The Nation Newspaper

Category: Segun Gbadegesin

  • Mr. President: Please clear this fog!

    A thick cloud of insecurity hangs over the nation. Kidnappers are on the loose. Killer herders are on the rampage. Banditry and cattle rustling are on the rise. No government can conduct its business with such a cloud of insecurity hanging over the country. Granted there are political opportunists counting on exploiting the volatile condition. Still, the challenge of insecurity is not in doubt.

    Unfortunately, the country is boiling with a cacophony of voices on the nature and source of the challenge. And our uniqueness as a divided people unwilling to get beyond their differences never disappoints. Therefore, accounts of the nature and source of the challenge varies across political spectrum and ethno-national divisions. Worse, there’s an aggravating fog of policy proposals.

    Lumping all cases of insecurity, including recent increase in kidnapping activities into one basket of farmer-herdsmen clash, the South sees land grab by foreigners. Following from this is the prediction of another civil war in the horizon. A recent social media post is introduced with an ominous quotation attributed to former President Obasanjo: “War will soon break out in Nigeria. Mark my words.” Of course, if it does, it could be the final one. For, which country can survive two civil wars in the lifetime of a generation?

    On its part, the North, ever so defensive of its lumpenproletariat, which its own elite has never lost an opportunity to impoverish and exploit, sees only economic forces at work. Precisely, it sees the consequence of climate change in desertification and drying up of Lake Chad, forcing herders down south in search of pasture, and, thus, the inevitability of clashes and conflicts. But as that observed reality appears to be made with a “nothing you can do; therefore, deal with it” attitude, the South sees the North as an arrogant nose thumper.

    Between the two frames of reference, there are elements of truth. There is desertification. Lake Chad is drying up. There is influx of cattle and herders from foreign countries up our northern border. There is southbound movement of cattle. There is indiscriminate cattle grazing on farmlands in the Middle Belt and Southern states. There is cattle invasion of residential areas and public spaces. There is maiming and killing of human beings in defense of cattle. And there are reprisal attacks on cattle and herdsmen.

    A good understanding of the above-stated truths should lead us to two further realities. First, not all our security challenges are attributable to farmer-herder conflicts. Second, government has responsibility for all our security challenges.

    The first truth is a non-brainer. Before the recent heightening of the sense of insecurity posed by herdsmen, the South lived with the menace of armed robbers, cultists, and gangsters. There were/are inbred kidnappers. Think Evans, who is still in court defending himself. The police, never tired of parading suspects before they are tried in court, recently identified some Yoruba kidnappers in public. There is the phenomenon of ole ile (house robbers) for which we have indigenous vigilantes manned by the hunter guild in Yoruba towns and villages.

    Going to my second truth, government has responsibility for all insecurity challenges. But lumping all insecurity challenges with the challenge posed by foreign herdsmen in our midst unfortunately simplifies a complex matter. Focusing on the menace of open grazing by herdsmen is extremely important. But we must not think that solving that piece of our security challenge will eliminate criminal kidnappers on our highways and forest reserves.  An effective measure for one case doesn’t necessarily work for the other.

    Over a year ago on this page, I observed that a viable path to resolving the farmer-herdsmen crisis was to modernize cattle breeding and rearing and that nomadism is not its essence. Since last year, the federal government has put its energy into resolving the crisis. But, considering the various iterations of solutions proposed to date, it has been foggy efforts at best.

    In the twinkling of an eye, we moved from grazing reserves to cattle colonies and now to Ruga settlements.  How, for heaven’s sake, is it so hard to bring together all stakeholders and agree on a policy that respects the autonomy of states under the Land Use Act and so prioritize the states as the final arbiter in this matter? Surely, the Federal Government has a responsibility for national security. But states are vested with the constitutional authority for the use of land in their areas of jurisdiction. Therefore, the federal government cannot impose any policy on them without their buy-in.

    I am certain that the Presidency understands this inescapable reality. But its policy pronouncements on this matter have not demonstrated to states and their citizens its readiness to respect it. It is time the President, in his wisdom, cleared this fog of confusion and uncertainty.

    The Presidency is an exalted office for good reason. It is the only office in the land that has the entire country as its constituency. Therefore, an elected president represents the whole country, not an ethnic nationality. Surely, becoming a president does not mean that one loses his or her ethnic identity. But it means that you bracket your unique ethnic identity during the time you serve, and you take on national identity. In this capacity, every ethnic nationality must have confidence in your ability to be dispassionate and fair as you deal with challenges that are national in scope.

    While I have no doubt that Mr. President is capable of faithfully discharging this great responsibility of fairness and thus rallying the entire country to the greatness that it richly deserves, his SILENCE in times of great crisis such as the current one is telling. For it unfortunately creates a perception, in the minds of his adversaries (unsurprisingly) but also in the mind of his admirers, that he just doesn’t care what people think in view of what they are experiencing. This is sad!

    Mr. President, you have a huge Mimbar or Pulpit which affords you the singular opportunity to rally the citizenry to your vision of the greatness that you are leading them to. Specifically, in times of manifest division arising from fears of insecurity fueled by fogs of doubt and clouds of suspicion, you have the responsibility to set matters straight and clear the fog. Unfortunately, it appears that your administration is more and more responsible for the thickening of the fog. You must now come to the rescue.  It does not by any means belittle your exalted office to go on national television to calm restive national nerves. Instead, it enhances your credibility and integrity as the Number One Citizen.

    From all that has been made public about it, Ruga settlement is Ranching. If so, it is not new to the country as many commentators have observed. But why give it a divisive nomenclature? In the mid-fifties, regional governments had cattle ranches. Why not now simply have state governments resuscitate those ranches for the benefit of their people? The federal government, with its prioritized interest in agriculture, can provide the enabling environment for these ranches in the form of grants to states or to specific cooperatives. This way, any Nigerian, not only Fulani herdsmen, are beneficiaries of the policy. Perceptions of favoritism or, worse, disguised land grab, is laid to rest.

    Why is land grab perception so real and so dangerous? There have been testimonials on the origin of the Middle Belt farmer-herdsmen crisis where small herdsmen settlements morphed into large colonies, generating conflicts over landownership. Land Use Act takes away land from indigenous families vesting it in state governments. But these families appreciate the fact that they still have access to their land even if through lease from government. There is some satisfaction in that. But let’s be honest. No family, South or North, will ever be pleased with losing its land to non-indigenes who can claim equal right of ownership! It is not only anomalous in our context; it will certainly aggravate an already tense national climate of fear and suspicion.

    Fortunately, on an optimistic note, Mr. President can easily clear this fog now, and put the devil to ignominious shame.

     

     

     

  • Insecurity trumps partisanship

    As a new wind of insecurity blows through the land of the descendants of Oduduwa, it appears that the wisdom of the ancestors has once again been vindicated. They observe that it is normal that a child be afraid when confronted with a fearful situation. The geography of fear and the extent of the population it captures is however proportional to the seriousness of the situation. Certainly, it is not only children that are susceptible to fear.

    Conventional and new media reports of barbaric kidnappings across the Southwest have been relentless. While some of the horrific stories have had multiple reports on multiple platforms, there have also been reports of new cases almost on a weekly basis. While some of these horrendous crimes are reportedly committed on major highways, including the Ibadan-Ife road, many others have been reported in rural locations in the zone, the latest being the case of a caterer in Igboora in Ibarapa area of the state.

    Beside the media, cases have been reported by families and friends of victims as well as eye-witnesses. These reports have also been specific about routes and locations that are notorious for kidnapping, including sleepy places that have surprisingly become dens of kidnappers: between Maya and Ado-Awaye on the abandoned Lagos-Sokoto highway; between Olugbade and Idi-Igba on Iseyin-Okeho road; between Moniya and Iseyin on Ibadan-Iseyin road, between Okeho and Ilero; the Opara Forest Reserve near Ijio close to the Benin Republic Border; and Igboho-Igbeti axis. These are all in the Oke-Ogun area of Oyo State.

