Governors’ Forum: Assembly of Egotistical Men By Levi Obijiofor Regardless of the purpose for which it was set up, the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) is a diminished organisation. It is now widely regarded mockingly as a forum for entertainment and a medium through which stand-up comedians make fun of state governors. The NGF has lost its direction and perhaps outlived its value. Sardonically, the NGF has not demonstrated uprightness in the public conduct and utterances of its members since they failed unanimously to elect a leader last month. The behaviour of the governors since the failed election has been abysmal and should be condemned. We have before us state governors who are so self-centred. They are consumed by the desire to enhance their personal welfare rather than improve the wellbeing of the people they were elected to serve. The NGF is an organisation of egotistical men. The governors are so engrossed in the politics of electing their leaders that the poor state of the economy is not on their radar. The condition of unemployed youths is not their priority. The decrepit state of infrastructure in their states does not concern them. The anaemic state of hospitals does not worry them because they can afford regular overseas medical checks. Indeed, there is nothing more important to the governors than working out who should serve as the chairperson of their organisation. An entire nation has been distracted by a dispute over a matter as insignificant as the true winner of the NGF chairmanship election. This shows how we prioritise problems in Nigeria. Newspaper headlines in the past four weeks have been dominated by the politics of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum, in particular the leadership struggle among members of the amorphous organisation. When the governors assembled to elect their leaders last month, the atmosphere was far from cordial. The election was a farce. The confusion and bitterness that marred that election have given the governors that disgusting image of a group of undistinguished rabble-rousers notorious for heckling themselves and for trading insulting remarks. The rancorous outcome of the election has exposed the soft underbelly of the NGF. The governors just can’t elect their leaders or handle internal discontent among their peers. This is disgraceful. Should ordinary Nigerians still look up to state governors as political role models? Unable to accommodate alternative or critical viewpoints among their colleagues, some of the governors have behaved dishonourably in public. They deserve to be counselled. The hallmark of maturity, someone once advised, is the ability to remain calm in the face of all provocations. Rather than handle competing political ambition and differences of opinion among their members with deft application of wisdom and philosophical calmness, some of the governors demonstrated lack of tolerance, and showed infantile bravado in their conduct. Others thoughtlessly and shamelessly laundered their dirty linen in public. Has the Nigerian Governors’ Forum become a club reserved for cowboys emblazoned with an emblem of dishonour? By their behaviour the governors brought the high office they occupy to disrepute. Because they could not put aside their personal political interests, none of them showed respect to the esteemed office that is recognised in our Constitution. The fight for political office by governors who were elected to serve civil society has raised questions about the character of the men. It has also raised the question whether voters got things wrong when they elected these men to lead their states. Are members of the NGF fit to serve as governors? Managers of men and women who cannot manage their own affairs are not eligible to preside over official state matters and other important business of state. The NGF has had a short but eventful history since its formation in 1999. Anyone trying to chronicle the life of the NGF will find that the organisation is listed in Part C of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 1990. Although many people have argued that the NGF is not recognised by the Nigerian Constitution, the governors have consistently pointed to Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution as the source of the authority of their organisation. This is one puzzle to be sorted by qualified constitutional lawyers. While questions abound about the relevance and contributions of the NGF to national socioeconomic development, the organisation has outlined on its web site 14 areas it claims it has recorded significant achievements. Paradoxically, most of the so-called “achievements” are vague, abstract, and flimsy. They have not impacted positively on the lives of ordinary citizens. When the NGF states, as its fifth achievement, that it “has developed a strong collaboration with the National Governors Association (NGA) Washington DC, the United States equivalent of the NGF”, you have to wonder how this has elevated the living conditions of ordinary people. Other than the few occasions in which the governors collectively acted in the interest of the common people, such as the signing of the memorandum of understanding with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to get rid of polio in Nigeria by 2009, the NGF has knowingly or inadvertently impoverished the people. Weak leadership and endemic corruption constitute two problems that have held back the nation’s socioeconomic development. This is why people hiss when they read news about state governors fighting over who should lead their organisation. For many years, the public looked to state governors, the president and National Assembly members to provide informed leadership that will help to move the nation forward. Unfortunately, all of them have consistently breached the norms of accountability, responsibility and good manners. The failure of the governors to conduct a free and legally binding election to select their own leaders has exposed the high level of moral decadence within the political class. The question has been asked: If governors cannot conduct unproblematic and free elections at the local level, can we expect better outcomes during national elections in 2015? State governors are assumed to be mature, politically savvy, and prudent enough to choose their leaders. But the animosity that marked the NGF elections last month showed just how selfishness, internal party wrangling and treacherous schemes designed to privilege a preferred candidate can destabilise the election process. Politics in Nigeria is all about might is right. Something went terribly wrong during the election so much so that the governors are now speaking in tongues. If you ask the governors to mention the person they elected as their chairperson on 24 May 2013, you will receive as many conflicting answers as the number of governors who attended the event. Some governors went to the election venue with video cameras. Others armed themselves with camera phones to record the voting process. Members of the NGF have lost confidence in their own election process and in their leaders. Anyone who argues that an election that produced two factions and two chairpersons is free and fair must be deluded. Surely, what happened at the election cannot stand the test of even-handedness or the scrutiny of the moral character of the governors. The credibility of every election -- in Nigeria or elsewhere -- is governed by the manner in which the election is conducted. On 24 May, the governors muddled up their own process for selecting their leader. The emergence of two factions of the NGF led by Governor Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi of Rivers State and Jonathan David Jang of Plateau State (a retired air commodore) has helped to deliver the last rites to a sick organisation that has been bed-ridden for many months. When you examine the vision of the NGF, you will understand why some people have accurately framed the forum as a group of men on a useless fishing expedition. The NGF says that its vision is to serve as “An effective, proactive, inclusive, non-partisan forum which actively fosters, promotes and sustains democratic values, good governance and sustainable development in Nigeria”. There is a ring of contradiction in that vision. How could the governors aim to “sustain democratic values” and “good governance” when they could not even select their officials freely, when they could not agree on who their chairperson is, when they consistently question the ethical behaviour and motives of their members? Members of the NGF are neither dedicated nor committed to the principles for which their organisation was established. The governors are intolerant of one another. They are disrespectful of their own approved processes for electing their leaders. There is no feeling of collegiality among the governors. Many of them lack that important esprit de corps or feeling of dignity that derives from their membership of the NGF. The NGF claims on its web site (nggovernorsforum.org/forum/our-mission/) that its mission is to “provide a common platform for collaboration amongst the Executive Governors on matters of public policy; to promote good governance, sharing of good practice and enhance cooperation at the state level and with other arms of government and society.” The concept of collaboration among the governors should be regarded as a misnomer. The governors cannot collaborate at any level when they have pledged loyalty to two men leading two factions of their organisation. The governors cannot collaborate when they are slanging one another, exchanging foul language, and debating which faction carries greater credibility and weight in the court of public opinion. Let’s get this point clear. The collapse of the NGF will have no adverse economic impact on ordinary people. With or without the NGF, ordinary citizens will still face the challenges of everyday living.
Posted on: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 07:33:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015