21st January, 2013
Nigerian Senator Chris Anyanwu, journalist, publisher and broadcast entrepreneur, represents Imo East Senatorial District in the National Assembly. In this interview with OLUOKUN AYORINDE, Anyanwu speaks on various national issues including why it has been difficult for parties to form a formidable opposition. Excerpts:
As one of those at the forefront of the fight to restore civil rule in the country, what is your impression of the democracy we’ve had since 1999?
Our democracy is evolving; I wouldn’t say it has gotten there yet. But we are reaping some of the fruits. Freedom of expression is here, though in certain levels you will find out that there is no unlimited freedom of expression because certain considerations weigh and therefore it is impossible for you to even express your opinion sometimes. For example, there is the issue of party supremacy, so even if you wanted to say something and the party is going this way, that consideration will sometimes weigh on you and you cannot really fully express yourself. You find some of those nuances in different levels, in different ways, but those are exceptions to the rule. By and large, I think we have freedom of expression, people on radio speaking freely, unhindered within the ambits of the law of course. That’s one of the dividends of democracy. Of course, many people are feeling disappointed – there are expectations that haven’t come through. But that is part of the evolution of the whole thing. We don’t expect to attain within 13 years the height of America which has had democracy for about 300 years. But we’ve made leaps forward actually.
The concern of most Nigerians is that in terms of tackling the basic challenges confronting the people, democracy has not delivered…
You are mistaking democracy for development. Democracy is not necessarily to deliver development, but what we are expecting is that development will happen faster in an environment of democracy than in a dictatorial one. We are feeling disappointed that development is not happening as fast as we expected. And that is partly because of some positive things that have been put in place – remember, in those days we didn’t have due process and all that. Due process delays things, but it is enforced to save money and control things. There is a number of checks put in place and many of them have had the effect of delaying things, slowing down the process. But I think that in the next stage of our democratic development we have to look at the instruments we’ve devised since the advent of democracy in 1999 and see if there are some of them that have to be re-evaluated, strengthened, tidied or loosened up, so that things can continue to work within an environment that is also fairly controlled. Again, we look at the quality of leadership and the constitution of the different levels of government. In terms of structure of governance, the local government level has not been allowed to deliver what it is expected to because revenue supposed to go directly to local governments is not really being spent by them. There is also the other argument that the quality of leadership at the local government level leads to a waste of resources. So, instead of investing in development at the local government level, funds are being frittered away through fraud and all sorts of things. Those are things that we’ve to look at.
If the local governments are working effectively, we will see a lot happening from the bottom up. But what is happening now is that all eyes are on the federal government, less focus on the state government and nothing is happening at the local government level. Those are the defects that we need to work on. But the question is, can we work on it given what is happening now? Would the governors allow you to tighten the screws – sending money directly to the local governments, allowing them to spend the money? Because they (the governors) are the all-powerful elements in the system now. But if everybody understands that we need to do something about the local government level, then we can do something. And I want to tell you that when you send revenue directly to the local governments and they are now allowed to spend it on their own, what is likely to happen is that the quality of leadership at that level will improve. You will see a lot of retired permanent secretaries, retired heads of corporations wanting to give back to their people by working at the local government level. You will also see young people starting their political journey from the local government level. It will be wonderful for Nigeria if we could do that. But would they allow it to happen?
Talking about things we need to tinker with in our democracy, there have been arguments by some that one of them is the National Assembly. Many Nigerians believe too much money is being spent on National Assembly in terms of allowances and so on. And there have been various suggestions for cutting down the cost, like the introduction of part-time legislature and operating a single chamber. What is your opinion on this?
We cannot continue to think the way we have been thinking over the years. Nigerians are used to looking for a punching bag and in this system, at this time, National Assembly has become one because it has allowed itself to be blackmailed with the Nigerian public. And therefore, National Assembly to them is representative of all that is wrong in the Nigerian system under democracy. But that is absolutely wrong. Somebody is making Nigerians go to Afghanistan; that is, direct their gaze in one direction while the problem is somewhere else. And I think we have to re-direct the gaze of Nigerians to the fact that the problem is larger than the National Assembly; it’s a systemic problem. Some of things that I was talking about – the local government not working and the re-gearing that has to be done for things to happen at that level – are the kinds of detailed, painstaking thinking that we ought to be doing at this time at every level, not just about the National Assembly. If National Assembly is the problem, what about the executive? How much is spent on tours and the rest of it? When you look at the budget sometimes, you will see a whole lot of little things that add up, that are guzzling a lot of money. I don’t think the solution lies in a smaller or a larger National Assembly or the National Assembly as it is constituted now.
Many Nigerians believe that the National Assembly is not effectively carrying out its assigned task of overseeing the ministries, departments and agencies, MDAs…
That is their opinion and they have the right to think that way. But I think most of us at the National Assembly realise that everything we do here will be counted for us. Everyone has his own little area that he has been assigned to oversee and the onus lies on him or her to be rigorous at it. One of the first speeches that the Senate President gave in the seventh Senate was that this time, we have to be very rigorous with our oversight of the MDAs. And I think the same thing happened in the House [of Representatives] because we saw them going all over the country, going through activities of the Ministries. But the point is that the civil servants are masters of the game. You will do your best, but those who have been there for a long time and are grounded in these activities tend to have the upper hand. But I think as the National Assembly ages, it will get more adept at this. I remember in the sixth Senate, when I was in Defence and Army (committees). The Defence Committee of the US Senate visited us – some of them had been in the Senate for 25 years and were masters in the subject. So it’s difficult to pull the wool over the eyes of such men. And I think as Nigeria continues to grow in democracy and more members last longer in this game of legislation, we would get more National Assembly members being masters at their game.
