Nigeria’s search for an effective Leader – The obnoxious truth about the forthcoming presidential race

ANTHONY OBI OGBO

It has indeed come down to this – a race Between Rightwing Dictator and an Established Thief

For over 58 years, Nigeria has been in search of leaders with the right motive and intelligence to truly move the country to a self-sustaining level. For a country blessed with natural resources, only an insignificant number live above the poverty line. Every four years, the country’s political atmosphere is charged as different personalities vie for the most exalted office of President of the Federal Republic Nigeria. Yet the country remains unlucky in electing effective leaders who will institutionalize ethical leadership, and steer the country to an enviable status from the current global embarrassment.

It is not news then that Nigeria’s General Elections will be held on 16 February 2019. The campaign by political parties have intensified at various constituencies, and in most cases rough, as loyalist engage each other at rallies and on social media. But two major presidential candidates are on the forefront- from the two largest parties. The incumbent, President Muhammadu Buhari of All Progressives Congress (APC), and a former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar representing the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).

These two candidates are not new in Nigeria’s political arena. Buhari who has been in office since 2015 was a Major General in the Nigerian Army and previously served as the Head of State from 1983 to 1985, after taking power in a military coup d’état that dethroned the Democratic Government at the time. Atiku was the Governor-elect of Adamawa State when he was selected by the then Presidential Candidate, Olusegun Obasanjo as his running mate. He served as the Vice President from 1999 to 2007.

Undeniably, he is not medically fit; during his first two years, he shuttled to-and-from unknown medical facilities abroad to attend to his constantly failing health. Atiku, on the other hand, has spent his time making lavish trips abroad while he courted local chiefs and political godfathers to explore his political options and chances. Nonetheless, Atiku has visible investments in local and multinational corporations operating in Nigeria.

The purpose of this article is not to highlight the political history of these individuals. While the majority of voters are divided between the two major platforms, the APC and PDP, the choice of Presidency remains a tough call in a Nation currently dwindling through economic and sociopolitical turmoil. Currently, little or no progress has been made by the incumbent in addressing major issues bedeviling the country. From the economy through internal security, Buhari has fumbled without a blueprint and made flimsy excuses each time. Undeniably, he is not medically fit; during his first two years, he shuttled to-and-from unknown medical facilities abroad to attend to his constantly failing health. For a public servant who seeks to lead a country of over 200 million people, Buhari has continued to put on lid on his medical fitness. Atiku, on the other hand, has spent his time making lavish trips abroad while he courted local chiefs and political godfathers to explore his political options and chances. Nonetheless, Atiku has visible investments in local and multinational corporations operating in Nigeria.

Unfortunately, Buhari’s first term has not yielded the projected fruits because he does not appear to have the answers to institutionalized corruption and economic challenges that Nigeria currently faces. Yet, voters are skeptical about Atiku due to his horribly scandalous transgressions as a public servant.

Unfortunately, Buhari’s first term has not yielded the projected fruits because he does not appear to have the answers to institutionalized corruption and economic challenges that Nigeria currently faces. Yet, voters are skeptical about Atiku due to his horribly scandalous transgressions as a public servant.

Personally, I have spent the last five years criticizing Buhari; his dictatorial demeanor, ignorance in matters of contemporary leadership, and blindness to political governance. In fact, in my book, Governance – The Buhari’s Way, I described him as the most dangerous bee that lands on a scrotum. “Punch it, you smash your manhood; leave it, and you are stung to death.” Yes, he is that killer-bee that perches on the balls, wheezing for a destructive sting. He was involved—one way or the other—in every Nigerian military rule since the 1966-1969 civil war; participated in coups; and, as a retired junta member, ran three presidential races without a scrap of success, until a coalition of parties determined to change the witless government of the day, gave him the platform that aided his electoral victory in the 2015 General Elections.

Atiku, on the other hand, is no good. He is one of those politician elites who prospered through public-fund looting. Bombastically rich, Atiku shuttles rich cities in the Middle East and would swagger money, extravagant gifts, and young women. Atiku’s fraud case with William Jefferson – a former Louisiana politician who served as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for nine terms from 1991 to 2009 made global history.

Jefferson, infamous for having $90,000 in bribe money hidden in his freezer, is serving a 13-year prison sentence after being convicted on a slew of federal corruption charges. One of the most puzzling and intriguing facets of the case is that Jefferson’s partner-in-crime Atiku, the Vice President of Nigeria at the time divided his time between his Vice President position and Potomac, MD., where he and one of his four wives maintain a $2.2 million mansion. While Jefferson resides in a rent-free jail, Abubakar not only remains free but also, he is a Presidential candidate in a country where thieves are glorified. Unfortunately, it is leadership culture in Africa that most thieves do not go to jail, but occupy public offices. So, Atiku is no exception.

