Nigeria makes progress in tackling challenges

Nigeria has just completed a series of elections, culminating in the re-election of President Olusegun Obasanjo into his second and last term. Naturally, we have already sent our congratulations to him. At the beginning of May, Nigeria will conduct its local government elections.

We, together with many people across our continent and elsewhere in the world, awaited the elections in Nigeria with great expectation. All of us hoped that these elections would be held in an atmosphere that would ensure that they are free and fair.

It is clear that there were instances of irregularities in some parts of the country. However, it also seems clear that by and large the elections were well conducted.

There are established judicial mechanisms in the country to hear any complaints arising out of the elections. We trust that those who may have a grievance will resort to these mechanisms, consistent with their respect for the country's constitution and the rule of law. In this regard we agree with the EU Election Observation Mission, which has said it "encourages all stakeholders to actively contribute to a peaceful environment and urges aggrieved parties to resort only to legal remedies through the judiciary".

Nigeria is the biggest country on our continent in terms of the size of the population. It is an important economic player, especially in the area of oil and gas. Necessarily, it plays and has to play a vital role in the processes in which we are all engaged for the renewal of our continent. To do this requires, among other things, that the country should be stable and therefore not consumed by internal conflicts.

Of course, part of the interest in the Nigerian elections arose from the fact that for the greater part of the period since that country's independence, it has been victim to a number of military governments. Indeed, when President Obasanjo was first elected president in 1999, he took over from a military government.

Speaking to graduating Nigerian military officers two months after his inauguration in 1999, President Obasanjo, himself a former military Head of State, said: "In my inaugural address on 29 May 1999, I made it clear that military incursion into government in post-independent Nigeria had ended in a complete disaster, for Nigeria and for the military itself. No matter how noble the intentions of the pioneer coup makers may have been, the prolonged involvement of the military in the administration and management of the state had aggravated the problems of political instability and deepened corruption within society.

"A succession of governments produced by undemocratic processes has severely stunted the nation's political evolution. Furthermore, military autocracy concealed certain societal grievances and cleavages that would have been more meaningfully addressed had they been properly aired within a democratic environment.

"The consensus today is that, in the long run, the country's political development and her quest for lasting unity and enduring stability would be best achieved through dialogue and debate that are part of the democratic dispensation. The political class must be allowed to make its mistakes and learn from its failures, as is evident from the history of successful democracies elsewhere in the world."

He returned to some of these issues when he spoke at a passing out parade for Officer Cadets from Sierra Leone, who had been trained in Nigeria, again in 1999. He said:

"The root cause of much of Africa's problems is developmental. A most critical condition for development is a government which is open, transparent, humane and participatory. Nigeria in particular and Africa as a whole have been traumatised by bad governments and mismanaged to the point of desolation and penury. For far too long, our Armed Forces have been pre-occupied with matters for which they have neither training nor constitutional legitimacy. This trend has been ruinous to the nation as well as the Armed Forces. At the risk of repeating what I have already said, let me sound a note of warning to any serving personnel who thinks that he is in service as a gateway to a political appointment. Such personnel is advised to leave the service in his own interest because there is no place any more for the political soldier."

In these paragraphs, President Obasanjo raised precisely the concerns of all African democrats who were keenly interested that the latest elections should take place in a manner that would ensure the further entrenchment of democracy in Nigeria.

We are confident that despite the problems that were experienced, this has happened. This serves as an additional guarantee that the military will not be tempted to seize power again, on the basis that it has to intervene to ensure stability in the country.

The high level of interest in the Nigerian elections was also motivated by concern about the situation in the region of West Africa. As we all know, this area of our continent has been subject to a great deal of military conflict and instability. This includes the wars in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Cote d'Ivoire.

This instability continues to persist. It is now worsened by the fact that the region is awash with weapons. It has many people who are unemployed and know how to use guns, having participated in the various military conflicts in the regions.

So serious is the situation that the governments in the region have expressed deep concern about the growth of an African mercenary force in West Africa, which is used by people who have money and political ambitions, to destabilise countries and overthrow democratically elected governments.

Nigeria has played a leading role in the effort to end these conflicts and ensure stability for the whole of the West African region. Once more, she can only discharge this pan-African responsibility if she herself is a stable democracy.

The interest in Nigeria was, of course, also driven by other considerations. Because of its history and size, in some respects Nigeria tends to magnify many of the problems that affect us as African countries. It therefore becomes clear that if she manages to solve these problems, this would serve as a good example that all of us who face similar problems should emulate.

