Eddy Odivwri
Early in the week, the governor of Zamfara State, Mr Bello Mohammed, better known as Bello Matawalle, ordered the closure of five media outfits in the state. It was an exercise of power he did not have. The media houses affected are two federal government media organisations and three private ones. They include: FRCN (Pride FM) radio Gusau, NTA Gusau, Amji TV Gusau, Gamji TV Gusau and Alumma TV. He further ordered the Commissioner of police in the state to ensure the closure was enforced. Their offence is that they dared to cover the political rally organized by the rival political party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), in the state.
The state government, had in this political season, banned political rallies in the state, allegedly to curb the rise in terrorist activities.
In the governor’s thinking, the coverage of the rally, which he had banned, amounts to an affront to his authority in the state. It betrays his poor knowledge of the role of the media in society. How can the media, in exercise of its constitutionally-guaranteed role, be taken as an affront to his authority?
Expectedly, he has received much condemnation across board from major stakeholders and non-stakeholders alike. And he has rescinded his order. What Gov Matawalle did amounts to an attempt to gag the press and media services in the country. He probably should take a few lessons on the role of the media in a democracy. Assuming his ban on political rallies in the state is legitimate, does the defiance of that order by a political party not amount to news that should be reported?
Pray, what did he even do to the PDP which defied his order before venting his anger on the media houses? And assuming if he has powers over private TV houses in his state, does he also have powers over federal media organisations like the Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria and the Nigeria Television Authority? In more ways than one, Matawalle has been told he is not the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) who has the sole right to regulate the activities of broadcast organisations in the country. Can Gov Matawalle’s affront to the media be taken as done in ignorance? He is not a neophyte in government and public administration, yet, he betrays, every now and then, traits of impulsiveness.
Here is a man who had been a federal lawmaker (in the House of Representatives) for twelve years. Does he or should he not know the law?
He had been a commissioner for Local government in his state for four years, does he not know the law? He had schooled in University of West London, does he not know the law? He has been the state governor since 2019, does he not know the law? Can his ignorance of the law (if he truly is) be accepted as an excuse for the serial breaches and affronts?
The 60-year-old father of 29 children –16 boys and 13 girls, and husband of four wives, cannot be new to the laws of the land having served previously at various levels of governance
Late June this year, the same Gov Matawalle, perhaps swarmed by the plague of insecurity in his state, had called on the residents of the state to go ahead and acquire lethal weapons with which they can defend themselves against the rampaging terrorists in the state. He, in fact, promised to help residents facilitate the acquisition of the arms.
Again, he did not have that power. Only the National Security Adviser (NSA) of the country has the powers to grant such privilege.
He had offered to distribute 500 forms per each of the 19 emirates in the states, towards the acquisition of the said arms.
Yes, his state had been in the eye of the storm as far as security issues are concerned. The BBC had done a damning documentary— the Bandit Warlords of Zamfara–, earlier in the year. But it is clearly not enough for the wild and arbitrary measures he is adopting.
He had banned the riding of motorcycles in the state; he had banned the sale of petrol in some Local Government Areas in the state; he had banned all markets in some Local Government areas; he had banned political rallies, etc. Extending this to the media was thus not only overkill, it is also illegal.
In addition to the ban-this-ban-that penchant, he had ordered the recruitment of additional 200 men into the state-owned Community Protection Guards (CPG)
Investigations are revealing that Matawalle’s maximum rule approach is not far from wanting to be and remain the political determinant in the state.
It is remarkable that he was elected under the platform of the PDP. But on June 29, last year, he formally announced his defection to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). That he rides high in the political wave of the state is supported by the fact that he defected along with the three senators of the state, six out of the seven House of Representative members in the state, as well as all 24 members of the state House of Assembly. He is clearly not a political novice.
He is thus determined to remain the powerhouse of politics in the state. Thus, any confrontation from any quarters (including his erstwhile political family—PDP), has to be crushed, and if the media practitioners come in-between, so be it, they all have to be crushed together. A gateway to totalitarianism.
His erstwhile deputy, Mahdi Gusau, who refused to decamp with him to the APC got impeached. And in his place, Hassan Gusau, had long been appointed.
Already, there are indications of clashes and violence in the political activities in Zamfara State. Some deaths have been recorded.
