| NEWS
|
National
Metro
Africa
World
Business
|
|
|
|
|
| SPORTS
|
Home
Abroad
Golf Weekly
Results
|
|
|
| FEATURES
|
Focus
Policy & Politics
Arts
Media
Science
Natural Health
Law
Education
Weekend
Friday Review
Executive Briefs
Fashion
Food & Drink
Auto Wheels
Friday Worship
Saturday Magazine
Sunday Magazine
Ibru Ecumenical Centre
Agro Care
|
|
|
|
|
Rulership and the people's voice
By Adebayo Ninalowo
LET us proceed from the assumption that: (1) Those at the commanding height of the polity or rulership: share a common belief in a form of religiousity and God who has spiritual dominion over the heaven and earth, including the constituent parts. (2) The ruled (the people) also share the belief in divine attributes with their rulers.
With that set of assumptions, we proceed to enunciate the old clichZ - "vox populi vox dei". That simply means the voice of the people is the voice of God. That is to suggest that the commonality of people's opinions or will may well connote divine concurrence. In effect, it becomes sinful if not abominable for anybody to constitute a hindrance in the path of actualisation of people's common will.
Indeed, it would seem to be utterly an exercise in futility trying to reconcile claims of religiousity with refusal of a rulership to hearken to the voice of reason and the people. The present dispensation of government (not governance) under Chief Olusegun Aremu Okikiola Obasanjo underscores that kind of sheer hypocrisy. Although there are so many instances by which one may demonstrate that sort of utter hypocrisy of disdainful chicanery as to claims of monopoly of wisdom and knowledge, as well as proclivity to succumb to poor advice and judgement, it is the avoidable attendant crisis accruing from incessant increases in prices of petroleum products that commands our attention here. Inspite of brazen denials by key government functionaries, at the behest and on behalf of Mr. President, the various increases had been instigated and condoned through the instrumentality of the presidency by administrative fiat, without regard to consultation with the citizenry. Indeed, such astronomical increases had materialised inspite of massive popular opposition.
A number of frivolous and unwitting self-indicting reasons had been adduced by government in order to support, but not to justify the unjustifiable, the several abrupt increases in prices since 1999 under the present regime, namely: (1) The refineries are not working, therefore, refined petroleum products have to be imported with foreign currencies. (2) As a result of cheaper local prices of fuel as compared to those in neighbouring countries, smuggling of the products becomes attractive. Therefore, in order to mitigate the degree of smuggling, local prices must increase. (3) Although the most recent budgetary projection of crude oil was put at about $27 per barrel in international market, the actual price had jumped to as much as $54 per barrel, an increase of a 100 per cent beyond projection. Inspite of the obvious fiscal windfall, the reasoning of government might be that it would cost more to fund the importation of refined products. Therefore, local prices should increase. But the foregoing reasoning from government is rather unconvincing, precisely because it is inconsistent with elementary principles of logic, it does not appeal to common sense.
Here is why: In the first instance, if local refineries are not functioning, inspite of colossal amount of money that has reportedly been expended on them, culprits should be identified and be made answerable to the public. Simply put, the refineries should be made to work by whatever means possible. Secondly, if there are smuggling activities of petroleum products into neighbouring countries, it must be a function of inefficiency on the part of relevant security operatives. Therefore, astronomical increases in fuel prices cannot be an antidote to smuggling of the products.
Thirdly, if it is not the case that local availability of refined fuel is dependent heavily on importation, the impact of price fluctuations in international market would practically have been negligible. Besides, the windfall from sudden increases in the prices of crude oil should accrue into benefits to the people, not in paradox of hardships. Obviously, owing to generic utilitarian values of petroleum products, incessant price increases of the products inevitably attract concomitant escalation in the prices of other essential commodities and services; moreso with stagnant salaries and wages. Thus there is preponderance of pauperisation of the human condition.
The so-called policy of "deregulation" should not connote abdication of responsibility of government to the people in terms of their welfare. What is prudent for government in order to mitigate avoidable increasing levels of self-induced crisis of legimation of its existence, is not only to listen to the voice of the people, but also to re-orient its policies in terms of their desires and interest. Otherwise, it would be sheer absurdity not to expect people to agitate against clearly oppressive policies.
- Professor Ninalowo teaches sociology at the University of Lagos.
|
|
|
|
|
| BUSINESS SERVICES
|
Property
Appointments
Money Watch
Market Report
Capital Market
Business Travels
Maritime Watch
Industry Watch
Energy Report
Insurance
Compulife
|
|
|
|
|