Nigeria is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-faith country. To deal with this diversity, from the beginning it organised itself as a Federal Republic. Over the years, the number of states that constitute the Republic has increased, as various groups have felt that they needed their own State legislatures and governments. Nevertheless, these efforts did not stop a costly civil war, which ended in 1970, and was occasioned by the attempt of people in the eastern part of Nigeria to secede and establish an independent state called Biafra.

Nigeria continues to battle with the matter of a stable political system that will satisfy all the people of that country. As was to be expected, these matters of diverse regional interests were a significant feature of the recent elections. Given that many of our countries, including our own, are multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-faith, we are naturally interested to draw lessons from the progress that Nigeria makes in ensuring the success of the objective of unity in diversity in the Federal Republic.

We too have had to confront similar challenges, as represented, for instance, by the demand by some, for a unique Kingdom of KwaZulu within a republican state, and a similarly unique Afrikaner Volkstaat within a non-racial state.

One of the difficult matters that Nigeria has been grappling with is the issue of revenue sharing. This has to do with an equitable distribution of national revenues among the various States, to ensure balanced regional development, without favouring some and punishing others. This matter is complicated by the fact that the oil resources are found in one part of the country, the Niger Delta, called the South-South, many of whose residents therefore call for a disproportionate share of the oil revenues.

This has resulted in violent conflicts in this area. Speaking not long after the 1999 elections, President Obasanjo said: "The security situation in the Niger Delta Area remains fragile and largely volatile." This situation persisted even during the latest elections.

We are aware of the past tensions in our own country over the issue of sharing of resources among our provinces. In addition, tensions around the issue of wealthier sections in our municipalities helping to fund the development of poorer parts of the municipalities will be with us for some time.

Another matter of great importance in the evolution of Nigeria has been and remains the issue of good governance, especially with reference to the cancer of corruption. When the Cabinet Ministers were sworn in, in 1999, this is what President Obasanjo had to say about this matter: "This brings me to a recurring theme in all my speeches in which I decried the extent to which corruption has eaten into the fabric of our society. The recklessness with which public officials resorted to bribery, extortion, and other forms of corruption has done incalculable harm to Nigeria. Serious damage was done to the economy as investors, both domestic and foreign alike, were put off by the cost of doing business and the dangers of confronting rapacious officials. Most painful was the global association of our country with morally reprehensible and grievous acts, which have done incalculable harm to our self-esteem as a nation.

"This Administration has declared a war on corruption, which must be taken seriously by all members of this Government. The pervasive licentiousness in our society about the use of state resources for personal ends cannot be allowed to continue, for it rewards swindlers, demoralises honest officials and acts as a lethal poison in the body politic of the nation."

Despite all the efforts in Nigeria to confront this critical challenge, the problem persists. It will take a forceful, sustained and protracted offensive on the part of the Nigerian government and people to solve it. The gravity of the situation is reflected in the comments made by President Obasanjo in 1999. Accordingly, there can be no doubt that it has to be confronted with the utmost serious and dedication.

This situation should sound alarm bells for us as well. We dare not allow that the rot becomes entrenched in the manner reported by President Obasanjo. As in the case of Nigeria, we too, both the government and the people, have to engage in a forceful, sustained and protracted offensive to deal with the swindlers and the lethal poison of corruption in our body politic.

Nigeria is for us a vitally important partner in the effort to achieve both our own development and the renaissance of Africa. She plays and must continue to play an important role in ensuring that Africa takes her rightful place among the world community of nations.

Even as we rely on her support, we too must continue to support her efforts to build a stable democracy and achieve a better life for all her citizens. Among other things, this means that we should lend as much assistance as necessary and possible, as she struggles to deal with all the problems of a poor and developing country, that has to find Nigerian and African solutions to the challenges thrown up both by the reality of poverty and the fact of being a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-faith country.

We wish President Obasanjo, the new government and the sister people of Nigeria success in their challenging struggle to give birth to a democratic and prosperous African nation, at peace with itself.

Employment Equity

South Africa has yet to tap into its talent pool

The continued under-representation of blacks, women and people with disabilities in the workplace undermines South Africa's efforts to effectively tap the full potential of its people. Judging by the annual report of the Commission for Employment Equity, companies have yet to make significant strides in removing the barriers to the employment of South Africans previously excluded from a range of positions.