In all, Gov Matawalle, beside the episodic remorse in reversing his order on the closure of the media outfits, has to be watched carefully. He has goofed twice in four months. A third gaffe may be summarily disastrous to the ethos and practice of democracy. The will and wish of the Zamfara people cannot be circumscribed. They must be allowed to freely choose whom they want to govern them. They cannot and should not be forced or coerced.
Right of Reply
Re: Lawan, Akpabio, INEC And Senatorial Tickets
My attention has been drawn to an article authored by you with the aforementioned headline.
In the said article of 14th October, you erroneously stated that Senator Akpabio has lived his entire life on government, and did not fact-check your submission on what and who Akpabio was before he ventured into politics.
For the record, Akpabio is a legal practitioner of over 30 years in the Bar. Before his appointment as a commissioner, he was one of the founding Directors of EMIS Communications, an outfit that laid the foundation upon which what is now generally called GSM was built and improved on. So it is not true that he has lived his entire life on government.
His tenure as the governor of Akwa Ibom State (2007-2015) was the golden era in the history of the state, and it earned him the appellation ‘The Uncommon Transformer’ and that record is yet to be erased.
You see, he was offered the ministerial appointment not as compensation as you erroneously stated. He got that ministerial appointment purely on merit, considering his track record as governor and Minority Leader of the Senate as a first-timer. These unparalleled records in public offices are yet to be equalled by any of his successors.
So what you wrote is entirely your personal opinion which you are entitled to, and it does not in any way represent what the good people of this great country believe Akpabio is.
Your position on the Senatorial Primary for Akwa Ibom North West Senatorial District, which Senator Akpabio won and was declared winner by the body legally recognised by the law and in this case, the National Working Committee (NWC) of the APC is also not true.
Please get a copy of the Supreme Court Judgment on who is legally recognised by the law to conduct party Congresses and Primaries.
The concerns you raised on two nomination forms have long been explained by the INEC. Why are you so particular about Akpabio? How about Tambuwal, Umahi and even Ayade, who all collected two forms?
The law requires INEC to monitor primaries at designated time, venue and date as fixed by the NWC of the party. INEC has no duty doing otherwise.
Justice Nwite’s judgment stated clearly that where the NWC of a party invites INEC and it chooses not to attend to monitor their Congress, their absence at the exercise does not in any (way) invalidate the exercise. That is the position of the law. INEC was duly informed of the June 9 primary that produced Akpabio, but Igini for some reason best known to him, refused to attend.
APC senatorial primaries all over the country took place on the 28th. And Udom Ekpoudom chose to hold his on an earlier date and Igini chose to attend a primary that was not ordered by the NWC of the party, how would the outcome of that exercise stand?
The 28th May 2022 Primary that was held where Obong Ekperipe Ekpo won was cancelled by the NWC of the party due to security infractions and a re-conduct of the exercise was held on the 9th of June. INEC headquarters was duly informed but Igini chose not to attend. At the re-conducted primaries, the authentic winner of the legally organised primary of 28th decided to step down from the race, leaving Akpabio, Ekpoudom and one other aspirant to slug it out and at the end of the exercise, Akpabio polled the highest votes and was declared the winner by the party’s election panel from Abuja.
Just like you are entitled to your personal opinion, Etiebet is also entitled to his. He is not the law, what I have been saying is basically the law and not the (a) warped opinion of anyone.
Few Questions Would Suffice Here
1. Which date was fixed by the NWC of the APC for the conduct of senatorial primaries nationwide, 27th or 28th May?
2. Which party official from the National headquarters of the party conducted the purported primary you said DIG Udom Ekpoudom purportedly won?
3. Who between the NWC of a party and INEC chooses the date, electoral officers, venue and time for primaries and Congresses?
4. Who conducts party primaries? INEC or NWC of the party?
5. Is there any law of the land that stops any politician from contesting for any office he wants as an aspirant?
From your position on purchase of more than one form for any elective position by politicians, you must have been influenced by the erroneous assertion by former Resident Electoral Commissioner of Akwa Ibom State, Mike Igini, on the position of the Electoral Act 2022 as amended.
Igini’s misinterpretation of that Section of the law has since been publicly corrected by the Spokesman of the INEC, Mr Okoye on national television.
By the time you use your good office as a journalist and a writer to get the answers to the above posers, you would have found out that what you published on the above subject matter was way off the facts.
The landmark judgment by His Lordship, Justice Nwite as far as I know, was based on facts and what the law says, and not on what the law should say.
– Jackson Udom,
Chief Press Secretary To Senator Godswill Akpabio.
