But, since the Sardauna, I knew was a leader who never shied away from challenges, or ran away from problems, I have decided to take up as the subject of this lecture, one of the most disturbing problems of the times we live in. This is the current problem of political and economic instability in our country, on the African continent, and all over the world. This is a problem which has become so intense and widespread that we cannot do anything useful and durable to develop our country and ensure the welfare and security of our people, our communities, our societies and our nations, unless we address it and find the means of overcoming it, or at least reducing it to tolerable levels.

Given my own background, training and work experience, and given the late Sardauna's deep and far- sighted commitment to the building of efficient public institutions, which is now often overlooked and even glossed over, my contribution on this issue is going to be limited to how public institutions relate to the problem of instability in these opening years of the 21st century .I must confess that I have no answers. But, I hope to stimulate some serious thinking on the matter, which may move us towards tackling these problems.

Dashed expectations The 21st century was widely looked forward to, and even celebrated, as the new millennium, which would usher in security, peace and prosperity for most of mankind, swept along on the waves of what is called "globalisation". Many looked forward to a new international order, in which, democracy, human rights and free' enterprise, will triumphantly bring about what some scholars called "the end of history". Even those-of us in the poverty-stricken and disease-ridden countries of-, Sub-Saharan Africa, who are increasingly marginalized in this new global order, were expected to share in this worldwide spread of freedom, security and prosperity.

But, where are we now, in the new millennium? The decades of the 1960s and the 1970s were marked by growth in our economies and the establishment of public institutions, which in spite of all their limitations provided the framework in which we developed our countries. We went through all sorts of difficulties, including civil wars, but the strength of these public institutions enabled us to survive political and economic instability. But, right now, in the 21st century, the civil wars from Sierra Leone, to Liberia, to the Sudan, the Congo, Rwanda, Burundi and Somalia, seem intractable, almost impervious to any solution. Why is this so? In our country, we welcomed the new millennium with the hope that the uncertainties, insecurity, and instability of the past two decades were over, and our democracy was going to develop, mature and stabilise; and our economy, gradually, but surely, recover and grow. But, have we even begun to realise these hopes? The only honest answer to this question is that we have not realised most of the hopes and expectations we had, when we fought for the end of military dictatorship and the return to civilian rule. The security of our lives and property has not improved. Although violent communal conflicts were a feature of military rule, particularly in the 1980s and the 1990s, they have continued to ravage and devastate our lives, all over the country, in spite of our return to civilian rule.

We did not expect a miracle. But, we looked forward to definite improvements in our security, and not to the frightening scenarios of political party leaders, legislators and a federal minister, beaten, or, shot to death outside their homes, or, in their own bedrooms.

The widespread and intense unemployment and under- employment of a large proportion of our population, has hardly been tackled. This is partly responsible for generating the violent communal and political conflicts, which make our civilian governments weak and unstable.

The agricultural sector, which is the mainstay of our economy, and which employs the overwhelming majority of our people, and sustains our rural, and even most urban communities, is deteriorating rapidly. The labour force is aging, as the young flee from it. The tools are outdated and worn out. The required inputs are beyond the means of so many. As a result, rural and even urban families are breaking-up, spreading despair and insecurity and tearing apart the major fabric of kinship and neighbourliness binding our communities.

The governments, not only lack an effective and coherent policy on agricultural development to reverse all this, but merely pay lip-service to rural development and concentrate their attention elsewhere. Meanwhile, the agricultural crises they have failed to tackle continue to throw up all forms of violent conflicts and disruptions.

On our continent of Africa, civil wars and wars between states, plagues, famine and sheer impoverishment, are wreaking havoc with the lives of millions of our fellow compatriots, from Algiers to Cape Town and from Dakar to Asmara. The number of refugees, whose condition represents one of the worst expressions of insecurity and instability, inside various countries, and in exile, is in millions. The prices of our raw commodities, including gold and crude oil, are as unstable as the weather.

The prices of key African exports like coffee, cocoa, timber, cotton, vegetable oil and even gold, continue to plunge downwards and fluctuate, creating widespread uncertainty, unpredictability and instability in our economies. This is partly the result of technological advancement whereby less and less of our raw products are now required. Almost all the international agreements and institutions established after the Second World War to stabilise the prices of these raw materials have been scuttled. The World Trade Organisation has become an instrument, not of promoting world trade in the interest of human development, but in the interest of the rich and powerful multinational companies.

