A Lagos-based human rights lawyer, youth empowerment advocate and the National Coordinator of Enugu State Youth Assembly, Onuora Odo, speaks on issues of national importance including the leadership crisis rocking the national assembly.
As the National Coordinator of Enugu State Youth Assembly, what are the group’s aims and objectives?
Enugu State Youth Assembly is an umbrella body that serves as rallying point for youths of Enugu State extraction where ideas are cross pollinated on issues that affect the youth. It is a platform where youths are sensitized, conscientized and radicalized on the whole essence of youth involvement in political activities. We, among other things, crusade for not only youth involvement in political activities but also advocate for generational power shift. Politics of recycling old layers has been the order of the day and we stand against it in principle. A combination of the above factors were the forces that formed the fulcrum for the emergence of this group.
A couple of days back, Enugu State House of Assembly approved the appointment of 24 Commissioners, 11 SPAs and other key positions, how would you view the appointments?
For all intents and purposes, it would amount to deliberate suppression of truth to accept that the appointment was balanced in terms of generational, geographical purview. The appointment manifested apparent generational lopsidedness or better still, distributive disequilibrium and points tenaciously to the fact that the government of the day has scanty regards to the problems of the youth. I remember during the electioneering campaigns, the youths of Enugu State were promised at least 30 per cent slots in the distribution of appointment but today, what we see so far is abysmal 5 per cent. No wonder they say that promise weighs less than a feather in politics but those at the helm of affairs should remember that no injury is as injurious as a broken promise. The youths should not be seen to be relegated to the background in the affairs of the state; they are the leaders of today, no longer tomorrow.
It does appear from the recent events in the National Assembly that the relationship between Sen. Ekweremadu and the APC Senators can be compared to a tongue and teeth fight.
Yes! I share in that view. Obviously, it will be apt to say that it has been a show of shame since the inauguration of the 8th National Assembly.
There is no gainsaying the fact that the emergence of Sen. Ekweremadu as the Deputy Senate President does not sit well with APC Senators and members alike. But that is a clear manifestation of their crass lack of grasp of the constitutional provisions as regards politics of bipartisanship. By the wordings of Section 50 (1) of the 1999 constitution as amended, there is nothing to suggest that a minority party cannot produce presiding officers in the National Assembly. Sen. Ekweremadu is a child of circumstance who should not be seen to suffer any form of political victimization arising from party affiliation. Worthy of note and mention is the indubitable fact that both Saraki and Ekweremadu are products of the same process. Why should Ekweremadu be singled out for crucification? The hullabaloo about Ekweremadu’s removal is understandable; some key players in the APC power play who were angling for DSP’S position were caught unawares, hence the current intrigues and permutations.
What it all means is that APC members are not even prepared to embrace the change which has been their mantra. They should not forget that any attempt to undo Ekweremadu through unlawful means shall be stoutly resisted through lawful means.
It has been rumoured that the APC- led administration is bent on trimming the number of Ministers to 17.What’s your take on that?
That is purely a constitutional matter and don’t forget that the constitution as the grundnum is sacrosanct.The express provisions of Section 148(1) of the 1999 constitution as amended is to the effect that each state of the federation shall produce at least a minister….By the rules of interpretation, the word “SHALL” is mandatory. So, the APC-led government would be treading on the wrong side of law, thereby violating the provisions of the constitution. In the circumstance, we shall be left with no other option other than to seek judicial interpretation of the above constitutional provision.
What is your assessment of President Muhammadu Buhari so far?
In as much as it is too early to assess his performances, I think, at this juncture I will say that he is showing some lights by spotting those who are believed to have misappropriated public funds. No doubt, President Muhammadu Buhari is adjudged to be a man of tall integrity credentials.
I commend his anti-corruption posture. However, he may not be able to score above average as he is not surrounded by saints. Besides, he is a human being and is bound to commit some blunders. In the same manner, he should spend less time on probes and channel more efforts to other physical developments.
In the last couple of weeks, a FHC sitting in Lagos made an order confiscating former Gov. Chimaroke Nnamani’s assets and forfeiting same to the federal government. What is the legal implication?
Honestly, I have not laid my hands on the judgment to actually dissect it so as to know the ratio decidendi .i.e. the reason for the decision. However, judging by other decided cases, that of Joshua Dariye of Plateau State, James Ibori of Delta State and some other corruption cases were decided in that light. Certainly, judicial order for confiscation and forfeiture has been a familiar terrain in Nigeria but there is a school of thought that posits that such assets, having been acquired from the resources of the state should be made to go back to the State to fill the lacuna. For me, I have some flames of doubt as to the propriety or otherwise of the custody of the assets confiscated but truth remains that nature abhors a vacuum. There is no doubt that those assets were illegally acquired when former Gov. Nnamani held sway as the no1 man in Enugu State. So, when viewed in the mirror of logic and common sense, it won’t be out of place to recover those assets and give it back to the state. It appears to be a dangerous precedent as the state stands to be shortchanged in the entire exercise. The federal government should begin in the direction of establishing special offences Courts.
There was a strong belief that with a new government in place, the monstrous Boko Haram sect would stop its war of attrition against the nation.
Certainly, the emergence of President Muhammadu Buhari sent a signal of change which coincidentally is the mantra of the ruling party. However, the hope is dying down because the activities of the sect appear to be on the increase since the inauguration of the APC –led government. The truth is that President Muhammadu Buhari should completely avoid a snail speed and cosmetic approach in routing Boko Haram. It has been in the air that there are moves to negotiate with the sect by the federal government. But, my own candid opinion is that the move is an exercise in futility if not an activity in jeopardy. How can you negotiate with such a faceless, heartless, brainless group whose onslaught is targeted at the old, the young, Christians and Muslims alike. More worrisome is the fact that it is difficult, if not impossible, to fathom what they are crusading for. For me, negotiation is a no-go area since they have attained regional franchise status i.e. they exist in virtually all West African sub region.
TheSun