 We're glad to know you're still there. This is the break fast on PLOS TV Africa today where our first topic is the fact that INAG is raising concerns ahead of Bielsa, IMO, Kogi elections. Remember that they are going to be off elections or off season elections in November this year. So they're raising concerns ahead of these elections, holding in Bielsa, IMO and Kogi, different geopolitical zones as it is. We're glad to be joined this morning by the Executive Director Center for Public Accountability in the person of Mr. Olufemi Lawson. Welcome to the program. Good morning. Okay. What are these concerns? Let's begin with that, that INAG is raising because now every time we hear concerns, federal government is raising concerns that there are cool plotters trying to topple it. Before the election in February, they were raising concerns that people were trying to disrupt the election. Concerns, concerns, concerns that we've never caught any culprit raising concerns. What are these concerns by INAG? Well, these are legitimate concerns especially when you look at our political process and what happens mostly when elections like this get closer and of course from the report we have been getting from the media, you realize that there are real reasons to be concerned if you are a keen follower of the events from Kogi to IMO and Bielsa. There have been issues of crisis between opposing political parties. There have been attacks on supporters of political parties. The other time in Kogi state, there were accusation and counteracquisition by the two major political parties contesting the election, going to one attack on party secretariat, convoy of candidates and the like. So these are legitimate concerns and just like you said, we keep raising these concerns because as a society, we are not doing enough yet to criminalize electoral violence. It keeps reoccurring because when this election comes, politicians out of the expression will sponsor violence, then get whatever result they get from the outcome of the election. Then we wait for the next four years before starting this, but if as a society we have made a criminal offense for anyone, it's just like somebody picking up a gun this morning, going to face a bank wanting to rob, it knows the consequences even if it will be successful or not. But in the case of electoral violence, it looks so much like we are a place, people come after every cycle of election, they repeat it because nobody is being dealt with. Just like you said, the society is not dealing with perpetrators of electoral violence and they are sponsors and that is why these kind of concerns keep emanating just like INEC is raising their other stakeholders, civil society, the media are also raising issues because if you look at developments that are unfolding, you come to agree that there have to be enough concerns to be raised. And this time around, we are hoping that it will not just be another four years of lamentation, but that this would be an opportunity for the government to listen to what INEC is saying, to listen to what stakeholders are saying, to listen to what communities are saying ahead of these elections so that we don't just turn elections into war in Nigeria. But are you really, are you confident that it's because it's not being criminalized or because people who should prosecute these people just don't do anything? Because if you raise a gun against someone, it's a criminal offence. If you if you fight someone, if you kill someone, there are laws for these things. If you even incite the public, like what was happening in Lagos before the elections, where people were coming out openly to say, if you vote this, I'll deal with you, threat to life and property. It's a criminal offence. And these people are not prosecuted. Are you saying it's because there are no laws or there's no political will to do this? Yes, you're very correct. There's no political will. And in most circumstances, you know, issues of election are peculiar. There have been people who have been arrested for being involved in violence during elections, even in the larger elections. But the idea is that when such persons are made to go through the conventional judicial process, you realize that a lot of them will end up being on trial or to the next election cycle then because they are on bail, in most circumstances, they get involved again in such conduct. But if we have a special tribunal, just like we have advocated for the trial of cases of corruption and the like, that this, you know, with issues around elections, you understand, I think it would be easier and quicker to deal with perpetrators of violence than waiting on the normal courts, like we are currently experiencing. But I think the most important thing to be done is not to wait on government, particularly our security agencies. We must begin to take our destiny to our aunts and our citizens by first and foremost, avoiding any situation that will lead to crisis during elections. But first and foremost, also demanding action. We a lot of times when we don't demand action, you know, deliberately, we are spending from government and security agencies because sometimes, security agencies try to pretend they are not aware of some of these things that are happening. Let me use Biasa as a class case at this time around. Historically, whenever election is coming in Biasa, there has always been tendency for politicians from one side or the other to intimidate voters because these are very unique people when it comes to election because of the pattern they have always voted. Let me give you three instances. In 2015, we went by and said to monitor the governorship election, and the state was practically turned into war because of the desperation of a particular candidate to win that election. In actual fact, in a cut to suspend election in southern Nijor-Lukugome, the largest, in a way, constituency in the state, because the Lukugome was practically able to stage. In a, if I security apparatus, election observers, election officials were able because somebody wants to be governor at all costs. In 2019, we also observed the election in the same state, and there were less tension possibly because of the quality of candidates who were major candidates in that election. But this time around, that same candidate from 2015, who's tendency reviewed that there would naturally be crisis when it comes, is in the race, and that is why, as I speak with you, that same events that we witness in 2015 is going to emerge. If you will follow report from Biasa, I say that the invasion of communities, people have been chased out of their