The new international order, expected to come forth with the 21st century, has manifested itself as a new international disorder, taking the form of a nightmare of violence and destruction in the last few months. Military force, in its most naked form of bullets and bombs, has come to replace dialogue and diplomacy in the resolution of international disputes. The set of internationally binding treaties, which for over a quarter of a century have contained the threat of a global nuclear catastrophe, which may annihilate all human species, are now in tatters, with the recent unilateral withdrawal of the United States of America from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The nuclear arms race, with all its very dangerous consequences, has resumed. And this is not only between the USA, Russia and China, but also between India and Pakistan, and between Israel and a number of Middle Eastern countries.

The attempt to understand and limit violent and disruptive climate change, through the "Kyoto Protocol" , has virtually collapsed. Hurricanes, droughts, and floods ravage the lives of millions, even in the most developed countries, making most forms of infrastructural development precarious and insecure.

In addition, a number of important internationally binding treaties, which provide the legal enactments and establish the international public institutions for implementation, have been rendered ineffective. These include the Law of the Sea Convention, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Ottawa Anti-Personnel Land-Mine Treaty and the International Chemical Weapons Convention.

On top of all these, the economies of most of the world are in a recession.

This had started before the terrorist attack on New York and Washington of 11th September 2001 and has now deepened. The US Federal Reserve has virtually resorted to Islamic banking practices by slashing interest rates down to 2%. The Keynesian economic polices, attacked and derided in the 1980s, are now back in favour. But this has not stopped the slide into a recession.

In fact, one of the major economies of South America, that of Argentina whose policy of privatisation, deregulation, and dollarisation, were hailed in the 1980s and early 1990s, is on the verge of bankruptcy. Last month, the level of instability there, produced three presidents in a single day! This economic collapse of Argentina will have a devastating  effect on Brazil and other "Mercusor" countries, with ripple effects all over the Caribbean, the rest of the Americas, Japan, the Middle East, Europe and Africa.

Political problems But, even more serious than the economic problems affecting the world today are the political problems of dubious electoral systems of rigged, fixed or tazarce varieties, which use the facade of democracy, to cover up the denial of democratic rights and the denial of the organised process of free and popular participation in governance. The right to choose, which is the core of the democratic process, is being directly or indirectly rigged out in many parts of the world, to the extent that a large proportion of the electorate in many countries, either do not vote, do not even register to vote, sell their voter cards, or destroy their ballot papers altogether.

Fortunately, in places like Zambia, a determined public recently forced the electoral space wide open, to allow eleven candidates to contest the presidential election, even though President Fredrick Chiluba was earlier bent on embarking on an unconstitutional, self-succession project akin to the Nigerian tazarce racket." We all witnessed how the United States, which believes that it is the world's leading democracy, almost failed to produce a president-elect by December 2000, because of the way its electoral system failed to provide, for many of the voters, a rational and transparent method of exercising their right to choose.

The intense concentration of the ownership and control of the electronic and print media in many of the democracies of Europe and North America has made empty the fundamental democratic freedoms of speech and information. A few media moguls like, Mr. Rupert Murdock and Mr. Ted Turner, virtually decide whose speech the electorate hears and whose information is made known to the voters.

In our country today the boundary between advertising toothpaste and reports on activities of elected government is almost non-existent. Both items are, in most cases, paid for the print and electronic media have largely compromised professional ethics, becoming more and more preoccupied with making money.

As a result, an informed public opinion, mature, far- sighted, patriotic and stable has not emerged to give democracy the fertile soil on which to grow its strong roots. What we have are reports full of distortions, half-truths and out -right falsehoods aimed at satisfying the vested interest of the owner, politician or the advertiser, usually by appealing to the most base instincts of ethnic, regional and religious distrust, acrimony and hatred.

The violent communal conflicts which have rendered many parts of our country insecure and unstable, are fanned by this type of destructive politics and mercenary media practices, all aimed at fooling the electorate and rendering them incapable of exercising, in an informed way, their right to choose.