    While there have been reported cases of armed robbery and kidnapping by Yoruba indigenes across these areas, many of the reports have identified Bororo Fulani herders as culprits. Graphic pictures of victims have been posted on social media platforms, causing serious panic among the populace. Not eager to become a victim, many are reluctant to travel out of Lagos or Ibadan to their hometowns. If citizens are this wary of travel in their homeland, how can they invite foreigners to visit for direct investment in the local economy?

    For victims, it has been traumatic. For the rest of the residents who have been spared of the ordeal thus far, the thought of being potential victims is especially unbearably troubling. Security platforms have emerged across the land, with local communities figuring out what strategies they need to combat the scourge. There are ongoing non-governmental efforts, which include traditional institutions, across the region.

    The Yoruba Diaspora is not left out of these efforts. As the leading organization of Yoruba people in North America, Egbe Omo Yoruba, has initiated Town Hall meetings across the United States and Canada to sensitize Yoruba professionals resident in these developed countries about the plight of their people.

    In a release signed by the current President, Dr. Durojaye Akindutire and some past presidents, Egbe Omo Yoruba, which led the struggle against military dictatorship in the 1990s, observes that Yorubaland is now “in the middle of a security crisis that we did not even witness during the military era. Our people are afraid to venture out of their villages and cities because of the menace of kidnappers.” The Egbe also assures Diaspora Yoruba that they are not immune from the plight of their homeland compatriots as demonstrated by the “horrific story of one of us who went home with her family and suffered the most humiliating and traumatic experience that we do not wish even for our bitterest enemies”. The Egbe urged privileged Yoruba patriots enjoying God-given comforts in their land of sojourn to come together to secure their homeland. Homeland security is also a major theme of the forthcoming 25th anniversary celebration of the Egbe next month in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. This is how seriously the matter is taken by the Yoruba in the Diaspora.

    However, it is not lost on the initiators of all such efforts that no matter what they do or attempt to do, they must have a buy-in by the local, state, and federal governments. Hiring security personnel equipped with lethal weapons is not an option since only the government has the monopoly of the use of force.

    It is on this score that the recent stakeholders’ security summit initiated by DAWN Commission in collaboration with Southwest state governors must be commended as a turning point. The attendance of stakeholders, including many traditional rulers and all the state governors irrespective of their party affiliation, is a sign of success.

    Additionally, however, the speakers demonstrated an acute awareness of the danger that looms in the horizon in their region. As Governor Seyi Makinde, the lone PDP governor in the region put it, a kii fi ejo sori orule sun. It is dangerous and imprudent to go to bed knowing that there is a dangerous snake hiding in the bedroom ceiling. Furthermore, Babajide Sanwoolu, the young and dynamic governor of Lagos State gave us the assurance that “actionable and sustainable plan with milestones is our goal.” With this focused attention by our governors on the challenges of insecurity, should we not thank them and go to bed, confident that we are in good hands?

    Far from it. And I am sure that the governors also would be the first to insist that all hands be on the deck in this matter. Elected officials from local government councilors and chairmen to representatives in the state and federal houses need members of the public to continually work with them to carry out their assignments. Of course, governors are the Chief Security Officers of their states. To succeed, however, they need actionable intelligence from the public. “See something, say something” is a reliable ageless security strategy. In fairness to our people, this is one area where they have been highly alert to their communal responsibilities.

    As mentioned above, almost every local community has a security committee. This is just a modern-day extension of our indigenous system of protecting our communities with nighttime security guards. We are seeing variants of these across the land. While the Federal Government is still contemplating what to do about state and community policing, here’s one area where we can invest our energies and resources for self-protection. We have organizations such as OPC, Yoruba Koya, etc. which have made the security of Yorubaland their life project.

    I am not unaware of a few past missteps of some of these organizations including unwise partisan miscalculations. But as the elders note, forgetting past misunderstandings is a prerequisite to lasting friendship. To my mind, it is high time these organizations were lifted from the margins into open and effective collaboration with our governments to execute a security plan for the entire region.

    Of course, any effective security plan would require massive funding. With poverty at an unprecedented level in our land, we have an almost impossible task. Yet, inaction puts us at the mercy of kidnappers and armed bandits, whether indigenous or foreign, which makes it impossible to get out of the scourge of poverty. It is obvious, then, what the logic of our predicament dictates. If our people know what is at stake, and they are assured that no one, including those in position of power, is a freeloader, they are ready to make their own contribution.

    What this means is that our governors and elected officials across the region must lead the charge. They must be transparent with the people about how they use their security votes. They must coordinate their efforts. We have no borders across the zone. As Ibadan-Ife road has demonstrated, insecurity is easily transportable. The security of one state as good as that of the neighboring state. Hence, the wisdom of collaboration.

    Once the governors, by their action, have the public’s trust, there would be a willingness on the part of the latter, including traditional institutions, various stakeholders, and Diaspora Yoruba to make sacrifices necessary to fight the scourge. As Chief Security Officers, the buck stops at their desk and the ball is still in their court. They are well endowed to lead this charge. We look up to their non-partisan efforts. God help them as they lead with fortitude and courage.

     

  • The reign of fakeness 

    Welcome to a new world where fakeness reigns over the affairs of willing subjects. There are fake police, fake pastors, fake parents, fake governance structures, and fake news. The ubiquity of fakeness is such that sometimes it is a huge task distinguishing it from reality.

    I stand corrected. It is not so new. We have always lived with fakeness engaging reality as co-contestants for the trust of human beings. There have always been fake prophets in all religions. Indeed, the scriptures warn the faithful to be aware of them in the latter days. Fortunately, those with the grace of discernment escape being conned.

    But now is different. Fakeness has upped his game while many of his victims have lowered their gear. If you fall short of the grace of the Almighty, you are more than likely to become the subject of fakeness in his kingdom. Victim-hood is real, not only in the realm of the physical, but also in the abode of the spirit where we battle powers and principalities.

    Having just celebrated Father’s Day last Sunday and Mother’s Day last month, it is fitting to begin our journey into the kingdom of fakeness where it hurts most. Bringing children into the world is perhaps the most gracious blessing that a human being can experience. It is by no means assured. Many are not given the privilege, which is a good reason for anyone fortunate to be so blessed to take it seriously.

    Read Also: Comedian decries celebrities’ fake lifestyles

    In its program honoring mothers and fathers this year, both the Men Missionary Union and Women Missionary Union of the Nigerian Baptist Convention highlighted the evil of absent parenting when fathers and/or mothers have no time for their children. Such parents are not necessarily evil. They are not irresponsible.

    The mother in the play loves God so much that she keeps her vow to serve the Lord 24/7, leaving her children to His care. On his part, the father works so hard to take care of his children but has no time for them, even when they have matters bothering them that need his attention. The consequence in both cases is tragic. But there are worse cases of fake parenting. Can a genuine father have carnal knowledge of his daughter? Only a fake mother would volunteer to sell her baby no matter the price and no matter her situation. But it is now a daily occurrence in most parts of the kingdom of fakeness.

    Next to parents in order of importance and trust are clerics of our various faiths. We respect them as spiritual fathers and mothers, approaching them with our challenges and relying on their spiritual counseling in trying times. In the days of yore, many of them behaved true to type. But times are changing, and there are now many goats in the attire of sheep. Adulterous pastors sleeping with members’ wives, raping minors, and faking kidnapping! How such depraved human beings face their congregation pretending to be anything but fake is mind boggling. But it’s a new world of fakeness.

