*Talks on the circumstances which got Wabara the senate seat *Explains why INEC alone can not stop election malpractices * Says Nigerians will not tolerate Obasanjo for another term *Insists that Emergency Rule can not be declared in Rivers State just yet
For the Makaman Bida, Alhaji Shehu Musa, it was and remains a life of selfless service. And if you are in doubt, check this out. A top civil servant who then rose to become Secretary to The Federal Government, during the Second Republic, suddenly discovers that his pocket can not just sustain his continued stay in Lagos and, therefore, had to move out to another state, this simply translates to the fact that while he may have enjoyed the privilege of high office, he did not make money from government in the Nigerian fashion. In this interview with Alhaji Musa, you would read the thoughts of a man who appears disturbed by the electoral process, particularly as it relates to the activities of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, and concludes that the electoral laws can be strengthened to make the process a bit more water-tight. The Adolphus Wabara magical entry into the senate for a second term was discussed by Musa. And he points out that courts should not be allowed to declare the winner of an election. On the style of governance of the present administration, Musa says had the legislature been up and doing, or the other parties’ leaders more re-assuring, the culture of democratic governance would have been better than it is now.
While he restrained himself from throwing barbs, he still made his points. Excerpts:
Kaduna People are surprised that after serving as the SFG during the Shagari administration as well as holding other important positions, you staked your reputation to serve in the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Are you not worried that the 2003 elections conducted by INEC seem to have been characterised by all sorts of sharp practices, at least as alleged by the opposition political parties?
Well, you see, the point really is that when you have reached certain positions in public service or civil service, you get the feeling that your whole life is with the public service particularly if you are a pensioner or you draw pension from public coffers, you continue to be a servant of the people and when government without you planning for it or applying for it invites you to come and make contributions, then of course, in the good old tradition of the civil service, you answer the call without any conditions or pre-conditions as it were. And so, we never looked at it as you mentioned, like on sticking his neck or putting his reputation on the line. It wasn’t looked at like that. You always commit yourself to continue to make your own contributions. And as far as INEC is concerned, I think there were two elections which we conducted. The first one is the one that ushered in this administration in 1999 and by and large the controversy on that is within reasonable tempo or by and large, people were able to tolerate it.
The second one of course, the issue of whether INEC had done its duty or not is something which people should judge, considering the law establishing it. You find that at the level of the commission, the duties we are able to perform including putting the guidelines for elections to conform with the electoral law and the contribution, and by and large nobody has blamed the commission not to have done that adequately. But the operations in the field, the soldiers, the police, the officers who supervise the elections were what we call them casual staff, those who are not regular staff of the commission who form 90 percent of those who handle election.
However, at any point, they serve the commission for the one week period which the election lasted. And when you have a problem, field problems, the tendency of course is there to blame it on the commission; but the commission members like me at that time were very clear that we discharged our duties. And when the law says the man is elected is the returning officer, and you appoint a returning officer and he proceeds to collude with the politicians, then of course, you sitting there has no control over that kind of happenings and until it is possible for the commission to work within the framework of the law that makes it possible for him or for its officials who are not regular members of the commission including the security forces, one would not find it easy or appropriate to put all the blame or overwhelming blame on the commission for such incidents, especially since the law also stipulates the procedures for complaints to be laid in the tribunals which are set up, So, on the whole?
So, as far as I am concerned, I believe that I carried out my duty as a member of the commission faithfully. At the same time, I believe that some areas of mistakes, some of which are even criminal mistakes committed are; 80 or 90 percent of them lets say belong to the realms of commitment by people who are not under the control of the commission. You may have commission members who are returning officers who will be blamed for about 20 percent of such happenings. Now in the last elections, all such mistakes or problems were fully investigated and some disciplinary actions were taken. And in fact like you all know, because the tribunals have reversed elections and so on and so forth. So the sum total of it is the law and the constitution should always be looked at to see whether members of the commission and those who are involved in the conduct of elections conform with it. The resort should be made to law courts.
In some places like Enugu, where there were no elections at all, the Resident Electoral Commissioner announced results in such places. In some cases, it was even alleged that some PDP candidates were the people distributing INEC materials from the INEC storing room?
These are things which I have said earlier, when these people are already taking the law into their hands. It is not that election alone. There were so many activities that you find some miscreants or overzealous people taking the law into their hands and at that point, the commission can not do much, resulting to the law taking its course. Those who are also in charge of administration of law or legal administration are not seen to be perfect and those who conspired or who partake in this illegal methods again, the blame shouldn’t go 100 percent on the commission even though the commission was the authority that was to conduct elections.
