‘Nigerians should demand disclosure of sources of funding for programmes’

A political analyst and Associate Professor of Public Administration at Bayero University Kano, Dr. Saidu Ahmad Dukawa, criticised the Renewed Hope initiative, describing it as partisan.   How do you assess the evolution of the Renewed Hope Initiative from a First Lady–driven project into what appears to be a broader government-backed programme involving governors and […]

A political analyst and Associate Professor of Public Administration at Bayero University Kano, Dr. Saidu Ahmad Dukawa, criticised the Renewed Hope initiative, describing it as partisan.

 

How do you assess the evolution of the Renewed Hope Initiative from a First Lady–driven project into what appears to be a broader government-backed programme involving governors and ministers?

The Renewed Hope Initiative of the First Lady is strictly a political agenda that promotes the ruling party at the disadvantage of other political parties.

 

In your view, is it appropriate or healthy for Nigeria’s democracy for initiatives associated with the First Lady to take on the character of state programmes?

• Malaria Day: Rising treatment cost, prevalence deepen Nigerians’ burden
• Alleged coup: Military begins trial of 36 officers

It is very inappropriate and unhealthy as it violates the principles of equity, fairness and justice, especially that state resources are utilized for the self-centered objective.

 

There are concerns that the initiative is being used to showcase achievements ahead of the 2027 elections. Do you see this as a form of indirect political campaigning?

Certainly, it is a form of indirect political campaign, which adds to the inappropriateness we are talking about since other political parties do not have equal opportunity to start campaigning.

 

Questions have been raised about funding. What should Nigerians expect in terms of disclosure regarding the sources of funding for such initiatives?

Nigerians should demand full disclosure of the sources of funding for the programmes. Although it is pertinent that public funds, official paraphernalia and goodwill must have been involved, one would want to know whether the funds are appropriated or not. In other words, are the funds derived from the annual budget? If yes, through which office, since our constitution did not provide for the office of the First Lady?”

 

Historically, have there been similar cases and what lessons can be drawn from such precedents?

Historically speaking, the wife of the former Military President, Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB), Maryam Babangida, did similar thing under a programme named ‘Better Life for Rural Women’. And she spent stupendous amount of money on the programme, so much so that a Lagos lawyer, Gani Fawehinmi, of blessed memory, had cause to go court and challenge the programme.

The Supreme Military Council of the time had to promulgate a decree and backdate it, giving the programme a legal backing, in order to save its face. One lesson that can be learned from such precedence is that such actions can be challenged in the court of laws even under authoritarian regimes, not to talk of a democratic era. Those who claim to be democrats need to be wiser.”

 

What legal or institutional gaps do you think are being exploited in the operation of the initiative?

I think the gap that is exploited is the fact that the Constitution is silent about the office of the First Lady. So the fact that there is no legal provision which prevents the First Lady from doing what she is doing, I think is one thing. And probably the provision of security votes, one may perceive or one may think that probably the public funds that are utilised are coming from the issue of the security votes, so perhaps a clear outline of what security votes can be spent on or what they should not be spent on may block that gap.

 

What reforms would you recommend to address such concerns?

First and foremost, public opinion should be sought regarding the offices of First Ladies, both at the centre and at the state levels, so that people can be given the right to hear their opinion as to whether they see it desirable or not. If a sincere poll is conducted or a discrete research is conducted and found out that Nigerians are happy with the programme, then it should undergo the necessary legislative framework such that the National Assembly can make laws for the office of the First Lady and respective state assemblies can make laws for respective state’s First Ladies.

And then it should be followed by institutional framework such that there can be an office, there can be civil servants in the office that will do the public service aspect of the job and the First Lady should be given the right to appoint political appointees and their roles should be clearly specified.

And if that is done, it means the office would be a legal entity that can sue and can be sued. And in that regard, proper appropriation should be embedded in the annual budget. And all the other paraphernalia of office be given and therefore be subjected to the codes of service such as the proper auditing and accounting of the funds that are devoted to the programme.

That will make it legal. And it is the legal framework that will make it fair and just such that anything that can be perceived as discrimination against other political parties can be held constant. And I think that will be more legal and acceptable.

 

How does the current initiative compare with past programmes like Better Life for Rural Women?

I think there is not much difference between the Maryam Babangida’s Better Life for Rural Programme and the Renewed Hope Initiative in the sense that all of them lack necessary legal as well as institutional framework. They all work with simply the name, First Lady, without necessarily having institutions in place, without having a legal or administrative framework, and the utilisation of public resources from all indications and the movement of the First Ladies across the country in a flamboyant manner and so on and so forth. I think I don’t see any difference between the current programme and that of the military regime.”

 

How can the civil society groups intervene?

I think civil society groups can engage in mass mobilisation and sensitisation against the appropriateness of the programme. Besides, opposition parties can take legal action by going to court, like Gani Fawehinmi, of blessed memory, did during the military regime. So I think it’s a responsibility of the opposition, because they are the ones that are being cheated the most, apart from the general public whose funds are supposed to go into more meaningful development projects.

 

What broader electoral or political reforms would you suggest to prevent such controversies?

I think we should come up with clear guidelines regarding political campaign, so that those kinds of actions can clearly be seen for what they are. So that if they violate the guidelines, at least INEC can take action or the opposition can initiate something that can be a check on the parties.

The National Assembly, too, can come up with guidelines and regulations regarding how any First Lady can contribute to the political process or even to governance.