The minority may have their say;
The majority may have their way;
But the entire nation must carry the day.
……Let us call it inclusive democracy.
Barring any late twists in the tale, this is the capstone piece in the ‘A Nation in Heat’ series of national liberation essays.
We have endured the dead heat in Nigeria over the last couple of months.
We have shed no tears about the unsustainability of the old ways of doing things in Nigeria.
With foreboding and trepidation we have contemplated the imminence of disaster foretold, looming on the national horizon.
Thanks be to the Grace of God, exercised through the statesmanship and sportsmanship of the departing President Good-luck Jonathan, and the wise counsel of global leaders and statesmen, this was nipped in the bud.
We have felt a sense of déjà vu as we light-heartedly reflected on how we came to this sorry pass and how history may repeat itself again and again, far into the future unless we individually play our own part by charting a new course for our dear country with our electoral vote.
Our prayers and our desire have now become fait accompli. The deed has been done indeed.
The minority have had their say about staying the course and transacting business as usual. The majority have declared their intention to chart a new course by electing to do business as unusual.
Now it is time to guarantee that Nigeria truly carries the day.
It is time to establish emphatically once and for all times that the democracy we practice shall always be inclusive, catering for the best interests of all without exception.
It is time to ensure that our democracy shall not be exclusive, pandering to the selfish interests of a few persons, fortunately privileged by gender identity, existential mileage, social status, ethnic origin, personal location on the ethnic majority/minority map, personal connections, religious affiliation, economic muscle, intellectual attainments, militant background or partisan orientation.
In short it is time to reboot Nigeria and ensure going forwards that we never again fall back into the old decrepit ways.
We are all living witnesses to the fact that the old ways of conducting national affairs in Nigeria which have been subject to incremental and largely negative change right from the time of national independence till date has latterly begun to manifest traits indicative of specialized evolutionary adaptation to unthinkable malfeasance, stupefying decadence, unimaginable rot and mind-boggling abuse of public trust.
The national operating system no longer responds to simple logic, the institutional control lights are dimming and going blank one after the other. A systemic crash is imminent if not already in progress.
By choosing Muhammadu Buhari as the President-elect, Nigerians may have chosen the one person best equipped by Spartan self-discipline and fervent mettle, the person best motivated by sheer puritanical zeal, to initiate and see through to its logical conclusion a revolutionary as opposed to a mere evolutionary change in our way of carrying out national business.
If God protects him, and one is not in any doubt that the rump of the vanquished and the rear-guard of the old decadent Nigerian system will attempt in one way or the other to abort his mission, sabotage his political longevity if not altogether extinguish his mortal existence, Muhammadu Buhari stands the real chance of emerging as the bona fide architect of a modern, truly unified and truly great Nigeria, standing head and shoulders above all the rest including the usually acclaimed fathers of post-independence Nigeria.
In this essay, we shall highlight a few symptoms of the overarching existential obstacle to the emergence of a truly united and unified Nigeria which President-elect Muhammadu Buhari must grapple with and overcome if he is to take a prime place among the largely non-existent pantheon of truly great Nigerian leaders.
Aside from typical mentions here and there we shall skip the obvious obstacles such as corruption and terrorism since these are already firmly established in the national agenda and figure rather prominently in the incoming administration’s self-defined missionary radar.
We shall proffer some potential solutions to this core, deep seated Nigerian disease which manifests itself through several symptoms while noting that each manifestation of this core morbidity merits a dissertation in its own right.
It is conceded that the solutions proposed herein are rudimentary, as yet unrefined and still largely inchoate. Yet if these thoughts can inspire offshoots or trigger even better ideas about nation-building from others, then the ‘A Nation in Heat’ series would have achieved its founding objective and not been a waste of everybody’s precious time.
Sub-nationalism vs. pan-Nigerian nationalism
Far from being one nation with a common destiny, Nigeria may more accurately be described as about 300 ethnicities or sub-nationalities, forced by historical circumstances and contiguity to live together in one national space much like co-wives living under the same roof in a polygamous setting.
And so these sub-nationalities are perpetually quarreling and squabbling with one another, trying to carve out a greater share of the Family wealth for themselves and for their children from the hands of the family Patriarch, in this case the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
If a polygamous setting is a recipe for domestic chaos, the Nigerian situation is compounded by the fact that the family Patriarch at any given time far from being a nominally neutral “husband”, is in fact a direct offspring of one of the feuding wives!!!
