Connect with us

Politics

OFFICIAL: Tinubu Doing What You Lacked the Courage To Do 20 Years Ago – Presidency Fires Back At Obasanjo

Published

on

Obasanjo

They accused Obasanjo of chickening out in the face of opposition when he should have activated some economic policies needed to save Nigeria during his tenure.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

The Tinubu-led presidency has lambasted former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo after he said that the president came into office without a plan.

They accused Obasanjo of chickening out in the face of opposition when he should have activated some economic policies needed to save Nigeria during his tenure.

The presidency also submitted that some of the bold reforms Obasanjo lacked the courage to implement are what President Bola Tinubu has set in motion for the good of the country.

The presidency also chided Obasanjo, asking him to stop seeing himself as the only saviour of Nigeria.

The statement by Temitope Ajayi, the Senior Special Assistant to President Tinubu on Media and Publicity, comes as a direct response to an interview by Obasanjo in which the former Nigerian leader, in an interview with News Central Television, made a veiled reference in which he accused Tinubu of coming to power without any plan.

However, Ajayi, in his statement, defended the policies of the Tinubu government, saying Tinubu is displaying the courage to do what Obasanjo failed to do twenty years ago.

“A video of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s interview with News Central Television has been trending on social media platforms for the past week. In the interview, the former President, in a veiled reference to the current administration, said Nigeria has a President who came into office without a plan. Yet, the same ‘planless’ president is implementing a bold economic reform programme that Obasanjo initiated and abandoned mid-way.

“This intervention is essentially about a tale of two leaders and how they both handled fuel subsidy removal, a very touchy issue every president of Nigeria has avoided since 1973 because of its disruptive nature and potential to precipitate a pushback that may lead to civil unrest. This serious matter in itself can make a difference between a bold and courageous leader from one that is pretentious and hesitant.

“It is a fact of history that one of the things former President Obasanjo set out to do, among other reforms his administration embarked upon, was complete deregulation of the downstream oil industry. But hard as he tried, he failed to actualise it. Obasanjo faced so much opposition from organised labour and civil society groups that he abandoned a good policy that would have led to massive economic gains for the country. All he could muster the courage to do was to raise the pump price four times during his two-term tenure.

“Twenty years after Obasanjo failed to implement complete downstream deregulation, President Bola Tinubu had the courage of his conviction to implement the policy, redirect the economy, and ensure efficiency in the management of public finance.

“Despite his foibles and messianic complex, former President Obasanjo is no doubt a remarkable leader. His administration opened the economy and implemented essential reforms that his immediate successor should have continued with. What most critics find offensive about the former president is how he sees himself as the only saviour God created for Nigeria. As far as he is concerned, no other leader before and after him has been good enough. For context and clarity, it is essential to recall the former president’s position on deregulating the downstream oil sector when he was in charge.

“In a national broadcast on October 8, 2003, President Obasanjo expressed his frustration and anger at the Nigeria Labour Congress for its opposition to the deregulation of the downstream sector to the point of accusing labour leaders of sedition thus:

“As you are aware, my government has embarked on fundamental reforms designed to depart from the waste and unproductive exercises of the past and leave lasting legacies for the prosperity and improved welfare and well-being of all Nigerians. Since 1999, we have gradually but steadily embarked on the programme of liberalisation and deregulation of the Nigerian economy to promote efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. Most Nigerians and certainly all organised key stakeholders in the Nigerian economy, including the Nigeria Labour Congress, have endorsed the deregulation programme of government.

“It is a fitting symbol of our administration’s commitment to the welfare of workers and in an effort to cushion the effects of deregulation that the government provided 80 buses to the NLC in 2002. The transliner buses were delivered to the Congress for management without government interference. It is noteworthy that every step taken to deregulate the downstream oil sector has been dogged by, sometimes, irresponsible opposition by the Labour Congress. The result has been that we took too little steps to achieve no meaningful and satisfactory progress. We have tolerated all of these in the interest of promoting popular dialogue and informed dissent.