Restoring public institutions

All these practices, which generate and sustain insecurity in our societies and instability in our political system, continue to flourish because, the public institutions established by the Constitution and laws, and by internationally binding treaties and conventions, to protect public interest, and rights of all citizens and nations are subordinated to the private and parochial interests of the individuals and groups in power.

This is not to say that pubic institutions should be made to intrude into many areas of our economic and social life. The privatisation of many commercial and other enterprises being undertaken by this government can lead to a lot of economic benefits and strengthen the stability of the democratic system. However this will only be so when the exercise is carried out in an open manner, whereby those carrying it out do not use their positions and public resources to corner public enterprises in the name of privatisation.

Given the experience in other African countries, notably Senegal, this is not bound to endure in the long run. But perhaps more importantly it must be recognised that these privatised enterprises can only succeed in their legitimate functions,' if there are effective public institutions to define and enforce the regulatory, legal framework for them to flourish, grow and endure.

In my view, it is wrong to see public institutions as being automatically opposed to private enterprises. As we can see in countries like Russia when public institutions were subverted, only criminal activities succeeded, and legitimate and enduring private enterprise are pushed to the margins.

Indeed, it has also become manifest that the small circle of individuals in Russia, who have grown immensely wealthy at the expense of the generality of the citizens, as a result of the privatisation exercise have now been placed in a position to control the outcome of elections through their ability to financially dominate election campaigns.

This, therefore, raises the question as to whether there can be true democracy in the absence of equal access to election campaign resources by those who seek for political office. What happens when money becomes the central factor in ensuring access to democratically elected leadership positions? Does this amount to democracy? Can this democracy endure, as the mass of the electorate get poorer and poorer and the politicians get richer and richer? But, public institutions cannot be restored and made to play a constructive and democratic role in ensuring stability in society unless what they are is widely understood and broadly accepted. Public institutions; even the civil services, the law-enforcement agencies and all the rest of the public services are not established as organs of the people in power. This is so even though in a democracy candidates of the political party, which wins the elections, have the responsibility for the duration of their mandate, to set for the society the policies and programmes they are to implement. These public services are, therefore, not organs, or, agencies of those elected public office-holders, or, of their party. They are institutions established to serve the public and uphold the public interest, as defined by those elected to rule, within the framework of the Constitution, the law and other legitimate legal enactments and directives.

What has happened over the years is that domestic and international public institutions have come under attack from three sides. From one side are ethnic, religious and regional chauvinists and bigots who vehemently challenge the notion that, in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society, it is possible to have public institutions which serve all the public and all nations, irrespective of the ethnic origin, or the religious affiliation of the public officer. They do not accept that public institutions can be established, with their norms, regulations and procedures codified and deeply imbibed by their staff, such that they can advise on and implement public policy, in a patriotic manner, without ethnic, religious or national bias.

The second attack on public institutions is coming from greedy and powerful networks of private business interests, who believe that business comes above everything and determines everything, and public institutions are merely other arenas for business. They turn public officials into mercenaries. They reduce their norms, regulations and standards, into means of serving the highest bidder and or the one with the most powerful political connections, bought and paid for in the course of corrupting the democratic process and disenfranchising the electorate with money rather than with the gun.

The third attack on public institutions is coming from the demagogic politicians and political party apparatchik, who believe that public institutions exist to serve the interest of their party in general, and the party position they hold, in particular. They deny that there may be a world of difference between the interest of their party and the interest of the public; and that public institutions are to serve the latter and not the former.

All these three forms of attack on public institutions have substantially weakened them in this country and internationally. Here in our country, the attempt to illegally smuggle and impose an Electoral Bill whose primary objective was to exclude democratic contest at the 2003 elections was indeed a clear evidence of the way these attacks have made our public institutions so weak. Many of the politicians now in power see the Independent National Electoral Commission and the State Independent Electoral Commissions as agencies established to be used to serve their own personal political ambition.