As the fortunes of pan-Nigerian nationalism which apparently only finds expression on the soccer pitch dims, the stock of sub-nationalism is on the ascendancy. So we increasingly hear talk nowadays of the Yoruba nation, Tiv nation, Ijaw nation, Igbo nation, Urhobo nation, Hausa-Fulani nation, Kanuri nation, Idoma nation, Itsekiri nation, Ndokwa nation, Igala nation, Nupe nation, Bini nation, Ika nation, Berom nation etc.
A favorite tactic of cash and carry politicians is to earnestly preach sub-nationalism when they fall out of the political patronage safety net. They use this as a bargaining chip of making themselves politically relevant. No sooner do they regain public positions than they revert back to pseudo pan-Nigerian nationalism.
Byso doing these so-called opinion leaders perpetually confuse their ignorant followers about their true identity. Not surprisingly the masses in Nigeria often self-identify themselves as Nigerians when their fellow kinsmen are in positions of executive authority and self-identify themselves by their particular ethnic group otherwise.
Majority – Minority Dichotomy
Much like the Hindu caste system, the majority – minority dichotomy has effectively reclassified Nigerians into first class, second – class, third class citizens etc. in direct relation to the magnitude of their ancestral, ethnic population. At the apex of the national caste food chain are the big three ethnic groupings namely the Hausa-Fulani tandem, the Igbo and the Yoruba rendered in alphabetic order. These are the pseudo ‘first class’ Nigerian citizens.
Below them come other groupings such as the Ijaw, the Tiv, the Bini, the Urhobo, the Kanuri, and the Igala etc. again in no particular order. These are the so called second-class Nigerian citizens who are bitterly resentful of the domineering status of the big three ‘first class’ citizens but replicate big three tendencies in their own local geo-political spheres of influence lording it even more ruthlessly over their third class, fourth class, fifth class (you get the drift) compatriots.
And so we have the Tiv lording it ruthlessly over the Idoma. The Urhobo arrogantly flaunting their numbers over their neighbors including the Igbos in Delta State. The Igala frustrating the minority Yoruba in Kogi State. The Ijaw in Delta State oppressing the Isoko and the Itsekiri in the Delta South Senatorial district. The (minority?) Fulani feudally checkmating the (majority?) Yoruba in Kwara state. One of the few exceptions is Edo State where the majority Binis are coexisting fairly happily with their Esan and Afemai minority cousins of the same Edo stock.
The situation is so bad that even within the same ethnic stock, you still find the majority-minority dichotomy at play. An example is this writer’s ancestral Oshimili South Local Government Area, which comprises Asaba and a host of smaller communities of the same Igbo stock. The writer is not aware if at all a non-Asaba yet Oshimili South LGA indigene has ever been popularly elected as Executive Chairman of the Oshimili South Local Government.
Turn by Turn Leadership
In a largely failed attempt to inculcate a sense of belonging across the nation and to address the twin evils of ethnic subjugation, sub-nationalism and the majority-minority dichotomy referred to in the preceding paragraphs, Nigerian “political engineers” fashioned out a de-facto turn-by-turn leadership selection method.
According to this turn-by-turn convention, political leadership rotates between the northern and southern halves of the country on the one hand and between the geo-political regions within each half on the other hand. On paper the idea seems to be workable. In practice it is a disaster and an open invitation to chaos, anarchy and mediocrity.
It is an invitation to chaos and anarchy because it is as yet unthinkable in Nigeria and an utter affront on local ethnic sensibilities for the President and the Vice President to emerge from the same ethnic stock. Sadly too, nowadays it has become equally unacceptable for both the President and the Vice President to profess the same religious faith!!!
What then happens if an elected President from a particular ethnic sub-nationality is incapacitated by sickness, removed by impeachment or as was recently the case, eliminated by death? Does the Vice – President from a different ethnic group whose turn it is not yet to enjoy office, remain as a perpetual deputy or does he step up onto the podium of power?
All things considered, it stands to reason that turn by turn leadership may never lead to a turnaround of Nigeria’s fortunes. At best it will lead to an intensification of misrule as each succeeding leader attempts to emulate or even surpass his immediate predecessor’s criminal antics and dictatorial tendencies while in power.
Quality of Leadership
The two key defining features of quality leadership are integrity and competence, the latter of which is used here as an umbrella term to cover all the core leadership skills such as technical ability, subordinate motivation, clear communication skills etc. The two are absolutely critical for good leadership.