The case of Enugu was effectively dealt with at the tribunals and I think irrespective of what any individual can think ultimately, it is what the tribunals make of it, unless of course, at the end of the day now, we are learning from insight, we persuade our law makers to make the law clearer and make it possible for the on the spot issuance of results because you can’t go beyond the law on declaration of results. If the guidelines are not followed, they are good ground for tribunals to nullify elections. And so, if what was said took place, those who are affected or victims of the malpractice, should collect and present evidence to that effect to tribunals, but the tribunals system many people argue is not yielding results. Okay, so, we should work out a way that it will yield results by changing the law or amending the law appropriately, and making sure that the next election, we have inputs from these lessons we have learnt from this one.
The Senate President, Chief Adolphus Wabara’s disputed election happened when you were in INEC and you were even quoted as stating that he did not win his senate seat. What really happened?
Well, as an individual now, I am not speaking for the commission, I have since retired from the commission and as an individual, I feel that so many things went wrong and I don’t want to be involved in legal tangles beyond what I had done earlier on.
My stand was that the judge who was eventually sacked ordered the commission to issue certificate of success of the election (to Wabara) was going beyond his jurisdiction and we should have election declared by the right people, at the right time, not subsequently after so many under currents have taken place.
At this stage, it will not be appropriate for me to comment beyond these observations which I made. When I was a member of the commission because the commission must have been fully involved now in more details of information concerning the election and if the commission decides that it was satisfied with those new information, so be it. And one thing I believe very firmly, is that we are all responsible to the Almighty Allah. Any temporary relief obtained as a result of the weaknesses in the law provisions or law administration will not provide permanent solution. I think we should remember firmly that our stewardship must be accounted for before the Almighty.
If in fact there was mishap in this election, Nigerians should lament forever. They should take things to the Almighty and the Almighty is there to make the final judgement.
But after the election, you were one of those that said that Wabara did not win. Do you still maintain that positions?
That was what I said that in that place, there must have been some new information either from proceedings of tribunals or courts that made the commission not to carry on with the case, or claim that the election was not won. I have no locus standi now because even if I maintain that (he did not win), it doesn’t make any difference to the whole thing. But I still have locus standi before the Almighty, that’s why I believe that, and that is my directional judge. We may look at it now as if He (God) has taken a stand but we should be familiar in his own miraculous way and could task us on the issue in another way before long or after sometime.
Some people believe that President Obasanjo is planning to stay beyond 2007. Do you believe it is appropriate for anybody to perpetuate himself in power in this country?
Well, these are claims and counter claims and what have you. Certainly, it is not, in the spirit of our democratic norms itself. But it is not something which is new, especially in Africa here and I personally do not think Nigerians, majority of Nigerians will like that to happen, because we are talking about giving opportunities to different parts of the country to have a feel of what it is to the spirit of appreciation, it is not only that the others, such groups or ethnic groups will feel marginalised and deprived but we need new blood, new ideas. The so-called continuity to me, we continue with progress but when you have static situation or what a good friend of mine described as dynamic inactivity, then you all look forward to having fresh ideas for this kind of situation.
On the other hand of course, Nigerians, would deal with the situation concerning change of constitution. Unless the present constitution is changed for that kind of approach, it will not be possible. The issue is not yet out of hand with Nigerians and I believe, as we go along developments will bear themselves out and we would see whether Nigerians would tolerate it or not.
How do you see the agitation by both the south south and south east to produce the 2007 presidency.
My understanding of it all is that parties decide where they want to rotate their things and as far as the spirit of the constitution is concerned, the constitution seems to support a rotation between the south and north as it were. Though south-south and southeast both have the right to agitate but it is my opinion, that at the time the rotation gets back to the south, they should sort out which zone should produce the president then.
The Attorney of the Federation and Minister of justice has asked the police and the National Chairman of PDP to disobey court orders at different times. How do you see this development?
Well, I am not a lawyer but as a layman, I find it a dangerous trend but the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is a very strong organisation in Nigeria and I respect whatever position the NBA takes in respect of such issues that come from time to time. The idea that the Attorney General has constitutional power to issue Nolle prosecui, these are very heavy responsibilities and you’ve just got to be good yourself as a professional lawyer to be able to interpret actions based on either the letter or the spirit of the Nolle prosecui
It is not a matter of Nolle prosecui now. This is a situation where somebody has gone to court and court gives an order...?
