 We're back with the breakfast and plus TV Africa. Let's look at the second conversation for the second leg. Our concern is about police neutrality and the 2023 elections. President Mohamed Abouhari has charged security agencies engaged with various support services in the 2023 elections to remain apolitical and maintain a high sense of professionalism and assist from behavior that would bring or disrupt these services. The president gave the charge of the commissioning of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the DIA in Abuja. Mohamed Abouhari urged the agency to handle the distribution and monitoring of classified materials and other logistics professionally and in accordance with standard operational procedures. But over time there's been reports of police involvement and compromising the election process in Nigeria. Now fast forward to now. The presidential candidate of the African Action Congress had said that to overcome election regain and violence in Nigeria there should be more focus on security agencies than the political parties. So we're appointed that there was no election regain or valence in Nigeria that happens without the connive night, without the collaboration of security agencies. Now in 2019 the situation presented itself with a tendency to compromise security personnel. Two days before the elections, Nigerian election that was postponed, there was announcement, thousands of police officers traveled from their duty stations to their posting across the country to ensure that security of voters and sensitive election materials were in order. Not a week later, officers remained in the field without stupends for food and accommodation. That's very compromising, right? We have Dr. Omosola, Deji, who's a political scientist, who's in the studio with us this morning and we'll just try to understand if there's a possibility of having police neutrality, if the police can be apolitical in our elections, especially with the injunction that has been given by the president, but not necessarily the police, but you know our security agencies. Dr. Omosola, thank you so much for being part of the show this morning. Good morning. Thank you for having me. Yes, it's a good thing that you are a political scientist. I'd like to ask you, what have you observed so far? What are your thoughts and perception of the elections? Few moments were already there February 2023. Well, by February 2023, general election is going to commence and the political terrain is getting heated up gradually. The campaign has not been on point as I wish. The issues pertaining to the people has not much been addressed. I wish that the candidates can do more in terms of addressing the issues that concerns Nigerians and moving from what to how. Most of the candidates have mostly been saying what they would do to Nigerians, which usually realize that they are still the basics. We have a repetition of the 2019 campaign promise. The 27 campaign promise will provide electricity, will pay salaries regularly. The campaign still remains the basics. Despite that, I expect that even if it is the basic, we should be moving from the what to the how. You are going to make Nigeria from a consumption economy to a production economy. How do you intend to achieve that? You are going to provide electricity. How do you intend to achieve that? I believe that the politicians should move away from saying just what they want to do to how they want to achieve it. I think that starts by citizens themselves asking the right questions, asking for more engagement. I think when this is done, election would be what it truly should be, which is testing the popularity of the candidate and according to their programs and how well they can perform and achieve eradicating the suffering of Nigerians based on the mandate given to them. So far to me, the political terrain has not been quite interesting. What we've had largely is more of stakeholders engagement. The politicians are trying to win who they think is strategic and can influence vote to their side like political leaders, religious leaders, traditional rulers, but the engagement on the part of the people who would go to the poll to cast their vote has not really been as interesting as it should be. And one would think that the long time that we have now for campaign will create room for rigorous campaign will create room for ideological perspective or now to curb security or now to boost the economy or now to eradicate unemployment or now to reduce inflation. Largely, this has not been seen. So, but it's a good thing that you have also mentioned security, which is a major concern. I mean, before we just hit the nail on the head as regards, you know, the statement by the president to security agencies, but there are lots been happening, a lot's been happening, especially with the attacks on, you know, the umpire's office in different parts of the country, mostly in the south is, do you think that this in any way would truncate the election? We've also seen an attack as a recent development, and that's on, you know, the headquarters of the police in a number of states. All of this, do you think that that has any implication for the elections? Well, if the attacks are too many, definitely too many, if the attacks get too many, definitely it will have impact on the outcome of the election because it will affect our next strategy, mobilization, and the delivery of materials on time, the equipment that they're going to use. But I think the attack itself shouldn't have happened. Election is coming up. The security agencies are aware from the first attack on an INEC office, the security agencies ought to have identified INEC offices across the country, most especially in the southeast, where they are secessionist movement. They should have identified