Buhari’s 2015 promise of fighting corruption is paralyzed by his inaction of reported sleaze around his protégés and trusted officials. This has become a major ethical burden to the Nigerian President. Atiku, in this campaign moment, has paraded written pieces of literature about solving Nigeria’s moral issues. However, it would take a moral person to fight an immoral society. Atiku’s moral standing is still questionable.

The Presidential race beyond parties is clear; the voters would be left with two candidates that have no proven capacity to move the country forward. Burahi’s path for a moral society is a good proposal, but in both his years as a dictator and first term as an elected leader, he has shown a total lack of intellectual capacity to address matters of ethical governance. His 2015 promise of fighting corruption is paralyzed by his inaction of reported sleaze around his protégés and trusted officials. This has become a major ethical burden to the Nigerian President. Atiku, in this campaign moment, has paraded written pieces of literature about solving Nigeria’s moral issues. However, it would take a moral person to fight an immoral society. Atiku’s moral standing is still questionable.

Notwithstanding the lapses these two candidates exhibit, today, they are barring fangs to tear each other apart in a Presidential race a week away. Voters should be worried, that Buhari even as a failed incumbent, has a challenger that may not be trusted with the country. One of the core doctrines of change in the political contest is not just a handover of the leadership baton. The challenger must be morally and intellectually upright; must tender convincing proposal for change; and must show knowledge of conversion of strategies into governance actions. So far, Atiku’s camp has been parading basic campaign posters of unsubstantiated policy proposals irrelevant to major issues of the moment.

To be clear, this article is not an endorsement of any candidate but a synopsis of the uncertainties that befog Nigeria’s chances to attract a good leader in the forthcoming elections. The next best solution could have been a radical change initiated by a frustrated population. This might entail a disregard of the two major candidates for entirely somebody new for a holistic political detour. But the current political terrain would not support that option in a society where traditional and tribal connectivity still dominates social and political actions.

Without a doubt, this race might boil down to a choice between Buhari, a timid, nepotic but stingy rightist who would sit down on the national wealth without a clue about how to invest, and a lavish and irresponsible spender called Atiku, who could share the national treasury with the wolves that currently surround his candidacy.

So, voters might be faced with a choice between two candidates, one is a dictator, and the other an established thief. Without a doubt, this race might boil down to a choice between Buhari, a timid, nepotic but stingy rightist who would sit down on the national wealth without a clue about how to invest, and a lavish and irresponsible spender called Atiku, who could share the national treasury with the wolves that currently surround his candidacy.

Buhari’s battle with his health might yet not be over. So he might make more trips to fix himself. But Atiku has equally spent more time beyond the shores. He would lie to the nation that he was at a strategy meeting in Dubai, whereas he was busy meeting with unscrupulous money mongers that invest in his campaign. So, the choice is clear, between a weak, clueless, ailing incumbent who might still make many more trips abroad to heal a retiring soul, and a challenger whose fiscal recklessness, corrupt personality, and affiliation with dishonest political vandals might further sink Nigeria’s economy irreparably.

Either way, Nigeria continues the search for an effective leadership – it might take time.

_____________

♦ Anthony Ogbo, PhD is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us

Aisha Buhari’s Fraud Case – Governor Ayo Fayose was Absolutely Right

There were jubilations last week among Nigerians loyal to the Buhari regime. Initially, one would have ascribed their joy to possibly, a miraculous

By Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo — By Anthony Obi Ogbo

turnaround of the country’s current economic predicament; or a solution to severe food crisis that is claiming lives in the North; but none of those happened. Allies of the regime were actually celebrating the First Lady, Aisha Buhari for successfully visiting the United States of America, amidst speculations of her arrest over a high profile fraud case she was listed as an accomplice.

For clarity, Mrs. Buhari’s involvement in the money laundering case involving a former United States congressman, William J. Jefferson has never been in doubt. Jefferson was sentenced to 13 years in prison 2009 for accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes in a case that also involved a former Nigerian vice president Atiku Abubakar and the wife, Jennifer Douglas Abubakar. Documents from the United States Justice Department clearly revealed that Aisha Buhari was used as conduit and engaged in fraudulent wire transfers from her Nigerian account in favor of Congressman Jefferson via the ANJ Group LLC. (See complete Government’s Sentencing Memorandum).

