Recently, the former Vice-President of Nigeria, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, tested the political waters through the Chairman of Daar Communications, Dr Raymond Dokpesi, concerning a supposed one-term presidency. Dr Dokpesi was reported to have advised the South-East zone to allow Atiku to run for a single term from 2023 to 2027 and that if Atiku should renege on this promise, he (Dokpesi) would walk naked on the streets. This is not the first time we have heard this from the former Vice-President. In 2018, Atiku himself swore to the people of Nigeria to serve in office for only four years if elected into office, promising to sign any document to that effect, not to pursue a second term. At that time in 2018, what prompted Atiku’s solemn declaration was the concern raised about his eligibility in respect of age and also how his presidency may disrupt the zoning arrangement in Nigerian politics.

Atiku celebrated his 75th birthday in November 2021 and if elected as President of Nigeria in 2023, he would be 81 years old at the end of his first tenure and 85 years old at the end of the second tenure. So, it became natural for people to wonder if the ‘Not Too Young To Rule’ policy would ever work. Then again, Atiku is from the North, the same political zone as the incumbent President, Muhammadu Buhari, the latter who is set to complete his second four-year tenure in 2023. By Nigeria’s unwritten political arrangement, the president should naturally come from the South in 2023, which an Atiku presidency may throw overboard, should he win election in 2023, with a new opportunity for another four years thereafter. In an attempt to address these obvious political liabilities, Atiku was reported to have expressed his readiness to abandon his second term ticket, if elected into office as president.

A fallacy is said to be a false or mistaken idea, by which people are often deluded but cannot hold when subjected to proper scrutiny. The idea of Atiku foregoing his second term option for president in 2027 is false and can thus not be taken seriously. First, it is illegal. If Atiku is qualified now to contest for president under section 131 of the 1999 Constitution, he will surely be qualified to contest again in 2027 and one million voluntary undertakings to waive that right will not hold water in law. Under and by virtue of section 137 (1) (b) of the Constitution, “a person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if he has been elected to such office at any two previous elections.” The simple interpretation to this provision is that Atiku cannot be disqualified from vying for the office of president for a second term, under any guise whatsoever. Thus, the carrot of a supposed vow to waive this option cannot stand in the face of the Constitution.

The Constitution of Nigeria is the organic law of the land and its provisions cannot be waived, undermined or compromised in any political arrangement, as being proposed by Atiku. Section 1 (1) of the Constitution is very clear in this regard when it states: “This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria.” Atiku as a “person”, is already captured under section 1 (1) above and he cannot undertake to sign himself out of the provisions of the Constitution. That can only be for politicians, but certainly not the law courts, when faced with the task of enforcing and upholding the Constitution. Section 1 (1) says clearly that the provisions of the Constitution “shall have binding force”! These words were carefully chosen by the framers of the Constitution. “Shall” is a word of command, “binding” connotes an imposed obligation from which one cannot be exempted or excused and “force” suggests a sense of compulsion for total surrender, even against one’s own will. So, when a law “shall have binding force”, it is not one that a politician should throw around like his party’s manifesto.

Second, the office of the president for which Atiku is contesting and promising to run for only a single tenure, is a creation of the Constitution, under section 130 thereof. That being the case, only the Constitution itself can determine what happens to and how long a person can stay or contest election into that office. It is not the office of the chairman of the Peoples’ Democratic Party or even the Managing Director of a company. You cannot seek to control what you did not create. This is why the Constitution itself has taken its time to make itself ungovernable and unimpeachable, by stating in its section 1 (3), that: “if any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of the inconsistency be void.”

