A DIFFERENT PICTURE OF GOVERNOR DUKE

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LAGOS 001025

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE FOR AF/W
STATE FOR INR/AA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/25/2016
TAGS: PINR PREL KDEM PGOV NI
SUBJECT: A DIFFERENT PICTURE OF GOVERNOR DUKE


Classified By: Consul General Brian L. Browne for Reason 1.4 (D).

Summary
--------------


1. (C) Cross River State Governor Donald Duke is
intelligent, young and charismatic. The Nigerian media is
overwhelmingly favorable, portraying him as one of Nigeria's
ablest governors, a bona-fide economic and political reformer
capable of higher office in 2007. However, opposition
figures in Cross River use less salutary adjectives when
describing Duke. They claim he helped rig the 2003 elections
and that he brooks no dissenting counsel, despite his
superficial affability. Also, these opponents claim the
much-publicized Tinapa project is a massive waste. End
summary.

Governor Duke Applies "Typical" Tactics to Retain Power
-------------- --------------


2. (C) Consul General and Conoff met opposition leaders in
Calabar on June 15, 2006. Several of the politicians were
visibly nervous about meeting. One commented that if noticed
by the wrong people, the meeting would prompt a late-night
visit to their residences from security officials the next
day. Because of this, the venue was shifted from a popular
hotel to a more out-of-the-way local restaurant.


3. (C) The opposition openly questioned Governor Duke's
commitment to democracy. One participant claimed Duke told a
gathering of the state PDP that the people of Cross River
were not quite ready for participatory democracy. Thus, the
party would not pick its 2007 candidate by open primaries.
The primary would be mere window-dressing; the candidate
would be selected in camera and out of public purview, akin
to a papal conclave. Another opposition leader claimed Duke
engineered his ejection from the state legislature for
opposing Duke on certain matters. This former lawmaker, who
left the PDP for the ANPP, said he fought election rigging in
2003 by organizing his local community to pressure INEC to
count ballots fairly, but still had the race stolen from him.
He pursued the matter through the justice system to win a
decision in the lower court only to have that defeated at the
appellate after intervention by Governor Duke, he claimed.


4. (C) While some of the opposition leaders asserted that
active public involvement and vigilant monitoring at every
stage of the election process could make the 2007 elections
better than the 2003 edition, others saw little hope. The
naysayers claimed Duke and his People's Democratic Party
claque were keen on holding power. The opposition asserted
that Duke would resort to violence if PDP control of the
state were threatened. They shared examples from 2003, in
which security forces used violence against voters and
domestic monitors in Cross River.


5. (C) The men acknowledged the opposition was disorganized
and weak, lacking in resources and a positive rallying point.
Notably, this was the first time they had met as a group,
and many did not know each other despite the rather finite
universe of politicians in this small state. However, the
group asserted, if the elections were massively rigged in
2007, they would engage in civil disobedience. If the
government used force to douse their protest, they would meet
force with force. The more ardent among them claimed they
would link with Ijaw militant groups in the Niger Delta to
bring oil production to a standstill. (Comment: Much of
this was puffery, as unlikely to happen as it was
irresponsible to utter. Cross River has very little oil as a
matter of fact and none of these chest-thumpers were Ijaw.
However, their comments did reveal a level of frustration
both genuine and palpable. Some of the opposition's injuries
are self-inflicted and some of their biliousness is the
result of envy at Duke's popularity. Yet, their criticisms
were not manufactured from whole cloth. Their complaints
about Duke's superficial commitment to electoral democracy
cannot be disregarded. End comment.)

Public Perception Not Quite Economic Reality
--------------


6. (C) The opposition leaders criticized Governor Duke's
efforts to reform the Cross River economy, asserting he would
have better focused on agriculture than tourism. Several of
them asserted that life was now harder, with less money and
few jobs for the average citizen of Cross River than when
Duke came into office. They claimed people went hungry and
unemployment was high. More particularly, they criticized
the highly publicized Tinapa resort project as being out of

LAGOS 00001025 002 OF 002


touch with the pressing needs of a basically agrarian
populace. They believed the great investment placed in
Tinapa should have been earmarked for rural and general
infrastructure development. (Comment: In a June
conversation with the Consul General, the Ooni of Ife, a
close political ally of Obasanjo, was dismissive of Duke's
chances for high office stating the Cross River governor had
purloined huge amounts of money from the Obudu Ranch Resort
and Tinapa Resort projects. End comment.)

Comment
--------------


7. (C) Given the relative free pass Duke has gotten from the
usually cynical, often caustic Nigerian press, it was good to
hear directly from his critics at home. Again, their
complaints did contain a predictable gruel of envy and
exaggeration. However, their portrait of his complicity in
2003 election engineering and his attempt to closely control
the state chapter of the PDP bear consideration. In short,
Duke is probably not the saint his fine-tuned publicity
campaign highlights nor is he the unregenerate sinner the
opposition figures claim him to be. He is probably better
than most of his gubernatorial colleagues but not as fresh a
breath of democratic air as one would have hoped. End
comment.
BROWNE