By Adebayo Adedeji
Olaiya is a popular area in Osogbo, the capital of Osun State. And it is in the area the state government, ably led by Governor Gboyega Oyetola, is proposing to erect a flyover. The flyover, planned to be 500-metre long, would— on completion— be able to ease traffic hiccups and, importantly, forestall loss of lives occurring as a result of accidents on the road.
In his address on Friday 29th January, 2021, during a simulation and pre-construction protocol undertaken to appraise the impact of the traffic in Olaiya intersection, Governor Oyetola had announced that the flyover is to manage awful traffic around Fakunle-Olaiya, Odiolowo-Olaiya, Akindeko-Olaiya and MDS-Olaiya.
The governor also explained that those who are coming from Abeere, for instance, would be able to access the flyover without necessarily causing difficulties for those plying Alekuwodo and Odiolowo lane.
The governor, equally at the event, assured the state citizens of a timely completion of the project and as well minimal inconveniences to the people who have their businesses around the area. In his words, ‘. . . people are ready for this project. The cooperation level is high. And we will be monitoring developments along the line in case there are things to adjust to ensure that there are no unnecessary hardships.’
People at the event were joyous, and hopeful that in ten months’ time, at the latest, as the government had promised, the intersection would be wearing a new look for the benefits of all the citizens.
Hardly had the event terminated when a self-styled civil liberty organisation went to town to parrot their group’s displeasure about the project. A journalist, Ayodeji Ologun, signed on behalf of a group claimed to be Transparency and Accountability Group, TAG.
The group wanted the State Government to rescind its decision on the flyover because it is not needed now and the project was not sufficiently advertised according to the State’s Public Procurement Law of 2015. To them, the reported accidents at the intersection are due to human errors which can be managed if the traffic rules are enforced pedantically. Strangely, the group did not quote statistics, figures and authorities to support their disapproval.
My piece will attempt to address the issues raised by the group.
First of all, the failure of the group to avail their readers data relied upon to draw the group’s conclusion has reduced their arguments to conjectures. No serious advocacy group would challenge government’s policy without quoting statistics, figures and authorities. This lack of due diligence calls to question their competence and capacity to share views that would be unassailable and respected by all. What they have put forward is a mere opinion to which anyone could hold divergent and superior view. To philosophers, opinions are not simply facts. Two individuals may perceive the same thing differently. The fact about colour blindness, short sightedness and long sightedness, for example, can make two people see the same thing differently. However, according to Socrates, before an Opinion could be equated or considered to be a Fact, it must first of all be subjected to strict verification, using an acceptable code—i.e figures, statistics, etc. It is this code that will establish if an opinion is a fact or a guess judgement. The group, in their “polemical” piece, clearly failed this scientific, methodical and logical test. They only felt the untested opinion of a handful of them should be sacrosanct at the expense of the demand of the generality of road users.
Meanwhile, the data obtained from the Federal Road Safety Commission, FRSC, indicates that in Osogbo in 2018, there were 38 road traffic crashes, in which 61 vehicles were involved, 202 people affected and 109 people injured. And 12 fatalities recorded. The data also shows the accidents happened majorly on this same Olaiya road.
Similarly in 2019, 41 road traffic crashes were recorded. In the crashes, 15 people died while 139 people were injured. Again, most of the crashes were around Olaiya. And these crashes, in Olaiya, have been attributed to lack of ‘overhead bridge’ in the intersection, and not ‘flouting of traffic rules’ or ‘non-functional traffic signal’ as TAG has assumed. Investigations have revealed they were accidents and fatalities that could have been avoided if a flyover was available.
The decision of the state government to have a flyover in Olaiya was not based on the whims and caprices of the people in government, nor for their pecuniary gains as TAG have alluded in their statement, but rather it was borne out of serious and empirical considerations.
Except TAD, and the angry opposition PDP, no Osun citizen of note has expressed his/her disdain for the project. All are supporting the choice of the project for they understand it is for the present and the future. They are supporting the government to achieve its aim of securing lives and making our roads gridlock-free. They are supporting the government as can be attested to by their huge turnout and show of love during the road simulation last Friday.
The TAG’s call for stoppage of the project would have carried weight if they were to be known as purely professional group of traffic management specialists and civil engineers. There is no evidence to suggest or affirm that the group have requisite knowledge in traffic management. They have never been celebrately associated with work in road maintenance or traffic management. Hence any position held now by them concerning traffic management is doubtful, unreliable, unprofessional and probably self-serving. It is, at best, pedestrian. It will not be serious enough to make a government— peopled by experienced engineers and certified transport management professionals — change its informed plan.
On the other hand, the allegation of the group that the flyover contract did not meet the relevant procurement laws of the state appears careless, if not unreasonable. While yours sincerely can not confirm if the project has truly been awarded to any contractor yet, I am aware of the fact that contracts could be awarded under the State’s Public Procurement Law of 2015 without advertising it or subjecting it to conditions stipulated in Section 33(2) quoted by the ‘transparency’ group. It is called Selective Bidding or Restricted Procurement. This is allowed under Section 59 of the State’s Public Procurement Law previously cited.
Subsection 1 of the Law allows that, ‘. . . a procuring entity may by reasons of economy, efficiency, special skills, experience and proven track record of a contractor or service provider over a period of time, initiate procurement by means of restricted procurement if:
(a) the goods, works or services are available only from a limited number of suppliers or contractors. . .
2) Where a procuring entity engages in restricted procurement . . . it shall invite bids from all the suppliers and contractors.’
A contract awarded under a Contract-financing model, of course, is often accommodated under the Selective or Restricted Bidding. Many previous projects in the state, and in other states like Oyo, have been handled and are being handled, under this arrangement. Contract-financing arrangement is scarce and undertaken by limited number of contractors. Only few contractors in the country will put down their money to execute projects and wait till a later date to be paid. It is rare to get contractors that would enter into such agreements. In fact only genuine entities and privileged governments enjoy such concessions from service providers or contractors.
If the people behind the Transparency and Accountability Group had not rushed to Press, just a simple request, under the Freedom of Information law, would have sufficed and saved them the energy—energy they have dissipated in trying to smear the integrity of the governor and his team—for more rewarding engagements.
In closing, the government of Osun State has never left anyone in doubt about its readiness to be subjected to public scrutiny, about its preparedness to allow its policy interrogated by genuine opinion shapers, members of opposition parties and other development partners. The government believes suggestions and feedbacks from members of the public could help in strengthening its policy formulation and implementation processes.
However, the idea of setting up a ‘Situation Room’ for sadists and naysayers to curate bileful and grossly unsubstantiated script to malign other people and stymie the progress of governance should no longer be encouraged. There should be a measured standard in which transparency advocates and development activists conduct themselves in the public. They are to serve as governments’ partners-in-progress, not mindless agents of traducement against them.
Adedeji is a media researcher who wrote from Ilesha, Osun State.
