|
New Page 9
Why Duke fired Akpabuyo LG boss
TOM MOSES, Calabar
EARLY
this year when the Cross River State governor, Mr Donald Duke presented "A bill
for a law to make provisions for local governments in Cross River State" to the
state House of Assembly only discerning minds could decipher the motives behind
it.
The House was sharply divided between
those who accepted the bill as sent by the governor and those with some
misgivings.
But as members of the House debated the
said bill, majority of the lawmakers had good reasons to differ with the
governor on some aspects of the bill, hence, the several deletions and
amendments of the contentious provisions, which the governor was not happy
about.
Some of the contentious aspects of the
bill deleted were on deductions from the monthly allocation to the councils for
joint developments purposes in the states, powers conferred on the governor to
dissolve any local government council via a declaration of a state of emergency
in any council.
The governor’s disapproval was aptly
expressed in his letter to the speaker of the House, Hon. Bassey Ewah on Friday
March 26, 2004 titled, "Re: A bill for law to make provisions for local
governments in Cross River State," but received on Tuesday April 6, 2004.
"I am in receipt of the executive Bill
passed by the House of Assembly to make provisions for the establishment,
finance, composition of local government administration in the state and must
express my gratitude for the speedy consideration accorded it.
"With due respect to the House, I regret I
cannot give assent to the version of the bill now passed. I have set out below,
the various aspects of the bill with which I have reservations and arrive at a
consensus of this bill that will balance the concerns of the legislature and the
executive branches of government", Duke stated.
It would be recalled that other executive
bills to the House usually experienced no delay in passage except the Local
Government Bill 2004.
Thus, members of the public who watched
the debates and followed the proceedings were quite happy with the House for the
various amendments and imputs made into the bill. They were delighted that at
least, the members demonstrated their independence to check and balance opinions
on the Local Government Law. Many also felt that their romance with the
executive would turn sour because of the manner they interpreted the bill and
lampooned Governor Duke.
But a few days after receipt of the
Governor’s letter, the House made a volte face as every member seemed to
have suddenly realised the frivolity of their arguments and the futility in
stoutly canvassing them.
They passed the bill as earlier sent by
the governor, unedited, to the surprise of those who had earlier saluted their
courage, including council chairmen who it was gathered, were seriously lobbying
the House to maintain their opposition to the bill.
It was however gathered that the
governor’s insistence on the contentious provisions arose from the ugly
experiences he had with the immediate past council chairmen where most of them
were said to be only concerned with collecting allocations without having much
to show for such funds.
Besides, the bill is said to have been
evolved to curb the incessant cases of violent disturbances experienced in some
local government areas. Many of such violent incidents led to the death of many
innocent and promising youths.
Now, with the Local Government Law 2004 in
place, all the 18 local government councils of the state are to compulsorily
contribute 2.5 per cent of their monthly allocations to a joint account with the
state government for the joint execution of projects and development of the
state. Under the law, the state governor among other things, had powers to
declare a state of emergency in any local government area.
This means that he has powers to remove a
council chairman who falls short of expectations especially if his domain is
violence prone but has no inherent checks against security breaches.
Following its passage by the House, many
council chairmen were disenchanted over some provisions especially the ones
prohibiting them from executing development projects independently of the state
government as well as payment of their staff salaries. Monies for salaries and
allowances are deducted at source from council allocations and paid into
designated banks where the staffers are expected to go and withdraw personally.
In other words the chairmen are left with
only miscellaneous funds of N5 million each and perhaps, the revenue generated
in their respective council areas. "Chairmen are now like ordinary supervisors"
one of them confided in our correspondent.
It was for this reason that many of the
chairmen stoutly opposed the Local Government Law 2004 because it gives too much
powers to the governor just as it reduces the third tier of government in the
state to a mere appendage of the state government.
But their complaints are in whispers. A
few of them who cried out against the law received serious bashing from Governor
Duke because it seemed that their complaints, were borne out of ulterior
motives.
They included the Calabar South local
government area chairman, Mr Bassey Ekefre, that of Boki, Chief Jacob Otu Enya,
Akpabuyo, Dr Salem David Joshua and Ebaye Okonjong of Ikom local government.
