By
Ibrahim Dan Halilu
Obi’s piece “Why I do not think President Obasanjo should be Impeached,” published on Gamji website on September 9,2002 qualifies for what in advertising business is called “Brand Endorsement.” But it appeared the promoter is endorsing an unpopular brand, which is what President Obasanjo has become in Nigeria’s political milieu since the clamour for his resignation or impeachment began.
No right-thinking Nigerian will pretend that all is well with our democratic governance in view of the recent nosedive into ethno-religious cocoons by the ruling elite in attempting to cover up the incompetence of the president. It is rather unfortunate that those who fought for the enthronement of democracy in Nigeria with their freedom, wealth and blood are today retrogressing into defenders of civilian dictatorship led by President Obasanjo.
I remember vividly how the pro-democracy groups and human rights activists fought the Abacha dictatorial regime to a standstill at a time when most northerners were seeing nothing bad in that government. Not even the arrest and incarceration of the late General Shehu ‘Yar Adua and Obasanjo could convince the defenders of the Abacha regime that it was an unwanted government. Surprisingly, our southern brothers to whom we looked upon for salvation during those trying times, and who really did us pride by leading the struggle for the enthronement of democracy, have assumed the same role that the northern defenders of militocracy played under Abacha. The only difference between the two is that the latter is hiding under “protecting our nascent democracy” to impose dictatorship on us.
I wonder how Obi could defend Obasanjo and condemn the National Assembly over the impeachment saga, despite glaring evidences of failures, breach of constitutional provisions, incompetence, and the sustenance of love-hate relationship between the two arms of government. Why is it that everyone, including the President and his men are evading the real issue? Everyone, including Obi seems concerned only about the defense of the actions or inactions of the President, not penalizing the offense as if the president is greater than the constitution, which is the supreme law of the country.
I believe many Nigerians will be pleased to hear from Obi and those who spoke before him against the forced resignation or impeachment of the president what should bee done with a president who “has lost more than the peoples confidence in his presidency”, whose party fellows in the national assembly, including the House Caucus of his party, and of recent the party national caucus are no longer with him. Many are wondering what purpose and whose interest it will serve to have Chief Obasanjo in office for the remaining months of his tenure.
Perhaps, Obi has missed the point of what purpose the impeachment clause in our constitution is meant to serve by imputing that impeachment is a crude tool of removing the president from office. Contrary to Obi’s claim, the impeachment clause is a versatile tool used for expediency of times and circumstances to remove an elected president who choose to become a dictator. To cut short his dictatorship, the formulators of modern constitutions inserted the impeachment clause to serve as a warning signal to a deviant president. I therefore do not see anything crude about such a toll.
What Obi has failed to realize is that the impeachment stain, like any punishment meted out to offenders, is meant to make an impeached president remorseful and to serve a good lesson to other elected chief executives who may want to toy with the idea of transforming into dictators. The fact that President Bill Clinton of the United States had chosen to face a trial instead of resigning, and came out of it clean, is a good precedent which all true lovers and genuine admirers of President Obasanjo would advise him to grab.
But to threaten fire and brimstone if the president is impeached or forced to resign for his constitutional offenses as the Odua Peoples Congress (OPC) did, as the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) did, as the Yoruba leaders did, or to sound alarmist as some elder statesmen like Shehu Shagari did, as religious bodies like the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) did, as the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) did, as the Civil Liberties Organization (CLO) did, as the Yoruba media columnists like Idang Alibi did, as the Yoruba race generally, including those in Diaspora like Mike Ikhariale, Banji Ayiloge, Akin Falegan did is to renounce the constitution and to ignore the reality that President Obasanjo cannot uphold the democratic principles of separation of powers, respect for the rule of law and due process, which are the pillars of survival of any genuine democracy.
