There cannot be any question on the right and privilege of President Buhari to hire and fire any minister, head of government agency or parastatal but accountability and a sense of duty demand that reasons be given for the action, to the ultimate employers of both the President and his appointees, namely, the Nigerian people. Democracy, simple decency and decorum demand just that. The 26 heads of agencies, parastatals and commissions, who were unexpectedly removed from their posts on Tuesday, may have earned the sack but true to type, the Presidency gave no reasons besides the tepid announcement, and the result was a whirlwind of innuendoes and wild speculations which then painted the administration as reckless, indecorous and more than confused about basic human resource management.
The controversial decision was announced in a statement by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) David Babachir Lawal. “The President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari has approved the immediate disengagement of the following chief executive officers of the under-listed parastatals, agencies and commissions. He has also approved that the most senior officers in the parastatals, agencies and councils oversee the activities of the organizations pending the appointment of substantive chief executive officers” the statement noted.
The affected parastatals include: the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA), Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria (FRCN), Voice of Nigeria (VON), News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF), New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD), Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF), Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board (NCDMB) and Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN).
Others are: Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), Petroleum Equalization Fund (PEF), Nigeria Railways Corporation (NRC), Bureau of Public Procurements (BPP), Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE), Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA), Standard Organization of Nigeria (SON), National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Nigeria Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), Bank of Industry (BoI), National Centre for Women Development (NCWD), National Orientation Agency (NOA), Industrial Training Fund (ITF), Nigerian Export-Import Bank (NEXIM) and National Agency for Prohibition of Traffic In Persons and Other Related Matters (NAPTIP).
The government machinery was thrown into confusion, as news of the sacking broke in Abuja, the nation’s capital where most chief executive officers operate. All activities were temporarily grounded as it was not so easy to identify who to hand over to. The chaos was typified at the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund whose Managing Director, Munir Abubakar, was away in Livingstone, Zambia attending the 42nd session of the African Regional Labor Administration Centre Governing Council on Decent Work in the global supply chain. The Minister of Labor and Employment, Dr. Chris Ngige was said to be on the trip alongside the Permanent Secretary in the ministry, Dr. Clement Illoh. It was also not clear whom Asabe Ahmed will hand over to at the Petroleum Equalization Fund, where she was Executive Secretary.
The public outcry that followed the mass sackings was not unexpected. Nigeria’s public agencies have certainly suffered a serial debasement of values, desecration of ethics and, especially, erosion of professionalism exemplified by crass incompetence and flagrant disregard for rules and regulations. A re-orientation and renaissance, therefore, is a necessity if the engine of government, which includes these parastatals and agencies, would run smoothly and efficiently. At no other time than now does Nigerian need such a rediscovery. But to say Buhari was not expecting the reaction that greeted the sackings is to underestimate the political sagacity of the President whose recent actions have continued to confound even his most ardent critics and political opponents.
Although the president has the prerogative to fire any appointee, there has to be a better way to sack holders of high public office. Unless their offence was so egregious as to deserve public humiliation, and in which case such offence should have been made public, the president’s action neither showed consideration for the sacked officials nor respect for their positions. Granted, these officials hold their jobs at the pleasure of the president, but to recourse to such mass dismissals, without reason, indicate the President either judged poorly; was wrongly advised or was so confounded by the undesirability of the officials and contemptuous of former president Jonathan, who appointed them! In which case, they should have been quietly asked to resign or, if they would be so summarily dismissed, reasons should have been made public as some of those affected were a long way to the expiration of their tenure.
A curt and inexplicable dismissal of 26 heads of parastatals, agencies and commissions seemed to have defeated the idea that all public officers are accountable to the public, which is the intendment of the constitution. Failure to do this very simple right thing has given room for speculation. The grapevine has taken over because of the dearth of official information, inevitably leading to an avoidable PR crisis, which exposes the government to even bigger ridicule. It is alright that the officials have been sacked, though ignominiously, but have the right lessons been learnt? More importantly, it must be asked: has the President set a template which should therefore not require a dramatic event before officials are fired in the future?
The public expectation is that the appointment of their replacements would follow due process and respect extant laws and statutes. It should not be an opportunity to reward party loyalists and political sinecures in defiance of the law. Such illegality reverberated in the appointment of the now sacked director-general of the National Agency for Food, Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC) who assumed office without a pedigree in the Pharmaceutical Council of Nigeria, whereas NAFDAC Law demands that the director general must be someone who has been practising as a registered member of the council for a minimum of five years.
To deepen democracy, rule of law must be sacrosanct. This is why in appointments into high public office, illegality and arbitrariness and the accompanying invidious mutilation of due process as twin pillars of democracy does little credit to the president’s image. Public office is a call to national duty and only the ready, willing, and able deserve it. Though appointees of the president, their allegiance ought not to be to the person that appointed him; it is to the country. To dispense as a favor to the merely well-connected is to do a disservice to the country. The choice in this, of course, is that of the President of the Federal Republic. Needless to say that how well his appointees perform will determine the President’s own report card as well as his place in history.