But unfortunately Dr. Joshua had gone to
the press to react to the bashing he was given by Governor Duke claiming that he
was never given ample time to address the governor.
Joshua in the said reaction expressed
serious anger at the governor addressing him impolitely not minding that he was
one of the few persons who introduced him to Cross River State politics and also
stood by him till he emerged as governor.
Prior to this exchange of words, the age
long skirmishes between two communities in Akpabuyo resurfaced. Villagers at
Ikot Eyo Ndem, were attacked by youths alleged to have come from or instigated
by the Efut Esighi community all in Akpabuyo local government area.
Consequently, it became very easy for the
chairman to be attacked by the state chief executive.
Governor Duke immediately wrote to the
House of Assembly requesting an instrument to suspend Dr Joshua from office as
chairman of Akpabuyo using the skirmishes as enough justification.
"Whereas on 11th June 2004 and on
10th/11th July 2004 and also in the recent past, the village of Ikot Eyo Ndem,
Akpabuyo local government area was attacked by persons alleged to have come from
or been instigated by the Efut Esighi community also in Akpabuyo local
government area.
"Whereas these disturbances, said to be
part of a long-standing dispute of uncertain origin between the two communities
of Ikot Eyo Ndem and Efut Esighi, led on each occasion to extensive damage of
property, loss of lives and a breakdown of public order and safety in the
locality of the two communities.
Whereas the elected authorities of
Akpabuyo local government area have not only been unable to enforce the
maintenance of law, order and public safety in the locality in question, but are
also widely alleged to have been involved in the said disturbances.
"Whereas for the maintenance of peace,
order and good government in Akpabuyo local government area, an administrative
panel has been instituted to inquire into these attacks, their circumstances,
the dramatis personae therein and the various roles played by them and
"Whereas it is necessary to take certain
measures to ensure that peace is fully restored to the village of Ikot Eyo Ndem
and the said inquiry is carried out free of undue influence, misrepresentation
and obstruction of Justice."
Based on the governor’s request, Dr Joshua
was suspended from office for 90 days. But that period elapsed on Tuesday
October 19, 2004 but the problem led to his outright removal from office.
A letter to this effect from Governor Duke
to the Speaker, Cross River State House of Assembly, Hon. Bassey Ewah, dated
October 18, 2004, alleged that the findings and recommendations of the panel of
inquiry showed that Dr Joshua was not resident in his local government area, a
development that was seen to be in direct contravention of section 46(3) of the
Cross River State Local Government Law 2004.
He is also alleged to have lied that he
did not receive any funds upon assumption of office, hence, his inability to
provide logistics support to the Police Mobile Force Unit deployed to the
troubled areas. The panel debunked this claim and reported that funds were
speedily disbursed to him specifically for the exigencies of the communal clash
between Efut Esighi and Ikot Eyo villages.
"During the outbreak of hostilities, the
suspended chairman clearly abdicated his responsibilities and left the
initiative of providing vital remedial responses to his vice chairman and other
public-spirited persons. The chairman instead relocated to Calabar for no
justifiable reason.
"The suspended chairman, despite every
opportunity given to him, held the administrative panel of inquiry in utter
contempt and refused to appear or in any other manner to assist the panel in its
work instead, he resorted to digressions and leveling of spurious allegations of
bias against the state government including unsubstantiated accusations of
threat to his personal safety.
"I hereby state that the suspended
chairman committed serious breaches of the duties of his office through various
negligent and irresponsible acts and omissions before, during and after the
communal clashes in question to wit, the invasion of Ikot Eyo Ndem.
"Dr. Joshua engaged in gross misconduct
and was substantially responsible for the abject breakdown of law, public order
and safety that occurred in Ikot Eyo Ndem, Akpabuyo local government area on
11th and 12 June 2004."
According to the governor, it is for these
reasons that he requested the House of Assembly to consider and pass a
resolution to support the outright removal from office of Dr. Joshua as
chairman, Akpabuyo local government council.
But the removal of Dr Joshua from office
has not gone down well with many people in the state. Most of such critics have
accused Governor Duke of vindictiveness and high handedness.
They are equally worried that the present
state assembly has passed a law that would mortgage their future.
