Featured

The Jaded Lips of Enugu Brand of Criticism

Published

5 years ago

September 8, 2020

By Reuben Onyishi (Ugoachataberu)

Criticism is a discipline which dedicates itself to thinking its object. It hived off philosophy and engaged the interest of the ancients like Plato and Aristotle. Plato viewed criticism as an object in the hand of a genius, a legislator, whose prescriptive rules guide the thinking of its object. For Aristotle, criticism seeks to describe its object, that is, a description of what has been done or produced. Whether prescriptive or descriptive, criticism is basically reactionary in that it responds to its object.

As a discipline, criticism is a body of knowledge that has a procedural pattern of the application of thought to a phenomenon. It is a learned pattern that tasks thinking and practice, something on which a reasonable amount of time is spent in its study. This accounts for why Alexander Pope, the great English poet, in consideration of criticism, says, “But you who seek to give and merit Fame, And justly bear a critic’s noble name, be sure of your own reach to know, how far your genius, taste, and learning go. Launch not beyond your depth, but be discreet and mark that point where sense and dullness meet” (Essay on Criticism). By implication, criticism is a task that demands depth in learning and erudition. It does not yield itself to the simple and unlearned. Nonetheless, oftentimes, fools rush in where angels fear to tread. That accounts for why all manner of pretenders makes claims to the title of the critic.

When pretenders take the garb of critics, we see folks who never advance a judgment of their own but catch the spreading notion of the town. They reason and conclude by precedence and own stale nonsense which they never invent. This brand of critics abounds in Enugu State as a coterie of ill-informed, groveling urchins who try to keep up with the Joneses in the excoriation of the administration of His Excellency, Rt. Hon. Dr. Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi. These are hallelujah boys and cheerleaders who neither know next to nothing nor have a mind of their own. These low- witted lots find their way into social media platforms. They cannot engage with quality discussion of issues but would rather resort to vulgarity and use of uncouth stereotypical terms like ‘idiot’, ‘onye nrashi’, ‘useless people’ and the like. They cannot make simple errorless sentences as they are half-baked. They abound on Facebook platforms and have no known tangible reasons for the positions they take except that they are dregs, derelict mortar, and rotten palm nut.

Enugu State is also replete with other sour grapes of critics who praise in the morning what they blame at night and always think the last opinion right. They blindly lay claims to objectivity but in the real sense of it has no stand on any issue. They lack depth and can easily pander to any opinion that holds sway last.

Another crop of sour lips in Enugu State is constituted and moved by the spirit of irridentistism, clannishness, and nepotism. Recently some of them went to town with a fad couched Nsukkanisation. Even at the fact that Ugwuanyi has shown an exemplary leadership devoid of clannish sentiments as he distributes amenities to the various parts of Enugu State on equitable consideration, such jaded lips cry wolf to serve selfish zonal interests in order to arouse sympathy and perhaps cajole the governor into a weakened position of pandering to their whims and caprices. A case in point is that of one failed journalist who calls himself Jude Orji, whose brand of journalism consists in brown envelope taken from Abuja politicians of the said greater Awgu contraption of this world; a Jude Orji or whatever he is named whose journalism is founded on jumbling distorted facts to favor Awgu sentiments. His was a clear case of brazen lies as he struggled with words incoherently all through his ill-advised internet gibberish of an article. Within this category are also some folks from Nsukka Zone who also are disposed to clannish interests and a sense of entitlement. They point to a former governor who moved all state-owned institutions to his home town. They severely criticise Ugwuanyi for executing projects in other zones order than the Nsukka zone, claiming that the essence of the rotation of the governorship seat among the three zones is for the governor to concentrate development in his zone. These critics, if critics they are, are insatiable and unthankful. They care less about the economic implications of projects in terms of the paucity of funds occasioned by COVID-19. Until Ugwuanyi moves all the state-owned institutions to the Nsukka zone, he has yet to achieve anything. What poor thinking of the very object of their criticism, for how can clannishness and nepotism be a reference point to good governance in the 21st century? Ugwuanyi is a turn between his kinsmen crying clannish and the other zones crying Nsukkanisation- a turn between the devil and the deep blue sea occasioned by soured critical taste.

