I recently had cause to write on the plight of marginalised people and communities in the country and how it has eroded the essence of good leadership, governance and democracy.
Expectedly, the responses received were unbelievably overwhelming for lack of words to describe people’s responses.
The totality of the reactions were that the observations made were downright honest assessment of the performance of politicians and those in higher positions of leadership, particularly those serving as state governors and legislators in the country.
There were also some observations that security chiefs and heads of service organisations should acquaint themselves with required skills to perform effectively.
It is important to observe that although civilian practice since the advent of democracy in the country in 1999 has flourished, the general thinking among the people is that governance and the determination of meeting the expectations of the people have woefully failed. Surprisingly, there were also observations that strict compliance with service rules and regulations in government ministries and departments have not helped to arrest the abysmal decline in the performance of many organisations. Several respondents pointed to the fact that decline in the quality of service delivery is majorly the cause of serious mayhem and security lapses recently witnessed in the country.
Many respondents in their contributions on the poor performance in states and local governments in parts of the country, similarly, pointed out that the decline in quality service delivery is not limited to agencies and departments. Local government councils in most states in the country were unanimously pointed out as total failures. There are, however, reportedly some exceptions.
There are disturbing instances of failures in security services, defence and police organisations. Others were decline in service delivery in paramilitary organisations and performance of those in the legislative arm, especially in the states and National Assembly. They were also adjudged as not meeting the expectations of the citizenry and in some cases even the governments. The other critical observations were on the performance of some state governors. Poor performance was generally said to be widespread in states in the country.
There were, however, exceptions that some state governments, especially those that earn much, have performed reasonably well. The deciding factor in having an impressive performance in local governments in the country was the quantum of resource availability and those entrusted with managing resources at that level.
There were, nevertheless, the observation by a few that the dismal performance in some local government councils is uneven receipt of statutory allocations and mismanagement. Rampant corruption in local governments, especially those that receive huge monthly allocations in addition to what they receive from, for example, oil producing companies and related oil and gas companies, have performed expectedly well.
On state governments, most respondents were very critical of their performance. They were lambasted by many critics who alleged poor performance of most state governors. Some respondents observed that many governors do not have anything to show despite occasional claims in newspapers and regular outbursts that they are performing up to expectations. The most critical areas pointed out are the sordid state of schools and health facilities in the northern states. Some critics regretted voting during elections for many of them.
The study and observations on public office holders were incidentally a major responsibility for late President Musa Yar’adua (GCFR) who encouraged the State Security Services (SSS) to beam its searchlight on when he was in office. This was borne out of his belief that security practice is not limited to the use of force and coercion.
The late president believed that speaking truth to those elected and getting them to live up to expectation is a major and critical component of security practice. The late president equally believed that the use of force and the weakness of trying to impress those in leadership positions and dishonesty in any form are not acceptable modes of conduct in security practice.
He also strongly believed that security practice is not limited to the use of force and law enforcement. Yar’Adua believed good governance and execution of works that positively impact the lives of the people are essential components of security practice. These were beliefs that compelled him to task the SSS to closely monitor public office holders and state governments.
This article is written to assist public office holders to meet the expectations of the citizenry and governments in order to perform creditably. Many who worked closely with the late president will recall his regular exhortations that public office holders should always try as much as possible to positively impact the lives of the citizenry and endear themselves to the people and their governments.
It is sad to learn that discrimination and bias against some people in some states have now assumed unbelievable dimensions. It is public knowledge that even some very senior people in government block the chances of people who are not from their immediate environment from being appointed or considered for some offices. This attitude is what led to accusations of discrimination and lack of popularity in many states.
It should be noted that the late president never hesitated to call ministers and governors to order on receiving adverse security reports and public opinions that indicted them. Some of us will recall an incident when a minister was reported to have attempted to short-change the government and the country on a contract for a highway.
The minister was eventually sacked for betrayal and abuse of office. It will be surprising to many that the information that led to the minister’s exit was from the SSS. The minister was summoned and rebuked by the president before he was sacked.
Another incident worth recalling was when a Governor was reported to have endangered himself by learning how to fly a small plane. He eventually lost his life in a plane crash. Some assert that the incident in question was the result of not taking security reports seriously.
The regular monitoring of ministers was a very important component of Yar’Adua’s general view on his appointees and public expectations. Everybody, including the service chiefs, was equally cautioned to sit up. He never threatened any of them but simply told them the truth in areas under their jurisdiction.
They were warned to sit up. As alluded to earlier, the late president never condoned indiscipline and story-telling. Security reports were detailed, truthful and backed with documentary proof.
The dubious claims of being on top of situations were never accepted.
The other very instructive example was when he directed the DGSS to meet a certain governor to hear his own side of information that some areas and people in his state were being marginalised in terms of project siting, appointments and employment.
The president was unhappy because the governor took some decisions based on religious sentiments and was biased against a particular tribe. The other claim was that some parts of his state were deprived of critical projects, especially those being funded by the federal and foreign governments. The said governor had to come to Abuja to explain himself. Unfortunately, the foreign government that made contributions for the said project also wrote to the government lamenting how their assistance was being misused.