Both the man with integrity yet lacking in competence and the man with capacity but failing in character can do great harm to the system they aspire to lead. The former may do harm out of ignorance or ineptitude while the latter will do harm out of malice, mischief or greed. A leader that lacks both character and competence will invariably be an unmitigated disaster with absolutely no redeeming features whatsoever.
Yet all the while in Nigeria, people who cannot string together two consecutive acts of good and ethical conduct are presenting themselves as fit and proper persons for elections into high offices and the biased electorate are endorsing them for purely sentimental and largely primordial reasons.
In a setting where ethnic sub-nationalities queue up to produce leaders in a once in a generation or once in a lifetime, turn-by-turn circus, what happens if a particular ethnic group whose turn it is to produce a leader finds out that it’s best placed son or daughter is lacking either in character or in capacity or even in both?
Is that ethnicity likely to alert the nation about the deficiencies of its own son and forfeit the once in a generation or once in a lifetime chance to steer the ship of state? Or is it more likely to reserve its brutal assessment of its ward’s true capabilities to itself, conceal his deficiencies and actively support its own son’s efforts in their leadership quest nonetheless? The most plausible scenario is left to the reader’s best discernment but this is why a turn-by-turn leadership mentality remains at best an open invitation to mediocrity in governance.
Price of Leadership
Unquestionably the governing mindset inculcated in each member of a polygamous family setting from very early on is a ‘grab-as-much-as-you-can-from-your-polygamous-father’s-homestead-and-transfer-it-to-your-own-mother’s-roomstead-before-you-lose-the-opportunity’ mentality. Given this sort of background, is it any wonder that it is a simple matter to progress naturally from this parochial yet somewhat mildly altruistic mindset to a ‘grab-as-much-as-you-can-for-your-own-self’ selfish mentality?
Is it any wonder then that the price of leadership per capita in Nigeria is easily one of the highest in the entire world? And here we are talking not just about the stated official remuneration for leaders but equally as well of the unstated hidden mark-ups of satisfying their individual and ethnic group’s greed. It is these hidden mark-ups, built into the final costs of government projects that are the actual drivers of poverty, unemployment and underdevelopment in Nigeria. It is the hidden mark-ups that finance the elections of parasite politicians. It is concealed mark-ups that drive the incapacitation of various institutions including the Nigerian military and security forces.
The high returns of leadership is the single most important motivation behind the quest of all comers for elected public office. It is the main source of all the heat generated by electoral contest in Nigeria.
Leaders’ Ethnic Bias
The ‘grab-as-much-as-you-can-from-your-polygamous-father’s- homestead-and-transfer-it-to-your-own-mother’s-roomstead-before-you-lose-the-opportunity’ mentality also lies behind the abject partiality for their ethnic homeland shown by leaders in positions of authority across the length and breadth of Nigeria. The prospect of being recipients of this favored ethnicity status is the single most important reason why voters vote exclusively for candidates from their own ethnic background regardless of their character and competence for the post in question.
It is the reason why voters continually vote for bad leaders regardless of their abject performance in office. In a sense voters are happy to be ‘shafted’ by terrible leaders provided it is their own kith and kin that is doing the shafting to everyone else. By the same token voters are ready to vote against an excellent leader so long as he or she is not from their own ethnic background without the slightest regard for their otherwise stellar ability or performance in office.
In a multi-cultural, heterogeneous society as we find in Nigeria, there are a few cultural traits peculiar to particular ethnic groups that rub-off badly on their neighbors. While it is not easy to change these characteristics overnight, an awareness of their existence and a realization that they constitute potential sources of friction with other groups is a great leap forward in itself.
Restricting ourselves to the big three ethnic groups as well as the south-south geopolitical zone in no particular order, it is evident that the territorial aggressiveness and domineering instincts of some Hausa-Fulani (considered by some as withdrawal symptoms from feudalism), the mercantile crookedness and obstinacy of some Igbo (considered by some as a dire lack of social intelligence), the clannish partiality and ethnic propaganda of some Yoruba (considered by some as continual self-reassurance), and the swollen headedness and militancy of some Niger Delta indigenes (considered by some as inverted inferiority complex) rank up there as major irritants to the rest of the country and impediments to genuine national unity.
