1. Introduction

It is unnecessary to contest the fact that there had been constant disruptions and interruptions of Nigeria’s national development over the years. It is equally impolitic for one to engage in a distracted search for the appropriate point of departure in this paper vis-à-vis the commencement of the analytical consideration of the obvious causes of these major disruptions and interruptions going by the following statements:

Nigeria’s overall economic performance since Independence in 1960 has been decidedly unimpressive. Despite the availability and expenditure of colossal amounts of foreign exchange derived mainly from its oil and gas resources, economic growth has been weak and the incidence of poverty has increased. It is estimated that Nigeria received over US$22 billion from oil export receipts between 1981 and 1999. Yet the number of Nigerians living in abject poverty – that is, on less than $1 a day – more than doubled between 1970 and 2000, and the proportion of the population living in poverty rose from 36% in 1970 to 70% in 2000….Thirty of the first forty post-Independence years in Nigeria were spent under the heavy-handed rule of military dictators and despots. Much of the failure of policy and the lack of development have been attributed to the abnormal situation where a country was denied democracy and the rule of law, but rather forcibly subjected to military rule. There was therefore much hope and expectation that the restoration of democratic rule under Chief Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999 would bring relief, development and rapid growth to Nigeria. Unfortunately, it was not widely realized that the resumption of rapid economic growth and development would necessarily be contingent on the adoption and implementation of sound macroeconomic and debt management policies. As matters turned out, misguided macroeconomic and debt management policies under civilian rule have meant continued sluggish growth of real GDP, rising inflation and deepening poverty [1].

The Nigerian economy, since independence in 1960, experienced a steady decline in most sectors, and a transformation that led to precarious level of dependence on the oil sector, culminating in structural adjustment programme (SAP) of 1986, aimed at correcting the imbalance. Although the programme was laudable, it never really achieved the aim of redressing the economy due perhaps to poor implementation that was characterized by policy conflicts. By 1999, the economic problems in Nigeria, such as low growth rate, rapid inflation, large external debt, deterioration in various sectors, etc, had assumed alarming proportions [2].

Nigerians pretentiously mouth the ‘One Nigeria’ slogan; they have deep seated in them the idea that resources should be distributed on ethnic bases [3].

The Nigerian nation is driven by a series of overlapping economies; feudal; pre-capitalist, bastard-capitalist, klepto-capitalist, hunter-gather, all jostling in a benignly expansive post imperial bedlam [4].

Against this premise, it is incontestable to articulate the fact that interruptions in the national development programmes of many African nations, have largely remain consistently constant in spite of their deep-seated historical desires for development. But then, this desire in itself has long been characterized by fuzzy ideological philosophy and strategy [5].

The long history of desire for development notwithstanding, national development programmes and agenda of most African nations, particularly Nigeria had been largely interrupted by Time Robbers/Time Robberies (both individualistically and systemically imposed); Mis-management and; Socio-political, Religious and Economic Militancy or Militants’ Activities which have gained increased potency and venom with time and/or, in recent times. Thus, it remains a constant disturbance and poser as to why the interruptions continue to inhibit Nigeria’s national development given the awareness that these systemic factors exist and continue to live with us.

Using this as an analytical background, this paper focuses on the issue of national development and its interruptions in Nigeria over the years. It examines the roles played by Time Robbers, Financial Sector Mis-managers, Religious and Socio-political Militants in the putting to reverse the nation’s development. It equally seeks to critically analyse the roles of different Political Actors and Gladiators in the process. Even though, these systemic factors are in-exhaustive within the Nigerian political system, this paper limits itself to those it considers really threatening and detrimental to its development within the context of the current planetary phenomenon of globalization and its thesis which seemed to have completely permeated the systemic existence of all humans within it. This is particularly so in that, a concrete analysis of the issues involved and the identified role-players can, in our opinion, be usefully made against the orthodox-conceptual elucidation of the relevant terms – Development; Time; Management; Mis-management and; Militancy – involved in this paper vis-à-vis their nexus with the problematic of Nigeria’s capacity for managing her national development.

2. Analysis of the Relevant Concepts

This section analyses the concepts - of development, time; time robbers; management; mismanagement and; militancy – which are very central to the subject matter of the focus of this paper.

2.1. Development.

The issue of development is very central to all nations of the world. It has long evoked emotions as a provocative concept that has to do with the systemic existence of many nations and people all over the world. Thus, till today, it remains a subject of analytical disputations among theorists; scholars and; researchers all over the world and within the academia in general. To some extent, the tendency has been to use the concept in conjunction with the terms “economic development” and “political development” within which the concept of “national development” which on its own, remains a subject of intellectual and analytical controversies, has been contended as existing.

Development, in the context of “the more obvious distinction in the living standards between developed and less developed countries”, has generally been taken to mean “improvement in a country’s economic and social conditions” and, “improvement in ways of managing an area’s natural and human resources in order to create wealth and improve people’s lives” [6]. This definitional perspective like other ones had generated further controversies and disputations on the concept of development which has been elucidated thus:

Development refers not just to a quantitative increase in the aggregate or per capital output of goods and services in the economy but also to a positive and quantitative change in the social, institutional, and other structural relationship within which growth takes place. Development, therefore, is economic growth plus change, the change being interpreted as “the achievement of better health, better education, better living conditions and an expanded range of opportunities in work leisure. So when there is a general improvement in the provision of certain basic needs like housing, clothing, running water, good minimal education etc. for the people; when economic progress has contributed to a greater sense of self-esteem which translates into a feeling of self-respect and freedom for both the individual citizens and the nation state and when material advancement has expanded to the range of choice for individual citizens by freeing them from the three evils of want, ignorance and squalor, we say that development has taken place in the given society [7], [8], [9].

The term development refers to “increase in the energy levels of societies” [10]. This definition was informed by the Scholar’s thinking that “increases rather than decreases have been the underlying dynamic factors in the changes [in most societies of the world] in recent centuries”. McLean and McMillan [11] conceptualized development by articulating the fact that:

Development is a normative concept referring to a multidimensional process…It must be relative to time, place, and circumstance and dismiss any universal formula. Increased economic efficiency, expansion of national economic capacity and technological advance are generally accepted as necessary conditions if development is to be sustainable, as are economic and industrial diversification and adaptability in the face of shocks. It is the increasing satisfaction of basic needs such as food. It is customarily translated into improvements in certain social indicators and indicators of the (physical) quality of life such as life expectancy. Other conditions that have been included in development are increasing national self-determination, predicated on the notion that development is something a country does to itself and means reducing external dependency.

Generally, development has been taken to mean a process that “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [11]. According to Walter Rodney [12] “the term development is used to in an exclusive economic sense – the justification being that the type of economy is itself an index of other social features”. He went further to articulate his position on the concept the fact that “development in human society is a many sided process”. And, that “it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility and material well-being” at the individual level.

Against this epistemological background, it has been contended that “economic development cannot be divorced from the other aspects of development” because “its principal contributions is to enhance the range of human choice for all members of society without discrimination’ [11]. Thus, political development may be taken as encompassing or serving as the basis for national development and its economic component.

2.1.1. Political Development

This concept has been analysed to “mean continuous process of growth which is produced by forces within the system and which is absorbed by the system” [13]. Riggs [14] dualistically defined the concept of political development. This was done in his attempt to examine the people’s popular control over governance on the one hand and; the issue of politicization of the political process by both the citizens and the government on the other hand. In the former case, Riggs took political development to “mean the process of democratization, the growth of popular control over the government” while in the latter case he conceptualized it to “mean the process of politicization: increasing participation or involvement of the citizen in state activities; in power calculations, and consequences”.

Political development has equally been defined in terms of movement from one stage of an “evolutionary continuum” to another hence it “implies change in some direction: from something toward something” using terms like “transition” from “traditional” to “modern” conditions, structures, values, or practices”[10]. This sense of logic can be used to elucidate the concept of national development as it concerns various political systems Nigeria inclusive. Though, such development is largely expected to be driven by concrete socio-political, economic and philosophical foundation erected on a solid developmental planning with achievable and pursuable national objectives that are or should and must be insulated from the menace of Time Robberies and Robbers and; the various Mis-managers within the polity. This is particularly so given the fact that development planning is “a deliberate effort on the part of Government to speed up the process of social and economic development” and, that it deals with “a rational systematic and deliberate shaping of economic/social phenomena by the public authority in the most general sense” [15].

Ake [16], in his analysis of the problems of most African nations vis-à-vis the issues of development and national development gave prominence to the theory of political development. In the process he concretely identified the problems and/or crises that are associated with political development as inclusive of identity, legitimacy, penetration, participation, integration, and distribution crises. On this basis he articulated the fact that the extent to which the state or government can meet the challenges of these crises will determine its level of political development though with the caution that this varies from country to country in that, as earlier noted “the particular pattern of development in any country depends largely upon the sequence in which these crises arise and upon the ways in which they are resolved [17].

The review of the contributions to the concept of political development up to this point clearly shows that, it has attracted a lot of scholastic attention and, that it “has been defined in many ways that reflect the passage of societies and analysts” [11]. Thus, it has been equally articulated that its subject matter “is neither linear nor irreversible” because “not all countries are experiencing it, and some endure periods of political decline and decay, while a few suffer terminal political breakdown”. It has equally been noted that “political development enhances the state’s capacity to mobilize and allocate resources, to process policy inputs into implementable outputs” [11].

While articulating the various disputations and the asymmetrical ideological positions on the subject matter of political development that have confronted various Political Scientists in the process of their intellectual exercises and contributions on the concept, Handelman[18], provided a definition of political development which, in his own appeared to be relatively free from ideological and cultural biases thus:

Political development…involves the creation of specialized and differentiated government institutions that effectively carry out such functions as raising tax revenue, defending the national border, maintaining political stability, stimulating economic development, improving the quality of human life and communicating with the citizenry.

It should be noted at this juncture that “while earlier definitions of political development stipulated that government be responsive, representative, and non-repressive, they generally did not insist that government must be democratic” [18]. However, as a result of the problems of national development and integration in most developing and less developed countries – [which are similar to those of interruptions by Time Robbers, Religious, Socio-political and economic militants bedevilling Nigeria’s socio-economic, political and religious landscapes], - Political Scientists today, to some extent “have insisted that democracy and social equity must be integral parts of political development” [18], [19]. This is contrary to their reluctance to the hitherto expectation that “pluralist democracy” is viable for the Third world countries and, their preference for “political stability” first regardless of the regime in place (either military or other forms of authoritarianism” [20].

Given the foregoing, it is our contention in this paper that the inability of the Nigerian state to effectively respond to and/or, meet the challenges pose by the crises of her political development has been largely responsible for the constant interruptions of her national development by the menace of Time Robbers and Mis-managers in her political and financial sectors and; by the incessant religious and socio-economic and political militancy.

2.2. Time

Time which simply means the “measurement of interval, like seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks months and, years” is very important in human activities be at personal, corporate, national or international levels. In fact, time is one of the “scarcest and most important resources”. It is the medium through which event takes place [21]. It is a concept that “possesses the potential for shaping economic and social habits in any given society”. It “has been conceptualized in terms of cultural, religious social, economic and political dimensions”. And, that it is a perishable resource which cannot be replaced because: “it is constant, irreversible and successive; it moves in a certain order that cannot be changed and that it is absolutely impossible to expand or reorder it” [22].

