Government

PDP Attacks Osinbajo, Calls Him a Figurehead

Published

7 years ago

August 14, 2017

PDP Attacks Osinbajo, Calls Him a Figurehead

The main opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party, says Acting President Yemi Osinbajo is not in charge of the country.

It said actions taken by the Acting President had shown that power was not handed over to him contrary to the claim by the Presidency that ailing President Muhammadu Buhari ceded power to him (Osinbajo) before leaving Nigeria for London on medical trip more than 90 days ago.

Spokesperson for the party, Dayo Adeyeye, who spoke with one of our correspondents on Sunday, wondered why the Acting President had refused to assign portfolios to the two ministers that were sworn in more than two weeks ago.

Adeyeye, who was a former minister of state for works, observed that the action of the Acting President indicated that he was just a figurehead.

He said, “The Acting President is not in charge of the country. He is not in charge of anything. This is why nothing is moving forward.

“How do you explain a situation where two of the ministers who were sworn in after much pressure from the people and the National Assembly have not been assigned portfolios?

“He is not in charge. He is a mere figurehead and cannot do anything. The cabals are still in charge. That is why nothing is moving forward in this country.

“The two ministers are just idle. They have no offices, nowhere to resume to and nothing to do. What is the essence of their being sworn in then? They are ministers without portfolios.

“It is a constitutional breach on the side of the government because each state ought to have a minister each. Now, these two states had been without ministers for long and after you reluctantly appointed them, you refused to give them offices. “

The ministers are Prof. Stephen Ocheni from Kogi State and Mr. Suleiman Hassan from Gombe State.

Twenty days after Osinbajo administered the oath of office on the ministers, they have yet to be assigned portfolios.

Ocheni and Hassan were inaugurated on July 26, 2017, in Abuja.

Their inauguration came after another long delay since May when they were screened and cleared by the Senate.

It also took a resolution and an ultimatum issued by the House of Representatives for the ministers to be inaugurated.

Adeyeye said it was apparent that the All Progressives Congress was not ready to rule, adding that it won the 2015 presidential election in error.

He asked Nigerians to be patient, adding that 2019 would soon come when new elections would be held.

Reps want portfolios for ministers

Meanwhile, Members of the House of Representatives on Sunday called on Osinbajo to assign portfolios to the two new ministers.

Some lawmakers observed that the delay was abnormal and asked Osinbajo to take the necessary action by assigning portfolios to the ministers.

One of the lawmakers, who is from Lagos State, Mr. James Faleke, noted that the ministers seemed to be idle, a development that he said defied explanations.

He also stated that the ministers were appointed on the basis that there were vacancies in the Federal Executive Council to be filled.

Faleke added, “I don’t think that this is the way things should be.

“The 1999 Constitution is specific on the issue of representation of each state in FEC. Kogi and Gombe states were left out for a long time.

“Now that the ministers have been appointed and the Acting President has inaugurated them, they should be given portfolios.

“They were not idle before they were appointed ministers; they were doing something. But, now they are left hanging.

“We urge the Acting President to hasten the allocation of portfolios to these ministers.”

Another member, Mr. Karimi Sunday, recalled that Osinbajo told the nation the day he inaugurated the ministers that they would be assigned portfolios “shortly.”

Sunday said he did not know how long it would take for the Acting President’s shortly to come to reality.

He said, “It s surprising what is happening these days. It will appear that this government is confused.

“It took months after Ocheni and Hassan were cleared by the Senate for them to be inaugurated.

“There was even a resolution by the House of Representatives for the Acting President to inaugurate the ministers.

“What the Presidency has done is partial compliance with the resolution of the House.

“So long as the ministers have no portfolios, it is still a case of saying no ministers. Nothing really has changed from the situation we had before their inauguration.

“The Acting President knows the right thing to do and he should do it.

“Let him not forget that Nigerians will remember that it was during his time as Acting President that two ministers existed, who had no portfolios.”

However, another member, Mr. Johnson Agbonayinma, said in as much as it was important to assign portfolios to the ministers, not doing so right away did not mean that they were not useful to the government.

