A CASE FOR CLARITY AND UNITY Let us consider the reason of the case

A CASE FOR CLARITY AND UNITY

Let us consider the reason of the case.
For nothing is law that is not reason.
------Sir John Powell (1645-1713) English Judge, in the case of Coggs v Bernard (1703)

First, let me congratulate every Nigerian that made it possible for us to get the information and response demanded from the UNDP. Of course, all of us, both for and against the dollar salaries, must share equally the joy; more importantly, the joy that the Nigerian Diaspora Trust Fund does exist, saving our country considerable embarrassment, even though in the usual diplomatic language, the statement does accept in fact the responsibility of not keeping it open and transparent before now (impliedly though) with a promise to do so henceforth. On that level alone, it is not a small victory.

So, what do we do with this victory? How do we celebrate it? Do we fritter it away in one binge hoopla of the blame-game or take to the road further to consolidate it? Reason, my countrymen and women, at home and in Diaspora, should be our guide.

Let's start with what is wrong with what we know now.

The Petition drive was based on the simple principle of the right to know. Implied in that demand and in fact pointedly stated and not disputed is the fact that that no Nigerian outside the charmed circle knew this before Chief Ufot Ekaette made the revelation. But now, the UNDP is saying "it is committed to working to address the issue systematically in an open, transparent way as part of its support for the government and people of Nigeria in the effort to achieve the objectives of the country's economic reform programme". This is according to today's Guardian report.

Of course, some of us would want to ask why this was not the case before now; but I suppose it is not the ultimate responsibility of the UNDP to announce a Nigerian government policy initiative/ treaty/agreement/arrangement the said government enters with third parties. Our government failed the basic test of transparency, which should the foremost plank of its reform programme; it took the activism of the Nigerian people to get a promise that such will no longer be the case.

The second point of discomfort invariably must be the legality of the arrangement with the clarification from the UNDP. Unfortunately, this changes nothing on that front. Without seeking to belabour the point, what the government ought to have done in the first place was bring this bare arrangement before our National Assembly (because it is effectively a treaty) which should then have been enacted by an Act of parliament into our laws. Obviously, they would have needed the Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission to do this; but from yesterday report in one of the dailies, it would seem the Commission wasn't exactly keen on it due to the dollar angle to the matter. Now, I know that there are people who would argue that the government could not have been able to take this to the legislature without the backing and support of the RMAFC and/ or some constitutional amendment on its powers as a Section 153 (1) statutory body as detailed in the Constitution; but that would only have depended on how government presents the case before the legislature. If, for instance, it was couched in form of a 'Nigerian Overseas Experts Resettlement Fund', it technically would be outside the jurisdiction of the RMAFC, clearing all the legal bottlenecks. Specific portions of the Code of Conduct provisions might then be amended to meet this new legal reality. We would have had our reformers; they would have their money and no one would have been wiser as everything would be lawful. But the government shrouded it in a somewhat cultic feel, waiting until disaffection was reportedly brewing in the cabinet and journalists sniffing around before sending us to the UNDP for confirmation!

One thing people who support this arrangement are missing is that they are only providing ad-hoc solutions; in other words, our whole reform mission and the credibility of our government is hanging on an arrangement that cannot survive Obasanjo at best. Why should we allow this kind of arrangement to stand the way it is when we cannot be assured that by tomorrow, if the envisaged policies are successful, they will continue to be pursued and consolidated by successive a regime(s) in a sustainable manner? What happens, if say, tomorrow a new government comes in and decides to stand by this same much-vilified Constitution and the prevailing laws governing salaries and, on that basis, declare all that Obasanjo, Okonjo-Iweala, Adeniji have done with regard to this matter illegal, null void? What happens to all the good they would have done if it cannot be continued on the simple premise that they're unlawful, which they'd be if not done under the law, as is the case now? Are we prepared to stick our neck out that in the cloak and dagger political environment that is Nigeria, such would not happen?

Surely, the best approach is to legalize whatever proposals for change they have in mind, be it in the way we recruit experts from overseas into the public service, the way we reward them and the manner their ideas are implemented (the last of course, is very important in the light of the 'Nigerian Factor' that makes great ideas turn nightmares at the implementation stage). This means, if tomorrow we have a new government, no matter its agenda, it would be difficult to overturn things under the pretext of trying to correct a wrong; and if it has its own ideas about national development, it would also need to, like the previous government, run it through the gauntlet of the law. Democracy is enhanced that way on all fronts and the people can plan better, aid the reform effort and see its gains, and, because of the near-inherent stability, foreign investment will come in buoyed by the fact that they aren't dealing with people who've torn up their Constitution to attract them!. The new government certainly cannot move away from the set focus without making a superior case for change. It is no use for Okonjo-Iweala and Adeniji to succeed today on dollar salaries, turn things around and tomorrow for them to be arraigned before our courts for clear constitutional infractions! Of what use is the reform agenda if it does not survive the Obasanjo ad-hoc arrangement of today and if the totems do not keep our respect and enjoy our gratitude thereafter?

Besides, as it is, partly for reasons of lack of information and illegality, which are the two Achilles heels of the programme we're discussing above, the whole approach has not been very inclusive. How can we be considering the wider pool of competent Nigerian professionals and experts abroad if they do not have information, and even if they do, where they perceive the arrangement to be riddled with illegality, based on prevailing national laws? As it is, it is simply an approach grounded in impunity, because there's no indication of an open process in place to attract a wider pool of such talents (though that is what the UNDP has promised to address impliedly). I mean, how can anyone justify the fact that only two or a handful of expert Nigerians are to enjoy the benefit of such a Fund, knowing our massive skilled human resources need? The injustice is palpable, to say the least!

So, let's do the right thing - follow the law in all circumstances, first change it as necessity demands that we do so as to meet our urgent national needs, galvanize the Nigerian people at home and abroad through information, transparency, accountability and a proper people-led organizational model that would allow the debate that is on now to go on towards fashioning more ideas and solutions - solutions and ideas that will stand the test of time. More importantly, those of us in Diaspora should be vigilant; we certainly do not want the shoddiness and secrecy that characterized this whole thing up till now to continue, and we can only hope and pray that the government is wise enough to see us as friends and partners in the development of our country. No one has a greater stake in Nigeria than each of us. Our unity of purpose must define the effort now and not our minor differences in approach, methodology and all that inconsequential shrapnel that define all emotive national issues.

Our victory must be domesticated and complete.

March 2004