Anthony Obi Ogbo
Toward 2023: The Igbo cause and structure of the Nigerian politics
How can a lame-duck president with zero legislative support lead a people out of system inequality in a predominantly hostile political environment? In a democracy, the president does not have the authority to make laws or facilitate major structural transformations. The Igbo community is yearning for equal justice and equity through sweeping governance restructure. So, what kind of candidates or parties should they be looking for? Are they better off backing an immobilized president with Igbo DNA or negotiating with a congressional majority to push their agenda?
In the past six years, major Igbo political leaders encouraged the combative agitation for statehood stirred up by a separationist group, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). Elected Igbo representatives or officials used IPOB and their often extremely divisive crusades for political convenience. However, they did not weigh some long-term political implications of those messages.
For instance, IPOB championed violent “no-referendum-no-election” operations that unleashed bloody violence at political rallies and polling stations where election workers and individuals were simply participating in the process. IPOB also recklessly destabilized the commercial sector in the Southeast. Most Igbos ignored numerous warnings from political observers about the long-term destructive nature of the trend of pushing forward their agenda of a national system that would serve their communal interests.
Astonishingly, just recently, a few months before the general election that would usher in another regime, the Igbos have been all over Nigeria’s political scene grappling with how to align themselves to attain relevance. The group has been unsuccessful in its negotiations to attain a presidential ticket in the two major political parties. However, Peter Obi, a charismatic former governor of Anambra State, defected a few days before his People’s Democratic Party primaries to become the Labor Party’s flagbearer.
Obi’s candidacy soon picked up unprecedented momentum among the youth, especially those of his Igbo ethnicity, who are now mobilizing themselves for a historic voter-registration drive to push his candidacy. Strangely enough, the same activists who championed the movement to isolate the Igbo youths from the political process because they wanted a Biafra are now flying the Labor Party flag and leading the “Obi-kere re nke” campaign mantra in a push for an Igbo president. It was precisely this cause that they had opposed for over six years. So, where does this leave the Igbos?
The purpose of this article is not to predict the electability of any candidate, nor is it to sugarcoat the prevailing rocky political environment; rather its goal is to provide some empirical insights as well as lay a more realistic foundation to enable competent Igbo thinkers to explore the prevalent political options before making any meaningful decisions about the 2023 general election.
In a democracy, interest, not tribe, drives party affiliation and support
Politics facilitates communal interests. In a democracy, interest, not tribe, drives party affiliation and support. In other words, communities look for candidates who have the capacity to make decisions not just on their behalf but also in accordance with their interests. Therefore, it would be worthwhile to first identify the interests of the Igbos.
The majority of the problems Igbos are facing today originate from the country’s constitution and its current governance structures. In a nutshell, their demands focus on the following:
- Reconstruction of the current constitution to impartially address revenue and resource allocations, electoral maps, the structure of state and local governments, and the draconian federal character.
- Reconstruction of the current constitution to overhaul the current security structure and decentralize internal security.
- Laws to protect Nigerian citizens, their families, homes, and businesses in every part of the country.
- Laws to address marginalization or quota and guarantee equal opportunities to all Nigerians
With the aforementioned crucial needs, how could voting for a lone candidate without considerable legislative support help the Igbos? In Nigeria’s organizational structure, the executive function does not make the laws; it carries them out. The judiciary evaluates the laws but often has the power to preside over very crucial decisions. The National Assembly, which consists of a Senate with 109 members and a 360-member House of Representatives, exerts much power in making structural changes. In fact, should the President reject a bill, the Assembly could pass it by two-thirds of both chambers and overrule the veto —in which case, the President’s consent would not be required.
Under the current legislative structure, in the Senate (109 seats), the All Progressives Congress (APC) has 66 seats; the People’s Democratic Party occupies 38 seats while others have 2 seats and 3 vacant seats. In the House of Representatives (360 seats), the APC occupies 227 seats; the People’s Democratic Party has 121 seats while others have 11 seats with one vacant seat.
There are Igbos advocating for individual candidates and others embracing the Labor Party to appease their strong desire for an Igbo president. The latter needs to bear in mind that, currently, the Labor party has no seat in the Senate and only one seat in the House of Representatives. Is the Labor party projecting to win significant seats in the forthcoming election? If not, how could a president of Igbo descent, with one shaky legislative seat out of 360 help the Igbos under the current constitutional structure?