So why would a case that has irrefutably been in the public domain since 2009 reemerge with such distracting controversy? In a heated political exchange late June, the Ekiti State Governor, Ayo Fayose had questioned Mrs. Buhari’s integrity, citing her involvement in the Jefferson’s fraud, and challenging her to travel to the United States as a proof of innocence. Fayose was right in his challenge for several reasons; Mrs. Buhari and others listed as witnesses in the case had avoided the United States for fear of prosecution. For instance, Atiku Abubakar and his wife were subpoenaed by a federal court in Virginia, but a district judge declined to request the U.S. government to invoke an accord with Nigeria to facilitate the process. Mrs. Buhar’s possible indictment in the scam was thus left pending.

Aish_2 — Fayose (left), Mrs. Buhari…. Documents from the United States Justice Department clearly revealed that Aisha Buhari was used as conduit and engaged in fraudulent wire transfers from her Nigerian account in favor of Congressman Jefferson via the ANJ Group LLC.

This was why Mrs. Buhari had avoided the United States and in fact, declined all formal invitations for major events with flimsy excuses. She had cancelled her scheduled trip for the World First Ladies’ Conference in Colorado; she equally skipped a similar U.S. invitations August 2015, when she was scheduled to lead four other First Ladies; from Ghana, Mozambique, Gambia and Rwanda to Houston for a conference about African women in leadership.

Fayose’s challenge embarrassed the regime and raised a credibility question that contradicted Buhari’s wobbly campaign against fraud. To save face, the regime embarked on an image-cleaning scheme of the First lady, and invoked counter measures against the Governor. In this process, Mrs. Buhari through the regime had instigated a media campaign, claiming it was a different “Aisha Buhari” that was mentioned in the case; then she turned around and filed a defamation lawsuit against the Governor.

To further clear the grounds for a U.S. visit of the First Lady, the regime engaged pricey government lobbyists and legal advisors to explore Aisha’s foreign immunity options under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). FSIA –defines the jurisdiction of United States courts in suits against foreign states – where a foreign state generally is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another sovereign state.

The truth however, is that all Nigerian witnesses and accomplices, including Mrs. Buhari did not corporate with investigations and court orders then, leaving the case wide open for further action. Mrs. Buhari finally visited the United States because the regime found out she was not going to be arrested. To add to the drama, she had falsely announced that the reason for her visit was to hold discussions with aid organizations on how to help the women and children facing starvation in the north eastern part of Nigeria. Critics differ and took to the social media, lampooning her for lavishing millions of Dollars to paint the wrong image of the high profile fraud case she was involved in.

Aisha Buhari’s visit to the U.S. not a proof of innocence – State Department Sources

Furthermore, it must be noted that Buhari backed off from an acceptance by the U.S. to assist Nigeria in locating and returning funds stolen by corrupt government officials. This was because core members of his administration, allies, past Nigeria leaders, and also his own wife could be indicted if the United States would proceed.

As a top official of the States Department noted, Aisha’s visit is neither “a guilty verdict nor a proof of innocence. The simple fact is that her case is open, and she has not yet been indicted for specific reasons, so she’s entitled to visit.” Therefore, the Governor was absolutely right – Aisha has a case to answer in the United States and indictment is a matter of time, the law, and the scope of diplomatic immunity.

♦ Anthony Ogbo, Ph.D. is the Publisher of Houston, TX – based International Guardian

Aisha Buhari’s visit to the U.S. not a proof of innocence – State Department Sources

The U.S. show: Mrs. Buhari said had indicated that the reason for her visit was to hold discussions with aid organizations on how to help the women and children facing starvation in the north eastern part of Nigeria, but critics differ accusing the First Lady of lavishing millions of Dollars to paint the wrong image of her past deeds. — The U.S. show: Mrs. Buhari had indicated that the reason for her visit was to hold discussions with aid organizations on how to help the women and children facing starvation in the north eastern part of Nigeria, but critics differ accusing the First Lady of lavishing millions of Dollars to paint the wrong image of her past deeds

♦ Why she was allowed in the U.S ♦ More than a million dollars spent on legal consultants, media campaign, and event organizers

♦ Why the regime backtracked from cooperating with the US in locating and returning funds stolen by corrupt government officials.

International Guardian – Houston TX/

While the allies of Nigerian ruling party and government celebrate the First Lady, Aisha Buhari’s visit to the United States, sources of the State Department reveals otherwise. “Her visit is neither a guilty verdict nor a proof of innocence. We don’t just arrest persons without a course, and that course has a process. The simple fact is that her case is open, and she has not yet been indicted for specific reasons, so she’s entitled to visit,” a top official of the States Department stated.

It may be recalled that after the documents implicating Mrs. Buhari in a money-laundering case (See document – Page 23) involving a former United States congressman, William J. Jefferson was revealed, Buhari’s regime allegedly instigated a media campaign claiming it was a different Aisha Buhari that was mentioned in the case. The regime further intensified its determination to shield the First Lady’s involvement after it was learnt the United States Department of Justice had reopened the case.

