JOE ONOH'S PUBLICATION: PDP CHIEFTAIN REACTS

 

ONOH'S PUBLICATION IN NATION NEWSPAPER IS DELIBERATELY RIDDLED WITH LIES AND FALLACIOUS CLAIMS. THE ARTICLE WAS PEEVISHLY LACED WITH FABRICATION TO SMEAR ATIKU RATHER THAN ADDRESSING THE CONCERNS RAISED BY ATIKU AGAINST TINUBU FOR THE FUTURE OF NIGERIA.*

Aare Amerijoye DOT.B

Dr. Josef Onoh, in his latest tirade against Atiku Abubakar published in yesterday's Nation Newspaper 23/0824, has once again donned his mantle as the loyal defender of the APC's faltering government. His writing, filled with half-truths and glaring omissions, seeks to paint Atiku as a villain while casting President Bola Tinubu's administration in a saintly light. In truth, Onoh’s work is more of a lamentation from a jaded scribe than a rigorous analysis of Nigeria’s economic history and political landscape.

Onoh, like many of the APC's mouthpieces, seems to revel in scandalising Atiku, especially when Atiku dares to expose the glaring failures of Tinubu's administration. His article is a masterclass in polemics, filled with oxymorons that highlight his own contradictions. On one hand, he blames Atiku for the nation's economic woes; on the other, he absolves Tinubu of any responsibility, painting him as an unfortunate inheritor of a cursed legacy as if Tinubu Lagos State antecedents of appropriating anything he could lay his hands upon are not obvious to the Nigerian people.

To begin with, Onoh’s accusation of economic mismanagement against Atiku reeks of selective amnesia. He conveniently forgets the kleptocratic tendencies and ineptitude that have marred the APC's governance since they came to power in 2015, choosing instead to vilify Atiku for privatisation policies that were, in fact, a response to the systemic decay that predated his tenure. The so-called "negative socioeconomic impact" he ascribes to Atiku's actions fails to account for the corruption and ineptitude that have characterised the current administration’s economic strategies, or lack thereof.

It is laughable to read Onoh's claims about Atiku's "self-interest" in the privatisation deals. If Onoh were truly interested in facts, he would know that privatisation, which began long before Atiku's tenure as Vice President, was an effort to rescue the Nigerian economy from the grip of inefficiency and corruption that had long plagued state-owned enterprises. Onoh's diatribe, laden with unfounded accusations and devoid of evidence, serves only to distract from the real issues at hand: the monumental failures of the APC under Tinubu.

Let us be clear: privatisation, under the Obasanjo-Atiku administration, was not without its flaws. No policy of such magnitude ever is. But to attribute the failures of these policies solely to Atiku, while ignoring the role of those who implemented them like ElRufai and a host of others in charge of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE), is to engage in the kind of intellectual dishonesty that has become the hallmark of APC apologists like Onoh. Moreover, the privatisation efforts during Atiku's tenure as Vice President of the country were designed to introduce efficiency and transparency into sectors that had been bogged down by bureaucratic inertia and corruption.

Onoh’s fixation on Atiku’s role in the privatisation of national assets betrays a fundamental misunderstanding, or perhaps willful ignorance, of the complexities involved in such a process. It is as if Onoh believes that Atiku single-handedly orchestrated the sale of Nigeria’s assets without any oversight or due process. This narrative is not only simplistic but also dangerously misleading.

In truth, privatisation was a necessary evil. It was a response to decades of mismanagement and corruption that had rendered many state-owned enterprises insolvent. The process was overseen by various bodies and involved rigorous bidding processes to ensure transparency. As the former Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE), Nasir El-Rufai, documented in his book "The Accidental Public Servant," many of the assets sold were underperforming and a drain on the nation's resources. Yet, to Onoh, this is irrelevant; his goal is not to inform but to inflame.

The article also glosses over the significant strides made during the Obasanjo-Atiku era, including debt relief and economic reforms that set the stage for subsequent growth unlike the insolvency that his preferred political Party and leaders have thrown the country into. Onoh would have us believe that these accomplishments were mere happenstance, ignoring the painstaking efforts that went into reforming a deeply troubled economy. He accuses Atiku of selling national assets at "giveaway prices," yet provides no evidence to substantiate these claims. It is as if Onoh believes his readers will simply take his word for it, without question.

