|
Yar’Adua as Obasanjo’s ‘Greek gift’
By Levi Obijiofor
Friday, 1 June 2007
Depending on how you perceive Olusegun Obasanjo’s tenure as president, there are many people in Nigeria who would be mourning or celebrating Obasanjo’s exit from power. The only problem is that Umar Musa Yar’Adua, the man handpicked by Obasanjo to lead the nation, is sounding more and more like a perfect clone of Obasanjo. If Yar’Adua behaves and acts like Obasanjo’s replica that many people suspect him to be, the celebration of Obasanjo’s exit would be misplaced. What manner of president would Yar’Adua turn out to be? It might be too early to judge him but questions continue to grow about Yar’Adua and his likely style of government.
Would Yar’Adua be man enough to act independently, to introduce his own policies and to distance himself from the political baggage left behind by his mentor Obasanjo? Would Yar’Adua preside over national affairs by shuttling secretly at night between Abuja and Abeokuta to seek Obasanjo’s stamp of approval for his government’s policies? Would Yar’Adua be bold enough to ditch Obasanjo’s grandiose and worthless projects and introduce economic strategies that are designed to reduce poverty and lift the economic welfare of the people? The greatest problem that Yar’Adua faces now is the public perception that Yar’Adua is Obasanjo’s Greek gift to Nigeria. Anyone who understands the myth about Greek gifts would also appreciate the enormity of the game of treachery that Obasanjo played on the nation. Before he left Aso Rock, Obasanjo ensured that the April 21 presidential election would yield one result – the victory of Yar’Adua over all other presidential candidates. Now that Yar’Adua has mounted the presidential throne, the burden is on the man to prove his independence and freedom from Obasanjo’s vice grip.
Despite the pomp and ceremony that marked Yar’Adua’s inauguration as president on Tuesday this week, the atmosphere in the country is dense with clouds of suspicion and anxiety. There is a general feeling that, although Obasanjo ceased to be president three days ago (May 29, 2007), Obasanjo’s overbearing influence is expected to manifest in Yar’Adua’s policies. Metaphorically, the voice in Aso Rock might be Yar’Adua’s but the presidential policies could be Obasanjo’s. In this context, the first national test of Yar’Adua’s character as an independent man would be how he handles public perceptions of his government as a genetic copy of Obasanjo’s government. The second test would be how quickly Yar’Adua can move to overturn the numerous problems that Obasanjo created for the nation, in the eight years during which Obasanjo consistently danced to the applause of his uninformed foreign friends while the home audience jeered. This is a crunch time for Yar’Adua. He made his promises. He said he would be a man of his own. He said his government would be result-oriented. He must deliver on these promises.
Even before Obasanjo has had time to reflect again on his performance in office, his apologists have rushed to inundate the print media with epithets about the man’s larger-than-life achievements. But a thorough check would show that there are many policy blunders and presidential gaffes that were committed by Obasanjo. In the area of infrastructure support, Obasanjo’s government was a total failure. Obasanjo put his reputation on the line and made many promises about his government’s determination to regularise the supply of electricity. Sadly, like most projects he launched, Obasanjo failed to lift the frequency of electricity supply. He left the power supply situation in worse condition than he met it in 1999.
Major highways in Nigeria deteriorated during Obasanjo’s eight years in office. Ironically, while Obasanjo and his ministers announced allocation of billions of naira for road construction and renovation, the public noticed no improvement but more potholes and bumps on the highways. Under Obasanjo’s government, public hospitals became open houses where the sick and the frail went to die rather than to receive treatment. Medical doctors and specialists found it more fulfilling to set up private practice than to work in public hospitals with no basic diagnostic equipment. In the education sector, Obasanjo showed total contempt for university teachers. Rather than focus on innovative ways to improve teaching and research in the universities, the government spent valuable time wrestling with the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) over issues ranging from improved conditions of service for university teachers to adequate funding of university education. In spite of numerous industrial strikes by ASUU leaders, the quality of university education continues on the downward spiral.
Although Obasanjo’s admirers have continued to claim that he was the best thing that happened to the country in the last eight years, evidence does not support such assertion. How does anyone rate Obasanjo as immaculate when, during his two-term tenure, the man struggled to observe presidential etiquette? Although Obasanjo consistently flaunted the image of a reformed born-again Christian, his public and private conducts were far below his weekly religious preachings. Here are more contradictions. For eight years, Obasanjo led a government in which no one dared to disagree with the president. It was a government in which alternative viewpoints were repressed because they were perceived as confrontational. And yet each time Obasanjo travelled overseas, he took with him the hype that his government was democratic in name and in practice. The jury is yet to reach a decision on that claim. The best way to examine assertions that Obasanjo’s performance was nothing short of superlative is to unpack the assessments of Obasanjo’s government as provided by three eminent Nigerians – Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe and the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Muhammadu Uwais.
In a public statement issued on March 31, 2007 and entitled “The clouds are gathering”, Achebe said Obasanjo had not only undermined democracy in Nigeria but had also “taken Nigeria as low as she has ever gone”. Achebe accused Obasanjo of plotting to remain in office beyond the maximum terms stipulated in the constitution. Achebe was unimpressed with the institutions that Obasanjo set up and used to hound and haunt the enemies of the government, including all those who expressed views that were critical of Obasanjo. According to Achebe, Obasanjo “unfolded a gigantic scheme for staying in power beyond his tenure. He set up agencies with long titles like the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent National Electoral Commission. It soon became clear, however, that these devices were not intended to curb the crimes they enumerated but to go after people who disagree with the President, especially on his desire to extend his tenure.” Achebe drew attention to the contradiction in Obasanjo’s anti-corruption campaign, whereby Obasanjo looked the other way when wayward godfather Chris Uba confessed to Obasanjo that he (Chris Uba) single-handedly rigged the 2003 governorship election in Anambra State.
Soyinka’s assessment of the Obasanjo administration was equally strident. He not only criticised the government for ignoring the welfare and environmental concerns of the people in the Niger Delta, Soyinka also described the Obasanjo government as “stubborn, stiff-necked and recalcitrant”. In Soyinka’s words, the Obasanjo government behaved on several occasions like an executive lawbreaker. Incidentally, the federal government’s disregard for judicial decisions was the subject of a public speech by former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Muhammadu Uwais.
At the opening of the All Nigeria Judges Conference in Abuja on December 5, 2005, Justice Uwais noted that government contempt for court orders had become a common practice under the Obasanjo administration. Uwais said that, “in a democratic set up like ours, obedience to the Constitution is paramount and imperative since all key office holders under the Constitution are made to take oaths of office, which enjoins us to protect and defend the Constitution.” In his words, “Failure to do so is an affront to the Constitution and clear evidence of bad governance.” That was not all. Uwais said “those in authority and their agencies cannot pick and choose what court orders to obey. If they feel aggrieved by the order, the only remedy open to them is to appeal, but in the meantime, the order must be obeyed.” A word, they say, is enough for the wise. Those who want to twist history by seeking to market Obasanjo as the unassailable whiz-kid or spectacular reformer who saved Nigeria from imminent collapse should reflect on their exaggerated assessment of the Obasanjo administration.
|
Levi Obijiofor 
Posted by Robot| 22.10.2007 08:29