Mrs. Buhar’s possible indictment in the scam was hindered in July 21, 2008 after a district judge in Virginia declined to request the U.S. government to invoke a treaty with Nigeria to make specific individuals involved in the case available to testify. It may be recalled that a former Nigerian vice president Atiku Abubakar and the wife, Jennifer Douglas Abubakar, who were involved with Rep. Jefferson were accused of scheming to bribe, and were subpoenaed by a federal court in Virginia. A district judge however, declined to request the U.S. government to invoke an accord with Nigeria to facilitate the process.

The William Jefferson’s scandal resurfaced in bold news headlines, after the Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele Fayose, reiterated Mrs. Buhari’s involvement in the scam, daring her to visit the United States. The Governor’s challenge ignited a renewed panic in Buhari’s regime over a possible indictment and arrest, prompting the First Lady to cancel her scheduled trip to Colorado for the World First Ladies’ Conference.

It may be recalled that after the documents implicating Mrs. Buhari in a money-laundering case involving a former United States congressman, William J. Jefferson was revealed, Buhari’s regime allegedly instigated a media campaign claiming it was a different Aisha Buhari that was mentioned in the case.

International Guardian reliably gathered that Buhari’s regime collaborated with a team of paid lobbyists in Washington D.C. to ascertain the current status of the case before Mrs. Buhari’s could travel to the U.S. An anonymous government source alleged that more than a million dollars was spent on lobbyists, media campaign, and to various event organizers who facilitated multiple photo-taking events for the First Lady. The campaign was obvious. For example, a caption that accompanied a series of photos emailed to our newsroom, read; “Please help us circulate these photos in your highly valued media – we want to put Governor Fayose to shame.”

Mrs. Buhari had indicated that the reason for her visit was to hold discussions with aid organizations on how to help the women and children facing starvation in the north eastern part of Nigeria, but critics differ accusing the First Lady of lavishing millions of Dollars to paint the wrong image of her past deeds.

“It’s a challenge to the Buhari regime, and they felt they needed this trip to save face, and they spent quite a lot to get here,” said an anonymous guest who witnessed the First Lady as she was received by a cheering group of Government loyalists on her arrival. In sheer condemnation, Nancy Bolton, an Austin TX – based humanitarian consultant familiar with West African issues described Mrs. Buhari’s visit as a “staged-show put out at a very wrong time”. “With nearly quarter of a million children severely malnourished in Nigeria’s Borno state, spending millions to clean her image in a case clearly in the public domain does not make sense,” Bolton said.

Nigeria Food Crisis: “With nearly quarter of a million children severely malnourished in Nigeria’s Borno state, spending millions to clean her image in a case clearly in the public domain does not make sense,”

Late July, International Guardian reported how diplomatic options of Aisha’s case is being explored and resolved before she could visit the United States. (See publication). The regime, it was gathered engaged pricey government lobbyists and legal advisors to explore Aisha’s foreign immunity options under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). FSIA –defines the jurisdiction of United States courts in suits against foreign states – where a foreign state generally is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another sovereign state.

An anonymous government source alleged that more than a million dollars was spent on lobbyists, media campaign, and to various event organizers who facilitated multiple photo-taking events for the First Lady.

The Buhari’s regime did not officially addressed this matter, but Mrs. Buhari had skipped previous U.S. invitations for allegedly fear of arrest. For instance, in August 2015, Mrs. Buhari was scheduled to lead four other First Ladies; from Ghana, Mozambique, Gambia and Rwanda to Houston for a conference about African women in leadership positions but did not show up.

Investigations of Mrs. Buhari’s suspected money laundering case was purportedly reopened after President Buhari in his first visit to the United States solicited assistance in prosecuting cases involving Nigerian public officers. In July 2015, The United States said it would assist Nigeria in locating and returning funds stolen by corrupt government officials. United States also donated technology equipment to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to enable the anti-corruption agency enhance its fight against crime.

Buhari’s regime however backtracked after it was discovered that core members of his administration, allies, past Nigeria leaders, and possibly his own wife could be indicted if the United States proceeded. Documents from the United States Justice Department, it may be recalled, revealed that Aisha Buhari, was used as conduit and engaged in fraudulent wire transfers from her Nigerian account in favor of Congressman Jefferson via the ANJ Group LLC.

Jefferson’s case was made famous by the $90,000 in what prosecutors said was bribe money that the FBI found stuffed into his freezer, and a legal battle over the raid of his Washington office. He was convicted in August 2009 in U.S. District Court in Alexandria of 11 counts that included bribery, racketeering and money laundering. Jurors acquitted Jefferson of five counts.