THE ARROGANCE OF POWER A good thespian production does not set out to be didactic. Yet more often than not, the subliminal messages such a production conveys can be critical to changing or transforming society. I remember how we used to be amused by the theatrics of the court messenger alias “courtu ma” or “Nwa DC” in the light hearted television series “Iche Oku” in the early ‘80s. The funny starched brown Khaki gear and steel helmet that mimicked the white man’s bowler hat were some of the amusing accoutrements. However, the more sublime message was the power, the colonial ruler projected through the authority of the District Commissioner (DC) over the hitherto autocratic traditional rulers. The DC was the new political and judicial authority with powers to check the abuses of erstwhile traditional institutions and closeness to the DC by the “Nwa DC” by virtue of being an interpreter suddenly made him a new source of power in the community. The fact was that the barely literate interpreter’s understanding of a smattering of English language gave him awesome powers in the community making him a model around which new aspirations were formed. Consequently, every family yearned for their children to learn the white man’s tongue so that they too could become powerful in their communities. Unknowingly, our society was undergoing a new cultural metamorphosis in which government and those that were close to government became the new lords of the manor. For the colonial rulers, the colony was a conquered territory to be plundered for the interest of their motherland and the governance model they deployed to achieve that objective was different and distinct from their governance system at home but this was unknown to our people. One of the undying legacies of the colonial system of government was the creation of Government Reservation Areas (GRA) for themselves to distinguish them from the communities where the natives lived. The GRAs were usually better planned developments with beautiful houses and green areas while the natives lived in largely unplanned settlements that soon turned into gigantic slums. Invariably, the people were being conditioned into accepting that government officials should live in luxury irrespective of the condition of life of the rest of the population. The attainment of flag independence unfortunately did nothing to correct this colonial mentality as the first inheritors of colonial political powers moved literally and metaphorically into the spaces vacated by the departing colonial rulers. The only thing that really changed was the colour or race of the new masters of the manor. From the first generation post-­‐independence rulers through the subsequent military governments and the current attempt at civil democratic governance, not much has been done to alter the perception of power especially in the public service. To be sure, there have been political clichés of “servant leaders” among some in the political class but the arrogance of power never allowed humility of service to be on display. If it were not so tragic, one would be amused by celebrations in our newspapers and electronic media, of the construction or renovation of official quarters for the Chairman of local government council or a befitting state house for the governor of a state by elected officials. It is often unclear who the house is befitting for, that is, whether it is befitting for the elected official or the impoverished citizens of the state or local government? Unfortunately, this tragicomedy has been sustained over the years by the inability of governments to enforce the basic fiscal laws of our land. For instance, under the Personal Income Tax Act of 1979, the taxable income of a tax payer is the aggregate of cash earnings and perquisites of office or benefits-­‐in-­‐kind obtained in the course of the employment. Instructively, this provision has been retained in the Personal Income Tax Amendment Act of 2011. The Joint Tax Board provided a definition for benefits-­‐in-­‐kind as “ benefits accruable to an employee when an: (a) Employer’s asset is put in the Employee’s use (For tax purposes, the deemed value of such benefit accruing to the employee is 5% of the acquisition cost if known or 5% of the market value of the asset at the time of acquisition); and,(b) Employer rents or hires an asset which he puts into the use of an employee (For tax purposes, the employee will be charged with the difference between the amount incurred by the employers and any amount refunded to the employer by the employee).” What this means is that 5% of the cost or market value of the expensive residence should be added to the monetized earnings of the employee and taxed according to the law. The choice would then be for employees, either to receive appropriate cash incomes and opt to live in accommodations that their incomes can afford them rather than the imposition of official quarters that are beyond their incomes and for which they are required by law to pay tax on or to continue with such perquisites and pay the necessary price. The second aspect of this tax provision is that when employees are given official cars that are the most expensive in the land, they are also liable to pay tax on 5% of the cost of the car. In recent times, people have raised concern about the rising cost of governance in Nigeria which is said to be one of the highest in the world, yet we have in our body of laws the appropriate weapons to address the concerns. Imagine what will happen, if members of the National Assembly, Ministers, Governors, State legislators, Commissioners, senior bureaucrats and chairmen and local Government Councillors are made to pay tax on 5% of the cost of the numerous official cars at their disposal. One is certain that several of them would reject the benefits and create massive savings for the nation and where some accept them, the internally generated revenues of the relevant tax authorities would receive significant boost as a consequence. In practical terms, the cost of governance and fiscal discipline will dramatically change if these provisions of our law are faithfully implemented by our governments. The craze by public officers for the most expensive cars as official vehicles even when by law, they are not entitled to official cars will definitely be curtailed to the benefit of the Nigerian people. In a sense therefore, the correct implementation of our tax law provisions should begin the process of changing the allure of public office as a means of projecting power over the people and gradually replace it with the humility required by the calling to public service. Perhaps, as we do this, we will finally begin to put to rest the ghost of colonial mentality and its arrogance of power over a conquered and prostrate people. Clement T. Ofuani September 20, 2012