Timing time is “one of the most difficult problems of planning and it costs money hence the necessity of good time management is “most evident in the assembly line, since it rigorously imposes the necessity that everyone starts and stops at the same time, that each process be allocated a precise amount of time, and that each step be completed as scheduled” [23].

As a matter of fact, it has been articulated that “time is a fundamental yardstick…that helps to reduce behaviour to more manageable dimensions”. This is so because “efficient utilization of time is often associated with economic success” [22]. Thus “time and energy are among the most valuable resources of any organization” be it political, economic, sociological or corporate.

Without any doubt, timing is “one of the most difficult problems of business-planning” hence; the cost of poor timing vis-à-vis business or political planning can be considerably high and punitive to the system by ways of deformed goal-setting and attainment. This explains the contention that the manager, to co-ordinate plans, must make sure that derivative plans are consistent with intended goals and timed properly to support objectives and other decisions involved in a major plan”. And, that “he must also set clear goals and clearly delegate authority because people can only perform when they know what is expected of them and what their area of discretion is” [22]. Thus time is a commodity that must be safeguarded against the menace of its Robbers which are now prevalent within many polities of the world and their various economic sectors.

2.3. Time Robbers

The issue of Time Robbers has gained increasing attention in today’s corporate and political world and, it has continue to wreck havoc on the economy of most nations in terms of state and government capacity to deal with the increasing demands of the economy vis-à-vis the allocation of the scarce and critical societal resources to the citizenry.

When it is individualistic, time robbers operate at the level of the individual and, it is systemic when they operate and/or exist at the governance or corporate level. However, both of these can adequately cause interruptions in any nation’s developmental drives and at all levels of the nation’s existence vis-à-vis the expected functional performance of the system in terms of service delivery and ability of the nation to make such service responsive to the beneficiaries which, in most cases are the citizens.

Both the individualistic and systemic dimensions of time robbers are mutually inclusive in their capacities to wreck the engine of national aspirations, development and, their attendant objectives and goals. The paucity of attention and committed implementation of Nigeria’s development plans over the years -[from the pre-colonial period and, most importantly from the early days of independence to the epoch of 7-point Agenda of the Yar’Adua Administration which came into being at the commencement of the third phase of the fourth Republic in 2007 and; the managerial disaster in the financial sector occasioned by the abysmal financial transactional operations in the banking institution which spilled over into the era of President Goodluck Jonathan’s Administration] - is instructive and, can be traced to the impacts of both systemic and individualistic time robbers and robberies.

This is clearly so in that such paucity of attention has clearly taken for granted the sacrifices made by relevant stakeholders through the merger and acquisition of various banks as a component of bank recapitalization policy or programme between 2004 and 2005 before which the banking system was clearly in a state of slumber and complete coma. Given this developmental and systemic decadence brought about by the self-inflicted individualistic and systemic time robbers and robberies, it is important to critically elucidate what or who constitutes time robbers and time robberies, which today remain near-insurmountable obstacles to the effective management of the constant interruptions in the national development of a nation like Nigeria.

In the attempt to conceptualize time robbers it has been noted that:

Time robbers steal valuable time away from us. Some of these time robbers are imposed upon us by others. These types of time robbers can fall anywhere between total control to no control. Other time robbers are self-inflicted. In other words, we rob ourselves of valuable time…..most of these time robbers are within our total control (if we are conscious of them and the need to face them for effective performance) [24].

It is clear from this conceptualization that time robbers can be individualistic and systemic both of which can be environmentally, systemically and individualistically self-inflicted. They can either be human beings or personal attitudes to work or professional expectations/functions. Human beings as time robbers are those who are involved in the attitudinal dispositions of leaving tasks unaccomplished; aimlessly jumping from one task to another; indiscipline; refusal to delegate duties/functions that are expected to be delegated; frequently distorting set priorities; refusal to do first thing first; engagement in unscheduled meetings regardless of the consequences to stated political goals or mission statement of the organization or, the political system. In short, time robbers are those things and people involved in time robbery and wastage attitudes like involvement in routine and trivial tasks; ineffective communication; idle conversation at work; unnecessary telephone calls at work; entertainment of drop-in and uninvited/unscheduled visitors/visitations. Time robbers include the following:

Interruptions: This may take the form of unnecessary, necessary and untimely interruptions which can be discussed as follows:

Waiting for Answers: Simply put, this is the time spent waiting for someone else to respond to our questions or requests.

Unnecessary Meetings: Over 11 million meetings are held each day in America. Many are too long or unnecessary.

Equipment Failure: Computers, printers, cell phones, palm pilots… the list goes on. The more technology we have the greater our chances for the occasion “glitch.”

Too Much Work: Overload-you’ve got too much going on at once!

Red Tape: “Red Tape” is all of the policies, procedures, systems, etc. that we must go through to accomplish certain tasks.

Staff and Resident Demands: Many people in positions of authority like to have an open door policy…which is great! However keep in mind that this level of availability will lead to an increased level of requests and demands.

Disorganized Supervisor: You are an organized individual. Your supervisor is not very organized at all. The result: STRESS! You may also get stressed when working with staff members and co-workers who are less than organized.

Self-inflicted Time Robbers: Those things that we inflict upon ourselves also rob us of valuable time.

Procrastination: Procrastination is the most common time robber- putting things off until later. Why do we do this? Some tasks are unpleasant or require is to leave our “comfort zone.” As such we avoid them thus delaying their completion.

Lack of Self-Discipline: You know what you need to do, yet you seem to have a hard time accomplishing things. A lack of self-discipline not only prevents us from getting things done, but it is not good for our self-esteem. A recent example of this occurred in the United States of America in 2009 when an Air Traffic Controller was engaged in a phone conversation with another person while he was on duty, instead of giving appropriate flight guide/direction to the pilots of planes that were airborne. This indiscipline eventually led to a mid-Air collision of two Aircrafts (one helicopter and a small plane) which subsequent crashed into the Hudson River in New York.

Poor Planning: “if you fail to plan, you plan to fail.” Trying to pull things together without any plan or direction is time consuming.

Paper Shuffling: People in positions of authority and power, tend to deal with lots and lots of paperwork. Handling paper too many times is time consuming.

Perfectionism: “These copies are not centered… I’ll have to do them over.” “The ‘e’ on this poster.” Sound familiar? Perfectionism is said to be “paralyzing” at times as it can slow down or even put a stop to productivity.

Personal Disorganization: Where did I put my keys? What did I do with my cell phone? I know I put that report somewhere on my desk. The more disorganized we are, the more time it will take to accomplish tasks.

Socializing: When you live and work in a residence hall, socializing with others is a given. You need to invest a certain amount of time socializing with your staff and residents. Not all socializing is bad-but too much is unproductive.

Absentmindedness: Have you ever uttered the following, “Oh, I’ll remember that,” only to find out a few hours or days later that your memory wasn’t as great as you thought it might be? Forgetfulness can result in lost time.

Fatigue: You’re tired. You don’t have a lot of energy. It’s hard to be productive when you’re exhausted [24].

The foregoing is a perfect synopsis of time robbers and time robberies that have caused crises in the management world over the years and even up to this moment. They have usually caused constant disruptive interruptions in the management of many nations’ developmental programmes, Nigeria inclusive. They have become subject of discourse by many scholars and management practitioners in recent times thus; there have been constant analytical repetitions of their identification and analyses though, with different argumentative premises in each case. This explains German’s elucidation of the concept [25] and the posers he raised on it thus:

Have you ever noticed that the things that matter most often get pushed aside by less important concerns? At times, it seems like everyone and everything conspires against us and prevents us from accomplishing what we really want to. Events we never anticipated catch us blind side, demand our attention, and distract us, and when that happens, our productivity drops and so does our self-esteem. Because these events deflect us from what we really ought to be doing, they are very costly [25].

Against this background, this writer while articulating the in-exhaustive nature of the list of time robbers that may be provided and the fact that “not all the time robbers” (so listed) (e.g., equipment failure and meetings are avoidable, contented that the list provided “will help you guard against influences that can steal your most precious commodity, time”. He went further to state that “most of the time robbers simply creep into our lives and steal from us without our awareness. Suddenly, our time is gone, we’ve spent our daily allotment, and we don’t know where it went”. According to him, what time robbers imposed on us include: “Interruptions; waiting for answer; unclear job definition; Too much work; Poor communication; Shifting priorities; Equipment failure; Red tape; Conflicting Priorities; Low company morale; Untrained staff; Peer/staff demands; Lack of authority; Mistake of others and; Revised deadlines” while those that are self-inflicted include: “Failure to delegate; Meetings; Personal disorganization; Absentmindedness; Failure to listen; Indecision; Socializing; fatigue; Lack of self-discipline; Leaving tasks unfinished; paper shuffling; procrastination; Cultural workplace; unclear personal goals; perfectionism and; Poor planning”. Both of these categories and the items under each are similar to the ones already identified and elucidated in this paper but their identification by other scholars clearly point to their prevalence in most if not all political system or corporate environments.

2.4. Management and Mismanagement

2.4.1. Management

The concept of management like many concepts in the social and management sciences has generated a lot of intellectual attentions. Given its deep seated historical pedigree, it has elicited series of intellectual attentions over the years hence; it is not an exception to the problems of definitional pluralism that has afflicted most of the concepts that are germane to the pursuit of scholarship and knowledge within the various fields of disciplinary calling in the social sciences and management studies.

Management may be defined in terms of the people who are saddled with the functions of carrying out the activities associated with the term “management” thus, regarded as a distinct social group with special interests and characteristic economic view or, in terms of the process by which critical and scarce societal resources are combined and allocated for the achievement of given ends. Generally management involves people; the use of people as resources; achievement of corporate objectives through human resources. It clearly refers to people or any person in authority with other people (as subordinates) reporting to him. Silver [26] described “management as the cement that binds together all parts of an organization, moving it towards a goal”. This explains Omiyi’s [27] conceptualization of management as “the process of achieving predetermined objectives through others”. And, that “the purpose of management is to coordinate many divergent resources, including people, technology, money and raw materials, to work towards a common goal”. To some extent, management to some extent can be euphemistically likened to organization and its theories. However, analysis in this regard is not the concern of this paper. But then, it is the contention here that in “every human organization, be it business, political, economic, social religious or otherwise, the need for management is of paramount importance”. And, that this importance has been taken for granted and wrecked within the Nigerian political landscape by the menace of Time Robbers, Militancy and Mismanagers through mismanagement of the financial sector which has consistently over the years interrupted the nation’s economic and national development to the detriment of the generality of the citizenry.

2.4.2. Mismanagement

Mismanagement is the antithesis of management. As a concept, it is a direct negation of management hence; it is conceived as “management in negativism” which, in most cases is the faulty pursuit of corporate goal by a maladjusted person or a set of people acting as a group or on behalf of a group. Generally, mismanagement means “misdirection”. It connotes “management that is careless or inefficient” [28]. Managers are found in management while Mismanagers are found in mismanagement because; a Mismanager is a person who accomplishes little “due to mismanagement of his energies. Mismanagement can take different forms as we can have political mismanagement, economic mismanagement, religious mismanagement and financial mismanagement to mention only a few. For instance, financial mismanagement which has almost crippled the economic existence of the Nigerian nation in recent times as a result of the anti-banking conducts of some of the Chief Executives in the Banking sector has been defined as “management that, deliberately or not, is handled in a way that can be characterized as wrong, bad, careless, inefficient or incompetent and that will reflect negatively upon the financial standing of a business or individual” [29]. Both groups (i.e., Managers and Mismanagers) are found and/or, can be found in both the private and public sectors of the economy and their various sectors and sub-sectors like the financial sector which we are concerned with in this paper vis-à-vis the interruptions in the management of Nigeria’s national development.