The report shows that many companies are still failing to comply with the reporting requirements of the Employment Equity Act, not to mention the substantive issues of achieving actual change in the demographics of the workplace.

According to reports submitted for 2001, only a quarter of all employees in top management positions were black - eight percent African, 13 percent coloured and four percent Indian. Despite constituting just over 10 percent of the population, whites hold 75 percent of top management positions. Women only hold 12 percent of top management positions, although they constitute 52 percent of the population.

Similar imbalances are found in other segments, such as senior and middle-management levels and in professional, legislators and senior official categories. The situation is better in the technicians and associate professionals category, where blacks account for 59 percent and women 46 percent of employees.

Consistent with apartheid 'job reservation' patterns, black employees are most likely to be found in lower skilled, lower paying positions. These include categories like agriculture and fishery workers (79 percent are black), plant and machine operators (94 percent) and 'elementary occupations ' - such as news vendors, garage attendants and labourers - where 97 percent are black.

Black employees account for 83 percent of 'non-permanent' workers, who work less than 24 hours a month or less than three continuous months. These are generally the most vulnerable workers, with access to the fewest benefits.

These findings indicate that South Africa has still a great distance to go before it can claim to have made much progress in redressing apartheid imbalances in the workplace. This is as much an issue of human rights, as it is about economic growth and development. All South Africans should have access to equal opportunities regardless of their race, sex or disability. The legacy of job reservation and grossly unequal education spending must be challenged and overcome if the rights of all citizens to equal employment opportunities are to be achieved.

It is regrettable that it is necessary to continue to use apartheid terms to describe the process of employment equity. It does not signal an acceptance that people should be seen in racial terms, but rather an acknowledgement of the fact that people's opportunities today are still affected by how they were categorised in the past. By using terms like african, coloured, Indian and white it is possible to monitor whether there has been any change in the opportunities of those disadvantaged in the past.

As the process of employment equity gains momentum and the demographics of the workplace at all levels more accurately reflect the demographics of society, then the use of racial labels as a descriptive tool will have little or no purpose.

There is also a very practical reason why employment equity needs to gain pace. For as long as the vast majority of South Africans are excluded from meaningful participation in the economy at all levels, the country's economy will be running on far less than its capacity. A county that does not fully use the skills, energy and creativity of more than half its people will never grow and prosper. If South Africa does not grow economically, it will not be able to meet even the most basic needs of its people.

According to Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana, employment equity is about acknowledging that there is a talent pool in this country which has not been fully tapped into.

"We are not suggesting that black people, women and persons with disabilities should be given jobs that they cannot perform or have no potential to grow into, but . let the artificial barriers which were place in the context of an apartheid dispensation be removed so that we can build a truly non-racial, non-sexist democratic South Africa," Mdladlana said at the launch of the commission's report.

Employers reported a number of 'barriers' in advancing employment equity in their organisations. These included barriers to bringing people from designated groups into their organisation, and, having done so, in supporting their progress in the organisation through structured training and development, and succession and experience planning.

The commission report notes that the fact that training and development issues are so frequently reported as barriers shows that employment equity and skills development planning are not adequately integrated and do not support one another in organisations.

Mdladlana said that where employers have a genuine desire to overcome these barriers, there is no limit to what the labour department is prepared to do to assist. "However, I must also warn that in those instances where spurious excuses are being used around the non-implementation of the [Employment Equity] Act, officials will also go to all lengths to ensure compliance.

Employers will be expected to submit their next employment equity reports to the labour department by 1 October this year.

Mdladlana said he trusted employers would cooperate with officials in the department in promoting equity in the workplace: "Turning the clock backwards is not an option for the ANC-led government, whose mandate is to transform the country in such a way that all who live in it benefit from the opportunities it provides."

More Information:

• Commission for Employment Equity Annual Report 2002
• Employment Equity Act, No 55 of 1998

National Drug Policy

Laws for cheaper medicines kick in

On 2 May the laws and regulations that give muscle to our 1996 National Drug Policy come into effect. They include the Medicines Control Amendment Act of 1997 that was attacked by pharmaceutical manufacturers and celebrated by activists as the campaign for affordable medicines gathered support two years ago.

At the heart of the National Drug Policy is our determination to ensure that all our people have access to essential medicines of good quality. That vision remains as critical today as it was in the first years of democratic government.

