation for certain periods. These are pointers to something.
Would you align your thoughts with those of the people who believe that what is happening now has to do with the 2023 presidency?
Yes, I think…I don’t know at what point there was a problem in the villa because it was the same President that was saying his vice is very loyal. Now, with these decisions that are being taken, it means that they are either political or the president is worried that his promise to drive the economy is not yielding the desired result. But I will prefer to align my thoughts with those of the people who believe that something is wrong.
This leads me on to the demand by some Northerners that the presidency should still be retained by the North in 2023. Are you one of the Northerners?
I belong to the political party that is of the view that rotation is very important especially as the Constitution has made some key pronouncements as to the need to recognize the diversity of the people in key appointments and all that. So, I am not averse to rotation; but what I am saying is that it should not be a constitutional matter. It should be a matter that the PDP which as a political party should operate. For instance, President Olusegun Obasanjo completed his eight years, then President Umaru Yar’Adua came in, but unfortunately he died; then President Goodluck Jonathan took over and did five years. He ought to have completed his eight years too so that the North would take over. Now, another politician from the North has taken over. I do not subscribe to the view that they should be looking at it from the point of view of APC or PDP. No. We should look at it from the moral situation of Nigeria so that everybody would be given a sense of belonging. In Nigeria, the major problem we have always had is the national question. Can somebody grow up and pursue his ambition and attain the highest office of the land from whichever tribe, religion, ethnic group or section of the country you come from? The resolution of the national question should look at the fact that anybody can become anything in Nigeria. It should not be the exclusive preserve of any group, religion, tribe or section of this country. We must begin to look at ourselves as our brothers’ keepers. We must begin to see the unity of Nigeria as very important rather than sectional or any parochial divide. If APC wants to perpetrate itself undemocratically as they have done, of course, the point now would be they want to hand over to a Northerner. But is that the issue? If for instance they had an agreement with Asiwaju Bola Tinubu and Tinubu had kept to his side of the bargain and they had assured him of support, what is stopping them from supporting him? Why would they take him to the river and would not now allow him to drink water? Perhaps, Tinubu also has an ace up his sleeves. We don’t know what is going to play out in 2023. But I believe that my party accepts it and that is why a Committee was set up under the leadership of Ike Ekweremadu, the former Deputy Senate President which actually recommended that the position should be zoned to the North. That was how Abubakar Atiku became our presidential candidate. In our party, that will not play out because our party has this issue clearly spelt out. If Atiku had been president, certainly it would have gone to the South. There would have been no problem in 2023. However, the manifesto, intention and policy direction of the APC is very unclear. They have not made their position clear; so we do not know where they are headed. If they insist they want to retain the presidency in the North in 2023, I do not think that the Southerners will keep quiet to allow things to fly the way they want it. But let us keep our fingers crossed.
Do you have any reservation about the recent judgement by the Presidential Election Tribunal which pronounced President Buhari as validly elected during the last election?
Let me say this clearly: that the PDP as a party has rejected that judgement because ab initio, the PDP had indicated that the tribunal would not be fair to it. And, of course, we are not satisfied by the judgement of the tribunal because like the case of Osun State, the tribunal relied on technicalities on matters that are not supposed to dominate the proceedings of the tribunal. This is a matter that has to do with preponderance of evidence and not a criminal matter that requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. The tribunal relied on proof beyond reasonable doubt even where we have provided enough proof that ought to have swayed the matter to our side. But the tribunal felt they just have to do the hatchet job and so they have done what they can do and have left the Supreme Court to face the music of the people because most Nigerians have confidence in the Supreme Court than in the Appeal Court. However, the Supreme Court also has started fidgeting because the case of Osun State is a clear one where the same Supreme Court had laid a precedence that justice should prevail over technicalities but at the end what happened? We are at a crossroads over the matter, more so now that the President has tinkered with the Supreme Court by removing Justice Walter Onnoghen as the Chief Justice of Nigeria and replacing him. And of course, the President has made some new appointments into the Supreme Court and therefore we do not know the serving Justices that would be there to handle the case; whether they would be those who would be much more favourable to them or put the right and impartial people. Even when the right people are put there, perhaps they would be coerced to tow the line of the Appeal Court. We just hope that the Supreme Court would toe the line of honour and do the right thing.
Do you have any concerns about the state of the nation?