    How about fake police of which there are many? And I am not referencing impersonators. The police force recently informed the public that a person arrested along with kidnappers was an ‘impersonator’. Such criminal cases are common and deserve the vigilance of the unsuspecting public.

    However, my focus is not on impersonators. I am concerned about regular members of the force who are nonetheless fake. They voluntarily enlist in the force knowing its requirements. As officers entrusted with the safety of the public, they know that they may be required to sacrifice what matters most to them, including their lives. That is the norm. But many fake officers take at will the lives they are mandated to protect. Many others abandon their stations in the face of serious disturbance or threat to the public. Officers take off their uniforms, so they are not identified as police when it puts them in jeopardy. There are cases of heroic members of the public running to dangerous situations to save lives while officers stand by unperturbed. Are they real or fake?

    Perhaps, all the above are mere symptoms of a more serious malady, which is the fakeness of our governance structures. At least for more than fifty years since 1966, ours has been a fake federalism. We know what a genuine federal system requires. We know that the state and central governments are co-equal, with each responsible for specific functions. That is not what we now operate. Now we have an overbearing Leviathan at the center with states as appendages that need its patronage.

    The fake identity of our structure has its consequence for good governance. Wages and salaries of workers are dictated from the center. Many states have no internal resources to bear the burden of such expenditure, but they have no choice in the matter. They are not allowed to cut their coats according to their sizes. So, we have the sad phenomena of unpaid salaries and abandoned infrastructural projects.

    When the structure is wobbly, human beings devise their own ways of letting out frustration. And our people are unfortunately deceptively and negatively ingenious. Chased to the corner of existence, they are quite clever in negotiating their exit. They invent the art of fake news.

    Democracy thrives on the sharing of information. We must know what is going on in our governments for us to intelligently evaluate elected officials and their appointees. Successful elections depend on effective communication by contestants. Electorates access various sources for information on prospective candidates before they make up their minds who to support for different offices. At least, that’s the hope.

    In the pre-social media world, much of the information we relied on came from newspapers and television, and words of mouth. None of this is foolproof, of course. To booster sale, newspapers embellish their stories. Television stations have their sponsors, be it federal, state, or private corporations, with their agenda. And, as we also know, news passed on by word of mouth are only as reliable as the memory of the informant. Therefore, we have always had to be cautious about the veracity of news from these sources.

    However, this time is different. Social media has revolutionized our understanding of and reliability of news reporting. In the era of cut and paste WhatsApp platforms, Twitter handles, and Facebook friends, news are tainted by the bias of their purveyors.

    Recent reports of kidnappings across the country have brought this last point to the fore. A story circulated about the travesty of Fulani kidnappers along a road in the Southwest. It came with pictures of the atrocity. Shortly after, on the same platform, another member had seen the same picture and story, but it occurred in Zamfara, not the Southwest.

    There was the case of a mentally sick woman whose husband and brother-in-law were driving to the hospital for treatment. The woman raised an alarm, accusing her husband of being a kidnapper who had killed two of their children. Without waiting for the police, the men were treated to jungle justice by a crowd. Social media went to town with the news. It was much later that the police investigation confirmed the truth.

    Finally, on this score, a Breaking News flashed on my WhatsApp a month ago and has received wide circulation since. It is about the revocation of gun license by President Buhari. The wording and signing of the “breaking news” looked suspicious to me. But I thought that reporting such a consequential issue cannot be faked. Supposedly signed by Amed Bello, Media Center, Abuja, this news releases bear all the elements of suspicion.

    However, it didn’t take long before the story became conventional. The House of Representatives even reacted to the story calling on the President to reverse his decision. Though the Police declared that it was not aware of the ban, the Presidency has neither affirmed nor denied the story.  So, who knows, this may be a case of truth looking fake. In which case, not all that appears so is fake even in the current reign of fakeness. It is well.

     

     

     

  • Reaffirming justice and democracy

    IT’s a new Democracy Day. It’s a different June 12. And it’s all for the good of keeping hope alive. Yet, for many reasons, it is bittersweet in a deep sense.

    First, those who have been involved in the struggle for the validation of June 12 since 1993 can look back with some relief and feel fulfilled that it wasn’t all in vain. They can now confirm that they were not insane, after all. President Buhari’s words confirm their sanity: “As we all know, correcting injustice is a prerequisite for peace and unity. As part of the process of healing and reconciliation, I approved the recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day and invested the late Chief M.K.O. Abiola and Babagana Kingibe with National Honors, as I did with the late Chief Gani Fawehinmi. The purpose was to partially atone for the previous damage done in annulling the Presidential elections of that year.” (my emphasis)

    Second, the president makes it clear that this is only a partial atonement. The injustice that is atoned for caused the loss of innocent lives, including youths fighting for their future, adults eyeing a legacy, and the symbol of their struggle, M.K.O. Abiola and Kudirat, his wife. As far as we know, nobody paid for the injustice. That still hurts.

    Third, this is not tokenism. Buhari’s sense of justice is not a gimmick. If you are God-fearing, this is what you do. If you have a conscience, this is the direction in which it nudges you. And when you have made up your mind to atone for such an injustice, you identify what you have control over and can deliver, not a controversial honor that attracts a pushback. Buhari has the prerogative over national honors. And though he knew that NASS must sign off on the change of Democracy Day, he also knew that that institution, even under a hostile leadership, cannot afford to appear hostile to atoning for an injustice. This is what thoughtful and effective leadership is all about.

    Fourth, assume the charge of tokenism is valid. Assume further that a year ago, Buhari needed the Southwest for his reelection bid. In March, he won the election, and he has no political campaigns ahead. What motivated him on June 12, 2019 to propose remaining the National Stadium as Moshood Abiola National Stadium? To you, psychological egoists, what does Buhari stand to gain from his latest gesture in honor of the fallen hero of democracy?

    Fifth, we can understand the position of those who never cared about the injustice of the annulment and who benefited from the unjust incarceration and death of Abiola. They had the opportunity of a lifetime to correct the injustice with a befitting honor for the man. For eight years, they didn’t care. They have been shamed, and all they see now is disaster where everyone else is keeping hope alive and praying for peace and stability. “Envy”, as Proverbs declares, “rots the bone.”

    Now, we know that our democratic journey is a marathon, not a sprint. For the race, we need determination and a strong will. We cannot afford to regress. We must press forward. Unfortunately, a review of the last twenty years cannot but depress. Our story of the abuse of democracy started afresh in 1999 and has continued since. We talk of the abuse of judiciary now, but can we easily forget the mockery of the rule of law by the Obasanjo regime as it held on to Lagos State Local Government funds despite the ruling of the Supreme Court? Compare that with the Abacha administration snubbing the Supreme Court against which Justice Belgore famously protested? Do we forget the racing of whole communities, including Odi?  Or Presidential sponsorship of constitutionally invalid impeachment of political enemies including Oladoja in Oyo, Fayose in Ekiti, and Dariye in Plateau? But look who is casting the first stone now!

    Over the years, I have written on June 12 and Democracy Day. Unfortunately, as seen below, the issues that I raised in those column pieces have remained unchanged.

    In a June 15, 2007 column, I wrote, inter alia, as follows:

    June 12, 1993 offered us the best chance for an enduring democracy. It showed that Nigerians can be truly united and civil. It gave the poor the hope of a blissful future. It promised a genuine democratic and truly federal republic. The forces of darkness in this country shattered that dream and killed our hope. We lost numerous patriotic citizens in the struggle, including the bearers of the hope and the initiators of the dream. Yet none of the culprits has apologized for his or her involvement. None of them has paid for his or her crime. Instead they have been recipients of honors and awards.