A common thread runs through all the points listed above and that thread is the mismanagement of ethnic diversity in Nigeria. Diversity in nature often has useful purposes. Steel, brass and bronze are useful alloys which do not occur naturally but are made by the careful mixing of iron and carbon, copper and zinc, copper and tin respectively. What is there to stop Nigeria from evolving a very strong national character by blending the peculiar strengths of its diverse ethnic elements?
The process of transforming Nigeria’s ethnic diversity into strength begins with an acknowledgement that the fact of an individual’s ethnicity should confer no extra privileges nor impose any extra burden on their status or potential as Nigerians. In other words there should be nothing like majority ethnic group or minority ethnic group in Nigeria’s political lexicon.
There should be no first class, second class or fifth class Nigerian. Ethnicity in Nigeria should be reduced to mere bio-statistics entered into a form similar to age, gender, hometown or place of origin but should bear no relationship to a person’s status and definitely should never impose a ceiling to an individual’s potential achievement. How to reduce ethnicity to a trivial bio-statistic ought to be the subject of serious study.
Talking of bio-statistics it is worth mentioning in passing that three types of hometown statistics are prevalent in Nigeria, a fourth ought to be acquirable when and if the indigene-ship question is settled. They are place of (physical) birth, place of ancestry, place of (permanent) residence, and place of indigene-ship. When an American refers to his hometown in the US he is probably referring to his place of birth or the place of his parent’s birth if he was born outside the US. But then only few Americans (i.e. the Red Indians) are ancestrally American.
Nigerians should be encouraged to stand on their own feet and not perch on the back of their ethnicity to pluck low hanging fruits from the system. Discriminating against a Nigerian on the basis of ethnic origin, or religious affiliation, or gender or age should be criminalized in both the public and private sectors. If anti-discriminatory laws already exist, then they should be more energetically enforced. Defaulters of the anti-discriminatory laws should be made to pay heavy fines to the aggrieved party once discrimination is proven.
Can the anti-discriminatory policy be extended to apply to politics? How can voting for a candidate purely on the basis of ethnic solidarity be discouraged without coercion? The first thing to be done about ethnicity in Nigeria is to decouple infrastructural development from partisan cum ethnic politics. This can be done firstly by criminalizing the systematic developmental marginalization of any geographical area by people in government.
A public servant is paid from the common wealth to which all segments of society contribute in the form of taxes etc. The allegiance of any person paid directly from the public purse should therefore automatically go to the entire nation. A public servant paid from the public purse is by definition representing the entire nation and not his or her place of origin or ethnic group. To do otherwise should be to commit a criminal offence and this should be clearly stated in our law books. But we must go farther than this and develop systematic objective procedures to ensure compliance.
The era of development based on the goodwill and discretion of Nigerian political leaders, no matter how well-meaning they are, and the incoming Muhammadu Buhari administration is no exception, should be made extinct. It has been proven time and time again that anything left to the discretion of Nigerian political leaders no matter how well meaning they initially are, is immediately subjected to their potential indiscretion.
The import of the proposed policy framework is that no inch of Nigerian territory should henceforth be subject to under-development simply because it does not have a son or daughter in high government office. By the same token, no inch of Nigerian territory should be subject to over-development because it does have a son or daughter in high office.
In other words, all parts of Nigeria should be beneficiaries of an equilaterally assured development (EAD) policy whose scale and intensity in a particular area shall be determined solely by objective criteria in a structured developmental decision making process.
Structured Developmental Decision-making
To underpin the equilaterally assured development (EAD) of all parts of Nigeria, a developmental decision-making cascade which public sector projects at all levels i.e. Federal, State or Local Government must be subjected to prior to take-off is proposed. The very first step in the process is the drawing up of an economic development plan as used to be done in the past. Specific projects envisaged in the developmental plan may then be subjected to an economic viability analysis.
As done in H.R. (human resources) practice where objective job specifications are drawn up before seeking out and recruiting the best suited and qualified individuals to fill the position, a project’s planning specifications should list the attributes of the ideal location for such a project. Only after this has been done objectively and well publicized should potential host locations be considered.
This is as opposed to the current practice where a project’s location is arbitrarily chosen by political fiat even before the project specifications are drawn up. An objective and impartial procedure such as this should not bring about any cries of marginalization as is currently the case.