2.5. Militancy

This is a concept that has gained increased relevance and importance in the political lexicon of Nigeria in recent times due to her experience of civil and political protests and disobedience occasioned in part by dissatisfaction with the process of governance and the apparent abuses of the requirements of federalism as a structure of governance in the country. One can adduce many reasons for the increasing relevance of militancy as both a catechism of political understanding and technique of interest articulations to enforce interest aggregations or elicit political actions or force allocation of the critical and scarce societal resources by the government whether or not it is convenient for the latter. However, given the fact that it is a concept that has provoked a lot of reactions and emotions depending on the side of the political divide one finds himself or herself, it is considered worthy of analytical attention here from the position of a scholar contributing to a sensitive national discourse on a sensitive concept.

There have been various occurrences of militancy and activities of militants in Nigeria over the years. These can be said to have range from political, ethnic, religious, and sociological to economic militants’ activities all of which have cast doubts on the validity of national unity which has constantly been subscribed to and preached in this country. While the intention in this paper is not to identify any of these militants’ activities as the most important or disruptive within the Nigerian political space, it is considered imperative to focus on the militant activities that have taken place in the Niger Delta in recent times up till the period of “Amnesty Programme” of the Yar’Adua administration.

Reasons for militancy in Nigeria in recent times, particularly in the Niger Delta Area, which many scholars or analysts may be tempted to identify as one of the causes of

Interruptions in Nigeria’s national development have been attributed to systemic failure of both the government and society in Nigeria by Uwasomba and Alumona [30]. Specifically, these writers relying on the work of Okonta [31] contended that:

Society ant its attendant government provides the fitters about which Rousseau laments. Nevertheless, society and government are both necessary for the procurement of human welfare and progress. On the one hand, society provides evolutionary and resilient institutions and rules for man’s mutual machination of his many personal and environmental inadequacies. On the other hand, government ensures that institutions and then (sic) constitutive rules girding and facilitating the said mutual dependence and coexistence, abide without wilful and incessant breaches by dissenting individuals and groups for the purposes of realizing the goals of collective human welfare….However, when government and society’s constitutive rules and associated institutions seem to fail in significant respects, to ensure the protection of rights of equal neighbours, and also avail equal or judicious access to the commonwealth of a society like Nigeria, demands are made on the state. And so it goes without saying that government ought to ensure that institutions work and that rules are put in place for the realization of the welfare of the people. When a government fails to discharge its duties to the citizenry creditably they revolt [30], [31].

They went further to critically articulate the fact that the failure of both the society and government in Nigeria to discharge their expected duties to the citizenry has a tangential if not direct relationship with the emergence and continuous venomous existence of militancy within its systemic landscape particularly in the Niger Delta Region. In fact, according to them:

Today, as can be seen from the events that are rapidly unfolding from the Niger Delta region, the struggle for resource control and management has taken a new dimension with the introduction of militancy and kidnappings by the various groups that have emerged in politics of oil in the area. These bourgeoning groups and their militant activities have become a source of worry and concern to all the strategic stakeholders within and without the Nigerian economy. Since June 2006, violence in the Niger Delta has reduced Nigeria’s total oil production by a quarter. It is important to note that Nigeria has a nominal output capacity of 3.2 million bpd but its actual production is running short of this level. This has grave implications on the Nigerian economy which depends on oil [30].

It is the contention in this paper that today; it is innocuous to state that Nigeria is still without a properly consolidated political system. The reasons for this are obvious: pernicious theocratic traditions are holding sway in total disregard of the constitutional provisions. The constitution itself (if it can be called so), is causing its own problems. In fact, this, on its own, has called to question the intergovernmental character of her federalism vis-à-vis the expected fiscal intergovernmental relations and wherewithal of true federalism [32], [33].

We have ethnic militias (e.g. Ood’ua Peoples Congress, (OPC) Arewa Peoples Congress (APC), Egbesu Boys, Bakassi Boys, etc) everywhere; ethnic consultative fora (e.g., Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Afenifere, Arewa consultative forum, Yoruba Council of Elders, Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP) Northern Central Working Committee (CWC) Bendel Forum (BF) etc). These disturbing indices have, in themselves, been progenized by the Nation’s payment of lip-service to national unity and; self delusion about the nation’s unity which is better called “disunited unity” or a “fraudulent togetherness” occasioned by deliberate plastering of wounds through cosmetic approach to national issues which, on its own has engendered “dangerous deformities” in the Nigerian polity to the extent that the nation is still facing a myriad of problems like the 2009 Jos and Boko Haram quasi-political and religious crises [34].

As a matter of fact, Nigeria’s journey as an independent nation which began on October 1^st, 1960 with greater hopes, confidence and determination is today a victim of set-backs, doubt and permanence of hopelessness. Despite this, the people, through self delusion; inability to be really objective; fears; pseudo and expedient political brinkmanship of self-centered leaders and, what may be called “a cycle of human stupidity”, “paralysis of will” and “bleating resignation to fate” have not really come to grips with this reality [34], [35]. These factors and their real propensities for non-cohesive and mutually acceptable – (by ways of untainted commitment) – socio-economic and political philosophy or policy thrust coupled with balance of trade and payment deficits still, today, make Nigeria a “trading-post” economy and a den of obvious domestic economic wastage, mismanagement of public funds through corruption and kleptocracy by elected government and public officers [36].

After over three decades of independent political existence Nigeria has become a country where law makers applaud law breakers; it is a country where the state is appropriated by the dominant faction of the elite to the service of private interests; it is a country that has been rammed into a state of manageless statis through sheer profligacy, official kleptocracy and systematic looting of the treasury by corrupt political fiat and through corrupt corporate orientation an example of which led to the removal from office of the Chief Executives and Management teams of eight Banks – [Afribank, FinBank, Intercontinental Bank, Oceanic Bank, Union Bank, Equitorial Trust Bank, Spring Bank and, Bank PHB] – by the Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria in 2009 and the later identification - in the same year (2009) - of two other Banks – Unity Bank and Wema Bank – as distressed on the basis of similar poverty of Banking operations.

Generally, the indifference of the Nigerian state and government to people’s aspirations for self-actualization and satisfaction within the scheme of things is clearly one of the catalyzing factors propelling civil rebellions and militants’ activities within the Nation’s landscape in recent times thus creating a charge political atmosphere and disruptive political scenes to her political space. Chigbu [37] clearly puts this into a clearer perspective when he noted that:

The issue at hand today is that we have a deaf and chatter-box government. Sometimes one wishes we had a deaf and dumb government – one that will not annoy our senses with its noisy tongue, while not listening. Unfortunately, we have been gifted with one that does not listen but spend a great deal of time (talking and talking and talking ….) talking endlessly about issues that only at best kill our morale.

Given the havoc which militants’ activities have wrecked on Nigeria’s economy and people, there can hardly be any consensus on what the concept really means or how politically appropriate or otherwise it is as a technique of people’s struggle. It is suffice to state at this point that the definition of the concept depends on the definer and their ideological persuasions hence; the attempt here is geared towards a multi-focal view of the subject matter of militancy without giving credence to any as a universal meaning [38]. This analytical orientation in our view, allows for the determination of which of the various conceptions meets the need or belief of the readers or other analysts. It equally allows for rejection as well as new or further conceptualizations.

The world “militant” is both “an adjective and a noun”. It “comes from the 15^th century Latin “militare” meaning “to serve as a soldier”. Wikipedia went further to state that “the related modern concept of militia as a defensive organization against invaders grew out of Anglo-Saxon “fyrd”. In the process, militancy has been conceptualized as “the state of being militant”. It is a concept that gives rise to militants [39]. The term “militant state” refers to any individual who holds an aggressive posture in support of an ideology or a cause” [40]. According to this definition, “persons described as militants – either individual or groups – (composed of multiple individuals) – have usually enrolled and trained to serve in a particular cause. Militants may fill “their ranks either by volunteering, enlistment or, by conscription”. The American Heritage Dictionary of English Language defines “militant” as “having a combative character; aggressive tendencies, especially in the service of a cause” while Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines it as “aggressively active (as in a cause)”. Militants” can also mean “vigorously active and aggressive, especially in support of a cause as in militant reformers” [41], [42].

Militancy as a concept of struggle has its span within any given political spectrum hence, it has been contended that:

Militants occur across the political spectrum, including white supremacists, separatists, abortion opponents, and environmentalists. Examples of left-wing, right-wing, and special interest militants include militant reformers, militant feminists, militant animal rights advocates, and militant anarchists. The phrase militant Islam can suggest violent and aggressive political activity by Islamic Individuals, groups, movements; or governments. The militant atheist is usually used confrontationally when discussing those people who are more outspoken than the general population on subjects which explicitly or implicitly promotes atheism, but is also use in non-contentious manner to describe those who persecute religion in general. Various secret societies that have been known to militarists are known as militants” [43].

Generally, it has been argued that, militants to some extent and, in most cases, depending on their agenda and focus of action, do and, usually share some characteristics and traits. This view point has been articulated that “the various movements that seek to apply militancy as a solution, or who use militancy to rationalize their solutions for issues in the modern world seldom share common tactics”[39].

Against this background, “the characteristics of a militant who is aggressive and violent to promote a political philosophy in the name of a movement” have been identified to include the employment of “force or violence directly, either in offence or in defence” and; the justification of “the use of force using the ideological rhetoric of the particular group”. And, given the sometimes disruptive nature of the actions of militants, their actions have, in most cases been condemned by the direct and indirect victims of their onslaught. However, in most cases, such condemnations have been propelled by the indifference of some people to the agenda and/or, the antecedence of the militants’ actions which, in most cases are brought about in part, as a result of the inadequate articulations of their positions by the militants. This, to a significant extent has complicated the critics’ rational understanding of the raison d’être of the militants’ struggle on the one hand, while eclipsing the unwillingness of the critics to listen, digest and tolerate the bone of contention of the militants from the clear view of observers on the other hand.

Even though, the existence of militants through militancy - which in most cases, has taken ethnic and economic or religious and political dimensions most especially in Nigeria – has been conceptualized as “incompatible with democracy or any other kind of people-power oriented type of governance”, its constant and continuous venomous fertility in Nigeria can hardly be detached from the divisive political terrains and landscape of the nation because “the divisiveness of Nigeria can comfortably be traced to geography, religious(sic), ethnicism; and most recently, natural resource” [37]. According to this writer:

The quest to aggressively pursue principles of self-determination has resulted in the formation of several ethnic militias. The existence and use of thuggery in politics has not helped the situation either, however, it is understandable that things like these occur hence, the birth of several self-determinant groups that operate in the country today (and there seem to be too many of at the moment [37].

This is particularly so because:

There is wide spread ignorance and poverty in Nigeria a situation which the Nigerian state has consistently failed to deal with. When one adds religious/social intolerance; youthful restiveness/idleness and unemployment to mix (as seen in the Niger Delta), it leads to frustration. A frustrated soul will do anything to ventilate pent up emotions. The recent Boko Haram insurgency in Northern Nigeria puts these in good perspective [44].

This writer summarizes the issues that face Nigeria today and, which are quite related to the problems of militancy and activities of militants within her political system and, which the Nigerian state has constantly handled with kid gloves –[with irredeemable or irreparable consequences for her national development] - as follows:

1. IGNORANCE: An average Northerner, probably a Muslim, sees a Southerner, probably a Christian, as morally loose, permissive and undisciplined and presumes that Christianity permits it and that Christianity was brought on by western education and that Islamic militancy is the cure, while the southerner sees the northern counterpart as educationally backward, ill educated intolerable and socially out of touch, believes also that Islam is responsible.

