By Sylvester Udemezue
I read an opinion under the above caption and attributed to one Musa Usman who, from his tone, is visibly angry with A. G. ABUBAKAR. I think I should react to point out some obvious contradictions and own-admussions in the said opinion, but my reaction would be limited to only issues that were/are of public knowledge, since I am not a staffer of CAC, but a stakeholder being a law practitioner, law researcher, writer and public legal affairs analyst. Meanwhile, let me say right away, with due respect, that Musa Usman’s writeup has only involuntarily validated the suggestion that A. G. ABUBAKAR is a true leader who actually transformed the CAC and hence deserves appreciation and commendation by all.
Musa Usman’s article under the above heading started with the following words:
“…those much talked about reforms were initiated and concluded under Lady Azuka Azinge. They were only fully deployed during Garba Abubakar’ s time. Even the CAMA amendment Bill was concluded and signed under Lady Azinge”.
(1) With due respect, the assertion by Musa Usman that “They were only fully deployed during Garba Abubakar’ s time” is an express admission that it was A. G ABUBAKAR that actually supervised the INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGICAL transformation CAC. What if he had taken over and killed the initiative? Or, haven’t we seen many leaders in Nigeria taking over and immediately jettisoning or killing initiatives of their predecessors? If A. G. ABUBAKAR took over and sustained and continued an initiative of his predecessor, until the full fructification (coming to fruition) of the initiative under A. G. ABUBAKAR’s watch, doesn’t that make A. G. ABUBAKAR a great leader? Doesn’t he deserve our commendation,, even though he’s not perfect—- of course, no one is perfect? I repeat that the admission by Mr Musa Usman that full the automation and digitization of the CAC were only fully deployed during A G Abubakar’ s tenure shows that the suggestion is RIGHT, CORRECT, that it was under A. G. ABUBAKAR’S tenure that CAC moved from its archaic and antiquated mode of operation to a world-class automated, digitised mode, are right.
(2) Second, Musa Usman’s claim that the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020 was already passed and signed before the coming of A G. ABUBAKAR we CAC Registrar-General, is not accurate. My research shows that A. G. Abubakar became CAC’s RG in January 2020 while the CAMA, 2020 was signed into law on August 07, 2020. available at https://www.cac.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/CAMA-NOTE-BOOK-FULL-VERSION.pdf? . I recognized this in my learned paper. Also contained/discussed in the said paper is _“Major Innovations of the Companiesand Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020”_10 wherein I outlined some of the notable and laudable innovative provisions of the new CAMA.
See: Sylvester C. Udemezue, “A Compendium of the Historical, Legal and Institutional Framework for the Practice of Company Law and Corporate Governance in Nigeria” (2021) 8(2) Journal of Commercial and Property Law (Nnamdi Azikiwe University). 66 @67-70. https://journals.unizik.edu.ng/index.php/jcpl/article/view/661 or .
(3). Permit me to observe that there’s no doubt that the journey to the passage and ultimate signing into law of the CAMA, 2020, was not a day’s work, must have commenced before A. G. Abubakar’s tenure. But it’s not debatable that it was under his tenure it finally materialised. He had pursued it to its logical end and saw the 20-year-old outdated 1990 CAMA repealed and replaced by an innovative CAMA, 2020. A. G. Abubakar deserves our commendation. What about the fact that A. G. ABUBAKAR spearheaded and pursued the introduction of Companies Regulations 2021 – REGULATIONS MADE UNDER COMPANIES AND ALLIED MATTERS ACT, 2020, which replaced the outdated Company Regulations 2012.
(4). In the meantime, all these prove one more thing: that the protest to “celebrate” A.G. ABUBAKAR’s exit from the CAC was sponsored by people who felt he had “stepped” on their toes. But it should not be any surprise to A.G. ABUBAKAR; A long time ago, Voltaire had acknowledged that “Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road”.
A. G. ABUBAKAR should find consolation in the words of William Jenkyn: “As the wicked are hurt by the best things, so the godly are bettered by the worst.”_
(4). QUESTIONS FOR THOSE WHO NOW THINK LADY AZINGE DID WELL:
(A)If they truly loved Lady Azuka Azinge as they are claiming now, why did they not protest against her removal? Why did they not protest against any perceived persecution of Lady AZINGE, then? Perhaps if they had made noise then, Lady AZINGE, if she was innocent could have been let alone. Why is it now that they suddenly remember that Lady AZINGE was persecuted? It is hypocrisy; they’re just hanging on to irrelevancies and frivolities to try to justify their current malignant, sponsored and unjustified persecution of A. G. ABUBAKAR whose giant strides changed the face of CAC for the better, in line with demands of the global, 21st-century, technology-driven economy.
(B). If as they claimed, Lady Azinge was the brain behind the innovations at the CAC, why did the protesters not protest against her removal? Why did they not gather to express sadness about her removal, in the same way they are now gathering to express “happiness” about A. G. ABUBAKAR’S removal?