Now let us for the sake of argument assume that such an agreement not to vie for a second term in office is voluntarily or compulsorily signed by Atiku, it cannot be worth more than the piece of paper upon which it is written. If Atiku is able to secure his first term in office through such an illegal agreement indeed, then you can well guess what would follow towards the end of his tenure in office. Solidarity visits upon solidarity visits, from all our so-called “well-meaning” Nigerians, who will be swearing on their heads that Nigeria will collapse if Atiku is not allowed to finish his “good works” for Nigeria. Then royal fathers will follow, with women groups, okada riders and even beggars. And you can be sure that the National Assembly will pass a motion for Atiku to seek a second term in office. The sentiments will be too much to contain. On top of it all, some portfolio Non-Governmental Organisations, the faceless Civil Society Organisations and itinerant human rights activists, will storm the courts, seeking to invalidate such illegal agreements and to secure a court order to compel Atiku to run. And I cannot ever imagine my beloved North ever agreeing to forfeit a shot at the prime spot. So, let us perish the thought of an agreement for a single-term presidency, but rather run on the merits of programmes and policies. This is not a vote against Atiku in any way at all. Far from it.

I believe that Atiku is qualified to seek election into the office of president of Nigeria on the merits, such that there is no need to resort to this worn-out method of currying votes from the electorates through phantom promises that are not rooted in law. His fate in the coming elections should be based purely on his personality, his previous record in office, his new agenda for Nigeria and the integrity of the platform upon which he is standing to secure his mandate. Atiku should address his mind to Nigerians and what matters most to us in durable infrastructure, eradicating all corrupt practices, transparency in governance and above all, restructuring and fiscal federalism. All these must be addressed in very concrete terms with supporting documents to which Atiku can be held liable. Let Atiku address the issue of the economic prosperity of Nigeria, and how he wants to turn it around better than Dubai, such that in another five years from now, no aspiring candidate would have to travel that far, to plan his campaign strategy, and be contributing to the economic prosperity of foreign nations, because of an election that is to take place in Nigeria.

In the wake up to the PDP presidential primary election, Atiku was all over Nigeria, promising restructuring, but after he won the primary election, he went dead silent on it. This is at the heart of Nigeria, whether we will embrace restructuring in its true form or continue to dance around the theatre of implosion that is staring Nigeria in the face. Yes, we have all read his policy document, full of ideals but lacking in enforcement. We read better policy documents from Buhari and the All Progressive Congress in 2015 and we listened to promises of how the Naira will beat the Dollar, how Boko Haram will become a thing of the past because a war General was going to be in charge to lead the attack against the insurgents by himself, little knowing that he would spend the better part of his tenure in various hospitals abroad. We cannot have that again, where a candidate and his party openly canvassed for votes based on policy documents circulated massively to all Nigerians and upon attaining power, he and his party would turn around to openly deny and reject the said document, even when it is still on the official website of the latter, even as of today.

There is no need for Atiku to seek to turn around the Constitution to undertake the illegality of a one-term agreement; no need at all. In 2018, the logic behind Atiku’s one term vow then was to displace Buhari in 2019 and complete the North’s eight-year tenure. Without any doubt, Buhari’s re-election in 2019 automatically nullified Atiku’s ambition, whichever way one looks at it. Or how does one preach faith in the unity of Nigeria and yet he does not believe in the capacity of other sections to lead the country? If it is true that one of the factors going for Atiku is that he is detribalized, then he should be the one at the forefront of the campaign for power shift to the South, being the reasonable expectation of the majority of our people for equity, justice and fairness. Whereas I may not doubt the ability of the former Vice-President to lead Nigeria and turn things around, there are also one million Atikus from the South-East, South-South and the South-West, who can do the same and even do it better. That is when the sermon of unity and progress will make any meaning.