2. POVERTY: There is a large army of angry youths in virtually every part of this country. They are ready to be used as the devil’s workshop for a small fee.

3. FRUSTRATION: That there exists in Nigeria a large population of young men and women who are prepared to defy the state, sabotage it and inflict grave damage on it says something much deeper about the Nigerian state.

4. FAILURE OF GOVERNANCE: The soldiers and the policemen involved have been just as guilty as the insurgents. That our President chose to jet out to Brazil on a state visit while 700 of his citizen lost their lives in less than 3 days of violence reminds me of the early 80”s when president Shehu Shagari travelled out of Nigeria even as Net building was up in flames. Watch an indiscriminate police action during the Boko Haram riot caught on video. The act speaks volumes to the fact that governance may have lost its meaning, in its entirety [44].

In further articulating his position on the subject matter of militancy and the Nigerian state Chigbu [37] contended that “armed and ethnic militancy cannot be the best way to settling the Nigeria puzzle”. And, that “the ethnic militia system of fighting the government is not paying off adequately. Where it has paid off in some way, it surely under-paid – when compared to what could have been gained by taking a revolutionary but civil approach to the fight”. This position to some extent is clearly contestable given the emotions which the issue of militancy has generated and, of course it has been variously disputed. For instance, it has equally been contended that:

…but for the activists (sic) of the Niger Delta human activists in term of their determined desire and relentless efforts, the federal government was very comfortable with the status quote (sic) of exploiting and exploring oil from doing anything (sic) towards the poverty and environmental degradation for which the Niger Delta is known [45].

As a matter of fact, it has been contented that – [the different perspectives and emotional attachments to the issue of militancy - not withstanding], - as a concept or technique of political agitation, forceful articulation of interests in the quest for desired allocation or reallocation of the critical and scarce societal resources or benefits (either legitimate or not), militancy has its costs and benefits. The obvious costs of militancy notwithstanding, it has been articulated that “for as long as the Nigerian polity remains comatose, and choose to play the ostrich on issues affecting its citizen’s lives and aspirations, jointly or severally, militancy in its various ramifications will continue to arise” [44].

3. The Linkage of the Concepts with the Management Problems of Nigeria’s National Development

The concepts – development; political development; time; time robbers; management; mismanagement and; militancy - analyzed in the preceding section of this paper are without doubt important to the management of interruptions in the nation’s economy and national development in general hence they need to be understood in terms of their orthodox provisions vis-à-vis national development. However, their needed understanding to effect positive handling of governance within the Nigeria’s political landscape and terrains have been obviously elusive due to self-inflicted but avoidable bureaucratic and political pathologies. Some of these pathological problems and their propensity for interruptions and mismanagement of the nation’s development are respectively identified; discussed and analyzed in the section.

3.1. Paucity of Attention to National Development Planning over the Years

There had been constant interruptions in National Development of Nigeria as a result actions and inactions of functionaries of the state and government. The activities of time robbers and financial sector’s mismanagers as well as those of religious, political, economic militants have not gone unnoticed. These interruptions have taken place apparently as a result of the constantly obvious asymmetry between the political and economic objectives of the nation and, the government and state indifference to same which had traditionally caused squabbles and combative competitions among the citizenry and agencies of government over the years. This sedative governance philosophy has constantly caused dislocations in the nation’s development plans up to this moment. This tendency in itself has been given vitality by the rapidity of regime turnover in Nigeria and its usually accompanied epileptic governmental programmes and policies each time a regime changes. This continues to be so because:

It is not a new thing in Nigeria, that when a new administration is sworn into office, they always come up with some “new” policy or other. The experience of Structural Adjustment Programmes (SAP) introduced by Babangida regime is still fresh in our memory. The Obasanjo regime came up with the “Fight against Corruption” crusade, and to achieve this they set up the EFCC and ICPC. How far have they gone (sic) with this crusade is left to the Nigerian people to decide. On August 1^st 2007, Yar’Adua regime came up with its own policy, named the “Seven Point Agenda” [46].

Given these factors and, the fact that the Yar’Adua seven-point Agenda later gave way to President Goodluck Jonathan’s Transformational Agenda in 2011, this section of the paper focuses on the political and economic objectives of the Nigerian state as signposts of her national development but, which have been abysmally implemented in the past and, even up till date. The discussion in this section is done within the context of her socio-political and economic history as it concerns her national objectives/development planning programmes over the years which, as a result of interruptions have not actually been implemented in terms of their manifest intentions.

3.2. History of National Development Objectives / Development Planning in Nigeria

It has once been opined that “Nigeria’s principal objective (economic and social) at independence was that of rapid economic and social development and transformation” [47]. At that time emphasis was on the economy and education as well as on changing the economic structure which was predominantly agricultural in nature to an industrial one using a faster approach. Industrialization, based on the nation’s lesson from the history of advanced countries which indicate(d) the diminishing role of agriculture” was seen as “the key to effecting the desired change in the economic structure” of the Nigerian State [47]. Concretely put, the political and economic objectives of a nation can be understood in terms of its economic and political planning. Thus, there is no gainsaying the fact that Nigeria as a nation has definitely had her own share of numerous plans.

3.2.1. 1946-1956 Development Plans

The pedigree of Nigeria’s periodic development planning dates back to the colonial era starting from 1945 with the then ten year (1946 – 1956) development plan. This plan “was a plan for the benefit of a British colony” [48]. It gave way in 1955 for a new five year (1955-1960) development plan due to political developments-“approach of self government in the three regions with new constitutions; the need for transfer of some responsibilities”-that made it impossible for the completion of the existing ten year (1945-1956) development plan.

3.2.2. 1955-1960 Development Plans

The five-year (1955-1960) development plan was not different from its predecessor because, both of them were nothing but colonial planning devices for the perpetration of their interest [48].

3.2.3. 1962-1968 First National Development Plan

The first national plan came in 1962 for the period 1962-1968. It was called a national plan because: “It was the first Plan prepared for Nigeria after attaining independence in 1960. It had the backing or sponsorship of the State and applied, in a geographic sense only, to the country as a whole ” [48]. The national character of the first national plan suffered setbacks due to the regionalized presentation of projects for implementation which were not amenable to centralized planning and execution [48]. Not only this, the 1962-1966 political upheavals which created a general state of topsy-turvy in the country equally made the implementation of the National Plan for 1962 – 1968 impossible.

3.2.4. 1970-1974 Second National Development Plan

The next national Plan was not to be until 1970 when the second national Development Plan (SNDP) was made for 1970-1974 period with the objectives of making Nigeria:

→ a united, strong and self reliant nation;

→ a great and dynamic economy;

→ a just and egalitarian society;

→ a land of bright and full opportunities for all its citizens and;

→ a free and democratic society [49].

To attain these objectives/as translated, and, in order to be able take care of post-war reconstruction priority was assigned to various sectors thus:

→ agriculture, industry, transportation and manpower development take the first priority;

→ utilities, electricity, water, communications take the second priority;

→ other services take the last priority;

→ defence and security constitute a set sui generis.

→ Reconstruction of facilities damaged or in disuse and disrepair because of the war;

→ Rehabilitation and resettlement of persons displaced by war and of the demobilised personnel of the armed forces [48].

3.2.5. 1975-1980 Third National Development Plan

The Second National Development Plan was followed by the 1975 – 1980 Development Plan called the Third National Development Plan (TNDP) with the under listed objectives:

→ an increase in per capital income;

→ a more even distribution of income;

→ a reduction in the level of unemployment;

→ an increase in the supply of high level manpower;

→ diversification of the economy;

→ balanced development;

→ indigenisation of economic activity [50].

3.2.6. 1981-1985 Fourth National Development Plan

This followed the third national development plan. It covered the 1981 – 1985 period. The specific objectives of this plan included all the objectives of the third plan because of their relevance for the period. They include (d);

● increase in the income of the average citizen;

● more even distribution of income among individuals and socio-economic groups;

● reduction in the level of unemployment and under-employment;

● the achievement of a balance in the development of the different sectors of the economy and its various geographical areas of the country; and,

● increased dependence on our own resources in seeking to achieve the various objectives of society [51].

This plan added - greater self reliance; development of technology; increased productivity; reduction in rural-urban migration; promotion of new national orientation conducive to greater discipline, better attitude to work and cleaner environment – as objectives to the ones it x–rayed from the third plan [51], [48].

3.2.7. The Structural Adjustment Programme 1986 – 1989

There was a period of interregnum in the continuation of related periodic Annual Development Plan during which various reforms rook place within the context of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) and its objectives between 1986 and 1989. This period of interregnum during which SAP held sway led to the development and adoption of what was called a National Rolling Plan Strategy (NRPS) in the 1990s.

3.2.8. The First National Rolling Plan (Fnrp) 1990 – 1992

The strategy of national rolling plan took its root from the structural adjustment programme. It dramatically deviated from the tradition of previous planning approach (es) in Nigeria. Specifically, the 1990 – 1996 National Rolling Plan document had the following objectives.

(i) attainment of higher levels of self sufficiency in the production of food and other raw materials.

(ii) laying a solid foundation for a self-reliant industrial development as a key to self-sustaining dynamic and non-inflationary growth, and promoting industrial peace and harmony;

(iii) creating ample employment opportunities as a means of containing unemployment problem;

(iv) enhancing the level socio-political awareness of the people and further strengthening the base for a market oriented economy and mitigating the adverse impact of the economic downturn and the adjustment process on the most affected groups [52].

There were various development plans though, not in the same fashion within the context of periodic rolling plans throughout the military era until the commencement of the Fourth Republic in May, 1999. The pedigree of Development Planning in Nigeria showing the real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rate since 1962 is synoptically depicted in table 1.

Table 1. Showing the Pedigree of Development Planning in Nigeria and the real GDP growth rate 1962-1998

3.2.9. National Economic and Empowerment Development Strategy – (NEEDS): Reform Agenda

In the foreword on NEEDS, President Obasanjo in justifying the anteceding rational of his programme and focus of economic reform-agenda commented as follows:

The National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) is the response to the development challenges of Nigeria. In 1999, most people grossly underestimated the extent of social, political, and economic decay of the country. Since 1999, we have succeeded in stabilizing the polity, consolidated the democratic governance structure, and made modest progress in the social and economic spheres. Over the next few years (2003-07), NEEDS will consolidate the achievements of the previous four years and lay a solid foundation for sustainable poverty reduction, employment generation wealth creation, and value reorientation. Nigeria has all it takes (human and material resources) to become the strongest economy in Africa-and one of the leading economies in the world in the longer term. The goal of NEEDs is to mobilize the resources of Nigeria to make a fundamental break with failures of the past and bequeath a united and prosperous nation to generations to come [54].

