Former governor of Kaduna State and currently a senator representing Kaduna North Senatorial District on the platform of the Peoples Democartic Party, Ahmed Makarfi speaks with LEADERSHIP SUNDAY’s SHUAIB SHUAIB. He shared insights into several topical national issues and holds that his tiff with Vice President Namadi Sambo is now history.
You returned recently to the Senate after spending some six months at the tribunal. Do you think the process of redressing election petitions at the tribunal takes too long? Is there a need for changes?
Well I actually spent over 6 months but be that as it may; I believe election petitions can be dispensed with in shorter periods. But one will have to cooperate in seeing that these are settled as soon as possible. A lot of the delays I had noticed come from the parties.
This is because some try to buy time by playing hide and seek games and trying to prevent the process from starting off and the process going forward. How we can look at the law and ensure that wasting of the time of the tribunals are not allowed by either party will go a very long way in enabling the tribunals to dispense with the cases as expeditiously as possible.
It is not the fault of the tribunals; it is the parties. You will always find either the petitioner or the respondent, depending on what the issues are, trying to exhaust time, trying to waste time and the tribunals are bound by certain processes and procedures and when we try to exploit them negatively, we prolong settlement of election petitions.
So it’s really up to litigants and the defendants or petitioners and respondents in this case to make sure that we don’t waste time. But then the legislature can further look at the law to refine, to prevent this.
Also the Federal Court of Appeal that draws the procedures for election petitions to be heard can look at also the procedure that is in existence. They have improved it tremendously; there is still room for further improvement so that we don’t waste the time of the Tribunals in dealing with these matters.
A court verdict returned you to the senate. Some people in Kaduna are grumbling that you are not the actual choice. Do you think that justice is served when elections are annulled based on technicality rather than based on merits of the case itself?
My election was not annulled; my victory was not given to me based on technicality. It was based on a recount of votes. So when votes are recounted, and you remember getting the majority of valid votes elects you and the crux of my petition was that the person so declared did not get majority of valid votes as alleged. And when recounting in the public glare was conducted, that was confirmed. So the tribunal had no option but to declare me as having gotten the majority of valid votes.
On judgments given by the tribunals, recently the NBA President alleged that there were retired judges and some senior lawyers that facilitate the bribing of tribunal judges. Do you think there is a need for the National Assembly to investigate this?
What are we going to investigate? He that is the president of NBA, having made that weighty statement should rather come forward with more information that will enable the necessary agencies to deal with the corruption that he has said exists. He is the president, he knows better.
It’s not in my opinion an issue for the legislature and in any case, if what I read is exactly what he said; they are not going to let the matter be, they are going to take the matter head on. So he has made a statement and he has made a pledge to the nation and it is for him to follow up on the pledge to the nation that he has made.
You were the governor of Kaduna at a time when there was religious crisis. You were able to manage it well. Right now there is a threat not just to Kaduna but the entire country from Boko Haram; how do you think the attempt by Boko Haram to divide the country into religious segment can be countered by the Federal Government?
Well, I’m not sure of what the intention of Boko Haram is because you need to identify individuals and you need to hear from them categorically. In every religion, whether in Islam or Christianity, there are different sects. And even in coming to Islam we had Maitatsine; we had a number of sects that in the past have reared their heads with some consequences.
Be that as it may, I believe a lot of issues have gotten mixed up in the issue of the moment. And I believe government and other leaders and well meaning Nigerians are not taking the matters lightly.
When you are working in a complex situation, you don’t work on the pages of the media using the media. Because otherwise whatever you are doing may even be defeated. But I absolutely believe that government and other bodies in the North and in the country indeed are working day and night to try to get to the root of all the issues to separate all the issues and to deal with them accordingly depending on the issues that will be clear to government and to other authorities.
What kind of issues did you say have gotten mixed up?
For example, any crime committed will be attributed to Boko Haram. Sometimes when they say Boko Haram has claimed responsibility. How are you sure they are the ones claiming it? When we see some other people putting themselves in the position of Boko Haram to claim it.
So there are certain things that when they occur you can see traces of the activities of the sect that started from the Northeastern part. There are certain things when they occur if you look peripherally, you might even see it is an internal conflict. Some may be outright criminal acts unconnected with Boko Haram.
So that is why I see a lot of issues. Some may be out of frustration, may commit certain things and it may look similar and it’s crowned Boko Haram and somebody may make just issue a press release or just a phone call. How do you know the identity of the person making the phone call.
You have to verify that the person claiming to have done something is actually representing the body that he or she is claiming. I am not saying there are no activities related to them, I’m saying that there is a lot of mix up of issues in this issue and when issues are muddled up you actually need to be a lot more careful, you know how you separate all the issues and deal with them accordingly.
Do you think that the government should go through a negotiating path or use force before it grows out of control?
Force alone does not solve any conflict. You see you need a mixture of all the tools available to government should be deployed and I believe that is what government is doing. Those things that we know and those things that we may not be aware of at the moment because they have not been made public.
When you are talking of dealing with matters such as this, the actual use of intelligence is critical. Intelligence means something that people won’t see, won’t touch, and won’t hear. It’s only when the positive effect begin to be recorded, then you may say government has have done certain things to succeed. I believe all these efforts of diplomacy, the use of force of authority, lawful force of authority where necessary are been deployed and they should continue to be deployed until we resolve matters.