Written By Obioma Ezenwobodo Esq

By Reuben Abati

Femi Gbajabiamila, Speaker of Nigeria’s House of Representatives was the Guest Speaker at the 52nd Convocation Ceremony of the University of Lagos, his alma mater, on Monday, January 17, 2022. The theme of the lecture was: “Building Back Better: Creating a New Framework for Tertiary Education in Nigeria in the 21st Century.” The Speaker had a lot to speak about but what has caught public attention is his declaration that the time has come to increase the academic qualification for persons seeking to lead Nigeria either as President or at other levels within the political space: in other words, the President, Governors, and members of the National Assembly. He argues at page 16, of his 22-page published presentation, that just as the National Assembly reduced the minimum age of eligibility for public office, in response to the “Not Too Young To Run Campaign”, there would be a need to also review the mandatory academic qualification for persons aspiring to high offices, in order to enhance the quality of candidates who elect to lead Nigeria. I agree with the Speaker of the House of Representatives. My only concern is that in the face of a yet to be concluded amendment of Nigeria’s Electoral Act, he as Speaker of the Blue Chamber, has not yet raised it on the floor of the Assembly or cause it to be raised, in line with parliamentary procedures. He has chosen the platform of a public speech, and even more surprising is the fact that since he raised the subject, there has been very little attempt to amplify his viewpoint which I think is very relevant to current attempts to deepen Nigeria’s electoral system. My own take is that Gbajabiamila has raised a very fundamental question about Nigeria’s leadership recruitment process. Who should lead Nigeria? Who is best qualified to do so? The Speaker said that current provisions in Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution are no longer relevant in the 21st Century, and that the limits set therein are too low.

Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution simply says that “a person shall be qualified for election to the office of President if: (a) he is a citizen of Nigerian by birth; (b) he has attained the age of forty years; (c) he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by that political party; and (d) he has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.” Section 142 states the same provisions with regard to the office of the Vice President. The same provisions apply to other elected positions except with regard to the age of qualification as indicated in Section 65 (2(a) for candidates seeking election into the National Assembly, Section 106 (c) for the State House of Assembly and Section 187(2) for Governors and Deputy Governors. In section 137, the Constitution outlines the grounds for disqualification. But Gbajabiamila’s concern is about Section 131(d) and the insistence on “School Certificate and its equivalent” in the 21st century. What does this mean exactly, in today’s Nigeria? The answer is provided in Section 318 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, which is the Interpretation Section. Here it is expressly stated that in fact a Primary Six School Leaving Certificate is enough for anybody to aspire to any political office in Nigeria. Even the equivalent of a Primary School Leaving Certificate would be considered good enough. Section 318 defines “school certificate and its equivalent” as (a) secondary school certificate or Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guild’s Certificate or (c)Primary School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent and -(i) service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for a minimum of ten years, and (ii) attendance at courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to the Independent Electoral Commission for periods totaling up to a minimum of one year, and (iii) the ability to read v, write and understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of the Independent Electoral Commission, and (d) any other qualification acceptable by the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Thus, the Nigerian Constitution has created a liberal and accommodating situation whereby anybody at all can occupy important political positions in the country, and lead a country where the youths and others are some of the most vertically and horizontally educated persons in the world. Nigeria’s educated elite has no problems with education, the problem is that the educated ones run away from politics, when they attempt to be part of it, they are labeled and stigmatized, and so we have a country where the uneducated, the ignorant who have cash in their pockets, influential Godfathers, and the courage to hire social media noisemakers, who are even doubly ignorant, are the ones dictating the country’s pace. Within the purview of the extant law, no Nigerian political aspirant is required to show proof of having passed the School Certificate Examination or its equivalent. An F9 parallel in all subjects is considered perfect, even a concocted testimonial from a primary school or a secondary can take any Nigerian to the highest levels of government. That is even going too far. Some dubious proof of attendance at one or two seminars is enough, once the Electoral Commission says it is okay. In fact a certificate is not even required as we have seen in the case law on the subject. So why should anyone be surprised that half of the people who get elected to the National Assembly simply go there to sleep or that Governor behave like tyrants and that some State Houses of Assembly rarely meet except when money is to be shared?