    In a June 14, 2013 column, I offered the following observation:

    “June 12, 1993 represented hope for a new sense of nationality with the expectation of a genuine unity of purpose. However, the hope began to be shattered with the struggle for the restoration of the mandate that followed the annulment of the election. Instead of a united front, efforts were made to regionalise and ethnicise the struggle. And that effort has not abated even since the return of civil rule in 1999. We can debate the depth of our ethnic tensions at this time compared with 20 years ago. I am sure, however, that no one can deny what is obvious, that we do not now have a united country and the very idea of a nation is constantly being threatened….

    “We now think in terms of our ethnic nations, its marginalisation and all, with no corresponding interest in the entity named Nigeria. Why don’t we just get together then and reach a peaceful accord for everyone to go to their tents? I think what now holds the country together is the private interests of the political class. It is why the various elements of the ruling party who would have nothing to do with each other still get together to reconcile their differences. The Northern Governors Forum is out to protect the interests of the North. So is the Southsouth Governors Forum. These groups are majority PDP governors. But there is no overriding PDP national ideal that prevents conflict and promotes harmony between the sections. What does is the private and sectional interests that each governor wants to protect. As long as those interests are there, and can be protected by patching up difference, we may expect the Nigeria project to go on. But this is not a guarantee for lasting hopes for the survival of, talk less of the prospering of the nation.

    Finally, the following is quoted from the last two paragraphs of my June 15, 2018 piece titled “25 years after, apology and honour”:

    “Many reasonable voices, including from this page, have been raised concerning the need to attend to the structure which has exacerbated the dangers of sectionalism and sectarianism before they consume the nation. Restructuring has been the rallying cry across the zones since 1999, and before then in the demands and agitations of the various pro-democracy movements. While the latter could rejoice in the partial victory of the recognition of June 12 and the honor done to its foremost champion, they would even be more appreciative of efforts in the direction of restructuring because this portends more benefits for the nation.

    “Buhari can write his name in a bold platinum of history with an unflinching support for restructuring, starting with a fulfillment of the promise of his party to amend the constitution for devolution of power to the states. Together with the National Assembly, this can be completed in a jiffy, and they will be the proud beneficiaries of the gratitude of a nation truly bound in freedom, peace, and unity.”

    There is an existential threat facing the nation from a disunited approach to her major challenges, including violent extremism, banditry, cultism and kidnapping. A focus on constructing a national political structure that eliminates this threat is long overdue. President Buhari is well-positioned to do it. A rewarding legacy awaits him.

  • Femi Ojo-Ade goes home

    The wisdom of the ancestors is unassailable. They warn us about the plight of a straight tree out in the forest. For, because of its quality, which makes it attractive to experts in the housing and furniture industry, it doesn’t enjoy longevity. And by profound analogical reasoning, they lament the paradoxical plight of straight human trees.

    And so, another straight human tree has fallen in the forest of culture and the academy. But who is the furniture and housing expert that needs Professor Femi Ojo-Ade at his prime, when we, earthlings need him most? And for what? Our ancestors know too well that we are planted here by the supreme gardener for his purpose. And when he visits his garden and sees a beautiful tree that he likes, he can cut it for his use, and no one can ask why. Kabiyesi Olodumare!

    Still, we ask, why? A gentleman to the core? A first-rate scholar? A loving husband of almost 50 years? A devoted father and grandfather? A compassionate benefactor of young and old? A cultural icon? An exemplar of humanity? Femi Ojo-Ade was all of these and much more. He gave of himself, his superior intellect, and his sense of decency to all who passed his way. What else can we ask of a human being? And yes, we acknowledge the fact that he was allowed to stay with us for 77 years. But why can’t he live for 100 years at the least?

    There are known evil doers who live much longer. This is what makes us humans. We are at the mercy of God’s purposive time for us for which we have no inside knowledge. And yes, evil doers may live much longer than morally upright human beings. However, we are not privileged to understand God’s plan.

    We are not alone in this lack of understanding. Even the Preacher expresses his frustration as is recorded in Ecclesiastes 7: 15: “In my vain life, I have seen everything. There is a righteous man who perishes in his righteousness, and there is a wicked man living long in his wickedness.” And Job, in his state of despondency asks, “Why do the wicked live on, growing old and increasing in power?” But in all these, God is not unjust. As Job also realized, even the evil doers are judged harshly. “They are exalted for a moment, then they are gone.”

    Femi Ojo-Ade may have known. Unlike the wicked, he understood that he had no control of his time, and that everything was up to the one who sent him here: Riran la ran mi wa. Emi ko mo ran ra mi. Ase dowo eni to ran mi wa. Knowing this fact of our existence is requisite for living our lives in accordance with the ideals of excellence in thought and character. It was Ojo-Ade’s guide to life.

    Professor Femi Ojo-Ade, husband, father, teacher, scholar, cultural icon, was called home by his maker on March 19, 2019 and the world of scholarship and culture was shaken to its core. On May 4, family and friends gathered at the South Potomac Church in Maryland for a befitting memorial service. Former students and colleagues from Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, and St. Mary’s University, Maryland, and friends from Canada, Europe, and across the United States were in attendance. It was a glorious service that his memorable life richly deserved.

    Speakers at the service echoed two major themes, focusing on Ojo-Ade’s excellence in scholarship and outstanding consciousness of moral character, and these go to the heart of what we need to ascertain what a fulfilled life he led.

    On scholarship, speaker after speaker noted Ojo-Ade’s original contributions to scholarship in modern European languages, including French, in which he majored, and Spanish in which he did substantial research. He was the second Nigerian to attain the rank of full professor of French. He authored several books, including fiction and nonfiction, and contributed numerous articles to scholarly journals in his field. He was presented as a compassionate teacher who mentored his students, both undergraduates and graduates, to resounding success in their various fields.

    This is all good. But what is even more impressive is how Ojo-Ade positively influenced his colleagues to attain excellence. My good friend, Professor Ropo Sekoni spoke of how, as a colleague, Ojo-Ade encouraged him to learn French and Spanish, which knowledge turned out to be invaluable assets as he applied for and received several research grants, based on his knowledge of these languages. So, while some scholars would go to great lengths to guide and protect their tuff from “intruders”, Ojo-Ade sought out colleagues to enter his academic space, enriching them and himself as a result. This is the quality of self-confidence.

    One of the most moving tributes was from a young man whom Professor Ojo-Ade only met by chance, but who ended up becoming a grateful member of his extended family. Dr. Tunde Olusesi recalled how he was introduced to Ojo-Ade in absentia as he was desperate for admission to the university in the 80s. Though he had performed well in JAMB, he was unfairly edged out of admission. After letting him know the truth concerning the unfairness of his treatment, Ojo-Ade advised him to attend another institution with a promise that he would help him get a transfer to Ife the following year. He kept this promise. The young man also kept his own end of the bargain as he ended with a First Class degree in English from Ife in the 80s. Today, Olusesi has Ph. D in Social Work. And he remains eternally grateful to his mentor and big daddy. That is one of the tributes that moves the heart. How a man could be so selfless in the pursuit of the good of others!

    Professor Ojo-Ade had served for some years as Head of the Department of Modern Languages at Ife by the time that I was appointed Head of Philosophy Department at the university. For his well-known friendliness and accessibility, he was the first HOD that I ran to for advice and he was generous with his time and thoughts on navigating departmental and faculty politics for which I am forever grateful. We left Ife about the same time in the late 80s but soon met again in Maryland. While he was a tenured professor at St. Mary’s University, I was a tenured professor at Howard University, serving as Chair of the Philosophy department. I leaned on him again for professional advice.