The decision cascade has the following pair of sieves – Economic viability and Catalytic potential as well as a collecting pan, Socio-political inclusivity stacked in that order from highest to lowest. A project enters the cascade or sieve nest from the top. It is sieved against economic viability. If it fails and falls through, it falls onto the catalytic potential sieve where it is again sieved. If it fails, it then drops onto the inclusivity pan. Do not be put off by the high sounding terms.
The sieving benchmarks and the collecting pan are basically simple and intuitive. Any project that appears anywhere in this decision cascade is worthy of development – albeit on different terms.
Economically viable or commercial projects should be executed immediately with no further questions asked other than having a tolerable environmental impact footprint. Because they are viable, they need not be funded by government but they are guaranteed by government. They could be funded by borrowing funds, repayable over time on strictly commercial terms.
Patrons of such projects are ready to pay an economic price for their usage. Because they are viable, can generate income and can be self-sustaining, they must be first off the decision table with zero political input. Willing users of such projects must pay commercial rates for its use. Non-willing users must make do with cheaper alternatives. An example of a viable project might be a fast speed rail network serving the business district of a major commercial city.
Catalytic projects are projects which although not forcedly economically viable, nevertheless unleash the developmental potentials of a vastly significant number of the citizenry. In other words such projects are catalysts of economic development. Such projects may demand heavy initial governmental funding and their usage may in-fact be subsidized (say in rural areas) so far as the tangible economic and intangible social benefits accruable from them outweigh the initial capital outlay and the cost of subsequent government subsidy. Typical examples might include round the clock electric power and water supply. These are catalytic projects. They may be open to limited political input.
Inclusivity projects must have stakeholder input. In order words these are grass roots demand projects which are neither economically viable nor significantly catalytic. They are clearly open to political input. An example might be a community already served by an 8.4 metres wide road but which demands a dualized road simply for the sake of modernity or for convenience.
So aside from commercial projects which should not be left open to political input, the mix between catalytic projects and inclusivity projects as a proportion of total capital spending by a particular government should depend on the government’s ideological focus.
And so for instance a grass-roots focused government which believes that the people have to be made comfortable today and let tomorrow take care of itself may adopt a catalytic to inclusivity project mix of say 20% to 80%.
On the other hand another government which believes that it is best for the people to suffer today in order to lay the foundation for future economic growth and prosperity may adopt a reversed catalytic to inclusivity project mix of say 80% to 20%.
The day when all regions and ethnicities are assured of their development under the sun, politics in Nigeria would have taken a significant step towards ceasing to be a do – or – die affair. But that is not the end. Something also has to be done about capping the cost of leadership in Nigeria.
Leadership price cap
In most sane and advanced countries, people go into politics and enter the public sector to truly serve, acquire experience cum exposure and make a name. Afterwards they retire and go into the private sector to make a fortune if they are so inclined. In Nigeria, people go into politics to make a living and they enter the public sector to make a fortune. They never retire from the public sector and if they are forced by circumstances to leave office, they immediately search for the earliest opportunity to stage a come-back.
But government or politics should not be a place to make a fortune. A Nigeria is envisaged where if you are appointed into a public position, your family and friends will weep because they know you are about to go and suffer for the nation, not as it is today where if you secure an appointment, they stage congratulatory reception parties for you with one eye on the fall-outs you will corner from the system.
President Buhari has a historical mandate to peg the cost of public administration, and to cap the cost of leadership in Nigeria. The cost of leadership in Nigeria is too high and the quality of leadership is abysmally low. Realistic pricing of leadership in Nigeria is essential even critical. We must introduce a leadership price cap. The ripping off of the nation by elected and appointed leaders, sorry parasites-in-position, is obscene, scandalous, immoral and unjust.
One of the minor yet curiously legitimate ways in which parasites-in-position (pips) milk the treasury is via estacode allowances for foreign and domestic travel. They make all sorts of excuses for foreign and domestic travel. But the one type of travel that is crucial for reasons of socio-political inclusivity such as visiting victims of say Boko Haram terrorism they leave undone.
We propose across the board that there should be zero estacode allowance for elected officials apart from a small honorarium to cover hotel, travel, lodging expenses etc. which must be verifiable. If you cannot do the job and serve your nation under those terms, don’t present yourself for election or appointment. Stay at home and mind your own business.
Another way pips milk the nation is through security votes given to the President and State Governors. All security votes should be abolished. The monies voted for security should go directly to the armed forces, police and state security services. Afterwards the defense and security forces should be held 100% accountable for national security.
