With Buhari’s pledge to reform the nation’s judiciary, many had expected to see a great leap in the budgetary allocation to the sector in the N6.06 trillion 2016 budget – the highest in the history of the nation. But what did the sector get in an era of “change”? The president cut the N73 billion allocation his predecessor in office, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan gave the sector in 2015 by N3 billion.
Despite the government’s explanation that the nation was running an austere economy, no one appears impressed by the N70 billion budgetary vote for the nation’s judiciary. Even the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed has refused to pretend over the matter. Since the budget became public, the nation’s number one judicial officer has kept condemning the government’s disposition to reforms in the sector.
In the run-up to the 2015 presidential poll, one of the biggest issues of perception Buhari and his handlers battled to conquer was the president’s opponents’ attempt to tar him with the brush of a dictator. The president’s opponents had urged the people to reject him, insisting that he was going to rule with an iron fist and cast the law aside if elected.
Buhari did not take the matter lying low. He responded in full measure, assuring the nation that he was already a converted democrat. Whether the president has so far demonstrated his belief in the rule of law – the very essence of democratic practice – is an issue of passionate contention among Nigerians.
But there have been certain statements and actions Buhari’s opponents say have validated their stance that the president does not have the temperament required to function in a democracy. There is one such ready example those displeased with the president’s leadership style say gave him away as an unrepentant dictator.
On December 30, 2015, Buhari addressed a number of national issues during his maiden media chat. The president appeared cool and calm when the panel of interviewers began unwrapping their questions one after the other. Until the interviewers touched a sore point. The interviewers wanted to know why security agents were holding some accused Nigerians, including former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki and leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mr. Nnamdi Kanu, against the law and in disobedience of court orders.
The president lost his cool. He insisted: “Technically, if you see the kinds of atrocities these people are believed to have committed against the country, if they are given the opportunity, they will jump bail.”
Apparently expressing his dissatisfaction with the court order allowing Dasuki to seek medical attention abroad, the president queried: “What of the over two million people displaced, most of them orphans, whose fathers have been killed? What type of government do you want to run? We cannot allow that.”
He quickly moved to the case of Kanu, saying: “The one you are calling Kanu, do you know he had two passports – one Nigerian, one British – and he came into the country without any? Do you know he brought equipment into this country and was broadcasting Radio Biafra? Which kind of government do you think should harbour that kind of person? There is a treasonable felony suit against him and I hope the court will listen to the case.”
Expectedly, the president’s stand drew divergent reactions from members of the public. While many saw the president’s reaction as a clear case of resort to self-help and undisguised disregard for the independence of the judiciary, which has the duty to assess applications for bail and fix bail conditions, others insisted that Buhari acted in the best interest of the country.
Almost six months since, Dasuki is still being held by the government after fulfilling the bail conditions imposed by the different courts which heard and granted his applications. Like Dasuki, Kanu has remained in custody, a situation that appears to have helped in depleting the fundamental rights credit of the Buhari administration.
The president is, however, not on a solo walk in his position on those alleged to have looted the nation’s treasury and constituted themselves a threat to the peace and corporate existence of the diverse peoples of the country.
Many of the president’s supporters insist that the nation’s laws are too weak to deal with corruption and security threats. For them, a strongman is needed to put the nation back on track. In other words, the end of Buhari’s anti-graft campaign and war against security threats justifies the means for doing so.
No comments:
Post a Comment