We have yet another brand of Enugu critics who rush to Abuja to hobnob with overambitious legislators of Enugu extraction. They eat filthy lucre from the Abuja table and drink the intoxicating hemlock that drives then crazy. They have no facts but concoct lies and hold on to trivialities against Governor Ugwuanyi to please their paymasters, whose over-ambition has driven to the level of biting the finger that fed them. This is the pot into which such sevile herds like Enuma Asogwa, Celestine Okanya, Ezugwu Okike, and their slavish followers melt.

Quite another is a set of Enugu critics who seek recognition and appointments. They have come to misrepresent Governor Ugwuanyi’s humility and sense of security, peace and inclusive governance in the state, thinking that once they begin to tell lies against the governor, he would call them and settle them. A typical example is Richard Ngene who used to commend the governor for his many good deeds but when no appointment came, he resorted to insults. One David direct Ani also is known to have begun his own brand of criticism, believing he would get an appointment by so doing. Celestine Okanya before he went to Abuja to eat crumbs had exhausted his antics to get an appointment from Ugwuanyi and when it didn’t come turned from a friend to a foe. Related to these are also the brand of critics who had thought to defraud the state government but when their fraud was uncovered and appropriate steps legally are taken, they recruited some pseudonymized fellows to write nonsense against the governor. A good example is the case of Kingsley Eze and his Edwin Ugwuanyi, a pseudonym, recruited to slander and impugn the person of His Excellency, Rt. Hon. Ugwuanyi.

Criticism in Enugu State has gone sour and the teeth of the critics are set at the edge. Where are the true and learned critics who would reflect on the truth they know? Where are they who careless of censure, no too fond of fame, still pleased to praise, yet not afraid to blame? Where are the objective and constructive critics, the prescriptive and descriptive legislators whose rules guide aright, who to a friend his faults freely show and gladly praise the merit of a foe? Oh! This gift we lack in Enugu State. Enugu State is blessed with the object and lacks in those who properly think it.

Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi has outclassed his contemporaries in the South East of Nigeria. Besides coming tops in the ranking of the states with the ease of doing business, Enugu State is one of the six states in Nigeria that are financially self-sufficient, without their shares of oil revenue from the federation account. Some of the unlearned comparative critics would always point to Ebonyi State and refer all to the flyovers and beautiful Ebonyi streets glowing and glittering like full moon. Well, let the owl go to a corner of the market to hear the hoot of its underlings. A friend of mine from Ebonyi State recently posted on his Facebook wall that Ebonyi State is a place where light shines in the streets while homes are in darkness; a place where citizens beg along the shining streets and under the beautiful flyovers.

He who did not hear the din of Okpoko did the elephant stamp on his eardrums? Does anyone need be told what development Ugwuanyi has caused to erupt all over Enugu State in the area of road construction, provision of basic infrastructure, health facilities, regular payment of civil servants, job creation, creative mobilization of funds, and prudent management of both human and material resources? If you eat it not, you match it on your feet. All these are high impact factor projects and achievements worthy of critical thinking and articulation. The genuine thinkers are few; unthinking folks abound and have desecrated the aristocratic palace of true criticism. Alas! Enugu State is left with sour grapes in the jaded mouths of virulently vindictive critics

Share on Facebook

Business

Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Published

2 weeks ago

March 6, 2025

The Gleamer

Ismaila Ahmad Abdullahi Ph.D

The public hearings conducted recently by the two Chambers of the National Assembly have elicited positive responses from a broad spectrum of Nigerians, cutting across regional interest groups, government agencies, civil society groups, concerned individuals, the academia, and Labour Unions, among diverse others. Contrary to a few dissensions hitherto expressed in the media, almost all the stakeholders who spoke during the week-long sessions were unanimous in their declaration that the hallowed Chambers should pass the tax reform bills after a clean-up of the grey areas.

