Nigeria president Muhammadu Buhari on Friday was reported to have moved to intervene in a power tussle between the political and traditional authorities in the north central Kano State.

Tensions had been high in Kano over a move by Governor Abdullahi Ganduje to oust the Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II after a fallout deemed to be political in nature.

The Daily Nigerian portal cited an inside source at the presidency as confirming the news. Other portals have since reported same.

“You know the president hardly interferes in matters of states. But on this issue, the president had to just interfere. The president is not happy with the governor for taking the unpopular decision of balkanizing the emirate and making moves to dethrone the emir.

“The president therefore summoned Ganduje on Thursday and directed the Director-General of the DSS to call for emergency meeting with governors of the North West.

“The governors are led by the governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, who first met and briefed the president on the matter on Thursday,” the source is quoted to have said.

Buhari’s intervention comes on the final day the Kano State government had given to the emir to respond to a query of financial misappropriation and to explain why he should not be suspended.

Reports say the fallout between the two men was due to perceived support of the emir for the main opposition candidate in this years gubernatorial elections which Ganduje won after a supplementary vote to secure his final term in office.

The Emir, a former Central Bank governor, has had his powers split after Ganduje split the Kano Emirates – which dates back to centuries – into five. He appointed four extra emirs with the same powers as Sanusi.

Source: Africa News

Nigeria’s president Muhammadu Buhari surprised many when he did not deliver a speech at his inauguration on Wednesday.

The 76-year-old former military leader faces a long list of challenges, including combating a sluggish economy, high unemployment and a decade-old Islamic insurgency.

Buhari will need to create jobs if he is to turn around the country’s fortunes over the next four years. Nearly a quarter of the workforce is unemployed and most of its 190 million people live on less than $2 a day.

“Our expectation is that Mr President will now focus more on the issue of security, employment and agriculture because these are the core areas,” said Basil Ejidike, who chairs the APC in southern Anambra state.

Reactions to inauguration

Some social media users were critical of the absence of a speech. Software developer Tosin Olugbenga called it was a “missed opportunity”.

“It is an opportunity for the president to speak to Nigerians and give further assurance of his commitment to a better Nigeria,” he said in a tweet.

A nation in trance

Buhari now has a second chance to turn campaign promises into policies aimed at stimulating economic growth.

Nigeria’s economy grew by 1.93% last year, its fastest pace since the recession. Growth of 2.1% is forecast by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for this year, though that would be among the slowest rates in Africa.

Tackling insecurity across much of the country is already a priority. The military is fighting jihadist group Boko Haram and an offshoot linked to Islamic State in the northeast, while contending with communal violence over grazing land in central states.

A separate surge of bandit attacks and other violence in the northwest has forced 20,000 to flee to neighbouring Niger since April, the U.N. refugee agency said on Tuesday.

REUTERS

As many as 39 people have died in election-related violence in Nigeria, as the country awaits the results of this weekend’s voting in what is forecast to be its tightest poll since the end of military rule in 1999

Current President Muhummadu Buhari, 76, a former military ruler is seeking a second term on an anti-corruption platform.

He faces off againstbusinessman Atiku Abubakar, 72, a former vice president who has promised to expand the role of the private sector.

The election was held on Saturday, but violence and problems with electronic voting machines meant voting continued in a small number of places before polls closed on Sunday.

The ballot was initially due to take place last week, but was postponed just hours before it was due to begin, with the authorities citing logistics.

PIncumbent President of Nigeria Muhammadu Buhari

Nigeria’s 73 million eligible voters chose from a pool of more than 70 presidential candidates, although only those from the two main parties — Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar — are seen as having a chance.

The President last year publicly denied social media claims he died and was replaced by a Sudanese clone, and also courted international controversy in the past by suggesting his wife “belongs in the kitchen”.

The Situation Room — which represents more than 70 civil society groups — gave Sunday’s figure of 39 deaths, citing data from Lagos-based consultancy SBM Intelligence.

In one incident, seven people were killed in a shootout between Nigerian army troops and a gang.PMahmood Yakubu, chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),said an electoral official had been shot dead by unknown people.

The president’s office declined to comment, while the opposition candidate Mr Abubakar condemned the violence in a statement.

“No politician’s ambition is worth the blood of any innocent Nigerian,” he said.

The number of deaths reported by Sunday was below the final death tolls in previous elections in Africa’s most populous country, but in the past most unrest has taken place after results were announced.

P Nigerian election observers watch votes being counted

What’s at stake?