I think every reasonable Nigerian would have concerns about the state of the nation because the way things are going, I do not think that anybody who will succeed President Buhari would be able to do anything. This is so because they would only be engaged in removing the rot this government has left behind. It would be a herculean task when you came in on a tripod of fighting corruption, assuring security and developing the economy and nothing has been achieved. First, the economy is in comatose. Once the economy is in comatose, you must know that crime will be rife and corruption will multiply. This is a matter of common sense. So, if you have these things rising and corruption is high and crime rate is manifestly clear such that Nigerians are no longer safe while on the roads, in their houses or where they are working and the government can do nothing about that, then you can imagine where this government has left Nigerians. What the government does now is to issue threats to anybody who says they have not conquered Boko Haram or secured Nigerians and improved the economy. Is that how to govern? You better restore the citizen’s rights and concerns in a way that when they say we are not safe, you make it safe for them. Let me give you an example. When we were in the state (Kaduna State), we provided mobile security on the Abuja-Kaduna road. So, for the three years we were in government t, there was no armed robbery on that road. The reason was simply because eight security vehicles were moving from Abuja to Kaduna and from Kaduna to Abuja simultaneously. We were providing fuel and everything needed by the security operatives in addition to an Armoured Personnel Carrier, (APC) by the side. All the vehicles had communication gadgets and were regularly being monitored. So, there was no way there would be laxity. Even the Birnin Gwari-Kaduna road was carefully secured and it was a joint operation between the Army, Airforce, Police and other security agencies. So, it was a tight and neat security system that we left on ground. This was the initiative of the then Governor Namadi Sambo before he became the Vice-President. So, if we say we have to continue along the line of saving money while our people die every day, then it will be penny wise, pound foolish. You won’t spend money to protect your people, yet you want to spend money to provide infrastructure. Which citizen will enjoy the infrastructure? Is it the citizens who would have been dead? So, the whole issue raised about Goodluck Jonathan was that in five years he was supposed to have attained this and that. But if you now take a look at the over four years, getting to five years of this government, you will discover that President Goodluck Jonathan made tremendous achievements in terms of education, infrastructure and so on. But can you mention one infrastructure that this government started and they are the ones that are finishing it? None. So, would you say now that President Goodluck Jonathan did not perform? I think the major problem was that he is from the minority area and the minorities were chased away from the governance of Nigeria because they are in the minority class not because he did not perform.
Talking about security, some state governments in the North are negotiating with bandits in their quest to bring about peace in their states. What is your thought on state government’s negotiation with bandits?
It is a failure of security. That is clearly the failure of security and they do not want us to believe or accept that they have failed. So, they are pushing for negotiation with bandits. Why would you negotiate with Bandits? Would you negotiate with kidnappers? If you are doing that, then they should negotiate with that serial murderer that was caught in Portharcourt. What is the difference between bandits and kidnappers? When kidnappers abduct you, you must pay ransom. So, kidnappers are also bandits. I do not believe that negotiation with bandits is the right way to go. If the security men are those negotiating, it is the failure of security, but if governors are the ones negotiating, it is a tacit admission that security has failed. They have therefore abdicated one cardinal point of their duties as Chief Security Officers of their states and as such they are trying to get succor for their people. But a security chief in the mould of the Inspector General of Police should not be justifying the actions of bandits in any way because that justification means failure on the part of the security agencies. Security agencies are not supposed to negotiate. It is the civilians that negotiate and when late President Umaru Yar’Adua did the negotiation with the Niger-Delta militants, he didn’t do it with the military and the military did not help him to negotiate. He negotiated with them because the security agencies could not do anything. They couldn’t stop the Niger-Delta militants and the revenue from oil was being affected. Such types of comments from the Police boss are antithetical to national peace and progress. Nobody should justify banditry, talk more of negotiating with them. I think people should understand that the militancy in Niger-Delta did not start as a way of obtaining money through banditry or militancy, it started as a way of negotiating for better wages from the expatriates who were polluting their areas. Forget the fact that at one time, some people took it personal and went off the real intention. The real intention was to force government to look into their plight since the people polluting their lands have refused to pay compensation for the damages they caused while government failed to intervene. There is a difference and so that should not be cited as an example at all to justify negotiation by security agencies and state governments with bandits. It is just simply that the security agencies we have in this country are becoming so lazy that they are looking for a way out. It is shameful for a governor to pose with a bandit bearing AK47 rifle in company with serving Commissioner of Police where the bandit was talking tough and giving conditions. What the Commissioner of Police is saying is that we have failed. That is the clear implication of his presence alone in the forest. And once you see a bandit in the forest and is talking to you and is giving conditions, it becomes way out of order. What it means is that there is nothing else we can do than to resign to faith and the lifeline of the citizenry depends on the bandits and not the government. The primary responsibility of government is the protection of lives and property. How do you protect lives and property by negotiating with bandits? Would you allow them to continue with what they are doing if negotiations fail? Or will you go and attack them if negotiation fails? If you attack them when negotiation fails, are you confident that you are going to win? If government resorts to negotiation, it means such negotiation will either succeed or fail. What happens if some of the agreements. reached by one party to the agreement are no longer met? I am saying this because even among the bandits, there are factions. What guarantee have you that you are negotiating with the right bandits? What happens if others form another group of bandits just to attract another round of negotiation? How do you intend to curtail the activities of these bandits if you fail to meet with their demands? These are, certainly, not the best of times for negotiation. You have to subdue them. We are aware that the nation is fighting along several lines, but these are new criminal ways that people have developed – banditry, kidnapping, herdsmen attack, Boko Haram and the rest. (The Sun)