We have taken many initiatives to improve health care for those who suffered the worst deprivation under apartheid and have succeeded on many fronts. But there are still forms of treatment that we cannot afford to offer public sector patients. Although more fortunate than many nations, we are part of the developing world - and in the developing world large numbers of people die of treatable illnesses because medicines are too expensive.

In 1997 we resolved to enter the medicines price war and our weapon of choice was the commercial weapon of competition. We proposed to tap into international markets for cheaper prices on drugs and wrote such a provision into the Medicines Control Amendment Act (No 90 of 1997).

The Amendment Act also contained a wide-ranging set of provisions intended to upgrade and develop the country's systems for manufacturing, distributing and dispensing drugs. All these provisions were held hostage during the targeted onslaught of the multi-national pharmaceutical companies against those parts of the Act that dealt with access to affordable medicines.

For three years our government found itself standing largely alone, facing a legal battle against the concerted opposition of some of the wealthiest corporations on earth. At one point, the United States Government fired the commercial equivalent of a warning shot when it put South Africa on a "watch list" of nations who are alleged to show contempt for their international obligations.

South Africa maintained a solid front against our critics. We were confident that our quest for cheaper medicines did not contravene international agreements on the rights of patent holders. And, gradually the tide of public opinion began to turn against the pharmaceutical industry. By the time we faced the industry in the courtroom in Pretoria, we had the backing of a massive international campaign focused on "lives before profits".

The hearing had already begun - in the glare of the international media spotlight - when the drug companies decided to sue for peace. In the negotiations that followed the South African Government made no concessions on Act 90 of 1997 and our position on accessing affordable medicines was fully vindicated. The withdrawal of the drug companies was as unconditional as it was sudden. Within a few hours of the conclusion of talks, Act 90 of 97 was out of the dock and free to go.

In truth, the sudden end of the court case signalled another tough process. Act 90 of 97 was a groundbreaker not only in its approach to international medicines markets, but also because it created mechanisms for government to influence drug pricing and marketing practices. Such mechanisms exist in several industrial countries - but no other developing country has tried them.

As a result, the drafting of regulations to Act 90 of 97 was a much more challenging process than anyone had envisaged. In fact, additional amendments to the principal Act were needed in order to achieve a coherent package of law.

The most important provisions of this transformative legislation are:

• Parallel importing, which empowers the Health Minister to grant permission for the purchase of medicines in a foreign country if the prices for the identical product - produced by the same company - are substantially lower there.
• Generic substitution, which obliges pharmacists to inform clients if there is a cheaper generic drug (a copy of the original that has exactly the same effect) and to give them the option of the cost-saving version.
• The setting up of a Pricing Committee, which advises the minister on pricing issues but - contrary to its name - does not actually set drug prices. The latter activity remains the preserve of drug manufacturers. The committee can, however, assist the minister to set ground rules for pricing and open the whole pricing system up to the clear light of public scrutiny.
  In addition, the committee will analyse pricing trends and alert the minister to major price differences between local and foreign markets. In this way, the committee will serve as the trigger for the minister to invoke various provisions of the Act to pursue the cheaper options.
• Licensing and registration processes designed to ensure good practice all along the medicines supply chain. Critical among these is the requirement that doctors (and other health professionals) who dispense medicines must undergo specified training and must be licensed by the Department of Health. The best interests of patients will be paramount in deciding whether to issue a dispensing licence.

When they come into effect on May 2, the new laws will demand change in many established - and often lucrative - practices in the health sector. They will create a more ethical and consumer-focused environment. Many individuals and organisations that are part of this sector will welcome the change and be prepared to play by the rules.

But there will, undoubtedly, be those who want to protect their narrow interests and who doubt their ability to flourish when the playing field is level and the rules are clear. We expect there will be attempts to brand this legislation as excessively controlling, commercially naïve and hostile to patient interests.

We plead guilty to the accusation of control - but not to excessive control. The Acts build on the solid track record of the Medicines Control Council as the public's guardian and protector.

These laws are true to the democratic spirit and quest for social justice that inspired the National Drug Policy. The protection of people's rights depends just as much on transparent administrative processes, with built-in checks and balances, as it does on mass mobilisation.

With this framework now in place, we commit ourselves to work tirelessly with interested groups to advance the agenda of access to affordable, good quality medicines for all. This is an inherent part of our democratic project to secure a better life for all.

More Information:

• Medicines Control Amendment Act, No 90 of 1997
• National Drugs Policy, 1996

Return to Index