In spite of the humongous remuneration which they enjoy, elected officials in Nigeria are never satisfied. It is only in Nigeria that one hears of constituency vote for legislators to match the security vote for the executive. What is constituency vote? This is bare-faced stealing and a form of corruption of the highest order. Constituency vote should be abolished forthwith. Nigerians should thank God that we have at last voted into office the one man capable of tackling corruption headlong. And corruption together with its proceeds, distorts the national rewards system, demoralizes the capable, empowers the incapable, enthrones mediocrity and savages excellence. May God preserve the life of the President elect and strengthen his resolve to stamp out corruption in all its forms and manifestations.
The message must be conveyed loud and clear to all Nigerians. Politics and government office in particular are not places for making fortunes. Fortune hunters and gold diggers in politics as well as in government should try their luck elsewhere, such as in the private sector.
Inter-ethnic Table Manners
As a multi-ethnic and heterogeneous society, it is inevitable that inter-ethnic tensions would occasionally arise due to communication gap and inadvertent misunderstandings. The responsibility is on all of us as Nigerians to desist from actions which only serve to irritate other ethnic sub-nationalities. We must make a conscious effort to acquire appropriate inter-ethnic etiquette.
A man who when he was a bachelor had a dirty habit, while seated at the dining table, of spitting into the nearest drinking glass or mug after coughing, must make a conscious effort to rise up from the dining table and proceed to the rest room to spit out, for the sake of his new wife’s sensibilities and the longevity of his own marriage. The same demand evidently applies to all ethnic groups in Nigeria.
Some peculiarities of a few ethnic groups which cause ethnic tensions in their relationship with people of other ethnicities have been listed out in the preceding paragraphs. It is hoped that conscious efforts would be made by everyone to adjust accordingly for the sake of our country Nigeria.
However there is one particular ethnic misdemeanor which the President-elect must address forthwith as soon as he assumes power not only because it involves his own ethnic group of origin but also because human lives are involved. The wanton killing of innocent Nigerians in their places of origin by itinerant Fulani herdsmen has gotten out of hand, is a grave threat to national stability and cohesion and should end.
The time has indeed come for the nomadic lifestyle of the cattle Fulani to be modified to suit modern realities. It is evident from the constant battles between nomadic Fulani and their host communities across the length and breadth of Nigeria that the days of nomadic cattle herding are over. The world’s largest producers of beef are the United States, Brazil and the European Union. This writer has never been to Brazil but cattle-breeders in the United States and the Europe do not adopt a nomadic lifestyle. Civil engineers would tell you as well that cattle movement along well defined tracks is one of the prime incipient causes of gully erosion.
The time has come for Governments and wealthy farmers in Nigeria to establish ranches where cattle may be reared. Under this arrangement, grass cut from surrounding areas with the co-operation and involvement of local land owners and farmers can be transported to the ranches and sold at a nominal fee to the cattle breeders for their cattle. It might mean that cattle meat costs a little more for everybody but it would create a new industry of cutting specific types of grass for feeding cattle. More importantly the lives of innocent Nigerians as well as the itinerant Fulani themselves would be saved.
The nation is waiting and watching the President-elect’s action in this issue, a successful resolution of which will convey his seriousness of purpose to all Nigerians.
Wrapping It Up
Reforms do not occur in Nigeria because of the silent and despicable conspiracy between a few parasite politicians who are in position and want to maintain the status quo and the vast electorate (aspiring parasite politicians) who are not in position but stupidly and against all realistic odds dream of being in position one day in order to enjoy the very same obscene privileges.
For the umpteenth time, it bears repeating that no Nigerian is superior to another and no Nigerian is inferior to another, regardless of age, gender, status, educational achievement, ethnicity, religious affiliation etc. No Nigerian is born to be a slave and no Nigerian is born to be a master. The enemies of Nigeria are those who cast their votes on tribal or religious grounds regardless of the character and the capability of those presenting themselves for election.
Equally, elected or appointed leaders who show favoritism or partiality in developing their natal areas while under-developing other areas are pure enemies of Nigeria. And so as Nigeria reboots and begins to strip away the largely self-imposed shackles which have held us down for five decades, it is great to be able to proclaim to the world, “Watch out for us. We are back. Yes indeed Nigeria is back and is set to regain lost ground and reclaim its rightful position among the comity of nations. May God bless Nigeria. ”
- THE END -