Agbonayinma said it was possible that Ocheni and Hassan reported to Osinbajo daily and Osinbajo assigned duties to them to perform.

“Sentiments or complaints should not come in yet.

“Are we sure that the ministers are just sitting at home and not doing anything? Do we know whether the Acting President consults them and assigns some responsibilities to them?

“Let us be cautious for now,” he added.

Ocheni was nominated as a replacement for the late James Ocholi, who died in a car crash.

Ocholi was the Minister of State for Labour and Employment before he passed on.

Hassan, on the other hand, is a replacement for Mrs. Amina Mohammed, the Minister of Environment before she was appointed as the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations.

New ministers’ll get duties soon, says Presidency

When contacted on the telephone on Sunday, the Senior Special Assistant to the Acting President on Media and Publicity, Mr. Laolu Akande, said portfolios would soon be assigned to the two new ministers.

He however did not give a specific time that it would be done.

Akande also did not give any reason why the exercise is being delayed.

“Very soon, portfolios will be assigned to the new ministers,” he simply said.

But another Presidency official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told one of our correspondents that the exercise was being delayed by a major cabinet reshuffle being planned by the government.

He said it would not be proper to assign portfolios to the two ministers now and then effect the cabinet reshuffle shortly after.

“The truth of the matter is that there is going to be a major cabinet reshuffle soon.

“The thinking is that there is no need to assign portfolios to the new ministers now. It will be done soon,” the official said.

Up Next

Africa’s Working-age Population to Grow by 450m in 20years

Don't Miss

FG’s School Feeding Programme Gulps N6.2bn in 14 States

Samed Olukoya

Is the CEO/Founder of Investors King Limited. A proven foreign exchange research analyst and a published author on Yahoo Finance, Businessinsider, Nasdaq, Entrepreneur.com, Investorplace, and many more. He has over two decades of experience in global financial markets.

Comments

Government

Netanyahu Stands Firm as US Halts Bomb Shipment Over Rafah Invasion Warning

Published

1 week ago

May 10, 2024

Samed Olukoya

Amidst escalating tensions between Israel and the United States, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has adopted a defiant stance following the US decision to halt a shipment of bombs and warned against Israel’s potential invasion of the southern Gaza city of Rafah.

In a bold statement, Netanyahu declared, “If we have to stand alone, we will stand alone,” emphasizing Israel’s resolve to pursue its objectives despite opposition.

The Prime Minister’s comments, delivered via social media and a subsequent interview with American talk show host Dr. Phil, underscore Israel’s determination to address security threats posed by the Gaza Strip, particularly by Hamas militants operating in Rafah.

Netanyahu reiterated the necessity of military action in Rafah to eliminate the remaining Hamas battalions, condemned Hamas’s history of violence and reiterated Israel’s commitment to achieving victory and ensuring the safety of its citizens.

The US administration, led by President Joe Biden, expressed concerns over the potential humanitarian impact of an Israeli invasion of Rafah, prompting the decision to withhold additional offensive weapons shipments to Israel.

Biden’s statement echoed broader international apprehensions about the escalation of violence and civilian casualties in the conflict-stricken region.

However, Netanyahu remained resolute in Israel’s approach, asserting the country’s right to defend itself against security threats. He emphasized Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties and facilitate the evacuation of civilians from Rafah before any military action.

Despite the US’s decision to pause the bomb shipment, Netanyahu affirmed Israel’s commitment to its longstanding alliance with the US. He acknowledged past disagreements between the two nations but expressed optimism about resolving current tensions through dialogue and cooperation.

In response, White House officials reiterated the US’s support for Israel’s security while urging restraint and emphasizing the need to avoid actions that could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The administration clarified that the decision to halt the bomb shipment was aimed at preventing potential civilian casualties in Rafah.

The confrontation between Israel and the US underscores the complexity of navigating regional conflicts and balancing strategic interests. As tensions persist, both nations face the challenge of reconciling their respective security imperatives with broader humanitarian concerns, seeking to avert further escalation while addressing the root causes of the conflict in the Middle East.

