Successor/predecessor crisis

By Raymond Mordi Deputy Political Editor

 

The battle for political relevance between governors and their predecessors has been a regular feature of the polity since the return to civil rule in 1999. The norm is for outgoing state chief executives to handpick their successors, to ensure that their interests are protected when they are out of office.  But, in spite of such schemings and calculations, the new chief executives often quarrel with their predecessors when the influence of such predecessors becomes overbearing. At the centre of their feud is the contest for the soul of their political parties and the control of their states’ resources.

This reflects the nature of politics in Nigeria, which is essentially a matter of survival of the fittest. Nigerian governors wield enormous power and influence within and outside their domains. Some of the governors have control of budgets larger than that of many African countries. Governors typically rule with an iron fist in their domain. In most cases, they dominate the election process, ensuring that state Houses of Assembly and local government authorities are filled with their own allies, controlling them with patronage from public funds.

So far, they have been operating without much public scrutiny because of the over-concentration on the man at the centre. As a result, they enjoy a measure of impunity while in office. But, because power is so transient, their tenure comes to an end too soon and they become desperate in the quest to remain relevant when they are out of office.

Over the years, the altercations between some state governors and their predecessors or their godfathers have often brought to the fore some hitherto closely guarded secrets that would have remained hidden from the public were it not for such squabbles. The quarrel is often over the control of structures of the party in the state in question or the share of spoils of office between the governor and his benefactor.  This development often forces either the former governor or the incumbent to defect to another political party, to remain relevant in the politics of the state.

Such sour relationship and open display of animosity has been witnessed in recent times between Kano State’s Governor Abdulahi Ganduje and his predecessor, Rabiu Kwankwaso; Osun State’s Governor Gboyega Oyetola and the Minister of Internal Affairs, Rauf  Aregbesola; Akwa Ibom State Governor Udom Emmanuel and the Minister of Niger Delta Affairs, Godswill Akpabio; Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike and the Minister of Transportation, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; as well as the Edo State’s Governor Godwin Obaseki and former National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Adams Oshiomhole.

A similar relationship also exists between former Nasarawa State Governor Tanko Al-Makura and Senator Abdullahi Adamu; former Governor Kashim Shettima and his predecessor, Ali Modu Sheriff; and former Gombe State Governor Ibrahim Dakwambo and his predecessor, Senator Danjuma Goje.

The same thing happened in Abia State after former Governor Orji Uzor Kalu (who currently represents Abia North at the Senate) handed over to his anointed successor, Theodore Orji (also a senator representing Abia Central) following 2007 general elections. Orji had had to dump his predecessor’s party, the Progressive Peoples Alliance (PPA) for the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) to be able to assert his authority in the affairs of the state. In the ensuing cold war, Kalu had to abandon the state for months, for fear of molestation.

In Ogun State, the relationship between the immediate past governor, Senator Ibikunle Amosun and incumbent Governor Dapo Abiodun is not the very best. In the twilight of his administration, Amosun did everything within his power to work against the emergence of Abiodun as governor. In this regard, he supported the failed bid of Adekunle Akinlade to become governor. But, since Abiodun had the full backing of other APC stakeholders for the party’s ticket, Amosun had no other choice but to resort to the use of another political platform, the Allied Peoples’ Movement (APM), to pursue Akinlade’s governorship ambition, which failed at the end of the day.

In Oyo State, Governor Seyi Makinde has parted ways with former Governor Rasheed Ladoja who led the coalition that helped him to defeat the APC in the last general elections. Similarly, in Imo State, Governor Hope Uzodimma is in a fierce contest with former Governor Rochas Okorocha over public assets allegedly looted or cornered as personal property by the latter. In Kwara State, Governor AbdulRahman AbduRazaq has taken up arms against his former ally, Information and Culture Minister, Alhaji Lai Mohammed over who leads the APC in the state. At the centre of the seemingly intractable crisis in the north-central state is the battle for the control of the party’s structures.

The situation in Kano State is peculiar. The incumbent governor was Kwankwaso’s deputy for the first term in office between 1999 and 2003 and the second term between 2011 and 2015. Afterwards, Kwankwaso supported his aspiration to become governor in May 2015. But, immediately after Ganduje emerged as governor, they became political enemies. The disagreement between them and their supporters became so fierce that the police at some point advised the former governor to stay away from the state for security reasons.

It is understandable when a governor and his predecessor belong to different political parties; they are bound to disagree. But, in most cases, it is usually between a successor and predecessor who belong to the same political party that engages in such a dogfight. From all indications, they are not bothered about the welfare of the people they are leading. For them, the battle for political survival, which will give them the wherewithal to sustain their economic well-being, is all that matters.

Elder statesman, Alhaji Tanko Yakasai is enraged over the buccaneer attitude of Nigerian politicians, particularly governors. He said what has brought the country to its present state borders on the distortion of the concept of political leadership and the role of political parties in the entire set-up. He said until the political parties are handed back to the members to determine who emerges as party leaders and flag bearers in different elective positions, the situation will not change.

In other countries, he said, people choose politics as a career and the electorate respects them for that because they love their country and have decided to commit themselves to the improvement of the welfare and security of the people. Yakasai added: “This is the way things used to be in Nigeria during the colonial era and the First Republic. Now, after years of military dictatorship, people who vie for elective positions use the money to purchase the patronage of other members of the party, from top to bottom. So, people are elected without the necessary quality for leadership. As a result, when they come to the office, their preoccupation is usually how to recoup their ‘investment’ and even make a profit. In the process, they kill their normal business, because they no longer see it as a source of livelihood, as they are making enough money from politics.

“That sort of orientation also killed the quality of political leadership. For instance, people become party leaders, not because they merit it, but because they have money to pay for the position. At the end of the day, the party is not run by politicians, but by businessmen. The result is that the political parties we have today have no programmes to change the country for the better. So, everything in Nigeria has been distorted. That is the main problem; it is not just a question of the system we are operating.”

The former presidential aide said people are abandoning their occupations to invest in politics, “which appears to be the quickest way of making money nowadays”. He said almost everybody is in politics to make money and that only a few are interested in improving the welfare of the people. He gives a comprehensive picture in the following words: “Politics is now a business; it is killing genuine business. Many people are taking to politics to make money; the essence of seeking power nowadays is to make money. Some of them do this by inflating or padding contracts. This is why many businessmen or professionals will either go into politics when they have sufficient money to invest or sponsor someone to contest for any elective position, whether as councillor, local government chairman, member of a state or National Assembly, governor or even to be president.

“If the businessman elects to sponsor someone, he will be looking for a way to be compensated with juicy contracts when the politician in question gets into office. The hope is that he will make more money at the end of the day. This is the reason you see people nowadays trooping from one party to another, particularly from opposition parties to the ruling party at the centre because power in Nigeria is more concentrated at the federal level. They make money as elected or appointed officials, such as ministers, special advisers or members of boards and parastatals.”

Yakasai, 95, said the only way to change the narrative is to go back to the politics of ideology and national service. He said Nigerians who are dissatisfied with what is going on today must come together and strategise on how to rescue the nation from buccaneer politicians whose sole aim is to loot the national treasury in the name of politics.