A credible and relatively calm poll would open a new chapter in the chequered political history of Nigeria, where nearly six decades of independence have been tarnished by military coups, endemic corruption and secessionist movements.

“From Tuesday onwards we should have a substantial number of results,” said Festus Okoye, an election commission official.

The contest between Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar, commonly called “Atiku”, hinges on revamping an economy struggling to recover from its first recession in 25 years, which it slipped into in 2016 and emerged from in 2017.

P Electoral officials compile voting results

Nearly a quarter of the workforce is unemployed, while the cost of living has also risen rapidly.

Mr Buhari has focused his campaign on rooting out corruption, but critics say there have not been any significant convictions in his first term.

Mr Abubakar has said he would aim to double the size of the economy to $900 billion by 2025.

Reuters

As Nigerians gear up to choose their president on Feb. 16, there is good reason to fear a return to military-style dictatorship. Following incumbent Muhammadu Buhari’s extraconstitutional suspension in January of Nigeria’s chief judge, who heads the Supreme Court that has final say in election disputes, the main opposition candidate, Atiku Abubakar, requested U.S. and EU intervention for the “survival of Nigeria’s democracy.”

This is more than idle rhetoric. Buhari, an ex-general who led a short-lived military junta in the 1980s, was elected president in 2015 by Nigerians who (like this writer) accepted his claims to be a “reformed democrat.” However, his four years in office have highlighted the difference between accepting the principle of elective government and being a true democrat. In Nigeria, like elsewhere in today’s world, the biggest threat to democracy comes not from generals instigating coups but from authoritarians-at-heart winning elections, only to use their democratic mandate to rule anti-democratically.

Half of Nigeria’s 59-year post-colonial history has been spent under various military dictatorships, but this year marks the 20th anniversary of the return to democratic rule. While the country has seen its fair share of ups and downs during this period, some tangible progress has been made in the spheres of freedom of expression, judicial independence, rule of law, and general civil liberties—and certainly in comparison with the military era.

In the past four years, however, Buhari’s government has serially ignored court orders, harassed and arrested journalists and activists, deployed security services to intimidate political opponents, and unforgivably sanctioned the killings of hundreds of unarmed civilians on multiple occasions with the impunity of a power-drunk dictatorship. Yes, security services have been known to overreact even in advanced democracies, and civilians sometimes get hurt in the process. But what distinguishes governments committed to upholding fundamental human rights—such as the right to not be killed while demonstrating peacefully—are the post-incident actions they undertake to ensure such tragedies never repeat themselves. No such luck with the Buhari government.

Following the recent army killing of unarmed protesters in October 2018, rather than express remorse, Nigeria’s army brass falsely claimed that demonstrators had attacked soldiers who simply did what President Donald Trump told U.S. soldiers to do in the same situation: start shooting. Such callous impunity can only thrive in an army confident that its commander in chief will indulge such excesses. Buhari is, by any reasonable standard, personally responsible for the killings of unarmed civilians going unpunished under his watch.

In addition to all this, opposition figures such as former President Olusegun Obasanjo are warning that Buhari’s ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) party is readying to rig the Feb. 16 elections, an allegation lent credence by the irregularities and violence involved in a recent gubernatorial poll that the APC was determined to win at all costs. In perhaps the Freudian slip of the year, commenting on the gubernatorial election, ruling party chairman Adams Oshiomhole said: “I think that for democracy to flourish, only people who can accept the pain of rigging—sorry, defeat—should participate in an election.”

The international community is thus right to raise concerns about whether the upcoming election will be free and fair. On Feb. 16, Nigerians will be choosing not only their president but also their national assembly. Taking into consideration Buhari’s dismissive behavior towards the judiciary, a potentially rigged clean sweep of the executive and legislative arms of government by himself and his party could usher in an era of dangerously centralized power imperiling Nigeria’s modest democratic gains since the end of military rule in 1999. As of today, there are no credible polls indicating who might win the presidential election, and it is probably a toss-up.

The fact that Buhari still retains significant support among Nigerians despite his anti-democratic behavior requires explanation. One major reason is that Nigeria’s top political actors are all so morally compromised that an appeal by any of them to higher principles can always be persuasively dismissed by their opponents as hypocritical nonsense.

For instance, Atiku, Buhari’s main rival who accuses him of weakening democracy, has faced numerous allegations of corruption since serving as Nigeria’s vice president from 1999 to 2007. Additionally, the government that Atiku was a prominent member of itself oversaw massive election rigging and deployed widespread violence to stay in power. Meanwhile, Obasanjo, who is now accusing Buhari of wanting to rig the February election, was president at the time and once exhorted his party members to treat an upcoming election as a “do-or-die affair.”

