As the latest scandal in Nigeria’s historically
reputation-challenged oil industry continues to generate widespread reactions,
the issues thrown up so far in the allegations contained in the leaked memo
from the Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Ibe Kachikwu, and the
points made in the counter-response from the Nigerian National Petroleum
Resources (NNPC), point to a larger issue— President Muhammadu Buhari’s
now-established flawed detached leadership style.
In Kachikwu’s memo,
he had accused Maikanti Baru, the NNPC’s Group Managing Director, of
insubordination, recounting instances of being sidelined alongside the NNPC
board in crucial decisions including the award of contracts over the $20
million threshold totaling $25 billion, as well as staff retirement,
replacement and promotion, all matters he argued were mandated by the NNPC Act
to require authorization from the NNPC board.
He also made a
startling revelation in the leaked memo. He stated that he had been trying to
book an appointment with the president to discuss these pertinent issues and
some other industry issues to no avail. This disclosure was met by utmost
bewilderment in many quarters. Many could not believe that a minister of the
country could be struggling to secure a meet with the president given the
stakes, no less a minister in the country’s most strategic ministry, and one
assigned the direct role of co-managing the ministry with the president.
Some were even
quick to recall the president’s words in 2015 when reacting to the criticisms
and concerns raised over his delay in appointing ministers. The president had
said ministers were mere noisemakers and argued that the people who did the
real work were civil servants in the various ministries. Could the Kachikwu
disclosure be a proof of the president’s expressed disposition towards
minsters? Some wondered.
Interestingly,
Baru did not issue a response in his capacity as the NNPC GMD. Instead, the
NNPC delivered the rebuttal. Perhaps a more interesting fact was that the
corporation stated in its response that “the President ordered the Group
Managing Director (GMD) and Management of the Nigerian National Petroleum
Corporation (NNPC) to consider and respond expeditiously to the allegations”.
What this means is
that the president actually authorized a press release from the NNPC as against
the option of the more structured and bureaucratic approach of constituting a
panel of enquiry where all allegations and responses could be presented and
taken into account before appropriate recommendations made including
prescription of punishments were someone to be found culpable.
It is likely that
the choice of this approach was because, as the NNPC so copiously touted in its
response, the presidency was in the know all through and even sanctioned the
actions of the GMD and the management. The NNPC had said, “It is important to
note from the outset that the law and the rules do not require a review or
discussion with the Minister of State or the NNPC Board on contractual matters.
“What is required
is the processing and approval of contracts by the NNPC Tenders Board, the
President in his executive capacity or as Minister of Petroleum, or the Federal
Executive Council (FEC), as the case may be”.
If anyone had
expected a national emergency declared by the president after Kachikwu’s
damning memo surfaced including Kachikwu himself, those lines in the NNPC
response surely banished such thoughts. And herein lies the real problem—
President Buhari had actually not only tolerated a system that sidelined his
own appointed supporting minister who is the actual expert between the two of
them, but even encouraged the consequent insubordination by so doing.
Also, those who
had long argued that the president was too pro-North, especially in his
appointments, may feel an added level of justification. They will point to the
fact that since Baru had the president’s backing, he would most certainly have
okayed the recent controversial lopsided top-level appointments within the NNPC
as this was also one of the contentious issues that Kachikwu raised in his
memo, and which was surprisingly left out of the NNPC’s response. Was this done
because there was no solid defence?
The appointments
were not only dominated by Northerners, but had the inexplicable situation of
not even a single person from the South East included.
Some more cynical
observers have already concluded that the appointments together with the
earlier constitution of the NNPC board, also dominated by Northerners, were
mere extensions of a sweeping northernization policy by the Buhari
administration, warning that Kachikwu’s sidelining may just be the latest in
the strategic move towards maintaining a stranglehold on Nigeria’s cash-cow
industry.
Some have even
gone as far as pointing to controversial oil exploration efforts in the Lake
Chad Basin and newly-disclosed similar efforts in Sokoto and Yobe states, as
further proof of their alleged long-term Northern agenda in the control of
Nigeria’s oil resources.
Even some
observers sympathetic to the president have conceded his role in allowing such
suspicions to fester, advising him to take into account the diversity of the
country in making appointments, ensuring that federal character is factored in,
and that he not only acts equitably, but be seen to be so doing at all times.
To the issue of
leadership, this will not be the first time that the president had, through his
rather disengaged approach to management, allowed needless squabbles amongst
his core team or other officials within the larger structure of government to
which he has controlling influence, ending up not only just embarrassing his
government, but more importantly, threatening some important public objectives
with the promise of real impact for millions of Nigerians. Examples abound.
In February of
2016, Minister of Finance, Kemi Adeosun, openly clashed with the
Comptroller-General of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS), Hameed Ali during a
Senate budget defense session over the issue of the customs being entitled to
special salary package. Adeosun, whose ministry supervises the Customs Service,
had disagreed with Ali who was pushing for the special salary package,
insisting that special salaries for customs officers could only be applicable
if the service improved its IGR. Ali had in return accused the Ministry of
Finance of being the hurdle towards the attainment of its set revenue targets.
He said the ministry denied customs substantial earnings because of waivers
granted to some big corporations.