There is no doubt that the NEEDS document shows it as an economic and structural reform programme. However, it is disturbing that its rationality has now been abandoned and eclipsed by the Yar’Adua 7-point Agenda. This is despite the fact that the NEEDS as an economic paradigm was characterized and anchored on:

1. Privatization of public Enterprises and utilities;

2. Deregulation of social services i.e., the withdrawal or reduction of government support for education, healthcare, Housing, Agriculture etc.,

3. Devaluation of the national currency;

4. Retrenchment of the national workforce-what they call right-sizing and down-sizing;

5. Trade liberalisation;

6. Debt servicing and payment [54].

3.2.10. The Seven-Point Agenda of 2007

Presidential Yar’Adua shortly after he was sworn into office on May 29, 2007, came up with his Administration economic programme which he called the Seven Point Agenda with a focus on seven major issues of Power and energy; Food Security and Agriculture; Wealth Creation and Employment; Mass Transportation; Land Reform; Security and Qualitative and Functional Education” [46], [55]. Two other issues – Niger Delta and Disadvantaged Groups – have been identified as contained in Seven Pont Agenda hence, it was at a point re-christened as “Yar’Adua’s Seven Plus Two Point Agenda to transform Nigeria” [55].

The laudable mission and vision of the seven point agenda notwithstanding, it is doubtful if they can be realized as anticipated. To some extent, apart from the sycophancy of its adherents the agenda can hardly be seen as true signpost of national development its good intentions notwithstanding given the ever-ready nature/predispositions of the nation’s time robbers and; financial and political mismanagers a plethora of which abound within the Nigeria’s political space. In fact, it has been contended that “the present Yar’Adua administration in Nigeria elaborated a so-called “Seven Point Agenda” as it came into office. None of its goals have been achieved and will not be achieved on the basis of the present capitalist economic set up” [55]. The reason for this pessimistic view of the Seven Point Agenda has been advanced on the basis of the problems currently associated with the pursuit of the major issues contained in the reform programme as an economic reform agenda. Specifically, the reasons for the assumed and predictive ineffectiveness of the Seven Point Agenda has been articulated on the basis of the incapability of the erosion of capitalism vis-à-vis the playing of progressive role in society. Specifically it has been contended that “the ruling class in Nigeria would rather embezzle the money - (voted for the seven point agenda) – because they don’t have economic but act (sic) according to the dictates of imperialism” [46].

The pedigree of Development Planning in Nigeria as it affects her economy and its development has been likened to a roller-coaster illusory development [56], [57]. Even though this may be debatable depending on the analytical lenses of any given analyst, there is no gainsaying the fact that, in spite of these periodic Development Plans, Nigeria as a country is far from the promised land of economic benevolence or sustainable economic development. Thus, it is not out of place to opine that all the plans – (including the first four National Development plans, the Structural Adjustment Programmes and, the national rolling Plan strategies and their Documents) – since independence have failed due to loss of focus and policy blindness, to really launch Nigeria into economic and political prosperity. As it was once rightly opined these plans have really failed to “launch the Nigerian economy into sustainable growth and development” [53]. As a matter of fact, all the plans right from pre-colonial period to SAP; the National Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) put in place by President Obasanjo and, the 2007 Seven (7)-point Agenda of Yar’Adua Administration and, the Transformational Agenda of President Goodluck Jonathan put in place in 2011 were “mere christening and re-christening exercises within the same neo-liberal order” [58]. These Problems are caused in part by the rapidity of Regimes’ turnover and constant change in governmental administrations in Nigeria [59]. This position finds a deep seated solace in the fact that the Nigerian political terrains have been everything but stable and conducive for proper articulation of effective national development planning and/or effective management of the menace of time robbers and mismanagers of her financial sector.

4. Mismanagement of the Banking / Financial Sector / Disrespect for the Requirements of Fiscal Policy

The banking/financial sector in Nigeria today is in deep crises capable of dismantling the entire fiscal pillars and economy of the Nigerian state. It is disturbing that operators in this sector of the economy almost caused the total collapse of the nation’s economy through unprofessional banking operations in 2009 with total indifference to the efforts of the state between 2004 and 2005 through the recapitalization programme which came into effect on December 31^st, 2005.

It was this reform agenda in the banking/financial sector that rescued the nation from the self-inflicted trauma that clearly shook the banking/financial sector to its foundation between 1995 and 2002 during which period many of the then existing banks were clearly distressed leading to the closure of so many of them between 1995 and 2002 leading to the eventual consolidation in 2005. This disturbance has been clearly fertilized and given vitality and prominence by the latest developments which were blown open in 2009 by the newly appointed Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, when he unmasked the unprofessional banking practices and the contemptuous handling of bank transactions by some of the banks that were recapitalized in 2005. The Central Bank’s Governor’s discovery of this unethical banking conducts led to his removal the Chief Executive Officers and Directors of the eighth (8) banks that were clearly enmeshed in the scandal. The Banks involved or that have so far been made public are: Union Bank; Afribank; Oceanic Bank; FinBank; Intercontinental Bank; Spring Bank; Equatorial Trust Bank and; Bank PHB.

It has even become more worrisome, that instead of the expected rational support and/or, acclamatory approval of the policy or decision of the Central Bank Governor to remove these Banks’ Chief Executives and further call for similar cleansing, ridiculous extra systemic and unfounded/unsupportable reasons and attacks were advanced and directed at him apparently to scare him. To some extent untenable ethnic card was even put on the agenda of various discussants before they were taken off when it became clear that such orientations were bound to crash. In fact it took questionable harassment of the Central Bank Governor by so many political and economic actors and, compelled further visitations before his action was eventually approved and even commended by the National Assembly.

To some extent the EFCC too, has been made a subject of attack and public ridicule in its attempt to perform its functions and investigate the anti-banking conducts of the Chief Executives of these Banks. Such attacks were apparently put in place to inhibit the EFCC from continuing with the needed rescue of the Banking/Financial Sector from its current shame and betrayal of the nation’s and the stakeholders’ economic confidence reposed in the Banking/Financial Institutions and those put in charge to handle their finances. In any nation, where banking Institutions continue to behave this way, interruptions of her national development can hardly be avoided and/or, prevented.

5. Other Problems

There exist various other problems which are traceable to the difficulties of the management of Nigeria’s national development and its attendant programmes and objectives most of which have been touched upon in the course of the analyses in this paper. They include lack of good governance and accountability in almost all sectors of the nation’s political system; paucity of attention to the needed and important harmonization of the political and economic goals and objectives of the nation; poverty of administrative culture; menace of time robbers; militants agitations and activities (religious, political; economic and sociological in nature and paucity of time management). There is need to attend to these problems like others if the goals and aspirations of national development programmes are to be achieved. Such attentions are equally crucial to the effective avoidance of the constant interruptions in nation’s economy.

The fact that the existence of these problems within the Nigerian political system can completely wreck her engine of development calls for urgent actions by ways of what to do in terms of solutions and policy redirections.

6. The Ways Out of the Problems: What to Do

Against the analytical background of the issues considered in this paper, there is no gainsaying the fact that the Nigerian state is deep trouble vis-à-vis the management of her national development and the pursuit of national aspirations and responsive and responsible deliverance of public good to the people. It is equally indisputable that these problems had always been there within the political landscape of the Nigerian nation due to the menace of time robbers and time robberies and the onslaught of the various mismanagers a plethora of who abound in all sectors of the nation’s political economy. It has particularly become worrisome in recent times due to the unrepentant contemptuous activities of the mismanagers in the financial sectors of the nation’s economy which almost wreck the systemic existence of the nation until the timely intervention of the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria and the shake-up he brought to the banking/financial sector.

Given the dangers which these cancerous factors can cause the nation as a whole which are easily decipherable from their conceptual explications in preceding sections of this paper, the subject matter of this section is to proffer solutions to the terminal problems they pose to the nation so as to avoid a total collapse of the nation’s socio-political and economic systemic existence or system.

6.1. A Total Avoidance of the Abuses in the Public and Financial Sector of the Nigeria Economy

Optimal strategy for the management of both the private and public sector of the economy is need to avoid the mismanagement that daily takes place within the Nigerian economy due to the activities of time robbers and mismanagers that abound within the Nigerian political landscape. What should be done or to do in this regard include:

(1) Identification of the causes of government’s fiscal problems and development a multiyear forecast of revenue- yielding capacity as well as that of the demand for it services.

(2) Development of a “list of priority rankings for all government programmes, projects, services and benefits so that high- priority items could be retained or augmented and low-priority items could be reduced or terminated.

(3) Designing of an integrated strategy to generate new resources, improve productivity, and ration services so that both revenue and expenditure sides of the budget could be neatly balanced [60].

The foregoing should be done or embarked upon in Nigeria without the usual apolitical politicking which, hitherto, had permeated its approach to the problems of maintaining fiscal solvency in the past and, even, up till the present era of democratic governance of the fourth Republic. Added to the foregoing, to be able to manage fiscal stress in a public sector like Nigeria, the government and its officials should and, must be prepared to clear the “underbrush of the ambiguity and/or habit” that may serve as obstacles to the making of tough decisions and designing of innovative solutions [60].

6.2. Need for Good Governance/Effective Fiscal Policy and Sound Budgetary Process

Given the obvious dichotomy between good and bad governance, it is our contention that, any political system and economy which is devoid of good governance cannot but fall a victim to constant interruption in her national development as it has constantly being the case in Nigeria. This is more so in that “the term governance implies a configuration of separable but interrelated elements… statues, policy mandates, organizational, financial, and programmatic structures, administrative rules and guidelines, and institutionalized rules and norms…which in combination establish the ends and means of governmental activity” [61]. The need for good governance becomes imperative because we can as well have bad governance.

The relevance of the concept of governance to a successful management of a nation’s developmental planning devoid of the usual interruptions by some nuisance but avoidable variables is to some extent contingent on a clear understanding of what it connotes. A synoptic though, concrete explication of the concept is the subject-matter of discussion to which we now turn.

6.2.1. The Concept of Governance

The complex weaving of “economic, political and social aspects of a nation” has compounded the possibility of any easy or simplistic definition of the concept of governance in our society [62]. In other words, the concept has not been an exception to the volatility and eclecticism for which the disciplines in the Social Sciences have been globally reputed.

The concept, “even though, not new, means different things to different people” [63](http://www.gdre.org/u-gov/governance-understand.htm) thus, its definition has attracted a lot of attentions and, in the process generated various analyses from different perspectives thereby creating a plethora of analytical discourses and notions [63], [64]. These notions – (coupled with the fact that the concept of governance has over the years gained momentum and a wider meaning as an instrument of public affairs management and, a useful mechanism to enhance the legitimacy of the public realm and; the centrality of the concept to the existential characteristics of all political animals [63]) - have given additional impetus to the scholastic and, analytical efforts that have been made to widen its scope.

Such efforts include the attempts to redefine it in order to allow the consideration of “all interactions among everyone involved in decision making” [65]. This thinking has been predicated on what appears to be the restrictive nature of its traditional or orthodox conceptions within the various terrains and landscapes of most polities across the globe. The Canadian International Development Agency has been quite prominent in this area of thinking. This Agency believes that the orthodox or traditional perspective and, conception of governance has been rather restrictive as “it reduces the concept to activities and power relationships that involve government alone” to the neglect of the “influence, needs, contributions and responsibility of civil society or the private sector” [65], [66]. These concerns of CIDA which are quite attributable to its employees led to its contention of a redesigned definition of governance as:

a concept that has developed considerably since it emerged in discussions of development issues around the late 1980s. The first classic political science essays on the subject talked about the concept of “governability”, which made the rule of law the core of development. With the of the Cold War, “governability” gave way to the concept of governance, defined as redesigning or re-inventing public administration, in the broad sense of the term, to meet the new challenges of development in the era of globalization. Governance now deals with the issues relating to the mechanisms needed to negotiate various interests in society. It is increasingly seen as a concept that that encompasses a series of mechanisms and processes designed to maintain the system, to empower the population and to ensure that society owns the process [66].