Walter Onnoghen, the chief judge whom Buhari suspended, is claiming unconvincingly that it was due to “forgetfulness” that he did not disclose several sizable foreign currency accounts in his asset declaration. Moreover, prior to his suspension, he used his position to obstruct investigations into the matter. Corruption runs deep in the highest echelons of Nigeria’s judiciary. Many regular citizens thus feel scant sympathy for judges being muscled by the executive. They’re seen as part and parcel of the country’s corrupt elite, certainly no friends of the ordinary man.

Nigerian politics suffers from a moral vacancy, an acute shortage of credible political actors who could plausibly champion democratic values and set standards that others feel compelled to live up to. Ignoble actors evoking noble values they rarely uphold do not make for effective democratic role models. Hence many Buhari supporters remain unmoved by opposition claims that he is a danger to Nigeria’s democracy. To them, his rivals are hardly better democrats. Moreover, many Nigerians still see Buhari as, if not incorruptible, definitely far less corrupt than rivals like Atiku.

It also needs to be said that some Nigerian voters support Buhari precisely because of his strong-arm tactics. In a society where the corrupt always seem to have the upper hand and always seem able to defy institutional attempts to bring them to book, it is understandable that the instinct for some basic societal justice can easily translate into an impatience with institutions that appear stacked with people unable or unwilling to deliver basic justice.

This creates the opportunity for populist authoritarianism to hold significant appeal. Buhari’s justification of his suspension of the chief judge appealed directly to this societal hunger for justice. Pointing to Onnoghen’s attempts to frustrate investigations into his false asset declaration, he argued: “If justice cannot be done and clearly seen to be done, society itself is at risk of the most unimaginable chaos.” Nigeria’s political reality is stubbornly defiant of any simple good versus evil narrative.

In the final analysis, however, Buhari’s authoritarian actions cannot be described as anything other than detrimental to Nigeria’s democracy. The judiciary, as flawed as it is, has played a stabilizing role in post-election disputes, which in a country as volatile as Nigeria always have the potential to descend into violent confrontation. In a society as ethnically and religiously divided as Nigeria’s, democracy is as fragile as an egg; if not handled carefully, it could drop and shatter into a thousand pieces impossible to glue back together. That’s why it’s critical for the country’s judiciary to get reformed and strengthened by rooting out corruption within its ranks rather than suffering diminishment by Buhari. In practical terms, this would require corrupt judges to be weeded out by their peers, rather than by the politicians they are meant to hold accountable.

Irrespective of who wins the Feb. 16 election, the next few years must be spent ensuring that cornerstone values—such as rule of law, equality before the law, accountable government, free and fair elections, the right to nonviolent protest, and a free press—become sacred nonnegotiables in Nigerian public life, the democratic equivalent of the Ten Commandments. These are the dogmas of democracy, and only those who uphold them are truly worthy of calling themselves democrats.

Culled from Foreign Policy.Com

Corruption is taking centre stage in the run-up to Nigeria’s presidential elections, with the incumbent accused of failing to tackle the scourge of graft and his challenger facing claims about his past.

Muhammadu Buhari, an austere and pious former general, will take on wealthy former vice-president Atiku Abubakar at the polls on February 16.

Both are ethnic Hausas, Muslims from the country’s north. Buhari, who rose to power in 2015 on a promise to eradicate the “cancer” of graft gnawing at Africa’s most populous nation, has cultivated an image of blamelessness.

Bola Tinubu, Nigeria’s political “godfather” closely allied with Buhari, earlier this month described him as “a straight and honest man”.

“Leave a naira (local currency) on the table with Buhari in the room. You will find the naira on the table when you return,” he said, in a thinly veiled criticism of Abubakar.

For his part, Abubakar is alleged to have amassed several hundred million dollars by misusing public funds as vice-president under Olusegun Obasanjo between 1999 and 2007 — yet he has never been investigated in his own country.

“On the issue of corruption, I have challenged anyone, anywhere, who has any evidence of corruption against me to come forward,” Abubakar has said.

“I will shock everyone because I believe that I will fight corruption like never before.” But in the United States, Abubakar’s name has popped up in a Senate investigation into money laundering.

It charged in a 2010 report that US national Jennifer Douglas, Abubakar’s fourth wife, “helped her husband bring over $40 million (35 million euros) in suspect funds into the United States through wire transfers sent by offshore corporations to US bank accounts.”