You can even see that in the current Senate, those who have been there four, five times get very good. I was there the last time and I saw how those who were second termers performed. Now, those of them that are back now, I see they are getting better and that is what needs to happen. So, while the people have the right to feel the way they currently are, I think we should not be too impatient.
How good is the working relationship in the Senate because people will expect the lawmakers to transcend their ethnic and religious divides on important issues; unlike what is happening now in the consideration of the Petroleum Industry Bill, PIB?
What you are asking is: Can they not transcend politics and view things from the prisms of patriotism and long term benefit? And that is a question that every right thinking Nigerian should be asking. But you know that Nigerians tend to over-politicise issues and if some of them did not start making a media issue of their position, saying this PIB will not go and things like that, this other side would not have come together to say Okay, we will fight it on a regional basis. But I am hoping that we will transcend all that in the end and look at PIB simply from the nationalistic point of view. What is in the long term interest of Nigeria? If you say this will happen today, what if the condition changes, would you also agree for it to happen that same way ? So, we have to realise that whatever position we take now will be a precedent for future discoveries and the rest of it. Some ideas that have come out of very painstaking processes will hold in the end, I think.
Are you satisfied with the number of women in the National Assembly?
You know that I am going to say no. I am not satisfied. I think more women should be in the National Assembly. But it is not so much about the numbers, but the few that we have, what are they doing with their presence? That is what we should be talking about. You could have 100 people who would not make any impact, particularly on issues that concern women. But you could have only two people who are deeply committed and drive hard on the issues of women, of family and so on. And there is a lot of very serious issues in that area. Nigeria is replete with great women; women of great attainment in all areas of specialisation. What we are saying is that nobody should do things that frighten quality women from wanting to try to come in. Violence, harassment, intimidation, all have the tendency to discourage decent people, especially women who would not want to have anything to do with an environment in which they are intimidated, beaten up and the rest of it. We want the door open for our women and that is the meaning of the word ‘inclusion’. We want proper inclusion of women – no matter who they are, no matter their background. We have women of quality who can add value to the system if you open the door for them, but some people have their notions of the kind of women that should come in. But that is not what we are talking about.
You came in as a member of PDP in the last National Assembly and in the run-up to the 2011 elections, you were denied the ticket of the party. But you went to APGA, and you still won the election. How did you do it?
It’s by the grace of God. I have no secret if I must tell you. It is God that saw me through.
But do you know why PDP denied you the ticket?
That’s a really long story. But it is also really illustrative of some of the unfathomable developments that can happen in a polity that is trying to learn the processes of democracy.
APGA, your new party is now also enmeshed in crisis?
It is all part of evolution of democracy. We are all learning the processes. Even PDP is engulfed in crisis. Which party is not engulfed in crisis? Maybe only ACN. But even ACN may be a molten volcano and one day, it will just erupt. So, for those that are overt, it is no longer a new thing. But there are many that are covert that will, over time, become overt. The prayer is that the volcano erupts in time so that it does not disturb preparations for elections; because if the crisis comes too late it will cause a major problem. But if it comes early enough and they are able to sort themselves out, that’s better.
Why do you think almost all the political parties are in crisis?
It’s a power game, juggling for power – who is going to gain supremacy. It is positioning for the upcoming election in 2015.
Why do you think it has been difficult for the opposition to come together as an entity to enhance their chances of dislodging the ruling party?
I think it is attitude; most times, these things (merger of political parties) is motivated by selfish interests, not by commonality of philosophy or ideology. You don’t see parties based on very strong philosophical or ideological grounding here. There is no distinction between one party and the other here and quite often, the things that break them apart are issues of leadership. So, if the motivation is people’s desire to own and run a party or use the instrumentality of the party to achieve either personal or group gain, sooner or later, the whole thing will fall apart because interests will clash. But if they are grounded on a very strong ideology, I think they will last longer, they will succeed better. For instance, if there are strong bonds of philosophy and ideology holding together CPC, ACN and the rest of them, that will be the glue that will hold them together. And I think the sooner we get parties grounded in philosophies and ideologies, the better.
In Labour Party, for instance, there is a clear ideology- support for labour, the working class, but I hope that on deeper examination, the labour party will be discovered to be actually in support of labour and not just a name.
Very recently, there were stories about a clash between your convoy and that of the Imo State Governor, Rochas Okorocha. What really happened?
What really happened was very simple actually. It’s a story that one doesn’t have to keep rehashing. But what happened was that the situation was allowed to get out of hand. It was a case of bad management of an incident and I will like to put the blame at the door of the Governor. I will like to think that it was not premeditated, but then, one doesn’t know. I was going while he was coming behind me, we heard the siren and we cleared and stopped, but instead of passing, they now surrounded us and his men descended on us and started beating up our people.
And I felt that it was better that I should come out before they killed someone. I felt that my presence would help to douse the violence, but it didn’t actually. And I guess that when they saw they had hurt someone, they just scurried away to Owerri. And instead of doing what I felt a statesman should do – call, reach out, do something – they went and held a press conference. In fact, we were busy trying to save the life of the boy that they wounded – getting police papers, taking him to the hospital and all that. And by 9am when we finished taking him to the hospital, they had already talked to the press and the next morning the press was awash with stories that I nearly killed the Governor.
It just blew my mind. Why can’t you say the simple thing that the road was congested and you were in a hurry to get somewhere and you got impatient and your people took out their anger on innocent commuters who were also suffering the traffic jam with you; that you ordered your men to do what they shouldn’t do and they got mad and hurt someone? It is that simple. I don’t know what to say. But the whole thing was just unbelievable to me and I was dazed by it all.
.This article originally appeared in TheNEWS magazine of 28 January 2013