War cannot be left to soldiers

Indeed it is. As two legal pundits Festus Okoye and Femi Falana pointed out, the 1999 Constitution forbade Nigeria or any part thereof to be governed except as provided by it. As to how elected rulers can be removed, the Supreme Court provided an interpretation in the case of Atiku versus Obasanjo. It ruled that […]

Indeed it is. As two legal pundits Festus Okoye and Femi Falana pointed out, the 1999 Constitution forbade Nigeria or any part thereof to be governed except as provided by it. As to how elected rulers can be removed, the Supreme Court provided an interpretation in the case of Atiku versus Obasanjo. It ruled that there are only four ways in which a governor, deputy governor, vice president or president can lose his position. These are resignation, impeachment, incapacitation or death. We have had experiences with all of these situations since the Second Republic, sometimes coming out badly.  
It sounds incredible that the presidency is contemplating this action, except that it was done before. Back in 2004 Obasanjo suspended Governor Joshua Dariye from his post for six months when he declared a state of emergency in Plateau State. Dariye never went to court to test the suspension’s legality, which is the reason why it still crosses some powerful people’s minds. More recently, when Jonathan was planning to declare emergency rule in three states last May, he contemplated removing the elected rulers. At a meeting with National Assembly principal officers, the president said, quite unguardedly, that he wanted to give the National Assembly the powers of three state assemblies but that Speaker Aminu Tambuwal resisted it. By now it is clear who was standing on solid constitutional grounds.
Proof that it was Jonathan’s initial plan to sweep away elected governors accidentally came out when he sent a gazette notice of the emergency proclamation to the National Assembly. House members detected a clause in there that empowered Jonathan to commandeer the three states’ financial grants and direct how it should be spent. That is to say, he intended to use their funds to finance military operations. That was illegal because security is an exclusive federal responsibility even though in practice, state and even local governments commit a lot of resources to support the security agencies in their areas. The House expunged the clause; the explanation offered at the time was that the clause was put in there because the initial plan called for the suspension of elected officials.
With that recent history in mind, it is therefore not totally unbelievable that the presidency is contemplating reviving its old scheme. What could be the reason? In recent weeks Boko Haram carried out many deadly attacks on rural and semi-urban communities in Borno and Adamawa states, killing several hundred people. It is no surprise if government is planning a major response. The timing is auspicious because a top-rated Army General and security expert is coming on board this week as Defence Minister. The reported sealing of Nigeria’s border with Cameroun could be the prelude to the planned military offensive.
All these make sense, but why mull the idea of suspending the elected officials? Many Nigerians will say: vengeance! It looks like the president is in a foul mood recently. He sees saboteurs and enemies lurking in every corner. In one short month he sacked his Chief of Staff, sacked four ministers including the untouchable Stella Oduah, then sacked the Central Bank Governor, shortly followed by PPPRA’s executive secretary. The Governor of Borno State appeared in the crosshairs because of an altercation he had with the presidency early last week. Emerging from a meeting with Jonathan last Monday, Kashim Shettima was reported to have said that the insurgents were often better armed and better motivated than the army.
The presidency did not take kindly to his remarks. The next day, Dr. Doyin Okupe responded, saying “the statement made by the Borno State Governor, Alhaji Kashim Shettima that the insurgents are better armed than our military is based purely on a civilian perception of the situation at hand. It is clear that Governor Shettima does not have the expertise to categorize or classify the effectiveness of any weapon.”
 Ugh! The last time I checked, Dr Okupe is also a civilian. How is it that a medical doctor’s knowledge of military weapons is better than a banker/an agricultural economist’s?  If it is by virtue of experience in public office, it is true that Shettima has been a governor for less than three years. But then, the highest posts that Okupe ever held were party publicity secretary and president’s media assistant. By the way, the Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian armed forces is also a civilian and has had only four years’ on-the-job training.
Anyone can learn on the job provided he has at least average learning capacity. Now, Governor Shettima holds two degrees, was a university lecturer, was a general manager at Zenith Bank and was a commissioner in four different ministries including Finance, Education, Local Government and Health. There is also his photographic memory, his visible intellectual prowess and his bookworm personality. A man who saw his personal library many years ago told me that it is bigger than a normal Nigerian tertiary institution’s.
A man’s learning curve is made even shorter if he undergoes a literal baptism of fire. The governor of a state that is wholly at peace would learn the security ropes more slowly than a man who presides over a state security council that includes a JTF commander. In any case, what does it take to know which army is better armed and better motivated than another? Sitting smugly here in Abuja, I can tell that the Vietnamese Army can defeat any other army in South East Asia even though I have never been there. There is great authority in the end user’s judgment. A reader who knows nothing about how to write a newspaper story, much less edit one, can still sit back and say, “this newspaper is better than that one.” Will you tell him to shut up since he is not trained in journalism? If a patient tells you that “this hospital is better than that one,” will you dismiss his talk just because he is not a doctor? I don’t know how to make a common spark plug but I can sit here and say, “Daimler Benz’s engineers are better than those of Saab/Volvo”.
If therefore the people of Borno, who are at the receiving end in the last four years of war, reach a certain conclusion about which side is better armed and better motivated, I think the important thing is not to take offence but to ameliorate the deficiency, since it is ameliorable. I am just wondering; could it be that Okupe’s notion of a governor inexperienced in weapons matters was what drove the presidency to mull the idea of a Military Governor for Borno?
Even if the Constitution gives us that option, I don’t think it is wise to exercise it. I say so because fighting insurgents is not only about shooting them in the Sambisa Forest. A guerrilla war cannot be won without the support of the civilian population. The civilian population will not extend this cooperation unless they believe in the authorities. Which is why the Borno Governor’s prompt visits to attacked communities, calming them down, providing quick relief and long term rehabilitation, paying relief money to widows of slain soldiers as well as civilians, as well as providing financial and material assistance to the fighting forces and at the same time making investment in education, health and agriculture that will cut the insurgents’ recruitment reservoir, are all extremely important aspects of winning the war. This is exactly what the French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau once said, “War is too serious a business to be left to soldiers.”