The public hearings were auspicious for all Nigerians desirous of economic growth and fiscal responsibility. They were also a watershed moment for the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which had been upbeat about the tax reforms. Indeed, the public hearings had rekindled hope in the tenets of democracy that guarantee freedom of expression and equitable space for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Without gainsaying the fact, the tax reform bills have been unarguably about the most thought-provoking issues in Nigeria today, drawing variegated perspectives and commentaries from even unlikely quarters such as the faith-based leaders, student bodies, and trade unions, which speaks much about the importance of the bills.

In the build-up to the public hearings, not many people believed that the bills would make it to the second reading, much less the public hearings. Even the Northern stakeholders who seemed unlikely to support the passage of the bills have softened their stance and have given valuable suggestions that would enrich the substance of the bills. The Arewa Consultative Forum came to the public hearings well-prepared with a printed booklet that addressed their concerns. It concluded with an advisory that the bills should be “Well planned, properly communicated, strategically implemented and ample dialogue and political consensus allowed for the reforms to be accepted.”

The concerns of ACF ranged from the composition of the proposed Nigeria Revenue Service Board as contained in Part 111, Section 7 of the bill, the unlimited Presidential power to exempt/wave tax payment as proposed in Section 75(1) of the bill, the family income or inheritance tax as contained in Part 1, Section 4(3) of the bill, to the issues around development levy and VAT. On the development levy, the ACF stated that unless the Federal Government is considering budgetary funding for TETFUND, NASENI and NITDA, it does not see the “wisdom behind the plan to replace (them) with NELFUND”.

The position of the North was equally reinforced by the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, Northern Elders Forum, Kano State Government, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, and the FCT Imams. Like the ACF, these stakeholders lent their respective voices to the Section on the Inheritance Tax in Part 1 of the bill and the use of the term ‘ecclesiastical’, which, in their views, undermines certain religious rights and beliefs. The Kano State Government, represented by Mahmud Sagagi, affirmed that “we support tax modernisation” but cautioned that “we must ensure that this process does not come at the expense of states’ constitutional rights and economic stability”. Professor Auwalu Yadudu, a constitutional law professor, drew attention to the use of the ‘supremacy clause’ and cautioned that the repeated use of “notwithstanding” in the bills would undermine the supremacy of the Nigerian constitution if passed as such.

Other stakeholders that made contributions at the sessions included the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Nigeria Customs Service, and a host of others. While most of their concerns bordered on technical issues requiring fine-tuning, they were unanimous in their support for the bills. They aligned with the position of the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, Ph.D. and the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, which is that the extant tax laws and fiscal regulations are obsolete necessitating reforms aimed at creating a fair and equitable tax and fiscal space to grow Nigeria’s economy.

In one of the sessions, Dr Zaach Adedeji expounded on the criss-cross of trade activities in the Free Trade Zone whereby companies misuse tax waivers as exporters to sell their goods or services in the Customs Area at an amount usually less than the price the operators in the Customs Area who pay VAT and other taxes sell theirs thereby disrupting business transactions. This way, the operators in the Free Trade Zone shortchange the government in paying their due taxes by circumventing extant regulations, which are inimical to the economy’s growth.

Overall, the presentations were forthright, foresighted, and helpful in elucidating the issues contained in the bills. According to the statistics read out at the end of the hearings at the Senate, 75 stakeholders were invited, 65 made submissions, and 61 made presentations. At the House of Representatives 53 stakeholders made presentations. By all means, this is a fair representation. Given the presentations, it is evident that the National Assembly has gathered enough materials to guide its deliberations on the bills. As we look forward to the passage of the bills, we commend the leadership of the National Assembly for their unwavering commitment to making the bills see the light of the day.

Abdullahi is the Director of the Communications and Liaison Department, FIRS.

Share on Facebook