“Let me inform Nigerians that when government first came up with the deregulation programme, it was endorsed by the NLC and other stakeholders. In fact, the NLC had requested that we call it a “liberalisation” programme. It was thus more a matter of label than of substance. If we had been successful in implementing the deregulation or liberalisation of the downstream oil sector as earlier agreed by all stakeholders, including labour, we would not have been worrying about the periodic and unsatisfactory price-fixing which has led no where except to frustration. The failure to fully deregulate or liberalise has also cost Nigerians billions of naira which are currently wasted on millions of man-hours in queues at the petrol stations.

“The tens of billions of naira currently being lost in money that could have been used to increase capital spending in the universities, fund agriculture, repair and rehabilitate our roads, invest in education and health, improve security with extra police for security of lives and property.

“Realising that the investment of well over $400 million (excluding pipelines and depots) in the last six years mostly on Turn Around Maintenance (TAM) and repairs had not improved the performance of the refineries significantly, government had decided that it was unwise to put additional money into the repair of the Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries before privatising them.

“What most Nigerians must know is that the contracts for the Turn Around Maintenance for the Kaduna and Port Harcourt refineries were awarded with 50% of the cost paid upfront before the advent of this administration in 1999. Allow me to add that two of the three refinery locations in the country today, were built by my administration as military head of state. This means that if for no other reason, I should be interested in keeping them working. Already, 18 private firms have been licensed to build refineries but they have been reluctant to go into the industry because of Government’s price control in the sector.

“If only 30% of these firms had been able to establish and operate private refineries, thousands of jobs would have been created and Nigeria would have been in a position to even export refined oil products. All these benefits and more have been denied to Nigerians by the stop-go approach to the deregulation or liberalisation programme, and only a few Nigerians are benefiting from the prevailing government-controlled system. In fact, the NLC’s approach has been counter-productive, and inflicted more pains on Nigerian workers. Each time there is a small increase of three naira or more, transporters have used the opportunity to jerk up transportation cost thereby making the ordinary worker poorer.

“A once-and-for-all total deregulation would have meant a once-and-for-all increase in transport cost and the pump price for petroleum products. Without a doubt, a once-and-for-all total deregulation would have resolved the problem of availability and thus bring down prices for those outside Abuja, Lagos, Port Harcourt and their environs who have always paid much more than the official posted price. Pump prices arising from the present total deregulation would, in reality, amount to a reduction in prices of majority of Nigerians,” the statement read.

In further rejecting the call that the President came into office unprepared, the statement said Obasanjo saw a looming calamity but failed to address it, but now Tinubu has chosen to address the challenge head-on and focus on the bigger picture.

“Interestingly, excerpts from the 2003 national broadcast by President Obasanjo present a contrast between the former leader and President Tinubu. They also showcase two leadership visions. One leader saw the need to fight for the country’s long-term sustainability but chickened out because he lacked the courage to upset the status quo. Two decades later, another leader saw the damage the failure to make the right economic decision had caused the country. He decided to correct it to avert a looming calamity. While former President Obasanjo left the most challenging task of his presidency undone, President Tinubu tackled head-on what has become an existential threat to our collective well-being from his first day in office. He has remained focused on the bigger picture.

“President Tinubu recognises the burden of leadership and responsibility he bears on behalf of Nigerians. In discharging this burden, he knew from day one that he would have to make the right but unpopular decisions that would ultimately serve the best interest of the country and her people,” Ajayi argued.

He explained further that contrary to Obasanjo’s submission, President Tinubu came into office with the Renewed Hope Agenda and has been implementing it since May 2023.

“It is certainly not correct to say this president came to the office without a plan. President Tinubu came into the office with a clear plan titled “Renewed Hope 2023: Action Plan for a Better Nigeria.” It was a well-thought-out programme, with which he canvassed for votes across the country and was elected by our people.

“In the past 17 months, he has remained faithful to the document as he implements the distilled eight-point agenda.

“At the heart of President Tinubu’s economic revitalisation is gas development and expansion of gas pipeline infrastructure to enable Nigeria to compete with Russia in the European markets. In fairness to him, former President Obasanjo himself recently lamented he did not pay adequate attention to gas during his term of office.

“Expanding the pool of available talents and human capital through granting of loans to young Nigerians who are the future of the country to enable them acquire tertiary or vocational education is part of the plans that propelled Tinubu into office. Consumer credit initiative that will promote local production and further stimulate the economy is also high on Tinubu’s action plan. To the President’s credit, these two important policy initiatives among several others are being implemented through NELFUND and Nigerian Consumer Credit Corporation (CrediCorp).

