KWENU! Our culture, our future

Third term: What manner of public hearing

ACHO ORABUCHI

 Dallas, Texas, USA

Faced with a predictable defeat in the hands of Mantu-led committee and imbued with a growing angst of the populace, members of the opposition to the third term plan are hurriedly reorganizing for the impending battle at the National Assembly. This time they’re armed with the support of the silent masses.

But what manner of public hearing did Senator Ibrahim Mantu’s National Assembly Joint Constitution Review Committee (JCRC) conduct to reach a decision for the third term? In justifying the committee’s voice vote decision, he invoked the will of the people as the fortress of the third term. For Mantu’s JCRC to recommend that the section 137 (1) (b) of the 1999 Constitution which stipulates that “a person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if he has been elected to such office at any two previous elections” be amended to allow an additional term of four years, is an affront. To assert that the committee’s decision represents the popular or majority opinion of the populace seems to denigrate the intelligence of Nigerians.

How could Mantu’s JCRC reach a decision—a predetermined decision—after a murky public hearing distinguished by lack of public participation in all local government areas and turn around to invoke popular opinion? The Committee appeared less compelled to get public inputs than to masquerade a charade aimed at achieving one goal—third term. The Mantu-led group did not do a good job in ferreting out public opinion. The Committee was and still is a disservice to the nation. It’s really a shame that those handling the affairs of the nation don’t put the interest of the nation first.

The committee did not ensure a thorough vetting of the process. Rather it conducted the whole exercise through a narrow prism of venal interest—a construct anchored by status quo mentality.  For supplanting the wishes of Nigerian public with their own narrow interest, the JCRC members have set the stage for fulminated political power play between the supporters of third term and the opposition. The aftermath of the power play may leave the will of most people dampened and political obituary of many observed.

However, the snares of our past and present culture of corruption may intensify the travail of the opposition in this power play for some obvious reasons. Nevertheless, to understand this phenomenon, one has to first understand the system that shaped Nigerians. In a sentence, it is perennial corruption with corrupt power.

Unfortunately, issues in Nigeria are not subjected to the power of persuasion based on superior ideas and art of convincing. Instead, the power of persuasion based on bribery, blackmail, intimidation, and abuse of power is overly in play. This seems to be effective because of the following reasons: Most Nigerian decision-makers are gullible and could succumb to a little pressure to support policies that are against the primary interest of the nation due to venal behavior, lack of incorruptibility, and lack of principles and ideology.

Some these individuals are afraid of change for fear of the unknown. Others and the electorate may be devoid of metacognition, thereby leaving the elected and appointed officials to operate unchecked.

One interesting observation here is that some people are supporting the third term agenda in order to protect their interests and themselves from potential prosecution. These supporters would lose everything if the third term plan fails. As a result, they’re fighting for the plan with everything they’ve got. Future would spell doom to some without third term for President Obasanjo. Again, that is precisely self-interest.

Well, collision course lay in wait as the shadows of suspicion continue to trail JCRC while supporters of third term plan and the opposition honed their art of persuasion.

Would the opposition fluster in fear of retribution? In the same token, would the supporters capitulate in fear of future prosecution? The seminal issue is that the country deserves debates on issues with civility and without corrupt influences. At the end of the day, bad ideas would be clobbered.

If not, Nigeria would be in for a rude awakening. I’m petrified to read about the average years some leaders who turned democracy into a dictatorship decimated their respective countries. They literally put their citizens through a horrendous torture. I read Chuks Iloegbunam’s column the other day where he said, “Hastings Kamuzu Banda was President of Malawi for 30 years. By next year Omar Bongo would have been President of Gabon for 40 years. In 2009 Muammar Qaddafi would have ruled Libya for 40 years. Habib Bourguiba was President of Tunisia for 30 years. Mobutu Sese Seko was Zairean (Congo Kinshasa) President for 32 years. Gnassingbe Eyadema was President of Togo for 38 years.” Chuks forgot Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who was elected new president October 13, 1981 after the death of Sadat. The statistics were alarming. However, we may never know the human misery buried in those statistics.

Does Nigeria really want to emulate the above-mentioned countries? God forbid! Senate President, please open up the debate on the third term so that each senator would have the opportunity to express the views of his or her constituency. Admittedly, you must be under a tremendous pressure to deliver third term. Just do what is right and leave the rest for history books.

www.kwenu.com: Simply surprise yourself yonder!