In this interview with WALE AKINSELURE, immediate past president of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Reverend Supo Ayokunle reviews major political happenings and other developments in the polity in the year 2023 and how the nation can navigate towards a better future.
2023 was the year we had the last general election. Like never before there was the Peter Obi movement that attempted to disrupt the usual. What is your assessment of the election and progress in our electoral process?
The summary of the whole matter is that we now have a sitting president and the election did not result in physical war. We need to give glory to God for that. However, we had hiccups here and there during the elections. First, the Third Force would not have emerged if not for the issue on Muslim-Muslim ticket that made many Christians think that they should look elsewhere. By the pedigree of the current President, especially when he was governor of Lagos State and the fact that he came from a majority ethnic group, it wouldn’t have been difficult for him to overwhelmingly win the election. But because of the balancing that had always been there since the 1993 election that was cancelled, it had been a combination even when the military was there, they made sure they were sensitive to the religious situation in the country and placate everybody by making sure that if the president is Muslim, the vice president is Christian and vice versa. But this time, it changed and the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and many other Christians who felt that we shouldn’t have gone back by appearing to polarise the religious situation protested and the only candidate in the major parties that was tilted towards was Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP). The party also became a force because it was the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) that registered the LP and their party combined the Christian and Muslim. Even some who are Muslims, felt it should have been a balanced ticket. So the religious sentiment played a critical role. Otherwise, the president would have won overwhelmingly more than what happened in the last election.
Second, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) also recorded some human failures in the way the election was organized which led to the noise after the election. If you were not going to use the IREV, they shouldn’t have introduced it in the first instance. If INEC was not under obligation to announce using IREV immediately, enough explanation should have been made before the election so that people will not be in doubt and the expectation that electronic will be used to be the final result published wouldn’t have been the notion of so many people, including those in leadership and masses. The hope of the people had been raised that there will be electronic compilation of result which will not be subject to manipulation, all for everything to change. In the future, INEC should not promise what they may not be able to deliver. They should promise minimally. If you do better than what you have promised, that is better than not doing up to your word.
Going to the court was a positive thing as it shows that politicians are becoming more mature. They believe more in the rule of law, they didn’t tell their members to go out in violent protest. You are aware of how rough it used to be in the past. I think we are advancing, the electorate is getting more educated and the people are not ready to be used for the selfish ambition of any politician. The politicians also are getting more civil than ever before, showing that they believe in the rule of law by going to the court. I give kudos to the judiciary especially at the Supreme Court level for coming out to say the verdict of the Supreme Court will not be based on sentiments, popular opinion but what the law is. If that is done continually and sincerely, people will believe more in the judiciary as the last hope of the common man.
We now have President Bola Tinubu at the helm of affairs. Nigerians presently lament going through hardship. What do you make of his policies, decisions and actions in governance thus far?
The positive aspect of the present administration is that the president is a democrat right from the beginning. He had been a pro-democracy activist, rights activist. In the days of the military, he was part of the vanguard that fought the military hands down and even had to go on exile. He is truly a civilian leader, not a military, who converted to a democrat. That gives hope to our democracy that in the future, people will be more observant and make sure that it is pure democrat they vote into power who will know the limit of their powers and will exercise their powers reasonably within the ambit of the law.
Another positive thing is the president, saying they will fight insecurity hands down and double his efforts on food security. We need to have the capacity to be self-sufficient in food production and be a major exporter of many agricultural products. This will put food on the table of Nigerians, allow us employ the mass of unemployed young people spread all over the nation. We are urging the president to take practical steps more than what he has started with. He should vote higher amount for agricultural development and food security. Get more people, more graduates employed, create enabling environment for farmers to be able to expand their works and add value to our agricultural exports so that we can have more foreign exchange through agriculture, which used to be the mainstay of our economy before oil came. He has been saying we will diversify, and not focus on oil any longer. That is a good thing. A good leader must be able to identify where the system has not been well and be able to address that. In the budget, we want to see that more practically the areas of strength not tapped are focused upon so that more people can be employed, and the challenge the naira is having will go down. The naira will appreciate if we have more goods to export than we are importing. He has also done well in the area of solid minerals, trying to have new laws so that the untapped solid minerals can be tapped. The president is equally trying in his drive for foreign investors into the country. He has not been talking to us as a military, authoritarian, but as a civilian by appealing and telling the people that he recognizes that people are suffering and the number one duty of those he has appointed is to fix the issues. I will want him to focus on assessing each appointee from time to time so they don’t think occupying position is for jamboree buy about performance, to alleviate the suffering of the people. Occupying a position is not to lord it over or make quick money, it is to serve. We have seen people in other democratic climes perform where appointees are assessed based on their performance, if they fall short, they are sacked or they sack themselves.