(5). MY HUMBLE TAKE:
No matter from which angle one looks at it it’s obvious that the protests and campaign of malignant calumny against A.G. ABUBAKAR were sponsored to achieve a purpose: to tarnish his good image and take the attention of the watching public away from his unprecedented giant strides at the CAC, for which he ought to be celebrated, not vilified. Accordingly, in my humble opinion, the protests and campaign of calumny against A. G. ABUBAKAR, by a few CAC staffers are:
✔Unfair, considering that he made a noticeable mark at the CAC;
✔Unjust, considering that removal of Lady Azinge was not caused not done by A. G. ABUBAKAR neither did A. G. ABUBAKAR appoint himself into that office. It was President Buhari who had appointed him, and even if anyone consider that his appointed was motivated by clannishness, let the person blame Buhari (the appointor) and not A. G. ABUBAKAR (the appointee) who was merely appointed and has now done his part and creditably well;
✔Unacceptable, considering that, as I said earlier, we should celebrate and encourage leaders who have done well, and not persecute or vilify them. Jonas Salk’s counsel/declaration is both instructive and apt here:
“The reward for a job well done is an opportunity to do more”, and not destruction of those who have done well. A. G. ABUBAKAR does not deserve to be persecuted in this manner.
(6). I insist that the few disgruntled anti-A.G.Abubakar protesters seen in front of CAC headquaters “celebration” A. G. ABUBAKAR’S removal are brainless brownnossers, malignant back-biters, undiscerningly sheepish and slavish followers of some unthinking fanny embers. There is no justification for their actions. Such people who (I) resist positive change and or (ii) persecute positive-change agents, are part of the reasons Nigeria is down and stagnant.
(7). Finally, even if the workers’ union, AUPCTRE now is aggrieved that A. G. ABUBAKAR while on office, didn’t accede to their union-demands, they have no good reasons to sponsor other people or to mobilize their own members to protest in “celebration” of A.G. ABUBAKAR’s exit. The wise thing for them to do should have been to wait to take their demands and grievances to A. G. ABUBAKAR’s successor that he may look into it.
AN ANALOGY:
ASUU had a running battle with the immediate past Ministers for Education, and for Labour and Productivity. The Minister of Labour had dragged ASUU to court.. The Court ruled against ASUU. Till today, 8-month salaries (i think, February to October 2022) have not been paid ASUU members. Neither the workers at the ministry of labour/education nor members of ASUU rolled out drums on 29 May 2023 to celebrate the exit of both Ministers or of Buhari. I’m sure A
they’d now do the wise, rational, reasonable thing: present their grievances to Mr President Tinubu and his new Ministers, to look into.
(9). CONCLUSION:
The protest by some of CAC staffers to celebrate A.G. ABUBAKAR’s exit at CAC, and the campaign of calumny being waged against him in the social media, are petty, childish, and most probably motivated by foolish selfishness, senseless egoism, unpragmatism and lack of foresight on the part of the sponsors of such malignant propaganda against one of the most innovative and pragmatic leaders Nigeria has ever seen. I accordingly stand by my earlier position that A. G. ABUBAKAR is a great leader to whom we owe our appreciation and encouragement for having transformed the Corporate Affairs Commission from the archaic and antiquated institution it was, into a world-class institution that it is today. I encourage Mr President Tinubu to immediately find somewhere to fix A. G. ABUBAKAR, so that he can have an opportunity to continue the good work he has done in ICT-driven leadership and globalized-economy-compliant governance. Specifically, since leaders of the legal profession are absolutely clueless about how to use the ICT to integrate the Nigerian judiciary into the world’s globalized economy, I respectfully suggest to President Tinubu and to leaders of the law profession, especially the bench, to consider deploying A. G. ABUBAKAR to drive a reform for total automation and digitization of the registries, operations, processes, practices, procedures and proceedings of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the FHC, the NICN, and other courts in the country. I encourage the States to also consider using A. G. ABUBAKAR to transform their various state judiciaries, as A. G. ABUBAKAR has transformed the CAC. Indeed, A. G. ABUBAKAR’s sterling performance at the CAC is a reminder/consoler to us that Nigeria is not absolutely bereft of good leaders. As I have pointed out, the best reward for a job well done is an opportunity to do more.
As per the handful of protesters at the CAC, if you can’t see that the processes of registration of companies, business names, IT, and other businesses at the CAC have radically transformed by A. G. ABUBAKAR innovative sagacity, we can see it, because we do businesses with th CAC. We know the difference between the Pre-2020 archaic era and the post-2020 ICT-driven, digitized era.
Above opinion, respectfully offered with due respect, by:
Sylvester Udemezue (udems)
08109024556.
[email protected].
(17/10/2023)
