Beyond the 100 days controversy

SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 : AYO OLUKOTUN 0 COMMENTS

   

 

 

Tomorrow the President Muhammadu Buhari administration would have spent 100 days in office thus qualifying it to be assessed on its achievements or milestones in the early months of its tenure. Interestingly, part of the conversation on this score has involved a raging controversy provoked by the disavowal by the Presidency of two campaign documents namely, “What Buhari will do in 100 hundred days” and “My covenant with Nigerians”. In what looks like an attempt to preempt an examination of the administration based on the verbose and hard to fulfill promises made in the documents, the administration’s spokespersons distanced Buhari from the publications, which were widely circulated by his party.

Mallam Garba Shehu, Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity said recently that he did not authorise those pamphlets and went further to add that “I can equally bet my last kobo that candidate Buhari did not see or authorise those publications”. Whatever one makes of Shehu’s disclaimer especially in view of the counter claim in a section of the media that one of the documents emanated from Dr. Kayode Fayemi, Director of Policy Research and Strategy for the Buhari campaign; it would have been more helpful if that denial had been made during the campaign before the voters could be influenced by their contents. Alternatively, a mild apology on the part of the authorities would have been in order and more in keeping with the President’s image of transparency and honesty.

For, obviously it does not do the President any credit to say that he was not aware of campaign materials generated and widely circulated by his party. In whatever way that debate is resolved the tradition of examining new administrations by the 100days yardstick has come to stay. As many will recall, that governance practice was excitingly flagged off during the tenure of President Fredrick Roosevelt of the United States who turned his first 100 days into an occasion for a definitive turnaround in the fortunes of his country during the Great Depression. From the time of Roosevelt, many leaders have come to expect to be measured by what they do or fail to do in the first 100 days. In Lagos State, former governor Raji Fashola carried the practice forward by rendering account of his stewardship every 100 days. In other words, publics and electorates in many democracies have come to link the idea with early signs of the fulfillment of the social contract. How then has Buhari fared in the last 100 days?

Before attempting to answer the question, I crave the readers’ indulgence to offer a short take. This concerns the recent mysterious decision by telecommunication service providers to embark on yet another round of SIM card registration for their clients despite the fact that one had been carried out only a few years ago. A text message from one of the companies reads: “Dear customer, please visit our office immediately with a valid photo identity card to verify your SIM card registration. Thank you for choosing us”. Needless to say that those who refuse to comply with this instruction will be barred from enjoying services. Previously, this writer had complained about the bedlam and panic that are induced by such exercises, which result in long queues of consumers trying to beat the deadline. In several cities around the country in the last few days, anxious consumers waited under harrowing conditions to get their SIM cards re-registered.

It is still not entirely clear why so many man-hours are sacrificed to this avoidable and repetitive affliction in the name of registration or verification. If telecom providers did not keep good records, why should helpless consumers have to pay for their lapses? Too many hours that could be utilised for productive labour are frittered away on the altar of never-ending data registrations with no one it would seem, able to call these institutions to order. It is bad enough that Nigerians have endured for far too long the low quality services of telecom companies many of whom are carting home huge fortunes from irregular services. Why add insult to our collective injury by subjecting us to ordeals of disorder?

To return to the 100 days controversy, there is little doubt that Buhari has provided a sense of order, effective government and accountability. For example, the recent markup in power supply though reversible was not due to any policy innovation on his part but rather to the spreading fear among operators that they could be sanctioned for non-compliance. The same trend is replicated in our refineries where three of them started working recently at near-full capacity. The groundwork for these outputs were laid by his predecessor who did not harvest improved performance in part because of a weak governance style featuring a circumstance where public service providers worked with an indifferent attitude. That is a way of saying that the fear of Buhari has translated into salutary spinoffs beneficial for the system. The enduring challenge however is how to generate sustainable policy deliverables based on clear departures and initiatives.

In the same vein, the ongoing struggle against corruption, the sudden waking up from slumber of the anti-graft agencies and the quiet restitutions made by corrupt public officials suggest clear focus and attempts to translate a campaign promise into action. So far, the results have fallen short of the noise and thunder of probes and programmed revelations. Moreover, the administration is yet to unfold an anti-corruption strategy advisedly based on preventing corruption rather than dealing with its symptoms and effects. In this respect, it is not helpful that voices have been raised against what some see as selective justice rather than a holistic confrontation with instances of corruption. It might be useful too to caution unofficial administration spokespersons such as Governor Adams Oshiomhole on the increasing use of allegations of corruption as political or propaganda instruments. Such a posture can only detract from the seriousness of the business at hand. No one will doubt similarly, that determined efforts have been made to bring the fight against insurgency to the front burner, for example by such steps as the relocation of strategic military personnel to the North-East. That notwithstanding, the gains have been slow to come given the recent escalation of terrorist acts by suicide bombers with attendant atrocious killings.

One dark spot in performance thus far is the widely criticised northernisation of appointments and the implicit excision of South-East Nigeria from the political map. Official actions in this respect have raised for the administration a volatile sore point as they touch on the national question. Won’t it have been beneficial for example, if a professor from the South had been appointed as the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission in place of the disputed Amina Zakari? It is also true that vital areas of governance such as education, health and employment creation have gotten little or no mention thus far. Hopefully, the delayed appointment of ministers will begin to reverse the downgrading of these critical sectors.

Overall, the administration has within limitations indicated its determination to bring about change. It remains to be seen how far and how fast it will work to create lasting improvements in the lives of Nigerians.

• Olukotun is a professor of International Relations, Obafemi Awolowo University

Copyright PUNCH.All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.

Contact: editor@punchng.com