page 40

page 40 ‘Ambassadorial nominees’ list should be checked to avoid padding’ Mr Umar Lukman is the CEO of Octopus Communications Limited. He served the country for over 20 years in various Nigerian missions abroad, including the Nigeria’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York as the Head of Information Service Centre, managing Nigeria’s […]

page 40

‘Ambassadorial nominees’ list should be checked to avoid padding’

Mr Umar Lukman is the CEO of Octopus Communications Limited. He served the country for over 20 years in various Nigerian missions abroad, including the Nigeria’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York as the Head of Information Service Centre, managing Nigeria’s image at the missions. He bears his mind on the current list of ambassadorial nomination sent to the National Assembly for confirmation.

By Abdullateef Salau

What can you say of the new list of ambassadorial nominees?

The list of the nominees for ambassadorial appointment sent to the National Assembly for confirmation came to me as a shock. There is one intrigue or the other because when you look at the list of the nominees, some states manage to secure one slot while others like Bayelsa, Ebonyi, Plateau, Ondo and Sokoto have no nominee. The criteria for nomination is that an officer should not have less than 30 months to retirement. Most of the names on the list have less than the required months to go. They gave Borno three slots and they are even contemplating on getting the fourth one, which is the seat of Nigerian Permanent Representative to the United Nations. Four from Borno state while some states don’t even have a slot. I cannot imagine hearing from some other reports that the list was sent to the Mr President through text message. How could they sent such list of great importance to our nation through SMS? That list needs to be challenged.

A look at the list revealed that some states get more nominees than others. What does the law say about ambassadorial nomination from the state of the federation?

The rule, as made known by Mr President, says that no officer due for ambassadorial appointment from any state should have less than two years to retire. There are so many states that have officers/directors with more than two years to retire and are not being considered. What is happening in the foreign ministry? What is happening in the committee? They should take the necessary step otherwise we are going into another padding, which I called diplomatic padding. We have finished with budget padding, now it is diplomatic padding. In some states with one nominee, they have more than one directors and deputy directors with more than 30 months to retirement and are qualified to be nominated. Yet they are not considered. On the current list, there is even a nominee from a state that has four months to go and was considered. Also there are some states where directors are not being considered, but junior officers were nominated.

Do the directors from states where junior officers were considered at the expense of the senior ones have more than 30 months to retire?

Yes, they have, including states with no nominee.

Was the situation like this during the previous administrations?

It was not like this, everything was clear. Now, I don’t know from where the problem emanated.

What is the minimum number of ambassadorial nominee should a state have?

Each state should have not less than two and not more than three by the formula of 70 to 30 career and political diplomats respectively. With this, we will attain the required 70% career diplomats. This is clear, simple calculation.

What should be done to ensure that all states are represented?

For states to be well-represented in the ambassadorial appointment, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be allowed to do its job without the involvement of the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation or the Presidency. When someone from the office of either the presidency or SGF is involved in the nomination process, it complicates matter. I have never seen a posting like this before. After military, they say, the next is foreign affairs. This is the worst posting I have ever seen in the history of the ministry. They should have free hand in ambassadorial nomination otherwise we will consider it to be a padded list of ambassadorial nomination. The right thing should be done at the right time in order to save ourselves from being a laughing stock in the eyes of the international community.