Nigeria’s 52nd independence anniversary celebration has come and gone. It was the second year in a row that a low-keyed celebration would take place within an over-fortified Aso Villa. Regardless of the government’s excuses, everyone knew that security threats were largely responsible for its action. Besides, a highbrow celebration would have raised questions as what exactly was being celebrated.
A dominant theme in the post-anniversary analysis is lamentation over Nigeria’s lack of growth despite abundant oil resources and highly skilled professionals in all fields of human endeavour. How could a nation that loaned its professionals to other African countries at the dawn of independence, be the same one that could not nurture the potential of its highly talented professionals 26 years later, when “brain drain” began, and continues till today? How could a nation endowed with so much oil wealth continue to lack necessary development in education; health care; agriculture; and infrastructure, including power and water supply; air, road, and rail transport facilities; public libraries; and recreational facilities, while its leaders continue to indulge in capital flight?
To further complicate matters, personal and property safety continue to be compromised, while the business and investment environments remain polluted by growing internal terrorism and incessant armed robberies and kidnappings. Many observers have sounded a note of warning over Nigeria’s possible disintegration in the face of uncontrolled security threats and continued divisions between the North and the South over just about anything, from where the President should come from to how oil resources should be shared and whether or not states should manage their own police. These divisions are further complicated by ethnic, religious, and linguistic differences. The idea of a failed state has crossed many observers’ minds.
There is no doubt, however, that Nigeria is on the edge of a precipice. The question now is what can we do to prevent her from tipping over? Six major factors seem to be behind Nigeria’s free fall, and they need to be reversed if the country is to move forward. They are: lack of transparency and accountability; corruption; inept leadership; poor governance; citizens’ complacency; and a weak political structure that ignores, or fails to recognise, its fault lines. There’s no quick fix for these problems but we must begin somewhere, and now.
One can understand lack of transparency during the military era. Whoever was in power either put himself there or was installed by a small band of soldiers. Military rulers shared with the public only what they wanted to share. The expectations were much higher with the return to civilian rule in 1999. Yet, lack of transparency continues unabated. The consequences have been grave. For one thing, lack of transparency breeds lack of accountability. When you don’t know exactly what your leaders are doing behind the screen they have erected between the government and the governed, for what will you be holding them accountable?
Even more importantly, lack of transparency and accountability provides a platform for corruption. The problem with corruption in Nigeria is not just about what percentage of public funds is being looted by corrupt politicians and government officials but about what percentage of budgeted funds for a given sector is actually expended on that sector. Year after year, we are provided with huge figures (in billions) expended on this and that sector. But when you look closely at those sectors, you don’t find evidence of improvement to justify the stated expenditure. It has become customary for the National Assembly to set up a probe, apparently to demonstrate that it is performing its “oversight” role. We have now come to know that such probes often initiate another cycle of corruption as probe panelists look for their own cut. Then the Presidency comes in and sets aside the probe reports. A fake attempt to fight corruption follows until the case disappears from public notice.
The fact of the matter is that no matter what laws and institutions are established for fighting corruption, the effectiveness of the fight rests with the leadership. In countries where the most rapid and enduring political and economic developments have taken place, the role of effective leadership is always in the forefront. Whether it was the construction of the American nation or the rise of Japan from the rubble of World War II, or raising Singapore from squalour to a global business, investment, and industrial giant, we are talking about effective leaders, who put nation above self and came into office with a defined mission, a clear vision, and workable strategies for national development. Rather than wait to be goaded into action, these leaders successfully built a moral consensus among their people and changed the attitude of whole populations.
These are leaders who lead, rather than be led by a cabal; leaders who govern, rather than rule; leaders who motivate their people, rather than wait to be motivated. Above all, they are leaders who make national institutions work for the people rather than work for themselves. They deploy national resources to the service of the nation and its citizens rather than share them among the ruling class, cronies, and relatives. The truth is that no nation can rise above the quality of its leadership.
A proactive citizenry is needed that will work together to prevent milk from being spilled, rather than cry over spilled milk. The trick is to hold leaders accountable at federal, state, and local levels. In order for such a citizenry to exist, there must be a drastic change in the present attitude of complicity to proactive engagement. Change can hardly begin at the top in Nigeria because the political class benefits from the status quo. Citizens must be prepared to take their country back. They must rise above regional, ethnic, and religious sentiments when they vote for their leaders and begin to value meritocracy.
A recurrent problem since independence is the lack of opportunity for citizens to debate and agree on political and governance structure. Whatever political and governance structure we now have resulted from top-down, rather than bottom-up decisions. Yet, the divisions that exist among us cannot be wished away nor could the plight of ethnic minorities be swept under the carpet.
That’s why the call for a Sovereign National Conference has been on the ascendancy. Granting and funding such a conference may well be the beginning of atonement for the Jonathan Presidency.Source : punchng[dot]com
No comments:
Post a Comment