those INEC offices as outspot, and adequate security should have been provided in those offices. But if there is an attack on an INEC office, and the rest INEC offices are not protected, definitely I would finger the lack of responsibility on the part of the security agencies, or they are not proactive because as I say, a city in time saves money. If an attack is done to a particular INEC office, that should send signal that how many attacks have they planned to other INEC offices and offer adequate protection. It is not until two to three days to election that we now say we've deployed 30,000, 50,000 policemen. That shouldn't be the case unless we forget this is a general election. Definitely you can deploy SS manpower to a state because every state meets that particular manpower for the electoral process. Even if there is no gubernatorial election in some state, based on court judgment, they are still going to elect their legislators. They are still elect people to other platforms. So you can't deploy SS manpower. So I think that the security agencies need to be proactive to foster all these attacks on INEC facilities. We have the manpower. The DSS are there to gather intelligence, and the police are there to offer protection. But in a case where they are also being attacked, how do they become proactive? You mean the police? Yes, of course. We have seen if you have followed two years down the line, there was hashtag answers. The fact that Nigerians took to the street to protest police brutality, and this was across different parts of the country. But some persons actually took advantage of the system, and then there was a lot that happened, which, you know, it's been alluded to the fact that, oh, yes, the SS protests, those who were engaged in it were hoodlums and what have you. So it's a lot. But my point here is with the recent development, they attack on the headquarters of the police in Anambara state. These are, they're supposed to protect us. They're supposed to protect the people. Now that they are being attacked, how do they become even proactive? Well, I think the answers protest is a bit different from attack on the facilities, because this No, you said, you said that the police or the security agencies, I'm always quick to say the please. And that's because it is their responsibility. They are saddled with the responsibility of ensuring peace and order in a civil society. The military has no business, you know, that's not why they were created. But over time, we can't argue that the military has not been involved, you know, in governance and policing of our states. We should not be. But you are saying that they should be proactive. And I'm saying that how can they be proactive when they're also being attacked? They have been overwhelmed. So how you can't give what you don't have? I think Nigerian security agencies, if they really want to work, they will work. Look at the secessionist threat in the southeast. Look at how they undo the case of Nandikano. Look at how they undo the case of Sunday ago. So I believe that Nigerian security agencies, if they really want to do their job, they will do their job in terms of protecting both their own facilities and Nigerians as well. But there are different factors that make the police not to be able to kind of like deliver their mandate. There are political factors. There are social factors. There are economic factors. But regardless, despite these factors, I believe that if the Nigerian police really want to achieve something which is providing Nigerians a free, free and credible election, for example, how do you attack a police facility in Anambra State where there are police officers on ground and there is a lot of cash of arms? How do you carry that out successfully? For me, I don't see it as realistic if there is no fifth columnist, perhaps in the police itself, perhaps for the aspect of politicians and general ineffectiveness of the Nigerian agencies or system. But I believe that as regards the election, police can really be proactive. For example, we get large results in UB and all these places where there are Boko Haram during elections. How do they achieve that? And if you look at the terrain of those areas, these are areas that are difficult to man. Still, during elections, the terrorists disappear and you record a large number of votes. If you can achieve that in Yobi, in Borneo, why can't you achieve that in areas that are experiencing less security threats? I don't think that if the police are well determined that some Udlums can successfully attack a top police facility, I don't believe so. I believe that there may be some fifth columnists in the police itself or the police itself is not proactive. Maybe they don't have enough facilities to deter the crime, intelligence, and in fairness to the police, the police is overstretch. We have 400,000 personnel to man 200 million people in a vast terrain like Nigeria. And if you minus those that are being attacked, those that died in the course of service, those that died out of natural causes, the numbers are reducing daily. So I think that when there is perhaps state police, local government police, then the stress on the federal police would reduce. And it will help them to focus more on specific mandate. We could use the federal police for elections. We could use the federal police to prosecute terrorists, man terrorism, and all that. But if it is the same police that if they steal your phone, it is they that you would run to. If you have a fight with your neighbor, it is they that you will run to. Definitely they are overstretch. They have a lot on their hands. So I think we should find a way of reducing the level of work that we have given to the federal police itself. This will enable them to focus on the right thing and to man their