Gbajabiamila thinks this is not good enough. So, why has he not raised it where it matters? Why is minimum qualification for elective office not one of the issues in the ongoing debate about the Electoral Act Amendment? Going to UNILAG to run his mouth sanctimoniously is hypocritical. Indeed, as he pointed out, and let us help him deodorize the point, Nigeria cannot continue to recruit the uneducated, the ignorant, the sleepy, rambling wing of society to lead it into the future. This of course is not new. Once upon a time in this country, a matter was taken all the way to the Supreme Court over qualifications and the apex Court ruled that the Constitution recognizes something called RSM (whatever that is) as the equivalent of a School Certificate as long as it is acceptable to the Electoral Commission. In another case, when the issues of qualification came up, the Court ruled that a candidate for an election does not even need a certificate. That is how this country has been elevating persons in ishiagu, Babariga and flowing agbada to go and make laws and design policies that they know nothing about. Gbajabiamila as Speaker of the House of Representatives must have seen the danger up close. He presides over a House of Representatives where at least one member has paraded his four wives as an illustration of his male virility and has also had the effrontery of announcing the birth of his 28th child as a major contribution to national progress. Hon. Al Hassan Ado Doguwa, House Majority Leader, is threatening to produce up to 30 children before the next general elections and he wants the Nigerian Government to classify his home as a polling unit if he achieves the feat. Gbajabiamila presided over that session. He turned it all into a joke.

And that is precisely our problem. We think leadership is a Nollywood episode. When the President’s qualification became an issue in the 2019 election, the Nigerian Army showed up in court to make the claim that the Army does not keep the certificates of its recruits. In other parts of the world, former soldiers who have made sacrifice for the country are treated with respect and exemptions may be made for them, but the risk we run which the House of Representatives Speaker may be alluding to is that in the 21st Century, Nigeria may end up electing into high offices persons who may know next to nothing about climate change, global trade, artificial intelligence and the internet of things and they will go abroad and sit with better educated persons and end up disgracing all of us. It is a problem also with the country’s value system. Wealth, no matter how ill-gotten, has become more important than everything else. With the way the aforementioned sections of the Nigerian Constitution are constructed, we may one day elect into office, touts and all kinds of characters who would not be fit enough to represent the country internationally. We elect holders of “school cert or its equivalents” and yet we still worry about the poor attention that is paid to education in Nigeria, the rank anti-intellectualism that pervades the land, and the perpetual conflict between the educated and the monied elite in our land? To be a big man in Nigeria, you only need to attend a seminar and communicate in English, and the English you speak may not even be good enough for you to get an exemption for IETLS from the UK Home Office or for TOEFL from US Education Authorities.

Our argument: as 2023 approaches, is that we cannot afford to elect into positions, persons with “school certificate or its equivalent”. That has to change. Gbajabiamila, even if he has been negligent on the subject is right. We cannot afford to send to international platforms, persons who do not know the difference between foreign exchange and interest rate, or what is called diaspora remittances. The kind of avoidable leadership recruitment crisis that this country has faced so far must come to an end. I am not asking for a collection of certificates. A graduate degree would be enough. The assumption is that a Nigerian graduate would at least have enough sense to read up on what he or she may not know, and ask the relevant questions. But it is not enough to be a graduate also. That graduate must have necessary cognate experience in either the public or private sector. I recommend a minimum of 10 years. A Nigerian university graduate who has been sitting at home doing nothing significant, should not be allowed to suddenly show up to seek high office. That is not what we are talking about. This is not about paper qualification, but a kind of training that guarantees the ability to think. Mexico once insisted on educated economists, Ph. D holders running its system. The 60th President of Mexico (1988 – 1994), Carlos Sarlina de Gortari had a Ph.D from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. He was an economist and an apostle of free market ideas. Ernesto Zedillo was Mexican President from December 1994 to 30 November 2000. He had a Ph.D in Economics too, but the economy failed under his watch. There was also Enrique Pena Nieto (EPN), the 64th President of Mexico (2012 – 2018) who was sometime down the line accused of plagiarism in his academic thesis. It must also be noted that between 1958 and 1988, every President of Mexico was a law graduate. Their successors were similarly well educated. The eggheads of Mexico did not make much difference. In other words, strong academic qualifications may not make up for such other factors as emotional intelligence, maturity, integrity and character that may be central to the making of a political leader. That notwithstanding, it is certainly not the same when you compare the group of incompetents and strange bedfellows that occupy the policy heights of the Nigerian economy.