The couple are also accused of having received more than two million dollars in commissions for a contract with German industrial giant Siemens, which has since pleaded guilty in the case.

– Two essential reforms –

But this week Abubakar put paid to rumours that he was subject to a visa ban and unable to travel to the US by jetting to Washington for meetings with American counterparts. Abubakar told AFP last year he would retain no stakes in his various companies if he is elected president.

His sprawling business empire includes interests in telecommunications, transport, real estate, agriculture, import/export and healthcare.

Verifying his pledge to stand aside will be difficult in the opaque economic system in Nigeria, which global watchdog Transparency International ranked in the 148th place of a total 180 countries for corruption in 2017.

Buhari stands in stark contrast to his flamboyant fellow northerner’s private jet, Rolex watches and luxury cars.

His spokesman in 2015 said the president had “an austere and spartan lifestyle”, unlike other Nigerian politicians who have amassed wealth during their careers.

But Buhari, who vowed to usher in more transparent and accountable government, has come under harsh criticism for an apparent lack of progress in the fight against graft.

Steps in the right direction have included two essential reforms — a single Treasury account for all government revenue and the introduction of a biometric identification system in banks to better trace clients and transfers of funds.

“Those are the two areas I commend the government,” said Saadatu Falila Hamu, a specialist anti-corruption lawyer based in Abuja.

“But despite this, the government has focused their fight against corruption on people of the opposing political parties.” Hamu also faulted Nigeria’s main anti-corruption body, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), for “inefficiency”.

– Oil contracts –

In November, EFCC director Ibrahim Magu boasted having seized the equivalent of $2.3 billion as well as sumptuous villas, jewellery, and cars — but often outside legal procedures.

Buhari has pledged to review all oil exploitation contracts to be renewed after this year. Such an electoral promise “can either lead to total chaos in the industry or lead to sanity”, said analyst Soji Apampa.

Nigeria depends on oil sales for 70 percent of its revenues. In 2013 under president Goodluck Jonathan, the head of the central bank reported a $20 billion shortfall in revenue — a scandal that helped bring about Jonathan’s fall and Buhari’s election in 2015.

Nevertheless, the state-run Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, considered a slush fund for successive governments, remains notoriously opaque and Buhari — who is also oil minister — named a close associate to head it.

“Imagine a broken pipeline with all of Nigeria’s resources flowing through it. Instead of fixing the hole, you bring a man with a whip” to deter people from stealing, Apampa said. “We haven’t seen a government with an elaborate plan” to repair the pipeline, he added.

 AFP

Nigeria’s main opposition candidate did not attend an event on Tuesday to sign an election agreement stating a commitment to hold a peaceful election early next year, and his party attributed his absence to a “communication lapse.”

The opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP) confirmed in an emailed statement that its candidate, Atiku Abubakar, had not participated in the signing ahead of February’s election. President Muhammadu Buhari attended the event in the capital, Abuja. 

The peace accord ceremony was held days after the PDP said authorities had frozen the bank accounts of its vice presidential candidate, Peter Obi. 

Elections to choose the leader of Africa’s most populous country — the continent’s top oil producer and by many measures its largest economy — have in the past been marred by violence, vote-rigging and voter intimidation. 

The ceremony was an attempt to mirror the signing of an acclaimed deal ahead of voting in 2015, when Buhari came to power. It was credited with helping prevent a repeat of violence in the wake of the 2011 election, which Human Rights Watch said killed 800 people and displaced 65,000. 

The accord aims to ensure that the 2019 elections are “free, fair and credible,” the document said. Signatories pledged that their campaigns would refrain from “religious incitement” and “ethnic or tribal profiling,” and that they would not incite violence, according to the document. 

The PDP said it was investigating the circumstances behind the “unfortunate communication lapse” between party officials and the National Peace Committee (NPC), the nongovernmental organization that arranged the event, which resulted in Abubakar’s absence. 

“Our presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar and the party are fully committed to a peaceful electoral process and elections in 2019,” said PDP spokesman Kola Ologbondiyan in an emailed statement. 

He said the PDP would visit the NPC office to “fulfill all necessary obligations towards the peace accord ahead of the 2019 general elections.” 

The NPC earlier said it had sent invitations for the event to all 91 registered parties and the 73 presidential candidates. 

Independent observers for the 2015 race, the first time the agreement was signed, have since praised the accord for helping Nigeria pull off its first-ever peaceful transition from the ruling party to the opposition. Buhari defeated the incumbent Goodluck Jonathan.

VOA