    In the diaspora phase of the struggle against military dictatorship in Nigeria, Ojo-Ade was one of the few scholars who not only encouraged us, but who also joined in our efforts, contributing to panel discussions, attending conferences, and participating in rallies. At St. Mary’s, he organized a symposium to which he invited us to speak on democratic struggles in Africa. In those days, his great sense of humor helped us to bear the stress that we faced from time to time.

    Like some other colleagues, Ojo-Ade could have ignored the efforts to combat the evil of dictatorship. He could have chosen to face his scholarship. But he was unselfish with his intellect, which he lent effectively to public affairs. Even after the struggle, he continued to encourage us to hold elected officials accountable. During the crisis over the withholding of Lagos State Local Government funds by the Obasanjo regime, I wrote a piece titled “Mocking the rule of law”. It was a critique of the regime’s spurning the Supreme Court ruling. Ojo-Ade was one of the first who sent me an email appreciating that piece. He was just like that.

    Professor Ojo-Ade left behind a loving family, his wife of 49 years, Mrs. Molara Ojo-Ade, his beautiful children and grandchildren. I am confident that they will carry on from where he stopped. As his life’s journey ends, and they stretch their hands to lay him to rest, he has fulfilled his mission on Mother Earth. He has exemplified the injunction of the ancestors: Ka rin gbede gbede, ka lee ku pelepele, komo eni lee fowo gbogboro gbe ni sin.

  • Anticipating the Next Level

    Now that President Buhari has taken the oath of office for his second term, the much-anticipated Next Level is here. But what is in it? How will it impact Nigerians? These are pertinent questions. And while the President and his team have shared details of their plans for the Next Level during the campaign, we cannot blame Nigerians for being overly anxious.

    As it was four years ago, though this column appears on Friday, I am writing it on Wednesday. May 29, 2015, the day President Buhari took the oath of office for his first term, fell on Friday. And to capture the mood of the nation earnestly yearning for change, my column on that day was aptly titled “A beautiful day.” Though, it was an aspirational statement, it turned out to be declaratory as well. Watching the online streaming of the ceremony from my base, I was moved by its grandeur.

    However, more than a colorful ceremony, the expectation of Nigerians, after a hitch-free election in which the majority across the country voted for change, was sky high. They looked forward to the promised defeat of terrorism and insurgency, a relentless fight against corruption in high and low places, and a robust economy that creates a level playing field for everyone. Those were the promises of the change campaign that captivated and energized the young and old, and the men and women who joined the change train in 2015.

    The president went to work on his core promises. But it soon became clear that he and his team had underestimated the enormity of the task. Aggravating the onslaught of economic recession which had bared its fangs was Niger Delta militancy, which crippled oil production. Meanwhile, Boko Haram was proving to be an invincible mortal enemy of state. And corruption, with its hydra head, refused to surrender on the battlefield.

    To complicate an already bewildering situation, the various contradictions that have bedeviled the unity of the nation since her early days found a new outlet. While there is nothing new in the conflict between herdsmen and farmers, nor in banditry, nor in kidnapping, they all take on a new meaning in the context of an underlying ailment that we refuse to treat. The mood of the nation at the dawn of the Next Level is a somber reflection of this reality.

    May 29, 2019 is as beautiful as May 29, 2015. But the nation’s mood is not the same. Apart from the deliberate intention of a low-key celebration and the deferral of inauguration activities till June 12, something is eerily unsettling about May 29, 2019. Four years ago, enthusiasm was infectious. Today, while many still look to the next four years with hope in the determined effort of the president and his team, many still are pessimistic not only about their own wellbeing, but also about the good of the nation going forward.

    This is the challenge that President Buhari must take up and meet if he eyes a legacy beyond 2023. Die-hard Buharists may choose to feed him with heart-warming tales of his exploits. He needs to take those with a grain of salt. He must seek a deep understanding of what critics identify as the real problems with a view to finding real solutions. He must not dismiss every critic as enemies. He must see them as patriots with different ideas about the good of the nation. Even if he doesn’t agree with them, he must listen to them and, where possible, meet them half-way. After all, no human being has all the right answers. Only the divine being is omniscient.

    On the issue of legacy, what is it that really matters most? Taking the nation to the next level of economic advancement where everyone that wants a job gets one and the basic needs of everyone is met? Winning the fight against corruption so that transparency and accountability becomes the norm of our social and political life? Ridding the nation of terrorism, insurgency, banditry, kidnapping so that the peace of the nation is fully restored? Or achieving genuine national unity in which every section has a true sense of belonging which is achieved through a constitutional engineering that restores their confidence in its promise?

    Of the four alternatives to a great legacy identified above, the fourth is the most enduring. Surely, a president who does the other three would be remembered for good. But they are legacies that could be rubbished in a jiffy. President Buhari himself is a living testimony to this observation. The war against corruption was a major highlight of his administration as military head of state. But we know what happened to that legacy after he was toppled. Chef Awolowo did a yeoman task of developing infrastructure in the Western Region. But we know how that was managed after he left the scene especially by subsequent military administrations.

    Our political structure unfortunately presents an indomitable constraint against a legacy in the area of national economic advancement. This doesn’t belittle the effort to promote this ideal because, after all, the well-being of citizens is measured by the state of the economy. However, if national unity is successfully harnessed, it has the greatest potential to guarantee success in the other areas.

    Conversely, a determined focus on the economy and infrastructure can be disastrously undermined by the same people it is supposed to benefit if they lack a sense of belonging. Therefore, a president that eyes legacy and is motivated by the good of the nation, will do everything in his power to not just preach national unity, but do whatever is necessary to achieve it. Far from being a distraction, a serious effort to forge national unity is a precursor to achieving economic development. What does this mean for the president’s movement to the next level?

    First, it means that he must make every effort to carry everyone along. Surely, it is unrealistic to expect that everyone will buy into the president’s agenda. However, it is important to recognize that not only are there many citizens with him (he won by 4 million votes!), but also that many more would join him in this journey if convinced that he is genuinely committed to national unity.

    Second, therefore, it means that the president must reach out to the opposition, especially as it is concentrated in a section of the population. For far too long, we have had a North-South dichotomy that not only does no good to, but really hampers, desirable unity. Of course, pockets of resistance may be in the South-south and Southeast because they are aggrieved about how former President Jonathan lost his bid for a second term. That is natural. But there are genuine grievances that border on marginalization, which serious patriots from the zones have identified. It is the responsibility of the President to bring them to the reconciliation table.

    Third, it is time to address the elephant in the room, which is the political structure of the nation. Clearly what we have is a serious threat to unity and development both of which the president cares a lot about. What good does it do that we have a constitution that prioritizes unity in diversity but relegates diversity to the back burner of discussion as if it can be wished away? Meanwhile, because it is not managed properly, our diversity is becoming a curse rather than a blessing. This should worry the president.

    Every morning that we wake up to read or hear news about conflict between people of different ethnic nationalities, it should remind us that our effort toward national unity has been half-hearted because we have not dealt with the constitutional albatross hanging on our national neck. This accounts for the dreary mood of the nation on this otherwise beautiful day.

    While wishing him Godspeed at the next level, I pray for divine wisdom for President Buhari to identify the root of our national challenge and deal with it with the dispatch that it requires. That is the legacy he needs to look back to with glee when he retires to Daura in 2023.

     

    gbadegesin@thenationonlineng.net

     

  • In times like this

    A recent BCOS report on kidnapping in Ibarapa division of Oyo state brings the issue nearer home. This is not Northeast. It is not Northcentral. It is rural Southwest. Unlike Abuja-Kaduna Highway where kidnap victims could be senators or government officials who may be forced to cough out millions in ransom, reported ransom payment in Ibarapa is as low as 1.5 million Naira.