We need a new orientation. We need to pay attention to how we recruit leaders in Nigeria. The National Assembly must take a second look, or should have taken another look at Section 131(d) of the 1999 Constitution. Touts speak English. Yes. Thugs have access to school headmasters who can prepare testimonials and affidavits. In Nigeria – yes. The country’s Electoral Commission will accept any “equivalent”. Oh, yes. It is just too easy in Nigeria for anyone to become a major political stakeholder. The bar for legitimate political ascendancy is too low! We are already witnessing that in the traditional institutions where all sorts can wear beaded crowns. Within the larger arena, there must be due respect for minimum standards. The irony is written larger as follows: Under Nigeria’s Public Service Rules, nobody can be recruited as an Administrative Officer (AO) without a university degree or its equivalent, and yet, in the same country, the Constitution says a Primary School Certificate holder is good enough for the highest positions available in politics! Gbajabiamila failed the test when he took his opinion to the 52nd Convocation anniversary of the University of Lagos. He probably did not want to offend his colleagues in the National Assembly whose qualifications he knows cannot be vouched for, many of them don’t have the School Certificate that is the minimum. They can’t even provide the equivalent! And yet these are the same people making laws and taking decisions on behalf of the millions of well-read and capable Nigerians who stay away from Nigerians politics because they don’t want to mix and mingle with a certain Nigerian type with whom you can’t even have a simple conversation on anything. Why are we like this? Is it still possible to save Nigeria’s 2023 from the charlatans?

Is it too late? Nobody knows. The National Assembly has transmitted the re-amended Electoral Act Amendment Bill to President Muhammadu Buhari for his second consideration in accordance with Section 58 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. There are issues about mode of primaries, but there is this other big issue about a political system that recruits persons with “equivalents” in the 21st Century. The persons with “secondary school and its equivalents” are part of the problem with Nigeria.

Reuben Abati, a former presidential spokesperson, writes from Lagos.

By Tony Eluemunor

How many times have you heard it said that the right thing to do is to remove the subsidy on petroleum products?

I wonder why our leaders are not filled with shame when they betray their country by uttering that supreme insult on the people of Nigeria. President Olusegun Obasanjo, Dr Goodluck Jonathan, and now President Muhammadu Buhari have poured that insult upon injury against Nigerians. It is on record that the late President Umaru Yar’Adua remains the only national leader in recent times who refused to punish Nigerians by in­creasing the pump price of petrol, and insulting us by saying that the subsidy on petroleum products was being removed.

Could Ibrahim Babangida, Obasanjo, Jonathan and Buhari or any of their aides or Ministers explain when God enacted the 11th commandment by stipulating that Nigeria’s refineries should nev­er work and as a consequence, that impoverished Nigerians MUST buy petrol at whatever they are told is the international price of crude oil, though provision has been made for some barrels of crude oil to be made available to the local refineries, at reduced rates, to provide petrol and other products for Nigerians? And if the refineries have not worked, or have been sabotaged, whose duty was it to fix the problem?

If refineries work in other climes, and that includes govern­ment-owned refineries, why have they not functioned properly and effectively and optimally in Nige­ria? And why do the so-called cou­rageous heroes in Nigeria who blab about everything, excoriate every­one but their buddies, have refused to call a spade a spade when it comes to neglected refineries? Why have they refused to tell the truth?

The truth about the evil inherent in petrol subsidy cannot be that Ni­geria operates a system of petrol subsidy to lessen the economic burden on its citizens, but that our leaders, despite the hefty salaries they receive, have failed in their duty to get the refineries to work. Or is it not a part of the duty of those in government to get the refineries to work? This insult on the average Nigreians by those who should be apologetic for failing the masses should stop. Nigerians should shake off the stupor to which debilitating poverty has reduced them and let’s join the discourse.