communities, all ahead of this election. We've worked vigorous with watch interviews by citizens in those part of the state who are not being intimidated. A lot of people, families have been separated. There have been people who have been killed. And it is because we don't speak out enough to impress it on government, just like we are doing now. Particularly, these groups say that you cannot just sit back and make statements. When issues like this happen, you must name perpetrators. You must begin to shame perpetrators, and you must begin to make arrest and prosecute. Not just arresting or calling people for interrogation, just like you alluded to. So those are the steps that have to be taken out, which a lot of media and civil society organizations are already, because this has been predicted. If you look at what Eneke is saying, it is not what Eneke just woke up to say yesterday. There have been developments that have necessitated a statement. There have been other research groups, like Cell Orb and the likes, that have engaged the people by answer that are interacting with the people. And the people have expressed their fear on the likelihood of violence based on the conduct of these desperate politicians. So we must now, as we move ahead, begin to let people know that no election is more important than the life of our citizens. No election is more important. And this is what they call on the bias against the government. They say government in bias against the state. And I believe the government will not sit down and allow its citizens to be displaced, to be killed, or injured because of the desperation of politicians. The state must also decisively deal with whoever. The state have the power to prosecute. The state have the power to order arrest. Whoever is found to be involved, irrespective of who you are, involved in issues of violence in that state, the government was no longer waiting on Abuja, or the Inspector General Police, before the safety of its citizens could be guaranteed. What if the violence is in favor of the state? Because, for instance, if you go to Imu State, the governor, when he sat there, a lot of people were grumbling. He came from like the full position or so and became governor. People didn't really like it for a very long time and there was so much violence. And some people have said it is because of him that a lot of the things that are happening in Imu are happening. We go to Kogi State, for instance. We have the tatata syndrome, you know, and we see people dying every day. So it's not a biases thing. It's a Nigerian thing. It's a Nigerian thing. But these three states are particularly very volatile. Now, when you're talking to the government and you know that sometimes the government's hands may be soiled as well. What are you saying to the people? Because this is a matter of advocacy. This is a matter of enlightenment. What are the steps, the strategic steps that you're taking to enlighten the people so much that they will come to understand that human life is more important than any election or any government? Just like I've consistently said, the ultimate power is in the hand of the people. And in this case, even if supporters of the incumbent government are involved, I believe the government must have the way to deal with whoever gets himself involved in any form of violence. Why I am particular about calling out governments, particularly in those states, to ask ahead of whatever the federal government would do. It's like, for instance, in Biasa, you see the last three and a half years or thereabout. If you follow the history of the state, you understand that that is one of the most peaceful era in the history of that state because of possibly the leadership currently. So if the government has been able to ensure peace for three years, does that mean that crimes were not perpetrated? Does that mean that there were no tendencies for violence? The government must have been doing something to curtail excesses of those who have tendencies to perpetrate violence. So the government must use the same approach in dealing with whoever, irrespective of what political party. If as a governor, you are popular enough and there is somebody within your party trying to truncate your opportunity because of violence, I know such state should be sincere enough to prosecute such. And if it's also whoever coming from whatever camp or political party, it may not necessarily have to be from in the larger political party. Such places must be made to know that this is a principle of our state. This state has told the part of peace and tranquility and will not allow you to come and destroy the peace of the state. And just like you said, the bigger responsibility is in the hand of the people. The people must be fed in demanding from their government what is this utmost responsibility of the state, their security and welfare. So we cannot sit back and expect government to wake up with that sometimes without to come and address issues that affect us as citizens. I know that if the citizens in unison come and continually condemn this culture of violence that is being reenacted and across the states where elections are coming. I know that the government will be forced because these are the same electorate you are going back to to seek their vote. But intimidation has been going on for so long. Sometimes some people are outspoken and you wake up one day you don't see them again. Nothing about them is known. No news is what other avenues can we explore because people are afraid. For instance, the last the last election came and some people went to court and said, we're not satisfied with what happened. And even lawyers were found like find like 20 million like so much money. And they were warned strictly never to bring what they termed frivolous. Someone comes to court and says I'm not happy about this thing. And all you say is it's frivolous and you slam a fine on the person. So things like this are intimidating enough for the people to say, okay, let me just sit back. And maybe some people may not even want to go out and vote. The people that really have the interest of the state at heart. No, sitting back. So what what are what other avenues can be explored apart from just maybe coming to television and talk? Every avenue that will be explored must be legitimate. Yeah. And most usually the court is always a resort for us as citizens. And I don't want to believe and I don't want to agree with the opinion that the court will intimidate any citizen. Courts reserve the right to give judgment on this on the positive side or the negative side, depending on where you