    The menace of kidnapping is on everyone’s mind because of the unpredictability of one being a victim. You don’t have to ride a big car. Your commercial bus could be stopped and searched, and a kidnapper’s fingers summon you to get down, the beginning of an agonizing encounter, which could, as in the tragic case of an Igbinedion University lecturer, result in death.

    But what if kidnapping is just a ruse, a camouflage for something more sinister, something more traumatic? What if we are seeing the beginning of an external aggression on a scale that Syria didn’t foresee, but which was ultimately its lot? What if ISIS, having lost its dream Caliphate in Syria, sees an opening in a fragmented Nigeria?

    Indeed, it is now hardly a matter of “what if?” A Counter Extremism Project report suggests that, among others, kidnapping is a major source of financing for Boko Haram, which declared allegiance to ISIS in 2009 and became ISWAP. The report claims that “US officials have estimated that Boko Haram receives approximately $1 million for the kidnapping and release of each wealthy Nigerian it abducts.”

    So, while some kidnapping across the nation may be attributed to unemployment and poverty, if ISWAP effectively relies on ransom money in the North, strategically extending its tentacles to the South cannot be ruled out. After all, its goal is to establish an Islamic State in Nigeria, not just in the North.

    If the foregoing makes sense and kidnapping for ransom is a weapon in the arsenal of ISWAP, and if Islamization of Nigeria is its goal, then there is a religious factor in kidnapping. But what does this mean? It certainly doesn’t mean that every Muslim subscribes to ISWAP’s goal of Islamizing Nigeria.

    Indeed, using its own understanding of Islam, the terrorists have also targeted for elimination Muslims whom they see as apostates. It is important, therefore, that we do not play into their hands by making the issue a contest between Muslims and Christians. Particularly, the Southwest perilously stands to bear the full brunt of the catastrophe of a house divided against itself. Furthermore, however, it behooves everyone, Muslims, Christians, and traditional religion devotees, to stand together in condemnation of ISWAP’s Islamization agenda.

    So, there is a religious factor. But is there also an ethnic factor? Is there a Fulanization goal lurking behind the Islamization goal of ISWAP? Or is there a separate Fulanization agenda by a segment of the population?

    To suggest that there is a Fulanization agenda lurking behind the ISWAP Islamization agenda is to admit that if there is a Fulanization agenda, it is separate and distinct from the Islamization agenda. After all, again, not all Fulani buy into ISWAP agenda of Islamization. But there could be a connection via the means that ISWAP adopts.

    ISWAP is an offshoot of Boko Haram, which debuted in the Northeast. As such, it draws membership from young Fulani adherents, luring them with funds and social services that government doesn’t provide. The terrorists also sided with Fulani herdsmen in the conflict with predominantly Christian farmers across the North. However, this collaboration is more toward their goal of Islamization than Fulanization.

    Is there a separate agenda of Fulanizing Nigeria by a segment of the Fulani population? What would be the point of Fulanization? How would it work out? There are two possibilities.

    First, like the goal of Islamization, the goal of Fulanization might be to make every Nigerian a Fulani. Of course, it is not a realistic goal and no sane person would entertain such an agenda.

    Second, even if it is impossible to make every Nigerian a Fulani, Fulanization might be an expansionist agenda by which the Fulani extend their reach meter by meter until they take over the entire landmass. For all we know, no Fulani may nurse this expansionist agenda. But the perception among many non-Fulani across the nation is that this is more than an idea in the mind. It is the reality that stares them in the face. How?

    Fulani herdsmen have always been in the Southwest. In Oke-Ogun, they settle in Gaa in the outskirts of town, where they tend their cattle and sell milk and cheese to local host population. Non-herdsmen live in Sabongari and sell dried fish in the market. Even in the toxic partisanship of First Republic politics, they lived peacefully with their host communities.

    Suddenly, things changed. More herdsmen migrated south grazing their cattle, with no respect for farmlands and the crops on which farmers depend for their livelihood. Farmers’ complaints fell on deaf ears or were met with machete or AK-47 on their ancestral lands. How is this to be understood or explained?

    Unless you assert ownership or co-ownership of the farmland, would you justifiably gun down a farmer who complained that your cattle were ruining his crops? But how can you claim ownership or co-ownership of a land that your grandparents did not own, and you do not have a title to? And if the same scenario happens all over and the same population is implicated, how do we describe it other than an attempt to take over the entire territory.

    This is the context of the present rumble. Let us grant that there is no deliberate federal policy of Fulanization. But, rightly or wrongly, many southerners see as such any policy that seeks to appropriate ancestral land for Fulani herdsmen. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck, is the refrain.

    Is this perception justified? Is the fear warranted? If yes, how might it be allayed? Of course, perception and fear are subjective. But that doesn’t make them unreal. An objectively baseless fear still needs relief with reassurance.

    When young Fulani men hide AK-47s under the seat of their motorbikes or in bundles of leaves that they carry on their grazing routes, farmers’ fear is not misplaced. For in the mind of the latter, this gunrunning could well be a self-help prepping for the forceful takeover of their land.

    Community forums on security are inundated with stories of Fulani cells all over the Southwest. If these are mere rumors, they must be countered. If they are true, they must be exposed and disbanded before South-westerners seek their own solution, which could be disastrous for everyone.

    Unfortunately, some politicians are not helping matters. In the wake of the presidential elections, statements have been made which appear to thump the political nose of Southerners. When Northern APC leaders taunt and ridicule their Southern counterparts, and vow that the presidency will remain in the North for twenty years, this only fuels the growing unease that Southerners feel about the intentions of the North.

    From 1993 to 1999, democrats fought military dictators to a standstill and emerged victorious in the end. The bulk of that fight was based in the Southwest. NADECO was infamously given the nickname Agbako by a military general from the region. Agbako in Yoruba means misfortune. However, what was misfortune for the junta at the time was, for the prodemocracy group, resistance against the misfortune of military rule.

    A next phase of resistance is building. And It would be an unfortunate twist of fate if it broke out under an administration which has done so much for the morale of June 12 activists with the declaration of June 12 as Democracy day and the honor of recognizing Abiola as the winner of the June 12, 1993 elections.

    It should not be left to Southwestern leaders to clean up the mess created by egomaniac Northern leaders bent on dividing the South to conquer its space. In times like this, prudence demands that we calm restive nerves before it is too late.

     

     

     

  • Civics for leaders

    Except for a few outliers, various administrations across the country, from the presidency to state governments, will wrap up their tenure in two weeks. Meanwhile, preparation is in top gear for the inauguration of new administrations to run the affairs of the states and the nation for the next four years. Despite its experience of strains and stresses, the democratic system of governance appears to be developing reliable tap roots in the core of the nation’s political soil.

    Yet, as with any human-made device, the strain and stress that impacts the system are largely avoidable. But also, where they have been inadvertently allowed to intrude our political space, they, unlike the proverbial metal bracelet on the wrist of the Orisa priest, can be removed. Therefore, we must keep hope alive for a more robust democratic adventure ahead if we set our mind to it.

    We keep referencing the past when the system appeared to give us some level of satisfaction as well as hope of further progress. The reason we have retrogressed over the recent decades is not in our blood. Rather, it is due to our complacency and the blame is mostly on the leadership. But, again, the good news is that it is not a genetic disorder; and if we work hard at it, it is not irreversible.

    The complacency arose mainly from the disconnect between the requirements and expectations of a democratic system and the efforts we make to prepare ourselves for its success. As this column has often averred, as flawed as the 1999 Constitution is, Chapter 2 of that document captures admirably the fundamental tenets of democratic governance and its desirable outcomes on human happiness when it keeps a decent balance between citizen rights and responsibilities.