facilities and deliver a good credible election for Nigerians. The 2020 election will most likely be successful on what the police does or failed to do. Okay, so I'd like to share your thoughts on we're getting straight to the statement being made by the president. Let's not forget that the president had promised Nigerians that he would ensure a free credible elections in 2023. Now, the involvement on the police in our election process or security agencies, I like to just always stay with security agencies. Feels like I'm limited to the police, but what do you make of it generally? The fact that we have security agents being involved in the electoral process in Nigeria. Don't forget that so many persons have also queried that action saying elections have been militarized. You have uniform men of different quarters everywhere when you're on the day of the elections. What do you think of that really? Well, first, the president must have made the statement he made based on- No, I'm not talking about the statement. I'm just talking about the fact that we have security agencies or agents involved in the election process. That has been our practice over time, especially when we moved from a military era to a democratic dispensation. The notion of having elections with the presence of security agents, what are your thoughts? What do you make of this particular action and behavior? The presence of the security agencies is justified, but unnecessary if the right things are done. Justified in the sense that in a society where we have bandits, kidnapping, high rates of crime, and most especially when the premium we place on politics is very high. Everybody wants to become a politician. Everybody wants to get into political office. So the stakes are high. Because the stakes are high and the democratic process itself, it's not super credible. Then you would see that the politician would try to see how they can cash in on the lapses of the electoral system itself. And that's where the police comes in. If the electoral process is credible, maybe we wouldn't have much police involvement or let's say the involvement of the security agencies that much. That's where the justification comes in. But if the system itself, for example, in other climes, you wouldn't have much involvement of the police because there's a structured system and you cannot breach the system. It's impossible for you. Look at what happened in the United States, Donald Trump. He tried to manoeuvre his way despite losing the election. But he was unable to do that, to achieve that, because there is a structured system. But if it were to be in Nigeria, our system is different. We have this command and control system. If a police officer, a senior police officer, issues a command to his subordinate, even if it is against the law, the kind of system we operate, that police officer, that, you know, police officer will be effaced. Because at that time, the word of his boss is the law. If a politician at the further level, an influential politician, calls a security personnel for maybe assistance or issue and other, because the policeman is seeking one favor of the other. At that point in time, the word of that politician is the law. Look at the ushering election, not the immediate person, the other one, where we have allegations of remote control, one strange phone call, and all that. So you can imagine a system that operates that way. If we remove the involvement of the security agencies, I'm not sure that our election will be credible, because even before the election itself, I think violence in our electoral process comes in two ways, the inter-party and the intra-party. If the the way candidates emerge are not credible, there will be some members that are aggrieved that will even work against the success of the candidate of their party. They will also have the inter, whereby each party wants to win. So in a situation like that whereby people are desperate for power, definitely the involvement of the security agencies is necessary. I think what we should advocate for, which may be difficult, but it's not impossible, is for the security agencies to be non-partisan. They should not be double standard. We've seen situations whereby- So I mean that's what we're getting to now. That's the conversation we're getting to. But I also like to share thoughts on it. I stated that the president, of course, that's what he said, that he will ensure a credible election. And do you think that with this recent order or command or tax or whatever it is you want to call it, two security agencies, do you think that this is his commitment to ensuring a connection with the promise that he has made to Nigerians that he would ensure the free, fair and credible elections in 2023? In all fairness to the president, I think he has been working the talk on ensuring free, fair and credible elections. Why did I say so? The election is not yet here, but from the actions that he has taken, I can say that he is committed to ensuring free, fair and credible elections. For example, the APC primary. People thought that the president is going to impose a candidate, is going to unpick a candidate, but he stayed neutral and let the process evolve. And he has said it on the different forums that anybody that wins, it's fine by him. I think that is commendable. And I think that he has laid a foundation for people to reference in such a way that anybody that wins the election, if that person wants to impose a candidate, people can easily reference President Mahmoud Bari's action of not imposing a candidate. And for him to come out and say that the security agencies should go all out to ensure free, credible election, I think his words has been matched with action because in the course of the electoral process, he has not really get himself so involved