“If there is one President of Nigeria that came prepared and well armed with a clear cut plan to reposition the country across sectors for better outcomes, that President, undoubtedly, is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” the statement concluded.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

Politics

Pst. Tobi tackles Badenoch: Between 2023 and 2024, about 78,000 bags and phones were snatched in UK

Published

on

By

 

The British Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch has denied the allegations made by Pastor Tobi Adegboyega, who is based in the United Kingdom. According to Badenoch, Nigeria encourages its people to act inappropriately.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

Before she became the head of the UK opposition party, Badenoch had often criticized Nigeria. She made her allegations during an interview with a journalist in the UK. Additionally, she accused the Nigerian Police of stealing from the people they are supposed to protect.

According to The Punch, it was reported that in response, Adegboyega, whose church SPAC Nation was recently closed by the British Government due to concerns about mishandling £1.87 million in church funds, disagreed with her statements. He pointed out that there is no place in the world that is completely safe.

The pastor shared his views while appearing as a guest on an episode of Channels Television’s Politics Today on Monday.

He said, “I completely disagree with that statement. Between 2023 and 2024, about 78,000  bags and phones were snatched in London and the UK alone. There’s a very strong Nigerian black community in this nation.”

Further talking, he said, “For people like the leader of the opposition (party) you just mentioned to get to that position, they’ve been fighting on the street. There were funerals where kids were killed in the UK. They buried three kids from the same parents.”CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

Continue Reading

Politics

OFFICIAL: Why man who stole fowl was sentenced to death, by Akinwole A. Olasubomi

Published

on

By

The Osun State Government’s recent consideration of the prerogative of mercy for convicted individuals has drawn significant attention and has invariably stirred public opinion based on incomplete or misleading narratives. While this action demonstrates the government’s commitment to exercising compassion and upholding constitutional provisions, it is imperative that such privilege is not misinterpreted or misused to distort the sanctity of judicial decisions. Misleading narratives aimed at undermining the judiciary not only threaten public trust but also obscure the real facts surrounding this case.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

The Osun State Government deserves commendation for its thoughtful approach to this matter, particularly its willingness to consider clemency in light of the convicts’ circumstances through the prerogative of mercy as exercised by the executive arm of government is a constitutional provision designed to temper justice with compassion and mercy when appropriate. But this authority is not in anyway a critique of judicial decisions. Instead, it reflects a complementary relationship between the arms of government, underscoring the separation of powers.

However, it is equally crucial to avoid abusing this constitutional privilege by turning the law into a tool to fit a distorted narrative, especially one that trivialises the gravity of the original crimes. This recent development does not, and should not, be interpreted as a challenge to the judiciary’s authority. The judiciary’s role is to ensure that justice is served based on evidence and the letter of the law, while the executive’s mercy is a discretionary act that operates within a separate but complementary sphere.

It is therefore crucial to clarify the facts and reaffirm the role of the judiciary as the backbone of any functional democracy tasked with interpreting and enforcing the law impartially based on evidence, legal statutes, and due process. The misleading portrayal of the judiciary, and in particular the judge who presided over the case, is not only unfair but risks undermining public trust in this vital arm of government.

The current case is a reflection of this democratic balance. The judiciary fulfilled its mandate by delivering a verdict based on the facts and the law. Any subsequent exercise of clemency by the executive does not negate the judiciary’s integrity but highlights the collaborative nature of governance under the separation of powers.

Contrary to sensationalised reports, the conviction of Olowookere Segun and Morakinyo Sunday was not for the petty theft of a fowl, but for armed robbery and related crimes. The prosecution, led by the state Solicitor-General, Mrs. Abiola Adewemimo, presented irrefutable evidence, including eyewitness accounts and confessions from the accused.

The case stemmed from an incident in the year 2010, when the convicts forcefully broke into the home of Mr. Balogun Tope, a police officer, armed with a cutlass and a dane gun. They carted away valuables, including livestock, and were apprehended following their involvement in similar robberies. The evidence showed a clear pattern of criminal behaviour, including their admission to robbing another individual, Alhaja Umani Oyewo, from whom they stole broilers, eggs, and kegs of vegetable oil.