    The disconnect is clear: while we brilliantly elucidate the tenets and outcomes of democracy, we fail woefully in the matter of preparing ourselves for their achievements. But nothing ventured, nothing gained, and we cannot reasonably expect an output that aligns with input when the nature of the latter is completely at odds with the essence of the former. You don’t plant pineapple and expect a harvest of oranges.

    Before we embarked on the journey of democratic governance in the 50s, and independence in the 60s, all citizens, young and old, prospective leaders and followers, were well prepared through an effective program of formal and informal civic education.

    Civics, the formal education of citizens, is the study of the rights and responsibility of citizenship, and the obligations that we owe each other as members of the political community. It was a compulsory subject in primary schools throughout the country even prior to independence. And what we learned in civics class only validated our long-term traditional understanding of social relationships in the community.

    We learned, for instance, that the community of citizens is greater than any one individual; that we owe one another respect and compassionate care; that each has a moral obligation to contribute his or her quota to the community and the community has a responsibility to take care of its young ones so that, as they become adults, they feel a sense of obligation to pay back. We learned that crooks and frauds, egoists and freeloaders are anti-social elements and must be treated as such.

    The first set of leaders that emerged before and after independence were also the first products of this civic education program. Therefore, they were fully prepared for leadership role in the new nation. And it showed. They developed effective programs of public education which also prioritized economic development with a moral bias through the continuation of civics in schools. They led with example in the matter of ethical leadership. Their only defect, and a major one as such, was their primary focus on their immediate zones of affection instead of on a pan-Nigerian agenda.

    The soldiers that struck in January 1966 justified their action by appeal to what they considered the defect of regionalism, which in their view, bred the disunity and threatened disintegration, which they abhorred. They desired a national unity that had eluded the first-generation leadership. But they pursued their objective in a vacuum, and without adequate attention to citizenship education. Therefore, the products of their leadership development efforts were anything but what civics and civic education envisioned. MAMSER was hollow.

    Military leadership training produced emergency contractors, student leaders with itchy fingers and inordinate ambitions, and new-breed politicians as possessive individualists with deep throats. Subsequent civilian transitions have only built on this unfortunate legacy of kleptomania and exacerbated it. Ethical Revolution was a hoax.

    The story has not changed in the last twenty years of the 4th Republic. And change it must, if we are to be relieved of the strains and stresses that now threaten the foundation of our democracy and of the nation. From the political corruption of vote buying to the economic corruption of pen-robbery, from the egoism of freeloaders to the sectionalism of nationalities jostling for ascendancy, this republic will crumble under the weight of its mountain of challenges unless something gives.

    What must give is leadership malaise to which followership has only responded from time to time. With an impaired vision, a people can hardly survive, talk less prosper. The miseducation of leaders during the military era emphasized conspicuous consumption and a sense of entitlement that is alien to our cultures. That sense unfortunately resulted in the justification of excessive leadership compensation based on imagined sacrifice. But what sacrifice does a lawmaker makes that a policeman doesn’t? Lost in all of these is the ability of leaders to effectively preach to followers the gospel of selfless sacrifice for the nation.

    This leads us to the promise of Chapter 2 of the 1999 Constitution with its statements, first, of the ideals that make collective sacrifice for the nation worthwhile and, second, the policies that are to be pursued to realize those ideals. And it unequivocally assigns the duty and responsibility to “conform to, observe and apply the provisions of the chapter” to “all organs of government and all authorities and persons exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers.”

    Included in the provisions are the “principles of democracy and social justice” presented as the foundation of the republic. For this foundation to endure, however, the constitution identifies three sets of fundamental objectives. First, the political objective is to promote “unity and faith, peace and progress.” Second, identified as its social objective is the establishment of a “social order founded on ideals of Freedom, Equality, and Justice.” Third is the economic objective, which is to “secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status.” For each of these objectives, there are policy directives for their realization. However, from my point of view, a policy directive that encapsulates all of them is the directive to ensure that “there are equal and adequate educational opportunities at all levels.”

    Imagine if every administration even if since only 1999 has made the slightest efforts to discharge the responsibilities that these constitutional provisions impose on them. We would have little or no reason to worry about cults, bandits, kidnappers, armed robbers, etc. For, we could reasonably expect that such governmental efforts would yield positive results that are visible to everyone, so much so that even if they do not all benefit equally, those that don’t would understand that they are not deliberately discriminated against.

    Instead of that desirable approach, many leaders hustle and jostle for their selfish interests and those of their immediate families, and this sends a message to citizens that they must follow suit or be damned. But not everyone has easy access to government coffers. Those that don’t and are desperate to make it at all costs end up engaging in violent pursuits of their dreams of conspicuous consumption.

    As we embark on another four-year political journey, our leaders must go back to the basics of civics and civic education, shed their ugly cloak of egoistic greed, and lead with the fear of God. It is the straight path to the greater good of human happiness.

     

     

     

     

  • Beyond the politics of insecurity

    In the last two weeks, kidnapping for monetary gain in Nigeria has refocused attention on the spate of insecurity that overwhelms the country. Two weeks ago, on the notorious Abuja-Kaduna highway, UBEC Chairman, Dr. Mahmood Abubakar and his daughter were victims of kidnapping. They regained their freedom a few days later. Their driver was not so lucky. He was killed during the encounter. We are not told how much ransom was paid to their abductors.

    That unfortunate episode was followed in quick succession last week with the kidnapping of an Obafemi Awolowo University professor of surgery, Professor Olayinka Adegbehingbe, one of the high-profile cases in the southwest. He was released a day later after coughing out more than 5 million Naira in ransom payment to his Fulani abductors.

    Between those two cases, of course, there have been many more that are either unreported or are not so high-profile. A particularly tragic and senseless case was the kidnapping of a two-year old girl from an MFM church service in Agege. The little girl had gone to the restroom during service when she was grabbed by callous kidnappers who subsequently demanded ransom for her release. This is where we find ourselves as a nation.

    Banditry, kidnapping, terrorism, killer herdsmen, cultists, and gangsters have become the defining mark of the nation. Whereas our sister African nations, from Ghana to Rwanda, have transformed themselves and have become havens for diaspora Africans to vacation and do business, we keep sending a hopeless message of unfriendliness to those kith and kin of ours. Who would reasonably voluntarily choose a den of kidnappers or bandits as a vacation spot?

    It used not to be so. Yes, we had political thuggery in the 60s. And there were cases of pick pockets and house invasions. But they were few and far between and they were what our people used to refer to as ole ile (house thieves) who took advantage of familiarity with their victims to invade their space at night and steal what they coveted. As a young day-student at Iseyin, I was a victim of such pranks.

    Even during the civil war, we did not experience the kind of civilian-to-civilian violence that is our lot now. As a young bank clerical staff in Lagos in 1968, my friends and I used to sleep in the open space in the courtyard of our apartment. You will be tempting God to try it now. Yes, we had a heck of a time doing inter-city travels because of long queues at army checkpoints. But we were assured of safe travels even in the middle of the night. Now, we blame anyone on the road at 9 pm! What a country!

    Earlier this week, I received a video clip from a family friend. Recorded in Hausa, I struggled to figure out what the menacingly threatening fidgeting by the young men in army fatigue was all about. At first, I thought that these were bandits or terrorists celebrating their exploits. Later, it was explained to me that the video was shot by men of the Nigerian army and they were rejoicing that bandits and terrorists had escaped as they (the army) advanced.  It was a vivid illustration of the depth of our present predicament.