in a partisan manner. He has been facing his duties as the president and commander-in-chief of the further Republic of Nigeria. Most people do not expect that. They would have expected that he would go all out, like when President Tobas Ogil was leaving office and he was to install late President Umaru Musa Yara Dua. He went all out. But in this case, the president has, I wouldn't say stay away, but has maintained a matured ground. And this has given people confidence that if this trend continued, definitely we would have a credible election. The body language of the president matters a lot in terms of the action of the security agencies. If the president stays away from the process and let the process evolve itself. If the security agencies are appointed by the president, do not see the desperation on the part of their commander-in-chief to install a particular person as his successor. That will go a long way in helping them to carry out their duties effectively as expected by Nigerians and as empowered on them by the constitution. So are you saying that, you know, for every other time that the security agencies in Nigeria have been involved? Because, I mean, there are several cases of their involvement and Shorah has actually stated that there's no violence. There's no rigging that happens in, you know, our election process without the involvement of our security agencies. So are you saying that every other time this happens that, you know, those, whoever is the president at the time, you know, it's like they're taking a lead from, it's an endorsement? Is that what you're saying? Well, I agree with Shorah and I have course to disagree with him in the sense that- But is that what you're saying? Because you said that the body language of Mr. President, it's a signal to the security agencies or agents, however, you know, the cases. So my question is for every other time we've had the involvement of security agents in the election process, contravening it, you know, acting and helping to truncate the entire process, has it always been a body language from the top? You're saying that this person's, whoever is the president at the time, is a signal that they're getting from their, you know, the president? What I'm saying is the body language of the president helps. It helps. It's not like the final criteria. The president will not be at each state and at the polling stations. No, it's the officers that are there that will use that discretion. But the body language of the commander-in-chief, it helps a lot. If the president is desperate to install and he gives marching orders to his appointees that deliver so-so-so mandate for me, you will see that their action towards the election will be different. But if the president gives them a clear mandate that be fair, let the best person emerge. It also helps. So the body language of the president helps for us to have a credible election. But that doesn't mean that at the end of the day, we won't find policemen that would compromise. That doesn't mean that because the president has given orders, we won't find politicians that are willing to go on out to concrete the pressure. I think, okay, I understand. But I wish we had more time to talk about this. I mean, I'm just making reference to the past that, for every other time we've had that, could you also be that the body language has been that, hey, go read the election or, you know, because this is what I want. And that's what they have acted like that. But we'll leave that conversation. I would say that. Yes, let's leave that quickly. Let's leave that quickly. We're asked to go, but just before we go, just in a few sentences, is there a guarantee of neutrality of our security agents in the 2023 elections? Well, the neutrality of the security agencies depends on a number of factors. If Nigerians themselves are determined to have a free, fair and credible election, these security agencies sometimes read the body language of Nigerians themselves. If Nigerians are ready to go all out and vote and stand by their vote, it will be difficult for the security agencies to compromise. But as we have good officers, we have bad officers. So I can't guarantee that there will be totally like non-partisanship because we have policemen in uniforms who are eating members of political parties or who have eating interests in certain political parties that would influence their conduct. But I believe that if the system does not allow it, and if Nigerians are willing to stand by their vote, especially with the introduction of the beavers, whereby the results are transmitted electronically, instantly, if there's a large crowd and Nigerians are willing to stand by their vote, and the security agencies are willing to do their job, it would be difficult. I think where the security agencies get each other is in the area of compromise. We don't see security agencies snatching the ballot box and all that, but the compromise for talks, the compromise for politicians. So if there is less compromise on the part of the security agencies, I believe that with the introduction of the beaver system, we will have a better election. We are not yet there, but we'll get there maybe someday. Definitely. We can only continue to talk about this. Some other people will say we need to pray, but prayers without actions or faith without work is dead. So let's all get to work and do the needful, so we can move forward. As a country, thank you so much, Dr. Deji, for being with us this morning. Thank you for having me. Dr. Moshulat Deji is a political scientist and he's made out time to be with us this morning on the show, but that's the size of it. We take a break. When we return, we look at the threats coming from telecommunication companies. He might just be a lot for Nigerians in 2023. Please stay with us.