It may also be interesting to note that anytime a national election is polarized along tribal lines, the first major loser is the Igbo tribe because they do not have the numbers to succeed nationally, and they are not trusted by other regions to collaborate in good faith. The much-hyped rotational presidency is not a constitutionally mandated process but an arrangement by political parties. Thus, legislative support is needed to enshrine most of the demands of the Igbos in the constitution.
It might be hard to swallow, but the truth is that the problem of the Igbos is not in Aso Rock but lies within the legislative axis. The current get-out-and-register exercise inspired by Obi is commendable, but a harsh truth remains: it is going to be a rough and bumpy ride to 2023. Igbos must set aside their emotions and put on their rational, critical-thinking caps to play hardball politics.
♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D. is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
“Initially brought in to facilitate a solution, Miles is now seen as the problem“ —Anthony Ogbo
________________________
Since assuming the role of Superintendent of the Houston Independent School District in June of 2023, Mike Miles has consistently been making headlines, albeit for all the wrong reasons. Despite his responsibilities in organizing, leading, directing, policy-making, and execution, Miles has failed to pass every test required to excel in his position. Month after month, he finds himself under fire, with the latest allegations accusing him of misusing Texas public school funding. An investigation by Spectrum News revealed that Miles allegedly funneled public school funds from the state to a Colorado Charter School. This scandal comes at a time when the district is facing a projected $450 million budget shortfall, leading to proposed position cuts, including teacher layoffs and benefit reductions.
In response to the accusations, Superintendent Miles defended his actions, claiming that such financial arrangements are common between charter schools and their management organizations. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) has initiated a review of the matter. Meanwhile, State Democrat Ana Hernandez has called for Miles to be removed from his position and for a thorough investigation to be conducted.
The challenges facing Miles go beyond the current scandal, as he struggles to lead the largest school district in Texas and the eighth-largest in the United States. Teachers are feeling distressed and uncertain about their roles, parents are worried about their children’s future, and students are losing interest in their education. The situation at HISD is dire, and it is clear that a change in leadership may be necessary to restore trust and stability within the district.
Just last week, displeasure among parents worsened as some pushed back against layoffs while others protested recent budget cuts. Despite the opposition, Superintendent Miles remained steadfast in his proposal to lay off employees, although he did not disclose the exact number of individuals who would be affected. The board had previously approved a comprehensive list of positions, spanning nearly 20 pages, that were at risk of layoffs, including teachers, principals, and custodians. HISD leaders emphasized that the teacher cuts were based on performance rather than budget constraints.
Miles acknowledged that he was unable to provide specific figures regarding the number of teachers or principals facing job loss, but assured that this information would be available in the coming weeks. Several teachers reportedly received notices to attend a Zoom call to discuss their future employment with the district, although the purpose of this call was not clear.
The contentious relationship between Miles and the HISD community seemingly began when he assumed his position. In July 2023, just a month after taking office, Miles disclosed during a virtual forum that the district’s central office was reducing its staffing levels by over 2,300 positions. This reduction included the elimination of 1,675 vacant positions and the layoff of 672 employees. Miles attributed this decision to the central office’s excessive growth over the past decade, despite a significant decrease in student enrollment by 27,000 students.
In August 2023, The Houston Federation of Teachers filed a lawsuit against Miles and the board, accusing them of violating Texas Education Code requirements in the development of teacher evaluations. The teacher’s union alleged that Miles had created an illegal evaluation system without input from teachers and other stakeholders. The lawsuit was later dropped after the board of managers decided to use the state’s appraisal system for teachers instead of Miles’ system.
One of the key issues with Miles is his failure to thoroughly analyze the HISD operational environment before proposing his solutions. This lack of understanding often results in his recommendations being disconnected from the reality of the situation. Without a comprehensive assessment of the unique challenges and intricacies within the district, his strategies failed to effectively address the underlying issues and even led to unintended consequences. Indeed, Miles did not take the time to gain a deep understanding of the complexities of HISD before implementing his changes.
In any school district, the primary stakeholders are the teachers, students, and parents. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that other stakeholders also play a vital role in the success of schools. These include administrators, support staff, community members, and local businesses. Each of these groups brings unique perspectives and resources to the table, all of which contribute to creating a positive learning environment for students. By fostering collaboration and valuing the input of all stakeholders, school districts can enhance their ability to meet the diverse needs of students and support them in achieving academic success. This approach stands in stark contrast to the leadership perspectives held by Miles, which do not prioritize such inclusive and cooperative practices.