Justice Jide Falola of the Osun State High Court, sitting in Okuku, delivered a judgment grounded in the law. The convicts were found guilty of conspiracy, robbery, and stealing, with sentences proportionate to the gravity of their crimes, death by hanging for conspiracy, in accordance with Section 6(b) and 1(2)(a) of the Robbery and Firearm (Special Provisions) Act, Cap R 11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. Life imprisonment for robbery. Three years’ imprisonment for stealing.

The judge also showed humanity in his judgment, recommending that the governor may consider commuting the death sentence to a ten-year prison term, given the convicts’ ages and circumstances. This reflects a balanced application of the law, tempered with empathy, a situation we now witnessed being put into play by the Osun State government.

It is however disheartening to see attempts to trivialise this case by focusing solely on the theft of a fowl, ignoring the armed robbery charges and the overwhelming evidence presented in court. Such distortions risk misleading the public and eroding confidence in the judiciary. It is important for citizens to understand that the judiciary operates based on evidence and established legal frameworks, not emotion or public sentiment.

To those who care to know, the judiciary system in Nigeria cutting across the 36 sates and federal capital territory is a pillar of democracy, tasked with delivering justice impartially and without bias. So in the case of Osun State, Justice Falola’s handling of the case in question reflects the professionalism and integrity that underpin the judiciary’s work. The prerogative of mercy, if exercised, is not a repudiation of the court’s judgment but a constitutional tool for tempering justice with clemency.

Members of the public are urged to seek facts and reject narratives designed to undermine the judiciary. Trust in this institution is essential for maintaining law, order, and justice in society. Let us protect the integrity of the judiciary and support its critical role in safeguarding our democracy.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

Continue Reading

Politics

JUST IN: Customs has no right to confiscate foreign rice in open markets — Court of Appeal

Published

on

By

The Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna has warned the Nigeria Customs Service against confiscating foreign rice in open markets.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

The court gave the order on Wednesday in a judgement following an appeal by Customs against the judgement of the Federal High Court, Kaduna, which discharged and acquitted one Suleiman Mohammed of a two-count charge on the importation of foreign goods.

In the judgement delivered by Justice Ntong Ntong, the three-member panel of justices of the appellate court ordered the Nigeria Customs Service to release 613 bags of foreign rice, alongside 80 bags of millet worth about N200 million, and a truck impounded from Suleiman Mohammed, a 37-year-old businessman, on the Kaduna-Zaria Expressway.

The court also held that: “Kaduna-Zaria Expressway is not a land border and that the Nigeria Customs Service has no right to arrest Suleiman Mohammed on June 14, 2019, and confiscate his goods on the Kaduna-Zaria Expressway, which is outside the contemplation or application of the ban on the importation of foreign rice.”

It further held that the Nigeria Customs Service “has no right to patrol the Kaduna-Zaria Expressway or any highway for the sole purpose of arresting and confiscating any foreign rice on those highways or expressways because they are not land borders.”

Justice Ntong said he had “taken time to read the record of appeal, especially the judgement of the trial court, briefs of parties, statutes, and exhibits, and agreed with the trial court that the Kaduna-Zaria Expressway is not a ‘land border’ as stipulated by the law.”

The court held that: “The defendant was merely a purchaser of rice and millet at the Central Market, Gusau, in Zamfara State, with a receipt of purchase and not an importer, and that the Nigeria Customs Service ought to have arrested the importer and not a mere purchaser from the open market.”

Justice Ntong wondered how a fowl, instead of attacking the person who killed it, pursues the person who is de-feathering it, an Annang idiom, which suggests that the appellant ought not to shut its eyes against importers and instead chase petty traders and consumers who buy in the open market.

The court held that, after all, contraband goods pass through the borders, the main beats of customs.

The Court of Appeal also chided officials of the Nigeria Customs Service for carrying out “a shoddy investigation in the comfort of their office,” holding that “where it has become difficult or impossible for them to return the confiscated rice, millet, and truck, the Nigeria Customs Service Board shall pay to the respondent a sum of money equivalent to the current price or cost of the confiscated items.”

In dismissing the appeal, Justice Ntong Ntong ordered the Nigeria Customs Service to obey and comply with the orders of the Court forthwith.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>

Continue Reading

Trending