This was
interpreted as an open display of insubordination by Ali to his supervising
minister, while some also wondered why they did not compare notes before the
appearance, pointing to the issue of poor agency-ministry coordination, and the
absence of a looming president whose influence prevented such dissenting public
displays. But this was just tip of things to come.
In June 2016,
Kachikwu disagreed with the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi
publicly. In a town hall meeting in the Uyo, the capital of Akwa Ibom State,
Kachikwu had disagreed with Amaechi who claimed the newly established Maritime
University was valued at N13billion which he claimed was an impediment, stating
that it the amount did not matter and all effort should be made to pursue the
implementation of major projects in the Niger-Delta region.
He also differed
with Amaechi on how best to handle the threat of the Niger-Delta Avengers,
pushing for dialogue instead of Amaechi’s threat of force. This was another
example where Buhari’s officials felt free to publicly disagree with each other
without any sense of fear over the implication of the image of the government
or the impact on the president’s brand, another proof, some argued, of brazen
confidence born of discovery of the laidback, non-intervening posture of their
leader.
In March 2017,
President Buhari’s nominee to head the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(EFCC) on a substantive basis, Ibrahim Magu, found himself in a quagmire
resulting from an indicting report sent by the Department of State Services
(DSS) led by Mamman Daura to the Senate. That report was to be the stated basis
for Magu’s eventual rejection.
Many were shocked
that the DSS could send such a report without the president awareness or
intervention. Some also wondered whether it was even possible for the president
to make such a high-profile appointment with due recourse to security
clearance.
Magu had to
respond to the allegations made in the report publicly, a move that may perhaps
have, by benefit of hindsight, reflected the president’s strategy in such
situations as brought to the fore by the NNPC’s recent revelation of Buhari’s
instruction to it to respond to Kachikwu publicly.
This particular
case was thoroughly embarrassing. It prompted endless debates about the
president’s lack of control over the units of his government which many argued
was a recipe for chaos. Powerful actors within his administration, many
contended, had sensed the president’s detached and aloof approach, and were
exploiting that to their selfish ends.
This was not the
only such public spat Magu would have. He was yet again involved in a public
disagreement with the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of
Justice, Abubakar Malami, over sharing of high-profile corruption case files
and other matters.
As supervising
minister, the AGF had sent repeated requests to Magu to share the files in
question to which he maintained defiance. Magu was criticized in public by
Malami and he fired back. It was a messy and needless fight, many argued.
But it pointed to
the now full-blown disregard for the president’s image or the sanity of his
government by his officials, owing to his disengagement. His distance had
created a stubborn audacity that made supposed parts of a coordinated machine
act like independent power blocs scrambling for territory.
Another case still
not fully resolved, is the clash between the Minister of Health, Prof Isaac
Adewole, and the suspended Executive Secretary of the National Health Insurance
Scheme (NHIS), Yusuf Usman, over allegations of nepotism and fraud.
Many were alarmed
when Yusuf challenged the minister, stating that he had no such powers to
suspend him, and declaring his suspension a nullity, before levelling several
allegations of his own against the minister. It was a clear case of textbook of
insubordination in full glare. Many frowned at the public clash between both
officials and saw it as yet another proof of the manifestation of loosely
governed system created by Buhari.
It will be hard to
pass up the opportunity of mentioning the President Buhari-appointed Chairman
of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Itse Sagay.
Hardly anyone has been spared from his ceaseless lacerating criticisms. He has
attacked judges, lawyers, legislators, the opposition, social media users,
agitators, and now, the president’s own party— All Progressives Congress (APC).
Sagay is seen as a
loose cannon by many. Observers wonder why the president had so far not seen
the need to call him to order especially because his public comments have had
some damaging effect on the Buhari administration, the ruling party, and
efforts towards building strong executive-legislative relationship. But Buhari
has remained true to his deeply ingrained leadership style, one that keeps him
soundly asleep while chaos rips his surroundings apart.
It is not only in
matters involving officials of his government that Buhari has been detached.
This has also been evident in political matters as well. As crisis rocked his
party in the legislature and between party leaders, the president failed to
bring the overbearing influence of his office to bear in resolving the issues.
He allowed the conflicts to degenerate, leading to deep fractures within his
party. Some party members and outside observers were saddened by the
president’s posture, laying the blame of the escalating crisis squarely at his
feet.
Another dimension
to this rather tone-deaf approach to administration by Buhari is his failure to
respond with the swiftness and urgency expected of him by the public on several
important matters of national importance. His delay in appointing ministers in
2015 or even seeking an interim response to the rising economic challenge like
setting up an emergency committee of economic advisers despite public outcry,
remains a major example in this regard.
More recently,
Buhari’s continued delay in attending to the investigative report of the
Osinbajo-led panel on corruption allegations involving suspended Secretary to
the Government of the Federation (SGF), Babachir Lawal, and suspend Director
General of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), Ayo Oke, is another example.
Nigeria is a country
in desperate need of development. She can ill afford a president that appears
comfortably stuck in his own world, ignoring urgent calls and pleas from the
desperate public, rightly impatient, as well as the pressing demands of a
country severely broken from successive years of leadership failure.
News
Source: - Ripples | October 17, 2017.
Photo Source: - Punch | October 09, 2017.
No comments:
Post a Comment