Initially brought in to facilitate a solution, Miles is now seen as the problem. He was thought to be the key to resolving the issue at hand, given his expertise and experience, making him the obvious choice to lead the team. However, as time passed, it became evident that Miles was hindering progress rather than aiding it. His stubbornness, lack of communication, and unwillingness to consider alternative perspectives were causing tension within the group and impeding any real solutions from being reached. It was increasingly clear that Miles himself was the primary obstacle standing in the way of a resolution.
HISD would need to address this issue with TEA if they are ever going to move forward and achieve their goals. Removing Miles from his position would allow for a fresh start and a more collaborative approach to problem-solving, ultimately benefiting the students, teachers, and community as a whole. It is time for HISD to move forward without Miles at the helm.
♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Journalism and RTF Professor, Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo, is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
“In just two years, this court has rearranged America’s system and dragged it back to the 40s by systematically undoing major legislation..“ —Anthony Ogbo
________________________
President Joe Biden has been very outspoken about his thoughts that the Supreme Court dominated by rightwing justices, cannot be relied upon to uphold the rule of law. In June 2022 for instance, after this Court overturned Roe v. Wade, he said, “Make no mistake: This decision is the culmination of a deliberate effort over decades to upset the balance of our law. It’s a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court, in my view.”
In a typical democratic process, the three arms of government play a crucial role in ensuring a balance of power and upholding the principles of justice, accountability, and transparency. These three branches – the executive, legislative, and judiciary – work together to ensure the smooth functioning of a democratic system.
However, the current political trends in the American system might suggest otherwise. SCOTUS, conservative to the bone marrow, appears to be the only overbearing arm in the system, indirectly changing the existing rules, and dictating or interpreting them to suit their radical interests.
The key recent rulings of this far-right Supreme Court have been trending. These rulings have a serious impact on various issues, ranging from civil rights to environmental regulations. Indeed, SCOTUS is overly focused on destructively conservative ideology and this has drastically affected the rights of marginalized communities, such as women, racial and ethnic minorities, and the LGBTQ+ community.
Recent rulings so far are posing serious consequences for the lives and well-being of millions of Americans and could undermine the progress that has been made toward a more equitable and just society.
In just two years, this court has rearranged America’s system and dragged it back to the 40s by systematically undoing major legislation. For instance, in June 2022, in a historic and far-reaching decision, this court officially reversed Roe v. Wade, declaring that the constitutional right to abortion, upheld for nearly a half-century, no longer exists.
Another surprising but historic decision came around June 2023 when this court effectively ended race-conscious admission programs at colleges and universities nationwide. In a decision divided along ideological lines, the six-justice conservative supermajority invalidated admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Now, most other colleges are following that precedent.
We can go all day recalling very daring policies bastardized by the conservative majority of this court. For instance, the striking down of President Biden’s groundbreaking plan to forgive some or all federal student loan debt for tens of millions of Americans; and a controversial ruling against the LGBTQ protections in favor of a Christian web designer in Colorado who refuses to create websites to celebrate same-sex weddings out of religious objections.
But their mission is not over. In just this week alone, this court agreed to hear an appeal brought by a man charged with offenses relating to the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol in a case that could have a major impact on the criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump. That was not enough. It further handed the Texas Republicans a huge win when it ruled that the map in GOP-run Galveston County could be used, despite concerns that it was discriminatory against minority voters because it took away the only district dominated by Black and Latino voters.
The latest show of power by the Supreme Court has exposed the porosity of the democratic process. In addition, appointing politicians radicalized by dire social ideologies and party extremists to the Supreme Court raises questions about its objectivity and impartiality.
Here is a feasible remedy. While voters whine about immigration, abortion, gun control, etc., voters must take seriously the power of this court and its capacity to shape the future direction of the United States. Thus, curtailing their excesses requires a Democratic-led House and Senate to push through a more objective legislative agenda without objections. Giving the system another chance to induct more right extremists into this Court might be self-destructive.
♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Journalism and RTF Professor, Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D. is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
“He can equally argue that a presidential candidate in a forthcoming election must be exonerated from legal indictments to avoid “election interference” or “weaponization of the justice system” by the regime.“ —Anthony Ogbo
________________________
In the realms of political governance, the power of setting precedence cannot be underestimated. When a precedent is created, it becomes a guiding principle or standard for future actions or decisions. It establishes a framework for how similar situations should be handled, and it holds individuals accountable for their actions. Whether in law, politics, or personal relationships, setting precedence can shape and influence future outcomes.