Most APC defenders and advocates of Tinubu's erratic policies tend to target Atiku Abubakar when he exposes the economic missteps of the current administration. Dr. Josef Onoh's recent attack on Atiku is an example of this strategy. His role seems to be discrediting Atiku at all costs, possibly out of frustration over Atiku's continuous critique of the current government's incompetence and the suffering it has caused Nigerians. Atiku has been calling out the government to address the hardships faced by the citizens due to their mismanagement and corrupt practices, yet Onoh chooses to target him for his stance on privatisation, resorting to baseless accusations rather than presenting a factual critique.

To my surprise, Onoh does not even appear to understand the privatisation process he criticises. He claims Atiku sold all the industries, but fails to provide evidence of any company Atiku sold to himself or his associates. If Onoh could pinpoint any such transactions, he should help the Nigerian government bring Atiku to justice. Instead, he reduces the critique of Atiku to trivialities and unfounded rationalisations, all to portray Tinubu and his administration in a favourable light. It's clear that some people prefer to trivialize complex issues due to their lack of understanding or proof. 

Privatisation in Nigeria did not start with Atiku or the PDP. It began in 1987/88, long before the PDP took office. The privatisation carried out during the Obasanjo/Atiku administration achieved a 63% success rate, which, considering the context, is commendable. Many critics seem unaware that privatisation involves more than just selling assets; it also includes other methods like Deferred Public Offers, Private Placement, and Management Buyouts. They focus only on the asset sales method, missing the broader picture.

El-Rufai, the then Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises (BPE), and now an APC member, oversaw the privatisation process.And just like I earlier mentioned ,in his book, *Accidental Public Servant*, he clarified that the asset buyers followed due process, submitted technical and financial proposals, and emerged as the highest bidders. Perhaps Onoh and his ilk expected lower bidders to purchase the assets and compromise due diligence or what exactly could have been his grouses. If he has problems with any personality who after due diligence qualified to purchase the assets he should rather say rather trivialising the issue.

Onoh’s attempt to discredit Atiku is merely a ploy to distract from the failures of the APC and the suffering they have caused Nigerians. If he has concrete evidence that Atiku mismanaged the economy, he should present it. Atiku's involvement in privatisation was transparent and based on policies designed to revive struggling sectors. The APC's current efforts in privatisation pale in comparison, often appearing as an attempt to appropriate resources rather than genuinely reform them.

It is also important to contextualise the companies mentioned in these debates. For example, government-owned refineries in Warri, Kaduna, and Port Harcourt have been inactive since June 2019 under APC rule, leading to significant financial losses. These refineries’ struggles predate the PDP's tenure and are tied to deeper systemic issues that began during military rule. The railway sector’s decline also stems from these earlier periods, marked by poor management and a lack of investment.

Furthermore, companies like Michelin and Dunlop exited Nigeria due to erratic power supply, not because of PDP policies. The APC has not managed to improve this situation significantly since taking power. The automotive industry’s decline dates back to the 1970s and is linked to Nigeria's overreliance on oil and relaxed import policies, issues that continued regardless of the ruling party.

Nigeria Airways’ collapse was due to mismanagement, corruption, and overstaffing, long before the PDP came to power. ISO Glass Industries Limited was shut down for tax issues under APC governance, and Exide Battery’s parent company filed for bankruptcy in 2020. Leyland Trucks faced internal issues and competition long before PDP came to power. These cases illustrate that many factors contributed to the downfall of these industries, not solely PDP or Atiku’s policies as Onon would be delighted to call it.

Nigeria has suffered greatly under the APC, a party that has failed to deliver on her promises of change, next level and even now renewed hope. The sharp rise in transport costs, insecurity, and economic challenges highlight their failures. The APC's unfulfilled promises have only deepened Nigeria's socio-economic crisis, with rising unemployment and declining public services.

Under APC rule, Nigeria has regressed economically. The once hopeful promises have turned into a nightmare of increased poverty and insecurity. While the APC points fingers at past administrations, they have done little to improve conditions, pushing Nigeria further into hardship. The country, once seen as "Africa's Giant," is now struggling under the weight of failed policies and poor governance.