(cuts in) It is not the letter of Nolle prosecui but the spirit. The spirit is what I am talking about. When the Attorney General tells somebody to go and do that and he goes to do that, it doesn’t absolve the person who did it from continuous proceedings of the law and the second party; the other party could decide to proceed (with the matter) and the court would not stop to deal appropriately with it. And we have a strong NBA which could deal with the matter and so layman like us ought to be cautious.
The governor of Anambra State appears to be the only governor without police security in this country. Does this argue well for National security?
I suppose not, especially in Nigeria where the security situation is what it is . We have like ADC, batman or orderly, symbol, I think this could easily undermine the person and the authority of the person. So, I think the best thing is for government to look at it again and restore his security. That is my opinion.
Please can you compare the problems which led to the declaration of a state of current crisis in Rivers where hundreds of peopled have died? Do you believe there is need for a state of emergency also in Rivers as people are now saying?
This is trying to bring me into partisan politics and you see, I would rather not offer my opinion on the pages of newspaper to comment on this issue. Personally however, it is unfortunate we should have the situation that prevails in Rivers State but you should know that sometimes, it is better to temper this kind of prescription with caution because you might find that what is going on is not as a result of inability of government to deal with the situation. It is more of people even within government itself, who want to prove there case that the Chief Executive is not effective, or they also have a responsibility here.
So, to deal with situation like that, you don’t have to use the same prescription as my little knowledge of administration can show. Way back in my days as administrative officer, I learnt something: Sir Ahmadu Bello said that in a federation, what is required is unity and not uniformity. And when the Queen visited Nigeria in 1956, he told the Queen, we seek unity, not uniformity. So, you must not apply exactly the same prescription in a situation like that, especially the Rivers matter. In some of these internal unrest, we have had terrible internal squabbles in Delta, we did not (declare state of emergency); so, also, we even had it in Anambra state –– Agulari and Umuleri, not to talk of the Kaduna riots etc. so, lets say that the method of checking the situation should be measured, you can’t jump to the conclusion that because the two things seem to be the same, government at the national level was one way governing or not favouring one group or the other.
Having participated in the politics of the Second Republic, as Secretary to the Federal Government, what is your impression of the five years of democracy under Obasanjo’s regime?
I am very glad with this question. In 1984, I had an interview with this same Vanguard after the coup and I made it clear that days will come when we will be able to compare the spirit and the practice of democracy during that regime vis-à-vis any other democratic dispensation. I feel that the fault in our stagnation and the reason why we stagger as we walk on the path of democracy; the cause of it is the undesirable and premature judgement of the Shagari administration. We were building a lot of tradition and democratic structures.
We for instance got involved in a lot of internal problems of National Party of Nigeria (NPN) states. Individual governors and others came to form a caucus to discuss and to hear opinion of other people on their states and to do everything possible to put off whatever fire, extinguish the flame that was burning for instance in Cross River State, with the late Chief Clement Isong as governor with Rivers State with Chief Malford Okilo. Even in Benue State, we had Aper Aku. In Kaduna State, problems were there. But they were all put together in a family way and we felt that, if these things were allowed to go on like that over the next four years (1983), we would have got a very good presidential system of government traditions and conventions. You have to remember that at that time, although we chose a presidential system, the parliamentary system, with ministries and ministers;
ministers who are chief executives and it was something which had to be transformed into a Nigerian style of presidential system.
Now, as soon as that government went, we went into practice of parliamentary system again because the Head of states were not elected, not to talk of the ministers. It has become part of us; it is our blood, to have things done without regard to the constitution
But the lawmakers to me are as guilty as operators in the executive are because they themselves don’t consult their constituencies as they need to, on major issues before coming with a pronouncement. I don’t know, I am not sure for instance how much Ghali Na’Abba, for instance (former speaker of House of Representative) consulted his constituency concerning things he was reported to be saying and doing as at then. And as an observer in this Second Republic, I think that we have regressed, we have not built on some of those fine democratic traditions which we started during the Second Republic.
What you are saying is that Shagari’s government was better then this one?
I am not saying that it was better or worse, but I am saying that in terms of (defending the constitution and accountability, the National Assembly at that time was fully active and able to check the executive. And the state governments where they found that the policies of the Federal government were going hay wire, they went to court and secured judgements. Those were fine democratic practices which we could have built upon. That would have assured us much better development than we seem to be seeing here now.
