Featured

SILENCE IN THE FACE OF INJUSTICE: THE ISI-UZO EXAMPLE

Published

4 years ago

October 5, 2020

By Ifeanyi Ogenyi

Bishop Desmond Tutu once said: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality”.

The above quote aptly captures the position of most of the Isi-Uzo people who have chosen to be silent in the face of injustices against them in their Senatorial District.

A few days ago, I posed a question: “WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THE POSITION OF ISI-UZO IN THE POWER SHARING EQUATION IN ENUGU EAST SENATORIAL DISTRICT SINCE THE RETURN OF DEMOCRACY IN 1999 TIL DATE?

The above question attracted a lot of reactions but unfortunately, the answers elicited from the question were full of sympathy for Isi-Uzo people who have been strangely seen as a political orphan and the most unfairly treated Local Government Council in Enugu East Senatorial District has been so long denied the opportunities to represent the zone in any elective or representative capacity since 1999 till date.

Many agreed that for a very long time now, Isi-Uzo has been in political oblivion in the politics of power-sharing in the Senatorial Zone.

It is crystal clear that the injustices against Ndi Isi-Uzo are numerous and as an L.G.A, it has been practically excluded in the political dimension of power-sharing by the “Core Nkanu”.

The situation of political haplessness in which Isi-Uzo people found themselves in the Senatorial calls for concern of all the Stakeholders in the zone and all men of good conscience and a good sense of justice in Enugu redress the injustice.

It is very crucial to remind our brothers from other parts of the zone that Isi-Uzo is part and parcel of Enugu East Senatorial District and all other local government councils in the zone have benefited immeasurably from the zone except Isi-Uzo people.

In fact, it is safe to state that all the persons who had represented and still representing the zone in the Senate from 1999 to date seamlessly attained that position by leveraging on the block votes of Isi-Uzo people which had always been the deciding factors of who wins. Isi-Uzo has the most politically conscious people in Enugu East Senatorial District.

And it is indeed very unfortunate that after many years of a show of support and solidarity to other parts of Nkanu land by Isi-Uzo people, the kind gestures and goodwill extended unreservedly have not been reciprocated, rather, Isi-Uzo people appears to have been judged negatively by their brothers from other parts of Nkanu who incidentally were great benefactors of the goodwill.

There is no local government in Enugu East Senatorial District that has never had a fair share in the power-sharing except Isi-Uzo. All other five local governments namely: Nkanu East, Nkanu West, Enugu East, Enugu North, and Enugu South had once, twice, or even thrice had a bite on the cherry by representing the zone in one capacity or the other. Why is Isi-Uzo relegated to the background in the power-sharing? Why is Isi-Uzo dressed in the toga of “Political Orphan? Is it deserving of them?

Is 2023 not an opportunity to redress the injustices and unfair political treatments meted out to Isi-Uzo people in their Senatorial District? The time for the healing of the wounds should be by 2023. The moment to balance the imbalances.

The cardinal principles of justice, equity, and fairness should be applied in power-sharing especially so in choosing who occupies the Lion Building come 2023 when it is expected to be the turn of Enugu East Senatorial District to produce the next number one citizen of the State.

Hence, Isi-Uzo people should be allowed this time to occupy the seat of the Governor of the State if eventually zoned to Enugu East Senatorial District in line with the long-standing zoning arrangement in the State.

As deliberately poised as politics may appear, conceding the governorship position to Isi-Uzo will not only give them a sense of belonging in the zone but will also meet the ends of justice, equity, and fairness.
The case of Isi-Uzo is so pathetic that no Stakeholder in Enugu with an acute sense of justice should rest comfortably without seeing that justice is done because you don’t know when such a thing will befall any other L.G.A for whatever reason.

But the most worrisome of all is the pretentious attitudes and political posturings of most of the Isi-Uzo people in the face of the imbalances in the zone.

In the face of all these injustices, most of the Isi-Uzo people have chosen to hide in their trenches and to die in silence.
Where are the men? The time is now! Are Isi-Uzo people naïve? Not at all. While some have chosen to remain silent in the whole pathetic situation Isi-Uzo found itself, some have opined that it is too early to be talking about Isi-Uzo being allowed to occupy the Lion Building by 2023; and I asked what makes it to be too early for Isi-Uzo people to state the obvious? One thing that is clear is that power is not always gotten on a platter of gold, it is taken most time though not necessarily by force but by constructive arguments, agitations, engagements, and lobbying which all tools of power politics. And this is what is expected of Isi-Uzo people now, having known their political status in the power-sharing in the zone.

And for those who have chosen to be neutral and silent, it is very important to remind them that they are on the side of the oppressors and posterity will not kind to them.

Let there be justice, let justice, equity, and fairness reign in Enugu East Senatorial District.

In all, let our brothers from other parts of Nkanu land support Isi-Uzo come 2023 to be in the Lion Building. It will serve the best interest of justice, equity, and fairness; and Nkanu will ever remain great.

Share on Facebook

Business

Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Published

1 week 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