The APC's reign has brought about widespread distress, with only a few party loyalists and collaborators benefiting from the chaos. Meanwhile, ordinary Nigerians suffer under poor economic conditions and escalating violence. This decline under APC rule demands the attention and action of every concerned citizen.

The failures of the APC are clear. From the collapse of public services to economic mismanagement, their tenure has been marked by broken promises and increasing hardship for Nigerians. It is crucial to question the APC’s governance and demand accountability for their actions.

Rather than resorting to baseless attacks, Onoh and others should focus on addressing the real issues facing Nigeria today. Atiku's calls for accountability and good governance should be seen as efforts to improve Nigeria, not as opportunities for unwarranted criticism. The Nigerian people deserve better than the distractions and failures offered by the current administration.

Moreover, Onoh’s attempt to exonerate Tinubu by claiming he is merely "inheriting" the problems caused by Atiku is both disingenuous and laughable. Tinubu, who has not only been at the helm of the  affairs but being the leader of APC for long enough to encourage the implementation of meaningful changes, has instead presided over an administration marked by confusion, backtracking on policies, and an apparent inability to address Nigeria’s pressing issues. Under Tinubu’s watch, Nigeria has seen a continuation of economic decline, a rise in insecurity, and a lack of coherent strategy to address these challenges.

The hardships, suffering, and miseries that Nigerians are currently facing are not the ghosts of Atiku’s past but the direct result of Tinubu’s failed policies and his administration's inability to govern effectively. While Onoh spins his tales of Atiku's supposed malfeasance, he conveniently ignores the realities on the ground: the skyrocketing inflation, the rising unemployment, the growing insecurity, and the pervasive corruption that have defined Tinubu's tenure.

Had Atiku been at the helm today, there is little doubt that the story would be different. With his experience, foresight, and dedication to the nation's wellbeing, Atiku would have steered Nigeria away from the precipice of economic disaster upon which it now teeters. Unlike Tinubu, whose policies seem more geared towards self-aggrandisement and entrenching power than addressing the needs of the Nigerian people, Atiku has consistently shown a commitment to economic reform, transparency, and good governance.

In the words of Richard Wright, “The artist must bow to the monster of his own imagination.” Onoh has indeed created a monster in his mind, a caricature of Atiku that bears little resemblance to the man who has fought tirelessly for Nigeria’s democracy and progress. Like Arlene Raven's notion of criticism, which is "the art of making judgment," Onoh’s piece is more an exercise in condemnation than a thoughtful critique. It is as though he is engaged in a Freudian projection, attributing the failures of his preferred leaders to their political opponents.

If Tinubu and his defenders are to learn anything from this, it is that the Nigerian people are not fooled by such transparent attempts at deflection. As Thomas More once said, “For if the lion knows his own strength, no man could control him.” The Nigerian people, like the proverbial lion, are beginning to understand their power and the farcical nature of the narratives spun by the APC. They are beginning to see through the lies and distortions and recognise that the real enemy is not Atiku but those who have plunged the nation into despair.

Naomi Shihab Nye reminds us, "You can’t tell if the person is laughing or crying; there’s a thin line between both." Indeed, Onoh’s article straddles that line, eliciting both ridicule and pity for its desperate attempt to rewrite history and absolve Tinubu of his monumental failures. The Nigerian people deserve better than this. They deserve leadership that is accountable, transparent, and committed to their welfare — qualities that have been sorely lacking under Tinubu's APC but were hallmarks of the PDP era.

Dr. Josef Onoh’s article is a sad reflection of the lengths to which some will go to defend the indefensible. It is a cacophony of half-truths, distortions, and outright lies designed to obscure the real issues and deflect blame from those who truly bear responsibility for Nigeria’s current woes. It is time for Nigerians to look beyond such distractions and demand the leadership they deserve — a leadership that puts the nation’s interests first, not the whims of a few. And in this, Atiku Abubakar stands as a beacon of hope, a leader with the vision, experience, and integrity to steer Nigeria towards a brighter future.