Nigeria still grapples with the impact of the removal of the fuel subsidy. What do you make of that singular government decision?
The way it was removed was not good. The removal of subsidy would have come at a time the president had had a bird eye’s view of what is happening in the nation. Seeing it afar is different from when occupying the seat of Mr President. What we read in the newspapers, on some occasions, are not the actual things on ground. I don’t know whether the president was aware that the subsidy had a great impact in bringing the cost of living down so much in Nigeria. So, anyone that will remove the subsidy would have first of all found a way to ameliorate the consequences of the removal. You would see that ameliorating the impact of the removal of subsidy did not come quickly as the removal of the subsidy. A new government that knew the removal was good should have also planned ahead on how to ameliorate the attendant suffering. The palliatives came as medicine after death. Up till now, I don’t know whether the wage increase, which didn’t go anywhere, compares to the impact of the removal of the subsidy. How do you want people to cope when the amount used to take them to their place of work is more than what they earn at the end of the day, let alone feeding the family? It’s like putting people on a higher level of poverty. The removal of subsidy was too hasty and the palliative did not reach everybody. There was no one that did not feel the negative impact of the subsidy removal but, the palliative did not reach everybody. Before, I spent N25,000 on fuelling my car, now I spend up to N90,000 to fill that car. I’m a retiree, which palliative is coming to me? Who will subsidise me? While I am not against the removal of the subsidy, the way it was handled in a hasty way without ameliorating the impact of the removal, is not good enough. I don’t think the government knew how much the subsidy was doing in the lives of the people before removing it. Also, if you knew the cabal that was using the subsidy to enrich themselves, serve their selfish interests, why don’t you have the courage to deal with them squarely? They could not mention their names, let alone bringing them to book for economic sabotage. Then, you transfer the punishment on innocent Nigerians. I don’t think it is fair enough. That palliative did not palliate anything. It did not go anywhere.
There is a lot of talk about restructuring being a solution to our several challenges. Even the APC government set up the El-Rufai committee on restructuring which came up with recommendations. Do you also share in views that restructuring is solution to our problems?
Restructuring is so crucial in addressing several anomalies in our system. It is unfortunate that people that have been taking over governance have left restructuring attended to. Presently, the constitution we are using is a dual constitution. How can we be operating democracy using Decree No 24 as Constitution? It is not a constitution that came out of a referendum or conference of the entire Nigerian regions. The constitution of a democracy should come from the yearnings of the people. Each region should be represented in a conference to negotiate what will be the future of their federation. The present constitution was drawn by a military ruler who handpicked people to form a constituent assembly.
In the constitution itself, there is the religious factor where a lot of attention was given to Islam but little or nothing to Christianity or Traditional religion. It is a dual constitution where you say the nation is secular but at the same time, you make provision for Sharia. There is a confusion in the constitution where you ask, is Nigeria an Islamic nation or democratic nation? All these must be removed from a constitution that will serve the democratic interest of all. We need a brand new constitution. And the way to do that is, each region has to choose people that will represent them to discuss how we will relate in a federation.
Are you calling for another national conference?
Whatever name you call it because the present politicians in the Assemblies cannot do it. This is because they have gone there to serve the interest of their parties not the people. They say there is party supremacy, what of the people they will represent? People they have gone to represent must be supreme not the party. I am not saying they should be disloyal to their party but they should be loyal to the people they are representing. Whenever a decision will affect any area of the country where they think their votes could come from, they will not address it. We need a constitution that can serve all of us.
There were political issues in Rivers and Ondo States, with the president intervening. Some say the president’s intervention was meddlesome and unconstitutional. What do you make of the intervention of the president in the two states?
I have heard people on the side of the constitution and the law say that it is not right for Me President to intervene, that he should have been watching for the fire to continue to burn. I don’t see anything reasonable in that argument. The court is usually happy if many cases are settled out of court. I think what the president has done is to demonstrate that I am a responsible elder and father of the nation, I cannot be sitting and allow a part of the house under me to burn. If we have alternative to that, will be outcome be okay? The people criticizing the intervention of the president, why didn’t they intervene themselves? Why didn’t the parties to which those people belong intervene? What did PDP ruling in Rivers do to remove the embarrassment leading to colossal loss of infrastructure and causing a lot of distraction of governance in the state? Will a responsible leader continue to look at people dancing naked in public? Somebody intervened and there appears to be peace and you want to crucify him. If the people with whom the settlement was made considers it unfavourable, that person can go to court. Since the intervention in both states, there appears to be peace and that is the best way to go. The constitution itself does not cover everything hence the call for restructuring. If the constitution does not cover this kind of intervention, does it mean it is not good? Anything that will bring peace is good enough.
READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
and then