belong. But the truth is that we cannot have the right or they have the power. The power, the power, the power. So we cannot advocate any other option. Outside the legally available options. What we are doing is legitimate using the media as we speak. There are communities across the state that we are engaging traditional rulers. There are communities that are engaging faith-based organizations. We are some people that when they tell them so so so in church, they tend to listen more than even what they hear on the TV. So we are engaging in that. So we will use every legitimate avenue to educate the people and to mobilize the people. But we will not encourage any form of action that is illegal, that promotes violence, that can create more tension in the process. So what the media is doing is fantastic. We've seen a lot of advocacy from the media. We are seeing a lot from the society, from even some of the secret agencies and government. But I think we must as citizens put more pressure to the extent that we explore every legitimate option, including going to court, irrespective of what they have come to be. Okay, it's only so much one can do if the National Orientation Agency, for instance, is no longer functional because we don't hear much from them. And these are the people who gave us the Andrews Advait of those days, who gave us the good Nigeria, good people Advait of not so long ago and all that. But it doesn't seem as if the National Orientation is working. How do we get to change the psyche of the people of Nigeria, to think positively, to think national, to think about the welfare of... Petroticism is no longer there. I don't know if they teach them in school anymore. I remember when we used to gather around the flag to sing the national anthem and it was a thing of pride. I don't know if they still do it in schools because every school has their own anthem nowadays. So I don't know how patriotism can creep back into our society. What else are you doing to change the psyche of the people, not just for election, but for patriotism, for instance? Thank you. Fundamentally, we've lost a lot, as far as our past is concerned, as Nigerians and not as a people. But we cannot just lose hope. Especially when you look at those institutions of government that have failed, just like you mentioned, NOA. But I think technology and our advancement as a society has also provided other viable options to engage citizens, to educate them. In the days of NOA, MAMSA, there were no social media, the number of television stations in the whole of the country was limited, probably to NTA and few other states running television stations. So now we have an avalanche of TV, radio stations, social media, where we can engage citizens. So the job has gone more from the hand of government to the hand of the citizens, including media organizations, civil society groups, who are not doing the job of educating the citizens. We are doing that and I think with continued engagements like this, and interactions with community organizations, faith-based organizations, religious groups, as the case may be, we'll get Nigerians, getting themselves, getting to know where they're coming from, and of course, redirecting to the part of patriotism, which is very important in this country. Very, very important. So what have the challenges been like? Most of the, when you go out to do this kind of things, what do you experience? Things that other people who might want to also engage in, these might learn from? What are their challenges? Basically, it could be challenging, especially when you are involved in advocacies that have to do with elections, because politicians have tendency to justify whatever they do. So for us, we have more role to play engaging the citizens than engaging the political class, because for every A, you tell the citizens, politicians have the tendency to come and tell them, it's BCD, promises, and of course, just to get the vote. And the moment these votes are gotten, it is the next four years again that you find them on the big board, that you know they exist. So we are beginning to let Nigerians know that it is not just about elections, it must be continuous. After voting someone, you must be interested in other persons, governments in society, other persons spend their money. So it's a continuous process, and we don't wait for elections any longer. We want to consistently provide data that will encourage the citizens to follow up on their leaders, that will also encourage government to also know the needs of the people. So we are doing all that, a lot of data mining and analysis to know the real problem of our people, to know the real challenges facing our people, and to provide solutions by advising government, and also at the same time, advising the citizens. Okay, so you see a new Nigeria if possible, right? I'm very optimistic. You are? Yes. You are. I'm very optimistic. Okay, it's good to see someone who is optimistic. Please pass that optimism to the Nigerian people. Just talk to the people as a closing. Well, I want to encourage Nigerians to continue to demand for transparency and accountability. Nigerians belong to Nigerians. Nigerians belong to Nigerians, and not to government. So whoever is in government today will be there temporarily, as a governor president, your maximum is eight years. As a legislator, you can decide to go and see them for one day. But as a Nigerian, you will never see being a Nigerian. And that is why you must continue to see the country as yours, and continue to demand for good governance. And most importantly, ahead of these elections, the people must avoid politicians that are preaching violence, that are known for violence, in taking decisions when elections come in November. Okay, Nigeria is ours. Even if you decide to jack back to anywhere, Nigeria remains the only country that you'll be given the 100% regard as a citizen. When you go to America, even if you become a citizen, there is always... It's Nigerian America. Yes, you're in Nigerian America and all that. Anyway, it's been a pleasure having you, Mr. Olufemi Lawson. Thank you so much for coming on the program. In case you're just joining us, Mr. Olufemi Lawson is the Executive Director Center for Public Accountability. And he was talking with us about the elections coming up in Emo, Kogi, and Bayelsa. And the need for us to take the bull by the horns as citizens and make sure the concerns expressed by INAG and whatever authority is nipped in the board and we don't have violence. We'll take a short break and when we return, we'll still be talking INAG, but in another direction. Stay with us.