Since last year, the former president, Donald Trump has been at loggerheads with the law, playing hide-and-seek with the Justice Department over his surmounting legal predicament. The major contention was that a presidential candidate in a forthcoming election must be exonerated from legal indictments to avoid “election interference” or “weaponization of the justice system” by the regime.
Some media analysts and legal scholars with political interests have argued similarly, that the “candidate” Trump should be immune from charges over offenses he committed because he is a candidate.
A few days ago however, the Department of Justice filed new criminal charges against President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, accusing him of failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes while spending millions of dollars on a lavish lifestyle. He faces up to 17 years in prison if convicted. Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, defended his client accusing U.S. Special Counsel David Weiss, who is leading the probe, of political bias.
Since this announcement, President Biden’s Republican critics and the right-wing media communities have been celebrating. They have a reason to. For instance, this derisive federal indictment has provided a boost to House Republicans for their impeachment inquiry against President Biden – yet there was no mention of Biden in the indictment. So far, their efforts to prove serious wrongdoing on Biden’s part have come up blank.
But there is another dimension to Hunter’s case. As we know, Trump accumulated his legal woes before he quickly declared to run for President on November 15, 2022. He made it clear that no verdict or sentence would halt his campaign and bragged that he would carry on running for president from behind bars if he had to. And that if elected, he would use the power of his office to either quash any ongoing prosecutions or pardon himself for any convictions.
He posted personally identifiable information about court officials, including a photo of a judge’s daughter; warned of “potential death and destruction” if he is charged; and vowed, “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU.” Trump’s lawyers argue he is a political candidate exercising his First Amendment rights.
In Georgia, grand jurors’ names, addresses, and images were released online by Trump allies and a racist death threat against the judge presiding over the federal Jan. 6 case. The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law published a display of Trump’s troubling pattern of attacking judges and the courts for rulings he disagrees with. In addition, Rolling Stone (July 2022) reported how Trump told his team, he needed to be president again to save himself from criminal probes.
Trump has intentionally derailed proceedings by frivolously requesting delays and unwarranted extensions on pre-trial issues. These are just strategies to aimlessly continue dragging these cases with unjustified delays.
But his antics so far are paying off. Besides the delay tactics, Trump and his cronies believe that his cases would be strategically dragged to the extremely right-leaning Supreme Court, where the judges he appointed could be of great help.
There are also congressional efforts to save Trump from his dilemma. Recall that on March 30, a grand jury in Manhattan indicted him on 34 counts of falsification of business records. Shockingly, the response of congressional Republicans created an ugly pattern of defense for Trump. Before the indictment, Republican congressional committee chairs threatened to subpoena confidential records from the investigation and withhold federal funding in retaliation for any indictment.
These are all dangerous precedents that can stall the democratic process and destroy the scepter that guides the rule of law. In a democracy, setting a precedence may not be a written law, but remains a fundamental aspect of the legal system. In other words, when a court decides on a particular case; congress undertakes an unusual process, or the system condones a certain tradition, it becomes a binding precedent that must be followed in similar cases in the future. This ensures consistency and predictability in the system.
The danger of all these trends is that a line of legal patterns has already been created, and more are on the way. In the meantime, Hunter Biden could take advantage of these privileges by simply declaring to run for election as an independent. He could follow Trump’s playbook and equally enjoy the privileges already set in the political and legal system.
♦Publisher of the Guardian News, Journalism and RTF Professor, Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D. is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
-
Anthony Obi Ogbo1 day agoThe HISD Nightmare – Superintendent Mike Miles Must Go
-
Column2 weeks agoSecuring Truth: The Intersection of Investigative Journalism and Cyber Security in Global South Nations
-
News5 days ago‘I’ll bring my plane… I plan on keeping it for another four years’ – Biden on second debate with Trump
-
Education5 days agoBlack teen in Georgia awarded over $14m in scholarships, accepted at 231 colleges
-
Entertainment2 weeks agoStephcynie’s “No Lie”: A Soulful Anthem Redefining Love
-
News5 days agoNigerian officials probe plan to marry off scores of female orphans
-
News5 days agoSlovakia’s prime minister expected to survive assassination attempt
-
News5 days agoShell investigates smoke near Gbaran oil facility in Nigeria