For instance, please listen to one of the supreme heroes that the aver­age Nigerians glorify; Sanusi Lami­do, former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), defending his incessant calls for the removal of subsidy on petroleum products. During his 60th birthday celebra­tion in Kaduna last year, he gloat­ed: “Many years ago, when I was screaming about the trillions being spent on fuel subsidy, I remember there was actually an attempt to at­tack my house in Kano. I was in the Central Bank. Where are we today? We are face to face with the reality that this (fuel subsidy) is unsustain­able.” We applaud Sanusi as “the economist and banker”, but what in the two fields have stopped him from fighting the real battle; to see that the refineries were repaired? How many times did he cry out for such?

Why have the so-called heroes always left the real fight crying to be fought on Nigeria’s behalf and to turn around to punish the same Nigerians who have been impover­ished by their incompetencies?

Also, please listen to former Fi­nance Minister, Ngozi Okonjo-Iwea­la, deny masterminding the policy to remove subsidy on fuel during Jonathan’s administration. She told the BBC that he states governors be­gan pushing for subsidy removal six months before she joined the admin­istration. “The World Bank and IMF have nothing to do with this, abso­lutely nothing! This is an internal government decision and President Jonathan has made it very clear. Re­member, six months before I came, the governors have all pushed for subsidy removal.” Finish? Is that what her incandescent brain, Har­vard and MIT-trained brain told her could distance her from the collec­tive blame? Phew! She should tell us what she did to make the refineries function optimally? She has written several books on her service to Ni­geria, but has she written about her fight to make the refineries work?

Now, petrol subsidy has returned as a hot national issue. It is incred­ible that nobody in government, no politician, no personal aide of Mr. President and not even the President himself remembered that January 2022 would mark the tenth anniversary of “Occupy Nige­ria” protests directed against then President Goodluck Jonathan’s re­moval of the subsidy on imported petroleum products. That is why they could have chosen such a time to talk about subsidy removal, yet again.

Or could it be that they remem­bered but just didn’t care a hoot? That brings up the question: why things never change, even with this administration that promised a change to the next level? See it this way, why would President Buhari embrace an idea he quarreled with when he was an ordinary citizen, pleading to be elected President? And why would some persons who marched on the streets with him, excoriating President Jonathan for increasing petrol pump price increase, sit snugly in their minis­terial offices, instead of resigning, when the Buhari administration increased petrol pump price from where Jonathan left it?

On January 1, 2012, President Goodluck Jonathan announced the removal of fuel subsidy and increased the per litre petrol price from N65 to N141. “Occupy Nige­ria” mass protests ensued in major cities. The price was later adjusted to N97 after more than a week of protests. It was further reduced to N87 in 2015. But while Jonathan faced serious backlash from the fuel prices during his tenure, Bu­hari has adjusted the pump price from N87 to N145 without any pro­test, just as subsequent adjustments were equally accepted until another price hike was proposed this Janu­ary. The gathering storm over the price hike was diffused when Bu­hari postponed the evil day and evil price increase.

Please, put your hand in mine as we walk through the memory lane. Date; March 3, 2015, when Premi­um Times published a story titled “Fuel Scarcity: Buhari lambasts Jonathan, past leaders for neglect­ing refineries”. The story: “The presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, and former head of state, Muhamma­du Buhari, has expressed outrage at the current fuel shortage that has lingered nearly a week, criticising President Goodluck Jonathan and past Nigerian leaders who failed to fix the refineries.

“In his first response to the petrol scarcity that began Thursday, Bu­hari said past governments, and Mr. Jonathan’s, left Nigeria at the mercy of fuel imports by failing to fix the refineries.

“He recalled that two of the four refineries in the country were built while he was petroleum minister in the 1970s.

‘The countless man hours that will be spent at petrol stations today, will reduce our productivity as a na­tion. This should not be so. – GMB,’ Mr. Buhari tweeted Tuesday. (So, he once loved Twitter, too)

“In my time as NNPC chairman and Petroleum Minister in the late 70s, two of our four refineries were built, and domestic consumption catered for.