"The present crop of legislators except
for a few who are afraid of expressing their minds, have completely mortgaged
their conscience and independence. They cannot again think by themselves.
Somebody somewhere is now thinking for them. They have in fact, destroyed their
integrity.
"The local government as a third tier has
been dangerously squeezed by two collaborators, the state government and the
state House of Assembly that it now looks nonsensical for one to aspire to be
chairman.
"It also becomes difficult to assess the
performance of the chairmen so that we can ask questions subsequently to what
extent they think we can continue to encourage them to aspire. This is because
we will not tolerate appointments into the councils again because democracy is
about competition, popularity and acceptance.
"This law will facilitate conspiracy,
protect indolent chairmen and make the office less competitive and unattractive
because it is now directly run by the state government", Mr Ayei Ibor, a
political analyst noted.
On the allegation that Dr Joshua rebuffed
the invitation to appear before the special panel of inquiry, Ibor said it was
not true because according to him, Joshua apart from sending a detailed written
report on the said disturbances in his area, was represented by his legal
counsel.
"I would have preferred that Dr. Joshua be
queried on account of the rebellious interview he granted to those two
journalists and not on a skimish that is older than history, a skirmish that if
I am asked, I think is beyond the state and demands the federal government’s
intervention.
"In any case, the outcome of the panel’s
inquiry was known even before it was announced. But it is sad at this level to
use such antics to fix somebody who has differing views on certain issues", Ibor
insisted.
Also commenting on the removal of Dr
Joshua, a legal luminary in the state, Chief Francis Esu, declared the action as
unconstitutional saying that the removal of a duly elected chairman should be by
a recall process by his people.
Given the situation, he opined that
Joshua’s removal can be challenged in the law court and the resolution by the
House of Assembly annulled.
Chief Esu however blamed most of the
blunders in the laws passed by the state’s Houses of Assembly and the 1999
constitution of Nigeria which he stressed also confers too much powers and
influence on the governors and the executives generally.
According to him, it was based on such
powers that the state’s Houses of Assembly derived their strength to confer and
even transfer powers to the governors, the reasons notwithstanding.
"The only way to curb it is to have that
law rescinded. An action can be brought challenging that resolution. If it was
not done within the ambit of the law, it can be challenged", Esu informed.
Nevertheless, it does seem that the
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) led government is not in support of actions that
tend to smear its reputation and weaken its chances of continuous grip on power.
Several instances abound where the PDP leadership had summoned their elected
representatives at various levels to appear before it, to offer explanations to
certain allegations and complaints against them in some states of the
federation.
Accordingly, the party’s National
leadership did not hesitate to summon the Speaker of the Cross River State House
of Assembly, his deputy and relevant committee chairmen, the leadership of the
party in the state and the state governor, Mr. Donald Duke to appear before it
on Wednesday, October 20, 2007 in Abuja, the federal capital territory to
explain why Dr. Joshua should be removed from office.
"Although it could be predicted that Dr
Joshua will not regain his seat through that summon, the PDP at least, proved to
be a reliable arbiter for its members" Mr Clement Antigha, one of the political
heavyweights in Calabar noted.
But a top member of PDP in the state, who
wanted his name veiled, decried the manner the summon of Governor Duke, the
House of Assembly leadership as well as that of the state party executive was
handled. He said, instead of hearing from all the aggrieved parties during the
summon, the governor alone went in to have a three-hour closed door meeting with
the chairman of PDP, Chief Audu Ogbeh, while the rest waited in the reception.
Emerging from the meeting later, the
politician said, Duke only those with him to get into their vehicles for them to
return to Calabar. He was said to have ignored probing questions from them as to
the outcome of the meeting and rather sent a text message from his handset to
the acting chairman of Akpabuyo, Mr Emmanuel Edem to get prepared for his
swearing in. However, attempts to get Dr Joshua for comments on his next line of
action failed as he was said to have travelled out to Lagos State on his
pastoral ministry.
Dr Joshua, a medical doctor by profession, had earlier
served as Akpabuyo local government chairman in 1996 under the zero party system
after which he served as the Special Assistant to Governor Duke on Essential
Drugs Management before he was asked to contest the chairmanship election last
March.
|