Under Obasanjo/Atiku administration the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has a storied history of leadership that has significantly shaped Nigeria’s socio-economic and political landscape. Since coming to power in 1999, the PDP has played a critical role in restoring democracy after years of military rule. Under PDP leadership, Nigeria made significant strides in national unity and stability by promoting policies based on federal character and social justice. The PDP-led government settled Nigeria’s foreign debts through the Paris Club deal, which released funds for development projects and spurred economic growth.

One of the most notable achievements under the PDP administration was the liberalisation of the telecommunications sector, which led to the explosion of mobile telephony across Nigeria. The introduction of the Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) during President Olusegun Obasanjo/Atiku’s tenure revolutionised communication in Nigeria, creating millions of jobs, enhancing connectivity, and contributing substantially to the economy. This reform made Nigeria one of the fastest-growing telecom markets in the world, bringing telecommunication services to the urban and rural populations alike, and fostering a digital economy.

In addition to this, the PDP government implemented broad economic reforms that diversified the economy away from an over-reliance on oil. The establishment of institutions like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) underlined the party’s commitment to fighting corruption and improving governance. Moreover, the PDP invested heavily in critical infrastructure such as roads, railways, and power, laying the groundwork for sustainable development. The party’s policies also supported the agricultural sector, which saw a resurgence that provided food security and employment for millions of Nigerians.

Education and healthcare were other areas where the PDP made significant impacts. The establishment of more federal universities and the enhancement of healthcare delivery, including the eradication of polio, highlighted the PDP’s commitment to improving the quality of life for all Nigerians. The party also focused on national security, implementing measures that bolstered the nation’s defenses and counterterrorism capabilities.

Through these efforts, the PDP demonstrated a commitment to democratic governance, transparency, and inclusive growth. Their leadership set a foundation for Nigeria’s progress, emphasising economic stability, infrastructural development, and the promotion of national unity.

This comprehensive track record reflects the PDP's dedication to driving Nigeria forward, fostering economic growth, and ensuring social equity, and highlights the stark contrast between their achievements and the policies of the current administration. 

If Onoh were genuinely concerned about Nigeria's future, he would be advocating for transparency, accountability, and reform within the current administration. Instead, he uses Atiku as a scapegoat to deflect attention from the APC's failures under Tinubu's leadership. Onoh's approach is not only disingenuous but also counterproductive, as it distracts from the need for genuine dialogue and constructive criticism that could help Nigeria navigate her current economic and social challenges.

In stark contrast to Onoh's baseless claims, the PDP's track record speaks volumes. The party's achievements in various sectors, such as education, healthcare, economic management, infrastructure development, and national security, underscore her commitment to Nigeria's progress and development. Obviously speaking If Tinubu has inherited a curse legacy,it could only be from Buhari APC eight years reign, a government which he was part and parcel and in a trasition of APC to APC government he is now in the saddle as the country president and not PDP.The PDP has always been focused on building a united, prosperous Nigeria where every citizen can thrive.

The question remains: What exactly has the APC and Tinubu done to alleviate Nigeria's suffering and improve the country's socio-economic condition? While Onoh is busy defending Tinubu's lackluster performance, the Nigerian people continue to endure hardship under policies that have failed to deliver the promised dividends of democracy.

Dr. Onoh's publication is nothing more than a desperate attempt to malign Atiku and the PDP while ignoring the glaring failures of the APC and Tinubu's administration. It is time for Onoh and his ilk to stop the mudslinging and start engaging in meaningful discourse that focuses on solutions, not distractions. The Nigerian people deserve better than the current state of affairs, and it is the responsibility of all political actors to prioritise the nation's interests above partisan loyalty and personal vendettas.

The PDP's legacy is a testament to her dedication to democracy, economic growth, and national unity. The party's contributions have been instrumental in shaping Nigeria's democratic landscape and driving progress across various sectors. As Nigeria moves forward, it is imperative that we acknowledge these achievements and build on them to create a brighter future for all Nigerians. The APC and Tinubu's administration must be held accountable for their actions, and the Nigerian people must demand more from their leaders.

If Onoh truly cares about Nigeria's future, he should stop distorting facts and start engaging in constructive dialogue that focuses on the real issues facing the country. The Nigerian people are watching, and they will not be swayed by baseless attacks and unfounded claims. It is time for truth, transparency, and accountability in Nigerian politics.