Unless Obi and his ilk have forgotten the National Assembly did not wake up one day and just decided to ask the president to resign or be impeached. There has been series of face-off over role usurpation leveled against the executive. We have been living witnesses to the campaign of blackmail, witch-hunt and sabotage mounted by the presidency using various machineries, including the media to discredit the legislature when its principal officers insisted on asserting their authority and independence. We recalled with grief how Senators Okadigbo and Enrenwen were forcefully removed for refusing to be executive stooges. At a stage the national legislators were so tolerant of the president’s breaches that many of those condemning them now were accusing the legislators of being “settled” by the executive.
For those of us who have been following the trend of events we know that the resignation notice and the threat of impeachment came only as a last resort after series of agitation, exhortation and consultations with the party national leadership and caucus. Any family that has no elder to advise members and settle dispute such a family is heading for disaster, which is the state we find ourselves today under the PDP-led federal government. The Audu Ogbe-led PDP executive has no teeth to bite offending members, no guts to check insubordination by those occupying elective offices, including the President and the Speaker.
Though many apologists and defenders of the president have dismissed the comparison between the impeachment of two Senate leaders and the ongoing attempt to impeach president Obasanjo as incongruent and dwarfed in view of the level of support a president enjoy and the votes he captures at a national election, there is nothing yet to dispute the fact that the Senate and the House of Representatives as an arm of government is neither inferior to the executive arm nor subordinate to it. The two are first among equals, with each having its roles and functions stipulated by the constitution. In still believe therefore there is nothing on the way to block the impeachment in so far as it is serving the same purpose that the impeachment of the two Senate presidents was meant to supposedly serve. If the duo could be impeached for alleged corrupt practices, high-handedness and forgery, I see no reason the president cannot be impeached for offenses so grievous as unilateral tampering with appropriated expenditure and allocation of funds, tampering an electoral law signed by the National Assembly and other sundry breaches of the constitution.
Only a fool will accept Adamu Chiroma’s defense that a significant drop in the national income necessitated the unilateral review of the 2002 budget. Why were the budgets of the two previous years (1999 and 2001) not implemented to the letter when the revenue accrued to the federation account during those years was higher than projected revenue. After all, why could the executive not present the problem to the National Assembly with proposals? Why could it allow the legislature to make an input instead of constituting an executive committee to review the budget? What is the position of the presidential committee under our laws? These are questions, which neither the president nor his defenders have answered in their defense of the presidential breaches of the constitution.
I could agree more with the eminent Nigerians like Alhai Shehu Shagari who held that it would serve the interest of democracy better to allow the president to conclude the remaining six months or so of his tenure, face the electorates again and get their verdict than to impeach him or force him to resign at this stage of our transition. This is more reasonable than giving the impression that the impeachment pundits are bypassing the ballot box as Obi alluded. After all, they are performing their role of checking the executive. But even Shehu Shagari’s exhortation can only be reasonably acceptable to the extent that the president is prepared to change for the better. Otherwise, his resignation or impeachment is the only threat to our democratic transition. The people are jittery about condoning his dictatorial attitude till March 2003 because the fear is that he can use his power of incumbency to return himself to Aso Rock. And such fear is not unfounded for obvious reasons. First, there is guarantee that the rival parties will field the right candidates that could give President Obasanjo a good fight at the polls. People have begun to ask “How can the right candidates emerged when the democratic space is not only closed but controlled from al directions by the presidency? The PDP itself is blocking the way for the emergence of other aspirants, while the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is restricting the emergence of political parties that would have opened and expand the democratic space for new entrants into the presidential race and give the electorate more right of choice.
The impeachment is a good omen even if never takes place as long as it achieved three things. First, compelling the president to change his attitude to leadership and release fund for democratic dividends to reach the populace. Second, ensuring that INEC asserts its independence to conduct free and fair elections. Thirdly, sending a strong warning signal to the National Assembly that though they could not be impeached as the president their Ta Zarce depends on how well they perform their role as legislative arm of government. This may lead to the emergence of a reformed National Assembly, where the interest of the electorate gains an upper hand. This should be the purpose of the resignation notice or impeachment, as the case may be, not for any ethnic or religious sentiments some alarmists imputed. We should not be carried away from the real issues and substance of the matter by ethno-religious bigots.