A lot of people believe that politicians are those sponsoring Boko Haram, do you think politicians are behind this?
I’m not in a position to say but, I believe there must be sponsor. Some of them could be politicians, some of them could be businessmen, some of them could be foreign sponsors, some of them could be from northern part of the country; some of them could be from even the southern part of the country.
You see when you help people for any reason decide to cause any problem; they can make use of anything available. They may not share the same ideals with the people they are sponsoring, you know core ideals, but they may have commonality of some of the objectives, not in total, that they totally share common views. Nothing should be ruled out at this stage and I’m sure government is aware of that.
Let move to the probe being conducted by the National Assembly in the oil sector. Some are suggesting that the NASS oil sector probe is actually what is stopping the EFCC from investigating and acting. Do you think that right now the EFCC should take precedence over the National Assembly?
Their work may be separate and distinct; there is no provision in the law that says that they are to wait for any report of investigation. Maybe they don’t have enough forensic evidence as to take an open action of prosecuting culprits. Mind you, it was reported that they had visited some relevant organs of NNPC and NNPC itself.
They have collected a lot of documents to conduct forensic audit and other checks. It will take time for them to establish the truth and to find out any criminality and to draw up charges against those found culpable and if they come to conclusion that certain people should be charged.
It takes time, if they are not to waste their time and go with a shabby job and you know the court will throw it out. They need to do a thorough job, so I don’t think it’s because we are investigating. I believe it is only because they on their own, haven been invited by the Executive, doing their own work to be very sure of the issues of the facts before they can move forward.
Many, including even the government have admitted that there are problems in the oil sectors. Yet no one has been sacked so far, nobody has been sanctioned and yet committees have been set up to try and clean up the oil sector. Do you think that these committees are likely to achieve anything considering that it’s the same corrupt people that still exist in the system?
This is the first time the oil sector is being looked at and Nigerians have been calling for this. The National Assembly has been talking about the NNPC being above the law. And it is a good thing that we are starting to do that. To begin to give out punishment without having done a thorough job, you may punish the wrong person; you may give excessive punishment and you may not punish somebody well enough. It is very important to get facts against individuals so that the punishment will be commensurate with the offences.
But it is not going to be enough to punish, you see one fundamental thing, the punishment I mean is not just like you have prosecuted, you have sentenced, no; recovery should be the objective. Any individual or group of people or corporate bodies should not be left with the loot of the hundreds of billions that may be proven that were inappropriately taken.
So, I am for a thorough job, but doing a thorough job doesn’t mean taking eternity. This must be done expeditiously, because it is when you waste a lot of time that water can pass under the bridge.
Let me take you to the issue of the Sovereign National Conference. There are fears that those calling for it are seeking for the breakup of the country. Do you think this conference is necessary considering that there is a sitting National Assembly?
Former President Obasanjo set up a committee to draw up agenda for a similar discourse but he didn’t call it sovereign. I have forgotten the name that it was coined. I chaired that committee to draw up the agenda. There was nothing to do with the breakup of Nigeria.
But of course there are things that concern restructuring because in our recommendation we looked at the kind of government we have; whether we should continue with presidential or we should go back to parliamentary, or quasi-presidential. We considered whether we should have a single parliament.
We considered the issue of reducing constituencies to reduce costs of governance and all things to do with governance to reduce drastically the costs of governance. We considered issues to do with the status of local governments. We considered so many things, which are structural. It’s only discuss that can put Nigeria on the same wavelength in matters such as this. But it’s all within the context of one united Nigeria. Discussions, dialogue is good, but it’s also good to know what issues we are going to discuss.
So you are in support of this conference?
If people want to talk and you continue to deny them the need to talk, that is not healthy. But the issue is that what is the talk going to be about? First of all there should be an agenda for discussion. And it is for government to listen to all sides in the country. The South-south and Southwest have gone to the presidency, the rest of the country even if they have not gone.
The presidency should invite them and hear their take. And then the other key stakeholders in the National Assembly, and everybody should be consulted. Let’s have a consensus on how we should move forward. It is not going to be healthy to hear one or two sides and decide a way forward.
But when you have a general consensus, when you consult widely, you may find that there is a need to for the discussion and then if you do find, over what issues? So you narrow down all the issues that are for discuss and then when you go, you are likely to have a less rancorous discussion.
So these calls have been there, it’s not just now, but who is afraid of discussion, nobody is afraid of discussion. No matter what you are going to discuss, let’s not introduce matters that I understand differently, you understand differently then we will move nowhere.
Personally, do you think there is still a need to re-structure the country?
It depends on what you mean by ‘restructure’. I just told you in a committee that I heard that some of the restructuring were recommended for discussion. Our condition was for discussion, that some of the topical issues that should be subjected to discussion.
Let me give you an example like the Local Government you mentioned. Right now most Local Government don’t get their money. There so much haziness in their operations. Do you think that this is something that needs to be addressed?
It needs to be addressed, but except you see the procedure for amending constitution is part of the problem. If states don’t like a particular issue, they block it. It doesn’t matter whether it is for good of the people. So these are issues for discussion. If we decide to say certain amendments