This explains the claim that “no two political scientists would agree on what the concept of governance is or what it means” [73]. In fact, as once noted, “only few authors have defined) the concept with a view to serving analytical purpose” [74]. Hence, “governance as a concept has not been extensively used in the political literature until very recently when it gained currency” [75]. This notwithstanding, “the concept of governance has come to occupy a more prominent position in the discourse of international development” [74].

World Bank defines governance as “the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development”. According to it governance has three dimensions [76], [77]. These dimensions are: “the nature of political regimes; the exercise of authority in the management of social and economic resources and, the capacity of government to design and implement policy and to discharge its functions” [78]. They have been specifically identified and concretely elucidated by Olowu and Erero [79] as relating to the “rule-ruler-ruled relationship”. These scholars identified the three dimensions of governance in the context of “rule-ruler-ruled relationship ” as inclusive of “functionalism, “structuralism” and “normativism”. According to them, functionally, governance deals with “rule-making, legitimization, and enforcement” while it structurally comprises of three distinct institutions: the “ruler or the state”, the “ruled or the society” and, the “rule of law”. In this regard, they viewed governance as the “relationship between state and society institutions”. In the same vein, they claimed that “normatively, this relationship highlights the values associated with good governance”. These values according to them include: “transparency, organizational effectiveness, accountability, predictability, legitimacy, popular participation and plurality of policy choices”.

Within the same context governance has been conceptualized as the ‘good government of society” with three dimensions: political, technical and institutional [80]. In the same vein, it has been articulated that governance encompasses two interrelated dimensions: political and technical both of which consist of the government’s “will to govern well and the capacity to efficiently and competently handle public management” [81]. Governance refers to the act of exercising control over others, inducing others to behave in specified ways as required by law [82]. It is “policy making and policy execution regulated by systems of law and guidelines which are segregated into specific operations to achieve specific national objectives [62]. Governance connotes “the exercise of power and authority in both political and economic spheres”. It implies the exercise of power by a person or group of persons for the benefit of the populace” because, as he equally later claimed, it is through governance, that “the government in power dictates the form of relationship it establishes between it and the people as well as the goal of the state in economic, political and social terms” [83], [84], [85].

Implicit in the foregoing conceptual analysis of governance is the fact that, the latter connotes “the use of political authority and exercise of control over a society and the management of resources” [86], [87]. Thus, a scholar has claimed that “governance refers to the effective and efficient functions undertaken by a government maintaining a unified state, defending its territorial integrity and running its economy towards securing the well-being of its citizens [88]. As a matter of fact, governance in relations to the “person entrusted with political power and authority” has been analyzed as critical variable involving the following:

→ Responsibility and responsiveness in leadership and in public service;

→ Accountability in the mobilization as well as in the utilization of resources;

→ Discipline, effectiveness and efficiency in handling public (as well as personal) affairs;

→ Selflessness and impartial service to the people; and

→ Popular participation and empowerment of the people in the conduct and management of their common affairs [89].

For governance as the “duty of government to see to the orderly and stable management of the economy”[90], to have the foregoing attributes and, be effective, efficient and beneficial for democratic political arrangement, it has to be good. This is more so, since we can, as well, have bad governance.

6.2.2. Bad Governance

The possibility of bad governance could be said to be what the World Bank had in mind in 1989, when it began to dichotomize between good and bad governance by “advocating a political reform approach to government as a way of ensuring positive economic growth” [76], [88]. In fact, the World Bank identified the features of bad governance as follows:

→ Failure to make a clear separation between what is public and what is private, hence a tendency to divert public resources for private gain;

→ Failure to establish a predictable framework for law and government behaviour in a manner that is conducive to development, or arbitrariness in the application of rules and laws;

→ Excessive rules, regulations, licensing requirements, etc, which impede the functioning of markets and encourage rent-seeking;

→ Priorities that are inconsistent with development, thus, resulting in a mis-allocation of resources;

→ Excessively narrow base for, or non-transparence, decision-making [91].

6.2.3. Good Governance

The concept of good governance has been variously defined. It “has come into regular use in political science, public administration and, more particularly, development management. It appears alongside such terms as democracy, civil society, participation, human rights and sustainable development. In the last decade, it has been closely associated with the public sector reform” [92]. The concept has no single and exhaustive definition, nor is there a delimitation of its scope, that commands acceptance [93]. As a matter of fact, “apart from the universal acceptance of its importance, differences prevail in respect of theoretical formulations, policy prescriptions and conceptualisation of the subject itself [94].

The multidimensionality of its definition and, the “flexibility of its usage” even though, advantageous have created some difficulties at the operational level thus, attempts have been made to redefine what it actually means [94], [65], [66]. In fact, many of the definitions of the concept “include the demand for decentralisation linking (it) with other demands for state reform such as democratisation, participatory development, accountability of public servants, professionalism as well as transparency, non-discrimination and efficiency”[95], [96], [97]. It has equally been defined thus:

Good governance has 8 major characteristics. It is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making [92], [98].

This, according to SDC (2007) explains why “good governance continues to be based on the broad consensus among development circles that the state plays a key role in determining the rules of the game, enforcing those rules, and in making its resources available to the entire population” [96]. It equally explains why “good governance” has become “a key notion in which citizens can have a more active role” which should “increase legitimacy of the state [99], [100], [97].

It is decipherable from the chronology of the discussion in this paper so far that, the issue of governance, its goodness and utility to mankind cannot be taken for granted without severe consequences. This is particularly so, in that “the way a people are governed is of paramount importance in determining the quality of life of the people” [101. It is equally more so, if as it has been opined, “governance is a process that requires a viable authority” through which “the leaders are expected to exercise the power that resides with them in the interest of the state” [73], [85].

Commenting on good governance, a scholar argued that “before governance can be considered good, government has got to be effective. And, that it must first command the respect and allegiance of the people over whom it exercises governance and, must satisfy certain basic collective needs” [73]. This scholar went further to identify some minimal elements and/or essentials of effective (good) governance as inclusive of: “provision of security for the people”, “defence of the territorial borders of the state”, “protection of lives and property”, “enforcement of laws to enhance predictability” and, “economic development”. According to this scholar, “governance requires the ability to ensure the wherewithal of sustained government”. He equally asserted that “effective (good) governance requires that public authority be able to raise the revenues necessary to pay for services that must be provided”. The essence of this argument is that, “effective governance must be able to make possible the performance by the state of certain basic services” – transportation, communication, education and health services – “relatively cheaply and reliably” [102], [73]. This is more so, since effective governance means the capacity of the state, through its power of determinism or, authoritative allocation of scarce critical societal resources – to deliver the basic necessities of life to the governed and, equally “facilitate the process of economic development”. These lines of argument tally with those which posited that:

Good governance implies efficient and effective public administration, good policies and sound management of natural resources. It calls for the ability of a state to anticipate challenges to its well-being, provide core services with people and then argument these services, act as a catalyst of charge, and guide the various forces in a society toward harmony (and national development) devoid of ideological imperialism and multi-dimensional genocidal tendencies) (Emphasis mine) [87], [103]..

Within the same line of argument, it has been further claimed that:

Good governance implies ruling on the basis of equity and social justice, and an end to corruption, nepotism and political manipulation of public institutions. Only when citizens have the belief that their government operates on their behalf, in an open and accountable manner, will government be able to obtain their willing co-operation in, for example, mobilizing resources for development [87].

Other scholars have considered good governance vis-à-vis the raison d’être of statehood in this manner as well [104], [105], [106], [107], [108], [109], [110], [75], [76], [77], [91]. . These scholars’ works on the concept of good governance treat the latter as a system of rulership that is devoid of political expediency and antidemocratic political ends. It is deducible from their works that, good governance stands for dignified existence of all political animals in democratic political settings within the global political community. It has been clearly articulated that “good governance consists of five fundamental elements” as follows:

→ Accountability of government officials (political leaders and bureaucrats) for public funds and resources;

→ Transparency in government procedures, processes, investment decisions, contracts and appointments. Transparency is a means of preventing corruption and enhancing economic efficiency;

→ Predictability in government behaviour. This is particularly critical to the carrying out of economic transactions between individuals and in taking investment decisions: governments and public institutions should not be capricious in their behaviour and actions;

→ Openness in government transactions and a reliable flow of the information necessary for economic activity and development to take place. Without information, rules will not be known, accountability is low, and risks and uncertainties are many. With these the cost of committing capital is also huge. An open system should, thus, be encouraged to release information to stakeholders and promote dialogue among the people as well as ensure their active participation in the socio-economic development of the country.

→ Observance of the rule of law must be adhered to by government and its citizens; this means that governments and institutions should be subject to rules and regulations which are understood by everyone in the society [87].

The analysis of the concept of governance and its sub-component – (good governance) – in this paper clearly shows that the capacity and ability of and nation and, indeed, the Nigerian nation and its people to pursue and achieve a sound national development which is free form the constant interruptions of time robbers; public and financial sectors mis-management is absolutely dependent on a total commitment to good governance. In other words, the extent to which the imperatives of good governance are internalized and imbibed would determine the soundness or otherwise of a nation’s fiscal policy and its accompanying budgetary process. As a matter of fact, the need to respect the budgetary process in the quest for a healthy and uninterrupted National Development in a country like Nigeria is indisputable in the sense that:

In the pursuit of development, governments have to provide a variety of services. Such include economic and social infrastructure, the system of justice and law, pensions, etc. The performance or discharge of these functions requires that governments plan their financial activities and come up with detailed spending plans. These spending plans are represented financially in the form of budgets. In several countries, poor implementation and monitoring of budgets has however meant that the desired development outcomes that lie behind spending plans remain unrealized. This underscores the importance of the post-budget formulation phases of the budget cycle involving implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Monitoring is the continuous or periodic review of programme/project implementation by management to assess delivery, identify difficulties, ascertain problem areas and recommend remedial action(s). The purpose of monitoring is to ensure efficient and effective implementation of the programme/project contained in the budget. The neglect or ineffective conduct of these aspects of the budget cycle is very likely to result in a high rate of budget failure as well as a waste of scarce resources [111].

6.3. Budgetary Sanity

The need for budgetary sanity in Nigeria and its relevance to the formulation and implementation of sound national development for the nation and her people are compelled by the problems that have been associated with the budgetary process in Nigeria as a result of the lackadaisical attitudes of our political actors to financial probity, accountability and transparency vis-à-vis the fiscal policies of the Nigerian state. This way of life as it relates to the budget as a whole is very disturbing. There is the need to respect the budget as a tool of national fiscal control. It is our belief that, it is after the recognition of the budget as the only translator of financial resources into human purposes that, its sectoral allocation could be specifically analyzed in terms of adequacy or otherwise, because once the whole is disregarded as we are now used to in Nigeria, it would be meaningless to dissipate energy on its components.

Our contention here, is grounded on the fact that, in Nigeria, emotional extra budgetary spending by Nigerian leaders at national, state and local levels has made it impossible for the past budgets to perform their predictive functions for the Nigerian economy despite their typifications as “budget of hope” “budget of reconstruction”, “budget of determination” and “budget of consolidation” among other euphemistic terminologies. These problems, apart from those associated with the undemocratic nature of the military regimes when they existed in Nigeria, are more pronounced during the democratic dispensations the nation has had so far due to Executive-Legislative rifts which have disregarded the needed collaboration between them. This way of life is greatly disturbing when viewed against the subject matter of the concept of budget within any given political system as articulated below.

