Daily Independent (Lagos)
Daniel Kanu
29 December 2008
interview
Senator ONYEABO OBI is not only an elder statesman but also an astute politician who distinguished himself in the Second Republic. The legal practitioner who represented Anambra West/Onitsha Constituency is currently a member of the Board of Trustees of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
He says the recent Supreme Court ruling is necessary for stability while frowning at the lack-lustre approach in the anti-corruption war. He believes that corruption should to be fought ruthlessly.
A specialist in corporate and commercial law, Obi says do-or-die politics was not the policy of the party but former President Olusegun Obasanjo's perception.
He opens up, as only an insider could, on these and many other issues confronting the nation, in this encounter with Snr Correspondent DANIEL KANU and Reporter OLISEMEKA OBECHE. Excerpts:
What is your assessment of the Supreme Court judgment on the 2007 presidential election, which many had adjudged to be a political judgment?
Well, I cannot say that I am speaking completely as a lawyer because I am also a member of the Board of Trustees (BOT) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). So, I am an interested party. What we all know and even the president himself has acknowledged is that his election and all the elections of 2007 and before has a lot of flaws; and that was why he set up the Uwais Panel to review and reform the system, so that we can avoid those things in future. So, election petitions by their very nature are mainly technical matters; not based on the single principle of judgement or law or evidence. In most cases, it is all about the balance of probabilities. In criminal cases, it is beyond reasonable doubt, but in the election petitions, everything that is an offence, its test requires beyond reasonable doubt. It is virtually impossible to prove all these allegations beyond reasonable doubts. That is why the judgment, I wouldn't like to use the word, "political judgment", but I would say that all election petitions so far delivered have a political element. The Supreme Court said the appellant alleged a lot of irregularities and filed the names of so many witnesses and only called one; how can you use one person to prove beyond reasonable doubt, irregularities in a country so vast as Nigeria? So, there is a technical problem and judgments are based on evidence. There was a time span for filling the petitions, the time span for filling your depositions and a time span for filing the evidence and for hearing; all could not allow for a normal trial and we are already two years into the regime. Other countries use other methods. For example, election is not declared until it is confirmed by an independent panel like Constitutional Court and things like that. If ever you wait for election to be determined and then you go through all these process, there is no doubt that when you go through all these process, there will be some elements of political or social considerations. Even the common man would tell you - ah! the man had stayed for two years, why not leave him to complete his tenure? That is the Nigerian situation.
Answering as a politician, I will say that we needed some element of stability at this time in the country. Even the rumours of the president's ill-health caused a lot of anxiety and sensitivities. And, if the Nigerian Stock Exchange was sensitive to market forces, as free market is supposed to be, you would see that some shares would have dropped because of that. A court as high as Supreme Court will take so many things into account because the repercussion may be too much for the country. So, I will also say that there are some politics in it. The President himself has pledged to change the system so that it doesn't happen again, so, all the points made in the complaints will be addressed. It is a pity that the Uwais committee submitted its recommendations before the judgment, otherwise, it would have taken on board those comments that the Supreme Court judges raised.
Many people still believe that with the intolerable stance of the PDP to opposition, this government in terms of political reform would actually make no progress.
No, the failure of opposition is weakness of the Nigerian politician: everybody want to be on the winning side, nobody wants to wait or suffer a little inconvenience. And so many of them are rushing to join the dominant party, to 'come and chop' as Bola Ige termed it. They are so anxious to go and chop and so don't stick to principles and if the Nigerian politician had a principle - like many of us had in the ruling party but got no position or political appointment, but we are still there - things would have been different. Those who are in the opposition should stay there and work for their party to win the next election; if not win the next time around, win in some states where they can have the influence or leverage. But every party wants to dominate the political scene and that is the weakness of the opposition, which prevents them from making meaningful impact in the polity.
Do you think PDP can completely wash its hands off the cause of the dearth of opposition in Nigeria, having failed to provide a level playing field in two previous elections?
Well, you made a point there. But I will use one or two examples to illustrate the submission I made earlier. First of all, do-or-die politics is not the policy of the PDP; it may have been the policy of the ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo and a few people near him, but this National Executive have said we are not going to toe that line. The president of the country has also said the same, that is why you have seen some developments like, as soon as any PDP governor is overthrown by the court, immediately the President would order that he'd be sworn-in, and give all the supports. The policy and application of such principle have really changed. In the past, they would have said no, hold on. The other day, it was reported that the national chairman of the party said his position was being threatened by those who don't like his implementing the policies which he had wanted to operate, to change some wrong culture of in the party.
