allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Why We Couldn't Probe Obasanjo -Masari (Page 1 of 2)

Speaker Aminu Bello Masari headed the House of Representatives from 2003 - 2007. In this interview with Sunday Trust, he spoke on the current probes of some key sectors by the National Assembly, saying he is not suprised by the revelations from these probes. He is worried about the the lack of internal democracy in the PDP and how he survived impeachment plots as Speaker, among other issues. Excerpts

What can you say about all the probes barked upon by the current House of Representatives?

The House has the power of oversight to investigate. So, the idea of probe is not out of place. I think what is bothering people is how former President Obasanjo presented himself as a fighter of corruption and promoter of due process.

As Speaker between 2003 and 2007, what did you do to find out what transpired between 1999 and 2003?

The parliament is not there to finish everything. The Independent Power Project (IPP) that people talk about did not just start now. It started barely two years ago, before we left office. By the time we left office, the project was barely new. Advance payment and other things were done, and we only insisted that whatever contribution the federal government was making to the IPP must be budgeted for. We were not in the House to complete the work of the parliament. We did the little we could do and hoped that those coming after us would do better. That is how progress can be made.

Are you surprised at the revelations coming out form the probes by the House?

We are all in Nigeria. How can we be surprised at anything? By 2005, the picture of those in power was becoming clearer and everybody knew that anything could happen.

Are you not worried that these probes are diverting the attention of the House from its legislative duties?

I don't think so. About the power probe, the former minister and later Special Adviser to the President on Due Process visited the President and discussed the reform and the issue of power sector with the president and he said $10 billionwas spent on power and there was nothing to show for it. That was the starting point. The House felt challenged by the need to find out where the money is. The lesson that can be learnt from all the probes is that as a leader, one day, you will be called to account for your stewardship.

Some analysts see the lack of a viable opposition as the bane of our democracy.

They are absolutely right. In fact, all the probes indicate the weak opposition. If there had been a strong opposition, the dominant party would have been checkmated. Those who are in the opposition and have betrayed the opposition and democracy are still walking in the street as big men. The reality is that if there is any election today, PDP would still win because it is the only political party that has structures.

What is responsible for the weak opposition?

This cannot be far from the style of the former leadership, using security agencies to intimidate the opposition, coupled with our attitude. People are afraid of being in the opposition because those in power are naturally unkind and hostile to the opposition.Even in the PDP, you don't hsve internal democracy. So, how do you expect a party that does not have internal democracy to give democracy to the country?

What accounts for this lack of internal democracy within the PDP itself?

If the opposition had developed since 1999, by 2003 though the PDP still maintained the states it controlled, the situation would have been different today. But then, parties' leaders started running up and down against one another in Abuja. The tragedy was the handing over of the political parties to the state governors. The governor is the sole administrator of the party in his state. He decides everything. The governor decides who becomes a minister and most times he ensures that whoever becomes anything in the party is absolutely loyal to him. And the governors were not prepared to promote those who could be seen as the opposition thinking that if those ones become economically strong, they would be in the opposition against them.

Now, the PDP is advocating a seven-year single term of office.

I don't know the basis for that position. But as a member of the PDP National Executive Committee, I am not aware of that position.

Some PDP members are also calling for the resignation of Obasanjo as BOT Chairman.

The group which I belong to, G-21, is advocating a constitution amendment of the PDP and the essence of this is to return the party to its original constitution within which the powers of the BOT are clearly stated. We want to internalise democracy with the party by taking it to its original form through constitution amendment. I think that does not disqualify Obasanjo to become the Chairman of the PDP's Board of Trustees, BoT, but that must be based on the role clearly earmarked for the BoT by the party's founding fathers. If that is done, PDP would have internal democracy. And if the PDP, which controls about 30 states in the federation, is internally democratised, it would be in a position to influence democracy in other parties and bring democracy into governance. I don't know those calling for Obasanjo's removal or resignation as BoT Chairman, but the group I belong to only said that the BoT should go back to its original form, in nature and content.

web allafrica.com	Enter your search terms	Submit search form
OR subscribers use AllAfrica's premium search engine


Use our pull-down menus to find more stories

Today's Most Active Stories