6.3.1. The Concept of Budget

The budget is a financial statement that sets out the estimate of expenditure and revenue of a government or an organization for the coming year. It is a “mechanism through which subunits of government or any organization bargain over goals, make side-payments, and try to motivate one another to accomplish their objectives [112]. Thus, it is referred to as a political document that involves bargaining between various sectors of the political economy. It is a “planning device” used for the translation of “present scarce fiscal and human resources in the public sector into future government goal and programmes” [112]. It is a coordinating device used as a tool of fiscal policy in public administration. It is “an instrument (used) to allocate public resources toward achieving some public value and, used for looking forward (Planning) or for looking backward (monitoring). It provides indications for revenue flows and a time frame for decisions about the services and activities (within a specified time) and, it has “three general functions: a) budgeting; b) control, accountability and c) evaluation” [113]. Thus, serving as “a legal document that provides a vehicle for fiscal controls over subordinate units of government by the politically elected representatives of the people” [113]. In fact, the essence of the budget (expenditure control, accountability, evaluation) and, its basics (budget cycle, budget execution, sequencing) put together, stresses the purposes of control for accountability, efficiency; evaluation for purposes of monitoring, assessing and planning for futuristic service requirements and; policy consistency, predictability in line with the transparent procedures [113].

The budget constitutes one of the policy-nerve centers of government’s response to the political environment in terms of authoritative allocations of scarce societal values. The political view of the budget sees it less as a tool of public management and much more as a part of the general social decision-making process in which various participants, clientele groups, agencies and the council of economic advisers combined to determine who gets what? Where? When? How and Why? hence, it has to be participatory.

6.3.2. Participatory Budgeting

Participatory budgeting within the context of this paper refers to or is taken to mean a budgetary process that is predicated on the values of democratic process and its accompanying toleration of relevant constitutional inputs without bitterness or constitutional strangulation. It is a process devoid of legal sophistry and other politically motivated bumps or obstacles put in place to ostracize any of the organs of the government at any stage of the budgetary process. It is also taken to mean a people oriented process that takes into consideration the plights of the citizenry and, their consideration as the ultimate custodians of the nation’s sovereignty and, to whom those in government are accountable from time to time. The benefits of participatory budgeting are immense.

6.3.3. Benefits of participatory Budgeting

There is no doubt that a national like Nigeria or any nation at all, stands to benefit from the effective management of her public sector’s fiscal stress through the process of participatory budgeting. Through effective and participatory management of her public sector’s budgetary process, the Nigerian state will be able to meaningfully foster greater harmony among her political, economic and market choices and/or forces. This, in turn, will aid her capacity to reduce or clearly avoid political bankruptcy and provide to the citizens effective public service delivery and, in the process bring about politics of hope and its multiplier effects of creation of the needed road map to economic development. This reduction or avoidance of political bankruptcy from constituting a major problem to politico –economic benefit will aid the ability and capacity of the Nigerian state to find and maintain a balance between fiscal solvency and levels of services and benefits that are adequate, equitable and stable “[60]. Through this, effective management of the public sector’s finances would be enhanced and the Nigerian state would be able to avoid some of the defects which had occurred at various stages of her economic planning and, which had, in most cases, rendered them impotent as mechanisms for pursuing national agenda on economic and political fronts.

If this can be painstakingly done, the benefits that are inherent in the balanced management of the public sector’s fiscal stress through budgetary sanity can be infinitely and adequately tapped for the betterment of the citizenry. And the government will be able to identify and vigorously purse for attainment, some key national challenges. Equally, key political challenges of tension over the distribution of power and resources” “friction between legislative and executive branches of government”, “transparency in governance”, “religious contestations and regional groupings”, “sustainability of the democratic transformation” and “weak political party structure” among others, will become tactically manageable for effective governmental process and actions which would benefit the masses. If this state can be reached or attained, Nigeria as a nation-state where government remains the major player in the economy as against the private sector led-economy” will be able by means of authoritative process to put the “economy back on the path of equitable economic growth” [56]. The nation will equally be able to:

■ Design sound development policies and ensure effective implementation;

■ Design a sound and comprehensive poverty alleviation policy and programme for human poverty eradication;

■ Identify the sectors that form the basis for sustainable economic growth and focus on them, for example agriculture, energy, mining and industry;

■ Capacity enhancement for the informal sector which is plagued by low productivity and high poverty;

■ Appropriate debt management policy that will release foreign exchange for domestic investment;

■ Support the development of sectoral policies that will encourage capacity utilization, employment and increased productivity.

■ Support programmes that enhance national food security attainment, reduction in post harvest loss;

■ Diversification of the economy;

■ Promotion of small and medium scale enterprises and urban informal activities;

■ Facilitate access to credit, productive resources and employment;

■ Promote the acquisition of appropriate technology;

■ Provide support for the acquisition of information technology;

■ Broaden the base for economic decision-making, involving the private sector, NGOs, CBOS and Civil society;

■ Mobilize resources for priority development areas; and

■ Support the mainstreaming of gender into the development process.

■ Strengthen the coordination mechanism put in place by government at federal, state and LGA levels;

■ Support coordination among donors;

■ Support collection and analysis of poverty data;

■ Support programmes that guarantee fundamental human rights, protection of life and property; and

■ Support targeted poverty alleviation programmes [56].

6.4. Maintenance of Sanity in the Banking/Financial Sector

The need for sanity in the banking and/or, financial sector of the Nigerian political economy at this point of her national development is driven home by the fact that:

banking institutions occupy a central position in the country’s financial system and are essential agents in the development process. By intermediating between the surplus and deficit savings’ units within an economy, banks mobilize and facilitate efficient allocation of national output. Through financial intermediation, banks facilitate capital formation (investment) and promote economic growth [114].

For effectiveness of the pursuit of this sanity, there is need for a new and further merger and acquisition as well as recapitalization programme within the Nigerian banking/ financial sector. However, such a programme must be predicated on solid and inviolable foundation of efficacious banking values and philosophy with unequivocal mission statement/goals. Such philosophy must clearly spell out and prescribe the dire consequences that await violators and/or truncators of such goals.

In the process the requisite agencies like the ICPC and EFCC both of which must be restructured and/or even merged for better and effective performance, must be given the operational leeway without any misguided and extra systemic and extralegal influenced handicapping provisions under the guise of control. This is necessary in view of the current helpless situations of the agencies within the Nigerian political landscape and economy.

6.5. Checkmating of Amoral Moral Crusade by Amoral Chief Executives/People in Position of Power

Interruptions in the nation’s economic development and goals will continue in Nigeria unless the process through which some Chief Executives (both political and corporate/economic) get into office by ways of bureaucratic corruption/pathologies explainable in faulty selection/appointment process; electoral process and backdoor politicking is change or modified in line with the orthodox ethics of uprightness and honesty. This is more so, in that some of these amoral Chief Executives who can be likened to “mega” or “cow” thieves/kleptocrats soon become “amoral-moral crusaders” when they get into office and continue to sit in unethical judgement over falsely alleged “petty” or “chicken” thieves. And these “mega” or “cow” thieves/kleptocrats (as Chief Executives) usually blow such false and unproven allegations of misconduct against the falsely alleged “petty” or “chicken” thieves out of proportion. These “mega” thieves/kleptocrats are found in all sectors of the Nigerian economy and political landscape (public and private).

6.6. Concrete and Meaningful Policy on the Activities of Militants

One of the ways for dealing with militancy in a nation like Nigeria has been demonstrated and/or, put in place by the Yar’Adua Administration through its Amnesty Programme for the Niger Delta Region’s Militants in 2009. This programme came to an end in October following which the post-amnesty summit has taken place as a point of departure for other phases of the programme. However, the extent to which this can be regarded as an effective mechanism for mutually settling the militants’ activities in the Niger Delta is contingent on the management of the post-amnesty phase of the programme and its possible contradictions and/or subsequent developments.

It should be stated at this point that we are not unmindful of the contestations over the rationality and/or constitutional or legal appropriateness of the Amnesty Programme which, to some extent has taken on a legal dimension for determination. For instance, the Amnesty programme has been variously examined and commented upon thus:

In the first place, the point must be established that these young men are not “militants” but human right activists. The word “militant” is derogatory. I see the amnesty granted these Niger-Delta human right activists and environmentalists and the fact that the Federal Government named them “militants” as deliberate effort on the part of the federal government to criminalize the activities of the Niger-Delta human right activists. Amnesty in the eyes of the law is an unconditional pardon granted to criminals and not human right activists such as the young men who until now fought relentlessly for a better Niger-Delta. To a great extent, one could say that the expired President Umaru Yar’Adua yielded some results in view of the submission of sophisticated arms and ammunition in large quantities. The sophistication of the arms and the quantities surrendered by the Niger-Delta human right activist are enough to create palpable fear in the minds of every right thinking Nigeria. Thus the surrendering of arm occasioned by the Amnesty has further exposed the blatant carelessness, lukewarm attitude, and distain (sic) with which the federal government had been handling the Niger Delta issue [45].

The essence of the immediate above referenced position is discernible from the fact that “hours after an amnesty for Nigeria’s oil militants expired, the original group that began the unrest has gone to court arguing the move is illegal”[115]. In fact, the opposition to the amnesty was further concretely driven home by the following excerpts from comment of the Niger Delta People’s Volunteer Force (NDPVF) Lawyer with the BBC News:

“There is nothing to forgive here if you are fighting for the self-determination of your people”.

“…..the amnesty deal was a calculated plot to divert attention from the region’s underdevelopment and right to self determination”.

“They (NDPVF) are saying: Give us our resources to control, you have no right to control our resources on our behalf and no amount of intimidation or amnesty can make us lose focus of that fact”.

“President Yar’Adua does not have the power to grant pardons when nothing has been done wrong”.

“amnesty is “a means to cow everybody in the Niger-Delta into submission and silence” [115].

In the same vein, the amnesty programme has been seen as a misplaced priority because “the underlying political and economic landscape (of Niger-Delta) has not changed” in that “there are still no jobs for disaffected youths” (and), “powerful people in Nigeria continue to make money from oil theft and political godfathers will still need young men with guns in order to secure their positions” [115]. The persistence of these stiff oppositions to the amnesty programme raises serious questions and concerns about the possibility of the much desired peace and stability in Nigeria as well as the much needed effective management of the now consistent interruptions of the nation’s development. This is particularly so given the fact that such oppositions continue despite the fact that “President Yar’Adua in his speeches presented his administration to the world as a government that will not abdicate its responsibilities at this crucial post-amnesty period” and, the promise “that his administration would embrace the Niger Delta human right activists, rehabilitate them and engage them positively” [45].

6.7. Finding Solution to Time Robbers/Time Robberies

One of the ways of positively dealing with the disruptive effects of the constant interruptions in the healthy management of the nation’s national development is to provide solutions to the menace of time robbers including the ones that are imposed on us and those that are self-inflicted. Such time robbers and what to do to get rid of them for the sustenance of effective management of the now obvious interruptions in the national development and economy of many nations, corporate organizations, public sector’s bureaucracies are provided in tables 1 and 2 below for an at a glance decipherment.

Table 2. Time Robbers imposed upon people and possible solutions to them

Table 3. Self-inflicted Time Robbers and possible solutions to them

6.8. Inculcation of the Culture of Time Management: Effective Time Management and Avoidance of “Africa/African time” as the Answer

Given the disruptive impacts of time robbers and time robberies on the national development of any nation like Nigeria, it is important to put in place an effective mechanism for time management in order to checkmate their spread to all other sectors of the political landscape and the possibility of their becoming permanent characteristics of the nation.