Let me take you to Pakistan, where Mrs. Benizer Bhutto lost her life on the way to the presidency, and the present president who didn't expect that he would be a president before now had to put up a strong fight after her death, in other to dislodge the political forces in that country. If you mobilise the people, you can dislodge anybody. Let also take you to the United States. Did anybody believe that Obama, a Blackman, could overcome the culture that a Whiteman controls? Even, they did not accept a woman to rule America, talk of a Blackman; and when he started, nobody gave him a chance, not even Hilary Clinton, and most of the opponents carried a lot of negative campaigns against him. They even, at a time, started calling him different names and did everything possible to stop him, after his election, claiming that he is not a natural born American.
What I am saying is, if a party becomes a threat like the PDP, all the opposition would do is to find a way to dislodge it. People like Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State; Peter Obi of Anambra State - despite the fact that the PDP dominated the Anambra State House of Assembly - managed to win the election and he was rigged out. But he fought it all the way and later won. What I am saying is that there is no victory without tears. The politicians have to be determined to change the situation. And some of us are trying to change it from the inside; that is why we remain in the PDP. But those who are outside the party who wants to dislodge must go ahead and confront the system and overthrow it in a democratic way.
What is PDP leadership doing to stop the current trend of political office-holders from the party assuming dominant position over the party, instead of the other way around?
Let us say that what you have said is a passing phase. Now, after the 2007 election, the PDP set up (the) Ekwueme-led committee to seek ways of reforming the party. One of the recommendations of the committee, which I was in its implementation committee, which the party had accepted is that there is nobody to take the title of leader in the party, either at the national level or the state level; because that is what they all claim. The governor has no office. Normally, in the party, he is a member of the state executive or national executive. By appropriating or, if I may use the word, misappropriating the title 'leader', they try to overrun the party machine and use it for their selfish goals.
First of all, there will be no leader. Two, the question of appointment at the national level: a governor will not sit down and send a list. It must be cleared by the governor, the party chairman and the elders of the state caucus, which must be collectively approved. It is not now in the personal discretion of the governor who enjoys federal patronage; the thing has not gone on to the states yet because, in the states, the governor appoints and removes. It has not even gone to the centre where the President appoints and removes. But the systems are being re-corrected to remove that. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo was a former military head of state, when he came in, even though he was elected on the platform of a civilian regime, he acted as though he was still a military man: ignoring laws, constitution, party rules and even the amendment made to give him powers to become the BOT chairman. These things are being unscrambled and by the time they are completely unscrambled, we will see the dividend of a civilian becoming president. Things are going to be more democratic. It's a gradual evolution.
Having been in politics during the Second Republic and observed what has transpired since then till date, where can you say is the point of departure or the bane of Nigeria?
Two things are the bane of this country: one is military rule, which brought lack of transparency and accountability into our governance. The second is the oil boom. Oil boom came at the time when the military were in control and because of lack of accountability and transparency, corruption became (the) order of the day. Once you know a military man in good position, you become a millionaire overnight, and nobody asks you how you made it and nobody is there to expose the deal. First of all, you work for the man in power and in the end, depending on how you play it, you become either the millionaire or he becomes the billionaire. So, these are the two things that have affected Nigerian democracy.
Some people are of the view that there is nothing wrong with the Nigerian Constitution but the operators of the constitution?
I agree with that. Any document you produce, even as a lawyer if I draft a beautiful document, anybody can find fault in it. There is no perfect document, except, perhaps, the Holy Bible and Quaran. But even in those ones, you can still find something which you can still say ah, is this correct? We have not developed a political culture, rather we like to copy everything. You know carpet crossing was the reason why we abandoned parliamentary rule, as people argued that when you go to the presidential system there is no carpet crossing. But it is now worse in our own presidential system. Until the Supreme Court calls a halt to a regular impeachment, you can buy and sell impeachments. So, the major problem is not the Constitution but the players who are misapplying the rules for perverted ends. But the Supreme Court comes in to call this to order. There is no perfection in any document. Even the United States and United Kingdom, every day they have new problems and they solve it in one way or the other.
What is your view on the on-going political reform?
I don't think that political reform is possible with the present provisions of the constitution because there are more obstacles. For instance, when you talk about the issue of creation of states, you talk about balance of creating additional one state in the South East. But before you mention that, those from other regions will also be putting demands for creation of additional states in their political domain. Now, you require two-third of the National Assembly and simple majority votes of the state houses of assembly to get every decision ratified.
It will be difficult for a man in Adamawa, for instance, to vote in favour of bid to create additional state in say, South-East so that the region can enjoy more revenue. So, apart from the creation of the Mid-West in 1963, which was made possible by the presence of a disciplined political party alignment in the First Republic, all the state creations were done by the military. And even the military rulers themselves manipulated the state creation to suite their own constituency.