“But over the last several years our refineries have declined, and we are at the mercy of imports,” he said. Mr. Buhari criticised the government for allowing the prob­lem to persist by failing to fix the refineries, saying despite Nigeria’s oil wealth, the country has been re­duced to an importer of petrol. We must reject a system that has turned one of the world’s largest crude ex­porters into an importer of petrol. Things must change”.

And, really, Buhari got his wish and things changed. Jonathan was tossed out of Aso Rock Presiden­tial and he landed in Otueke. Bu­hari became President, ostensibly to change things. But have things changed? Or how come that in the seventh year into Buhar’s eight years in office, Nigeria’s four re­fineries are operating at about zero capacity? FACTSHEET: What you need to know about Nigeria’s ail­ing refineries and their perennial repairs, published on 14 April 2021, says:

“In 2012, an official task force ranked Nigeria’s refineries “bottom of the ladder” in Africa, saying that from 2009 to 2012 their capacity rare­ly exceeded 28%, according to the Nigeria Natural Resource Charter. Recent capacity has also fluctuated. In January 2017 it was at 36.7%, be­fore falling to a low of 5.8% later in the year. In April 2019 it fell to zero, where it has stayed since July of the same year”.

The way I read it is that the Petro­leum Minister of State in Buhari’s first tenure, Dr. Ibe Kachikwu per­formed the magic that brought our refined capacity to 36.7% in 2017, but President Buhuari sacked him in 2019. But before his final exit, Dr. Kachikwu had made it clear that he had lost even the little power he had. The only way to end the subsidy is to source our refined petroleum needs locally. Finish. If not, any time the price of crude oil appreciates, the monetary burden on Nigerians will increase. So, too, any time the Naira depreciates against the US Dollar.

So, why has Buhari, who boasted that in the less than four years he was Petroleum Minister, he (or the government he served in) built two refineries but has been unable to even keep one, yes, just one refinery working at any capacity? Or, why has the administration of the gov­erning party, the All Progressives Party (APC) not been able to be so progressive as to get just a refinery to work in seven years? And are APC members not ashamed of this terrible record?

My plea is that change could be deceptive. Or, as French writer Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, wrote in 1849, “the more things change, the more they stay the same”. This has been explained to mean that turbulent changes do not affect re­ality on a deeper level other than to cement the status quo. A change of heart must accompany experience before lasting change occurs.

A change of heart? No, that has not taken place yet. There is one visible change though; those who run the show. For instance, on 24 January when the government suspended the fuel subsidy remov­al, over “the timing of the removal” those that made the decision includ­ed: The Minister of Finance, Zainab Ahmed, Senate president, Ahmad Lawan, the Minister of State for Pe­troleum Resources, Timipre Sylva, Yahaya Abdullahi, and the Deputy Whip, Aliyu Abdullahi, the Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Reg­ulatory Authority, Farouk Ahmed, Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Mele Kyari, and Commissioned Chief Executive Officer of the Ni­gerian Upstream Regulatory Com­mission, Gbenga Komolafe. Others are the Special Assistant to the President on Natural Resources, Habib Nuhu, Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Finance, Aliyu Shinkafi, and Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum Resources, Nasir Sani-Gwarzo.

Do you get the point? While Ni­geria’s diversity remains, its deci­sion-making organs have shed that multiplicity of ethnic groups.

Still, I have to thank God for little mercies. We have a President who believes that it is evil for Nigeria to be importing refined petroleum products. He must remember when he said this (and I beg to repeat my­self) “But over the last several years our refineries have declined, and we are at the mercy of imports.”

Mr. Buhari criticised the gov­ernment for allowing the problem to persist by failing to fix the refin­eries, saying despite Nigeria’s oil wealth, the country has been re­duced to an importer of petrol. We must reject a system that has turned one of the world’s largest crude ex­porters into an importer of petrol. Things must change”.

Dear President Buhari, I support you totally and stoutly: Things must change. This is better than what Sa­nusi has been blabbing about. The people insist on subsidy simply be­cause Nigerian leaders have failed woefully. Or when did God also enact the 12th commandment: Ni­geria, thou shalt not export refined petroleum products? Haba!