The first step is to critically and systematically identify the national activities that are germane to the realization of the Nation’s goals and aspiration from those that are not by ways of prioritization and, determine that such activities are not to be toyed with. Once this is done the time wasting and robbing activities identified so far in this paper must be avoided at all cost vis-à-vis the said national activities. In short, time wasting/waster techniques must be avoided by our political actors and gladiators at all cost in the course of the pursuit of national agenda. This avoidance and/or solution to the menace of time robbers and time robberies can be done through effective time management which is simply “the appropriate allocation of time among various activities necessary to accomplish (stated) objectives” [22]. Time management will bring about effectiveness and efficiency vis-à-vis the attainment of stated corporate or political goals because as a concept dealing with “ a designed combination of processes, tools and technique” it “refers to a range of skills, tools, techniques used to manage time when accomplishing specific tasks, projects and goals” [29].

The attempt to enhance effective utilization of appropriate technique of time management – (as a result of “the recent general argument on the concepts of “time” and “management” on the basis of which “time management” has been conceived as misleading), - has led to a re-conceptualization of the term. It has consequently been contended that the concept of “time management” “should actually imply that it is “the management of our own activities, to make sure that they are accomplished within the available or allocated time, which is an unmanageable continuous resource” [29].

Time management as a technique and/or, approach against the onslaught of the activities of time robbers and; time robberies, has been categorized in line with the phases of societal development and changes in the dynamics of administration and corporate planning. Such categorization ranges from “First generation; Second generation; Third generation to Fourth generation” approaches. The categorized intergenerational approaches of time management and their respective requirements have been summed up thus:

● First generation: reminders based on clocks and watches, but with computer implementation possible; can be used to alert a person when a task is to be done.

● Second generation: planning and preparation based on calendar and appointment books; includes setting goals.

● Third generation: planning, prioritizing, controlling (using a personal organizer, other paper-based objects, or computer) activities on a daily basis. This approach implies spending some time in clarifying values and priorities.

● Fourth generation: being efficient and proactive using any of the above tools; places goals and roles as the controlling element of the system and favours importance over urgency [117], [39].

Time management has been articulated as having many concepts. Some of which include:

● Project management. Time management, can be considered as a project management subset, and is more commonly known as project planning and project scheduling. Time management is also been (sic) identified as one of the core functions identified in project management.

● Attention management: Attention management relates to management of cognitive resources, and in particular the time that humans allocate their mind (and organizations the minds of their employees) to conduct knowledge management [117], [39].

The extent to which time management can be effective is anchored on the “use of time” or, “the use to which our time is put”. And, the extent to which time management can be understood is contingent on the dimension of time usage. Thus, a dichotomy has been made between “spending time” and “saving time” in that “when we spend time, there is no improvement in efficiency, productivity, or effectiveness. The time is gone without a return. We save time when we perform tasks in less time or with less effort than previously. We use shortcuts and processes that streamline activities. We invest time when we take time now to save time later” [117], [39]. In line with this dichotomy, delegation of activities/duties has been identified as one of the techniques of time management vis-à-vis the checkmating of time robbers.

Time management requires some techniques in order for its effectiveness to be attained. These techniques are called “techniques for setting priorities”. Some of these techniques include ABC Analysis; Pareto Analysis and, POSEC Method. These techniques and/or methods are elucidated as follows:

1. ABC analysis is a technique that has been used in business management for a long time (and it involves) the categorization of large data into groups. These groups are often marked A.B, and C –hence the name. Activities are ranked upon these general criteria:

● A – Tasks that are perceived as being urgent and important.

● B – Tasks that are important but not urgent.

● C – Tasks that are neither urgent nor important.

Each group is then rank-ordered in priority. To further refine priority, some individuals choose to then force- rank all “B’ items as either “A” or “C”. ABC analysis can incorporate more than three groups. ABC analysis is frequently combined with Pareto analysis [117], [39].

2. Pareto analysis is the ideal that 80% of the tasks can be completed in 20% of the disposable time. The remaining 20% of tasks will take up 80% of the time. This principle is used to sort tasks into two parts. According to this form of Pareto analysis it is recommended that tasks that fall into the first category be assigned a higher priority. The 80-20-rule can also be applied to increase productivity: it is assumed that 80% of the productivity can be achieved by doing 20% of the tasks. If productivity is the aim of time management, then these tasks should be prioritized higher [117], [39].

3. POSEC method. This acronym constitutes a hierarchy as follows:

● PRIORITIZE-Your time and define your life by goals.

● ORGANIZING-Things you have to accomplish regularly to be successful. (Family and Finances).

● STREAMLINING-Things you may not like to do, but must do. (Work and Chores)

● ECONOMIZING-Things you should do or may even like to do, but they’re not pressingly urgent. (Pastimes and Socializing).

● CONTRIBUTING–By paying attention to the few remaining things that make a difference. (Social Obligations) [117], [39].

The beauty of time management notwithstanding, for it to be effectively evoked in the quest for a thorough and effective control of the menace of time robbers, time robberies and; mismanagers in a country like Nigeria, the culture of “Africa time” and “African time” must be avoided given its propensity for unimaginable damage to the attainment of set goals in today’s global world. The essence of this is identifiable from the fact that:

..“Africa time” or “African time” is a colloquial term used to describe a perceived cultural tendency, in some parts of Africa, toward a more relaxed attitude to time. This is sometimes used in a negative sense, about tardiness in appointment, meetings and events. The term is also sometimes used to describe the more leisurely, relaxed and less rigorously scheduled lifestyle found in these countries, especially as opposed to the more hectic, clock-bound pace of daily life in Western countries [39], [118], [119].

The concept of “African time” or “African time” remains today “a key-criticism in modern Africa” [39], [120] because “one of the main reasons for the continuing underdevelopment of our country is our nonchalant attitude to time and the need for punctuality in all aspects of life. The problem of punctuality has become so endemic that lateness to any function is accepted and explained off as “African time” [39], [120].

6.9. Tackling the Problems of Corruption, Lack of Accountability and Arrested Development

The now obvious problems of corruption, lack of accountability and arrested development which have become terminal to the healthy existence of Nigeria as a nation must be dealt with. This is necessary and must and should be urgently done in view of the damage it has unleashed on the nation’s psyche.

As a matter of fact, it is stating the obvious to observe that corruption and lack of accountable governance have thrown up issues that border on the development of Nigeria. Politics in the country has become for most of the political actors an avenue for primitive accumulation of wealth. No wonder the “do or die” mentality that has characterized the political processes in the country. Characters of all sorts of social and political plumage have hijacked political activities and in the process shunted out genuine patriots who would have contributed immensely to the development of the country. As a matter of fact, The nature, character and context of Nigerian politics have diminished an otherwise towering image of the country. In spite of the assumed limitations of the founding fathers of Nigeria, the current realities put them as men and women who struggled to leave some indelible marks in the National scheme of things. The Awolowos, the Azikiwes, the Ahmadu Bellos and the Okotiebos left institutions and monuments that have stood the test of time.

In all areas of life a large deficit can be noticed in the inability of the elite in power to address the needs and aspirations of the people. The latest Human Development Index paints a dismal picture of Nigeria as it is ranked 158 out of the 182 nations that were assessed. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) also ranked Nigeria, over 167th in life expectancy, 112th in adult literacy, 150th in combined GDP [121]. Again, in its assessment of countries in the African continent in 2009, the M. O. Ibrahim Foundation indicated that Nigeria fell below 20 other countries in terms of good governance on the continent, with Mauritius, the Indian Ocean Island being chosen as the best as its government and private sectors delivered the best practices and public goods to their people [122].

It bears repeating that in Nigeria the elite whether in political governance or the private sector have in fundamental ways not discharged their historical responsibilities creditably well. The level of graft and other socio-economic indiscretions prevalent in the country led to the establishment of the Economic and financial crimes commission (EFCC) in 2001 by the regime of Chief Olusegun Obasanjo. Opinions are divided on the activities of the EFCC. While some people are of the view that the era of Ribadu marked a golden period in the activities of the EFCC, others are of the opinion that the former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo used the anti-graft body to fight his political opponents thereby leaving other corrupt government officials who were close to him and his government. This paper does not want to dabble into this argument but suffice it to say that the need to strengthen the EFCC and its sister organization, ICPC cannot be over emphasized if the fight for the extirpation of corruption in our land must be successful.

It is in recognition of this that one acknowledges the efforts of the EFCC which brought to book former Managing Directors of banks in Nigeria who used their positions either to enrich themselves or their cronies. The EFCC must add more vigour in its fight against corruption and ensure that no corrupt official no matter how highly placed is allowed to go scot free. The arrests and prosecutions of the Chief Executive Officers of the eight or 10 banks that were involved in anti-banking conducts by the EFCC and example of which includes the sentencing of Cecilia Ibru, the Chief Executive of the Oceanic Bank by a Lagos Federal High Court in October, 2010 to 18 months imprisonment on three-count charge based on a plea-bargaining with the EFCC represents an index of EFCC’s commitment to the raison d’être of its establishment within the Nigerian body politic.

However, the ability of EFCC to do his with be enhanced through its restructured merger with the ICPC. In other words, The EFCC and ICPC must be restructured and consequently merged for effective performance. These can be done by making the revamped ICPC the investigative component of a new and revitalized EFCC with the latter serving as a prosecutorial and enforcement component of the new EFCC that will emerged from the merger. However, this reform can only be carried out or embarked upon if and only if the Government is or can be bold enough to face the challenges that may likely follow it given the complexities and slippery terrains of the nation’s political space which are usually dictated by retrogressive primordial attachments and sentiments and, the volatility of its geo-political considerations.

As a matter of fact, there is need for concrete accountability, which on its own is indispensable to time management as a technique of exterminating time robbers and time robberies and their executors. This is particularly so in that time Robbers can be effectively dealt with through a real and concrete commitment to the catechism of accountability and its propelling forces against putridity in the public sector and other sectors of the nation’s polity and its economy. The reasons for this are quite explicit given the imperatives of accountability and the latter’s nexus with good governance.

7. Conclusions

The problems and challenges of Nigeria’s national development have been examined in this paper. These problems which are due to the menace of mis-management through the plethora of mis-managers within all sectors of the nation’s political economy which gained increased and disturbing prominence in the country towards the end of the first decade of this millennium include the disruptive functions of Time Robbers and Militants. In the process of the analytical discourses, relevant concepts - [Development, Political Development, National Development, Management and Mis-management, Time, Time Management, Time Robbers and Militancy] - were elucidated. The non-understanding of these concepts in the context of the problems they constantly pose to national development planning, accountability and probity in the public sector, good governance, productive collaboration among organs of government, respect for the requirements of fiscal politics and policies was critically examined using a linkage analytical approach. This approach provided the platform and template for the consideration of what to do in terms of the country’s hydraheaded Management problems that have been constantly occasioned by the interruptions in her development plans which has consequently stifled her overall national aspirations and throttled her development into reverse among comity of nations.

Note

1. The earlier version of this paper was presented by the leading author at the 9^th National Conference of the Institute of Public Administration of Nigeria (IPAN) at Abuja, held between Thursday 22^nd and Friday 23^rd October, 2009. The leading author is immensely grateful to IPAN for seeking his expertise on the subject-matter of its National Conference for the year 2009. The presented version was later updated with requisite inputs by the other authors.