For instance, when Ogun State was created on the demand of the Ijebu people, they expected that the capital would be in Sagamu. But (because) Olusegun Obasanjo is from Abeokuta, the capital was placed there. The same thing happened in the creation of Delta State and others. It was only the military that had been able to create states and local governments in Nigeria.
So how do we extricate ourselves through this web of constitutional quagmire?
The solutions will come through the contradictions of the system. And the way forward is for Nigerians to keep struggling for our democracy, political fairness and accountability, and so on. All these fights are cumulative. Obama did not win the American election because of his struggle alone. He won because of the efforts of people like Martin Luther King Jnr, Jesse Jackson and others. As a matter of fact, it is all building blocks. So, we must be ready to play our own part and leave the rest to God. After all, Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt, but on getting to the Promised Land, Joshua took over. Every effort and challenge to a bad system helps to create the environment for a new system.
You raise the issue of corruption as one of the problems of the Nigerian system. Now that we have anti-corruption crusade on ground, what is your take on the way it is being fought?
As a lawyer, I supported Nuhu Ribadu's aggressive, sometimes autocratic excesses. The only way to achieve meaningful results from the crusade is to deal ruthlessly with corrupt persons in the society, no matter how highly or lowly placed, and that is why the President charged Mrs. Waziri, as the EFCC Chairman, to be ruthless in the fight. You cannot deal with the cancer of corruption with rule of law and kid glove, because the people involved will take every chance. Look at all the trials suffering postponements, (no) thanks to my colleagues in the profession. We can put every manoeuvre or technicality in the cause of trial that you cannot conclude the trial even in 10 years; and at times you ask if it is worth it. Secondly, the way Ribadu had been treated recently is not helping the cause of the crusade. If somebody fought against corruption, will he be punished for fighting against corruption? We know that EFCC during the time of Ribadu started settling private disputes. If somebody owes you money, you go to EFCC and they will come and pick you, this is not their purpose. So, there is always abuse, but the main thing is that corruption has to be fought ruthlessly, because corrupt people don't give up as they hire the best and biggest number of lawyers in the land and they can employ every tactics to frustrate their conviction. So, it is not easy.
But, many people still believe that majority of the politicians who actually milked this nation dry are found within the umbrella of the PDP. Don't you think this is another obstacle to the anti-corruption war?
Well, vested interest is not only in the PDP, they are in every political party. And more importantly, they are in the business world. It is the business people who are the agents, the tunnels and the bankers of corruption; not only in Nigeria but abroad. So, it requires a concerted effort, to fish the corrupt peoples out, to get the evidence to prosecute them and for the judges to convict them. It is not enough for somebody who is standing trial over corruption to be given bail to go and see his family abroad. A person who is facing criminal prosecution, of what need is it to give him bail to go abroad for health reason- what health? Those of them who were in that position should have put the necessary machinery in place to improve the quality of health care delivery in the country so that nobody goes outside the country for medical treatment. They should not allow people on bail to go and attend to their health care needs or see their family because that is the way they delay the trials.
The Judiciary has come under severe criticisms in recent times over its judgments, especially on electoral matters and delay of corruption cases...
We are not in ideal world. And that is the problem. We all know that all men are created equal, but some men are more equal than others, if you have money. Americans for instance, have a system for detection, investigation and prosecution; and their society is such that people live on their salaries and still feel contented. But when you send a police man in Nigeria who earns so little to go and arrest a rich man, if the man offers him about N100,000 to let him off the hook, he is not likely to reject the mouth-watering offer because he has a lot of basic needs to cater for which his salary cannot be able to take care of. The society we live in don't encourage people to stand up and fight. So, until we improve the society's checks and balances, many people on the streets who are corrupt, like the policemen, I feel sympathy for them because it is not nice but sometimes it can't help. If they post you from a place to another and you don't get your salaries and allowances regularly, then you will be forced to start looking for small, small monies to make ends meet. We tend to worry about petty corruption, but let's deal with the one on top first because it trickles down. But when you start pursuing the one down, they will think that you are hypocritical. Just like Yar'Adua said the other day, we know all the corrupt people in Nigeria.
Unfortunately, the principle we operate which says that an accused is deemed innocent until the court decides otherwise, doesn't favour the poor people. In Nigeria, people are afraid of coming out to testify against the rich and powerful people in the society standing trial over corruption, for fear of being witch-hunted later, unlike in overseas where such risks doesn't exist.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Daily Independent. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