Government

EFCC Declares Former Kogi Governor, Yahaya Bello, Wanted Over N80.2 Billion Money Laundering Allegations

Published

4 weeks ago

April 19, 2024

Samed Olukoya

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has escalated its pursuit of justice by declaring former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, wanted over alleged money laundering amounting to N80.2 billion.

In a first-of-its-kind action, the EFCC announced Bello’s wanted status in connection with the alleged embezzlement of funds during his tenure as governor.

The commission, armed with a 19-count criminal charge, accused Bello and his cohorts of conspiring to launder the hefty sum, which was purportedly diverted from state coffers for personal gain.

The declaration of Bello as a wanted fugitive came after a series of failed attempts by the EFCC to effect his arrest.

Despite an ex-parte order from Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, mandating the EFCC to apprehend and produce Bello in court for arraignment, the former governor managed to evade capture with the reported assistance of his successor, Governor Usman Ododo.

This latest development shows the challenges faced by law enforcement agencies in holding powerful individuals accountable for their actions.

However, it also demonstrates the unwavering commitment of the EFCC to uphold the rule of law and ensure that justice is served, irrespective of the status or influence of the accused.

In response to the EFCC’s declaration, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, issued a stern warning to Bello, stating that fleeing from the law would not resolve the allegations against him.

Fagbemi urged Bello to honor the EFCC’s invitation and cooperate with the investigation process, saying it is important to uphold the rule of law and respect the authority of law enforcement agencies.

The EFCC’s pursuit of Bello underscores the agency’s mandate to combat corruption and financial crimes, sending a strong message that individuals implicated in corrupt practices will be held accountable for their actions.

Government

Concerns Mount Over Security as National Identity Card Issuance Shifts to Banks

Published

1 month ago

April 15, 2024

Samed Olukoya

Amidst the National Identity Management Commission’s (NIMC) recent announcement that the issuance of the proposed new national identity card will be facilitated through applicants’ respective banks, concerns are escalating regarding the security implications of involving financial institutions in the distribution process.

The federal government, in collaboration with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS), introduced a new identity card with payment functionality, aimed at streamlining access to social and financial services.

However, the decision to utilize banks as distribution channels has sparked apprehension among industry stakeholders.

Mr. Kayode Adegoke, Head of Corporate Communications at NIMC, clarified that applicants would request the card by providing their National Identification Number (NIN) through various channels, including online portals, NIMC offices, or their respective banks.

Adegoke emphasized that the new National ID Card would serve as a single, multipurpose card, encompassing payment functionality, government services, and travel documentation.

Despite NIMC’s assurances, concerns have been raised regarding the necessity and security implications of introducing a new identity card system when an operational one already exists.

Chief Deolu Ogunbanjo, President of the National Association of Telecoms Subscribers, questioned the rationale behind the new General Multipurpose Card (GMPC), citing NIMC’s existing mandate to issue such cards under Act No. 23 of 2007.

Ogunbanjo highlighted the successful implementation of MobileID by NIMC, which has provided identity verification for over 15 million individuals.

He expressed apprehension about integrating the new ID card with existing MobileID systems and raised concerns about data privacy and unauthorized duplication of ID cards.

Moreover, stakeholders are seeking clarification on the responsibilities for card blocking, replacement, and delivery in case of loss or theft, given the involvement of multiple parties, including banks, in the issuance process.

The shift towards utilizing banks for identity card issuance raises fundamental questions about data security, privacy, and the integrity of the identification process.

With financial institutions playing a pivotal role in distributing sensitive government documents, there are valid concerns about potential vulnerabilities and risks associated with this approach.

As the debate surrounding the security implications of the new national identity card continues to intensify, stakeholders are calling for greater transparency, accountability, and collaboration between government agencies and financial institutions to address these concerns effectively.

The paramount importance of safeguarding citizens’ personal information and ensuring the integrity of the identity verification process cannot be overstated, especially in an era of increasing digital interconnectedness and heightened cybersecurity threats.