There was another incident when he tasked the security agencies to find out why the wives of some governors were riding in a convoy of about five cars, while members of the governor’s cabinet had only two official vehicles. Relatedly, even security chiefs were directed to ensure members of their management teams were allocated only two cars one of which was assigned their security assistants. It is important to note that even the president’s wife Hajiya Turai, although very humble, decent and highly respected, knew her limit and dared not go beyond it, which were laid down by the president himself. She also never interfered in any official matter beyond what the president clearly spelt out.
Many states took a clue from very strict compliance to what the president instructed. A governor remarked that a lot of sanity was installed in many states following the late president’s directive on this issue.
The other area the late president emphasised was the running of an all-inclusive government at state and national levels. Organisations responsible for the siting of projects and employment in state and national levels had clearly spelt out instructions on how to discharge these responsibilities, as stated in established statutory regulations. Equally, no state had an edge over their counterparts when discharging these responsibilities.
Many of those who worked with the late president were therefore taken aback when even security chiefs appointed by subsequent governments predominantly came from a particular part of the country and a particular religion. The late Yar’Adua respected the sensitivity of all parts of the country.
He cherished being told the truth and being honest in the discharge of responsibilities. He will not hesitate to tell the truth where any officer erred.
The other issue the late president guided state governors on was the use of public funds. He insisted that even security votes were to be judiciously used. Some security chiefs who went contrary to the president’s order were warned and in some cases sacked.
Vetting of aspirants to sensitive and higher public offices was the other area the late president was strict about. Aspirants were thoroughly vetted. Intervention from any quarters was not condoned. The president pointed out that if any appointment is to be made it should be in strict compliance with vetting requirements. The instruction should not under any circumstance be compromised.
What happened in the case of Peter Mandelson in the United Kingdom recently underscored the late president’s position on this issue. Some highly placed ministers also suffered the same fate in the country. Investigations revealed that some highly placed officials were responsible for covering up adverse reports on some government officials who slipped through.
The National Security Adviser General Sarki Muktar and DGSS closely worked with the president to ensure his directives on several issues were complied with. In some cases the Secretary of the Federal Government (SGF) was invited to join discussions on such issues.
In view of the fact that the government in ongoing efforts to consolidate democracy and ensure good governance at the various levels in the country, those being considered to serve the nation should be helped to professionally discharge their responsibilities.
Sectional and religious bigotry were also not tolerated by the late president and his trusted assistants. The late president believed all parts of the country had people who are eminently qualified for any position.
Similarly, those with forged certificates when identified through the procedure of continuous vetting were quietly exited. Many in the country have underscored the importance of thorough vetting and expectations of the ability to competently discharge their official duties. Vetting is a major way the president employed to ensure sanity and good governance in the country.
An embarrassing weakness in some security, defence and police systems that have contributed to some recent disturbing incidents and mishaps in nearly all the services are attempts by some officers to influence service policies to have preferential postings. The request for preferential postings, especially to so-called lucrative postings, is a serious threat to the government and the country. This was an area frowned on by the late president. Lobbying for posting as security details, station officers and to border security posts were never tolerated. Very disturbing is the fact that such officers spent more than their stipulated duty tours in postings they lobbied for. Personnel who partake in such practices also evade going on courses that are intended to prepare them for subsequent postings to higher ranks in most services.
Allowing personnel to lobby for lucrative postings unknown to many are lapses that have contributed to some recent gruesome incidents including loss of lives in the country. A former security chief confided that some commanders who lost their lives in some recent incidents previously evaded postings which they considered hard and did not allow them to have some benefits.
This is the reason almost all defence, security agencies, the police and paramilitary agencies in the country are contending with avoidable inadequacies.
To assist security chiefs to effectively perform their duties, institutions must not be exposed to some of the irregularities highlighted in this write-up on inadequacies in security and related organisations.
Taking proactive and pre-emptive measures to deal with some of the irregularities will help to eliminate very damaging mishaps. Previous office holders can share their experiences with even current security chiefs and their subordinates to purge almost all the negative practices to enhance their performances.
Stakeholders also need to appreciate that pressurising service chiefs to unduly influence them could undermine acceptable standard practices and government policies that could endear them to the government and the people. As observed earlier, government at all levels should take a cue from the principles and experiences of public officers such as the late President Shehu Musa Yar’adua. The many security chiefs should appreciate the fact that deliberate acts of misconduct or otherwise could amount to violation of fundamental principles of national security and good governance.
Efforts should be made to stop personnel who engage in such practices which are threats to their lives. Worse still is the fact that personnel who lobby for lucrative postings could even constitute threats to their principal’s lives and those of their family members.
It is commendable to note that nearly all who have mounted the mantle of leadership are trying their best to purge their service and institutions of negative tendencies.
A colleague we shared the rationale and principles of good and inclusive government observed the security situation in the country is disturbing.
Avoiding discrimination and bigotry in any form is also the best legacy those in public offices could bequeath to the citizenry. Those who succeed in public offices are those willing to learn and enshrine the principles of good governance and fairness. They should be fair to all people regardless of their political orientation and religious persuasion.
Public officers should also always remember the positions they hold are transitional. They should be prayerful to ask the Almighty God to grant them the wisdom to honestly serve those who appointed and voted them into public offices.