This is at the root of the deepening political instability, which is threatening to bring down to its knees our current attempt to build a democratic system of government. This will happen unless electoral bills, which guarantee free and fair elections, in conformity with the Constitution, are soon enacted and faithfully implemented by patently non-partisan and credible independent electoral commissions, at the state and federal levels. Democracy cannot exist as an abstract formula that brings no concrete benefits to the people of our country. True democracy can only be achieved through the active involvement of our people in the choice of their political leaders and the policies for running the country. We must not rest on our oars by falsely accepting that we are practicing democracy, when in fact it is increasingly evident that the majority of our people are becoming alienated by the current political dispensation in Nigeria. This is because it does not provide for them the political and economic opportunities to take control of their lives and improve them, as they rightfully expect.

Worldwide, the shocking level of violence and destruction which international disputes are generating, is a direct result of the weakening of global public institutions like the United Nations and its agencies, and the refusal by some powerful countries to enhance the capacity of these institutions to cope with the instability and other challenges, of the 21st century.

One of the most tragic cases is that of Palestine and Israel where the United Nations and other international public, institutions, have been denied their legitimate role to work towards peaceful resolution of that conflict. As a result, the level of violence in the Middle East has, not only worsened, but has also become a major cause of global insecurity and instability .The tragic events of the last few months have clearly demonstrated that there is no way to solve the problems confronting mankind without a much stronger and effective United Nations and other international public institutions.

Conclusion Ladies and Gentlemen, things are coming to a head. We have to either overcome, or substantially contain this instability, or we all sink into it.

While all of us have responsibility in this matter, within our country, the heaviest responsibility rests on the shoulders of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Senators and the members of the House of Representatives; the State Governors and the members of the State Houses of Assembly and Local Government Chairpersons and Councillors. They have to take decisive steps in the next few months to demonstrate in words and in practical deeds, that our public institutions., particularly the Independent National Electoral Commission, the State Independent Electoral Commissions, and the law enforcement agencies, exist to serve the public and not any individual, or political party .This is what the Constitution on whose basis they occupy their positions of power, provides. This is what the laws provide. These are the only measures that will save their offices, their persons and properties from being swallowed up and finished off by violence arising from political instability.

The most important single responsibility of our elected public office holders today, therefore, is to overcome their obsession with self-succession and to commit themselves to ensure a democratic and credible civilian-to-civilian succession in 2003.. They should learn the lessons, of our history and reject the sycophants urging them to succeed themselves by subverting-the Constitution and the public institutions we are building to sustain it.

The people of Nigeria have demonstrated, time and time again, that they deeply cherish their democratic right to choose. When this right is denied to them, conditions are created when the self-succession schemes and manoeuvres become self-defeating and end up in a tragic fashion for the country, for democracy and for the people involved.

However, those who think that they can hoodwink the Nigerian electorate by manipulating ethnic, regional and . religious differences and thus be able to misuse public institutions and public funds to perpetuate themselves, in power, are only fooling themselves. As we have seen before our eyes, sectionalist and chauvinist politicking has a way of consuming its practitioners, because of the way it generates the fragmentation of the ethnic group and, even the sub- ethnic and the sub-sub ethnic group, 9$ others turn this type of politicking against its practitioners. The only way therefore, to ensure our individual and collective security and enduring economic and political success is not to be frightened by some of the problems we face today and resort to this type of negative politics.

We have to stand up for the building of public institutions at all levels of our governments that can guarantee the security and welfare of all our citizens under our democratic Constitution backed by. a resolute commitment to fairness and justice for everybody, everywhere and at all times.

The public institutions, which the late Sardauna and his colleagues were building before he was murdered on these premises, thirty-six years ago, were intended to provide public service, protect public interest and ensure stability in our society. There is no doubt that, these public institutions played a major role in saving our country during the dark days of our crisis and: the Civil War of 1966-1970. Fortunately, the foundations, on which these public institutions were built, still exist.

Therefore, one of the most important ways in which we can build on to the legacy of the late Premier, is to reconstruct the foundations, he and his colleagues laid and build public institutions, domestically and internationally to cope with the challenges of the instability of the early 21st century. This is imperative because beyond any other thing, they stand for public, national and global human interests above all forms of shortsighted, parochial and selfish interests.

Thank you.

Being a paper presented at the Sixth Annual Lecture in honour of Alhaji (Sir) Ahmadu Bello in Arewa House, by Alhaji Muhammadu Dikko Yusuf, GCON.

Feb 2002