    In the first place, it was an unprofessional effort at propaganda. If you didn’t understand their message in Hausa, you would easily mistake them for bandits and insurgents. That is the way they appear to me in the video. But second, and more importantly, what, in the name of goodness, is there to celebrate in the total mess that we find ourselves in? Why are we celebrating the escape of bandits and insurgents instead of going after them until they are caught and brought to justice?

    No one is in doubt that we now have a crisis. The pertinent question is what is to be done in the face of a serious threat to our civilized mode of existence? You would expect this time to be an occasion for a unity of purpose to defeat terror, banditry, and all forms of reckless violence that have consumed the nation for more than thirty years.

    Instead of a unity of purpose, however, we have only engaged in a game of passing the buck and blaming the other. This past week, two ridiculous claims have made the round on social media, respectively blaming Atiku and Buhari.  In an article titled “US report indicts Atiku as brain behind recent killings in Nigeria”, an online media outlet alleged that “Center for Diplomacy and Democracy, Washington DC made this shocking revelation in a report released on Monday.”

    Of course, in the Internet era, it only takes a few strokes on the keyboard to verify a “report.” A search for Center for Diplomacy and Democracy, Washington DC came up short, the closest being “Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement”.  It has no such report. And the closest to Catherine Kerigun who supposedly signed the report “on behalf of the group” is Catherine Kerrigan who died two years ago. Could this story about Atiku being behind the killings have been made up? I don’t know. But it is not unusual for politics to get in the way of a crisis and prevent us from finding a solution.

    A second story is just as bizarre. The federal government supposedly paid Miyetti Allah N100 billion to stop the spate of herdsmen killings in the country. Does it even make sense that the federal government and Miyetti Allah would not think of the implication of such a deal? Would the organization not be admitting its culpability in the matter of herdsmen killings? Thankfully, the IGP has forcefully debunked the story.

    What is to be done? Three approaches are available to us. As a people of religious faith and unparalleled spirituality, we could choose putting our fate in God’s hands with the confidence that he will fight the battle for us. I am almost sure that even the most devoted among us do not think that this is a great idea. After all, faith and work are supposed to go together.

    Second, we could justifiably expect the federal government to discharge its constitutional responsibility and protect citizens from violent marauders in whatever shape or form they show up. After all, the president has also recently reiterated his understanding of his responsibility and promised to live up to it.

    While I do not doubt the president’s sense of responsibility and commitment to the security of the nation, I believe firmly that what we have on our hand is beyond one person or one person and a cabinet. Turning the security situation around now requires a national effort beyond partisan bickering or name-calling.

    Therefore, a third and most viable option is to declare a national emergency on security and rally all the nooks and crannies of the nation to action. For at least ten years, since 2009, the federal government under different parties, has been battling Boko Haram. Between 2015 and 2017, it appeared the battle was being won and Boko Haram was degraded. Then in 2018, we saw the beginning of a come-back effort on the part of the terrorist gang. This was compounded by the herdsmen killings in North Central. A third element in the sordid situation is the banditry in Zamfara and other Northwest enclaves. Now kidnapping has taken hold in the South.

    The federal government under every administration has proved incapable of meeting the challenge. Therefore, it is high time the country came together as one to fight the menace. For as the Emir of Katsina observed in a message he reportedly sent to Mr. President, without effective security no government program will succeed.

    Therefore, at his second inauguration, I hope President Buhari would launch a nationwide united focus against violent criminals, from terrorists to kidnappers and bandits and killer herdsmen, by declaring a national emergency on security. Such an emergency declaration will place security at the front burner of national consciousness and free up resources, including human and material resources, for the purpose, if necessary, from other sources.

     

     

     

     

  • Vicious conduct belies desirable values

    It is now common knowledge that where two or three diaspora Nigerians gather, top on their informal discussion agenda is the state of the nation. Between two strangers, a typical ice breaker goes thus:

    “How are you doing? Hope you’re hearing from folks back home?”

    “We thank God o! What else do we hear about than the usual: kidnapping here, cultism there, armed robbery in between?”

    Of course, between friends and relations, it is the stuff that every phone conversation and/or every WhatsApp platform is made of.

    Millions of Nigerians live abroad. They are students, artisans, and professionals in various fields, many in positions of leadership. They felt embarrassed and insulted when a world leader nicknamed their country as a sh*thole. But what can they do? Some even came to the defence of the man! That’s how pathetic our case is.

    The trigger for today’s piece, however, came from a heart-wrenching discussion that I had with three friends this past weekend. On Saturday, two family friends visited me and on Sunday, I received another family friend. As usual the discussion quickly turned on the homeland. Since all three just returned to the US, I was the listener-in-chief. And what I heard was thoroughly depressing, raising for me the question “is there hope for the nation?”

    Besides the known knowns of miscreants causing mayhem here and there, the picture painted was that of a debased mode of existence, a nation mired in vice and avarice where hustling and jostling for the frontline is the defining mark of relationships. House helps conspire with outsiders against their employers. Parents sell their babies. Clerics impregnate their members’ wives. And to get things done, in public service or private enterprise, you must deal under the table. I was told that the president is just wasting his time. Like Sodom and Gomorrah, Nigeria is irredeemable from the pit of hell.

    But are we really that hopeless? Are we really that inherently vicious? What values do we really espouse? How are values reversed? And how does a nation renew its values? Has our nation really gone far astray from her original base of desirable values that motivate conduct? It used to be the case that we saw ourselves as the keepers of our fellow citizens at local, state and national levels. Even the civil war did not rip us apart as much as the present divisive politics of hate. Every religion used to celebrate its festivals with the blessings and participation of other religions. That’s now an anathema, a sacrilege.

    Yet our neighboring countries like Ghana are celebrating the unity of faiths. Recently, the Chief Imam of Ghana celebrated his 100th Birthday in a Catholic Church, and the Vice President used the occasion to lecture Ghanaians about the doctrinal closeness of Islam and Christianity. A platform I am on recently also shared the picture of a new mosque in Abu Dhabi named “Mary the Mother of Jesus Mosque.” Ghanaian VP observed that there is more mention of Mary in the Koran than in the Bible. So much for our exclusive view of faith.

    My effort to find answers to my questions led me to the World Values Survey (WVS) which has for many years conducted surveys on the values held by people across the world. Fortunately, Nigeria was not left out of the 2012 edition, and the results are fascinating and instructive. The survey was based on face-to-face interviews of selected volunteers across the nation. Though, it was a small sample of 1759 out of a population of 200 million according to the most recent United Nations figure, it affords us some understanding of what we truly value as a people.

    Interviewers asked their volunteers more than 200 value questions ranging from economic, social, religious, and family values. Browsing through the answers which appear to me unsurprising because they do not deviate from what I have always understood as our indigenous value system, I cannot but wonder aloud, what’s it then with our conduct, which obviously conflict with the values we profess to hold dear?

    A few examples will do to underscore my point. 98.4% Nigerians say that the family is very important to them. Only 0.2% respond that it is not. Yet we have disproportionate numbers of dysfunctional families. For 62.2%, friends are very important, 32.3% think friends are rather important, while only 0.4% say they are not important. Only 21.0% consider politics very important, 28.1% say it is rather important while 5.8% find it not important. But with killings, mailings and hatred in the name of politics, you would think that 100% of the population find it extremely important.

    There is more. Work is valued as very important by 76.8% of respondents, while 16.3% consider it rather important, and 6.8% find work not important. This compares favorably with our age-old belief in the efficacy of work as antidote against poverty. And while I do not believe that the majority of our people choose the life of loafers, we have a challenge with huge unemployment numbers that result from many causes, not least of which is government dereliction of its duty on human talent development-education-which prepares young and old for gainful employment. Here, then, is a case of a value espousal that is consistent with desirable conduct, but which is unfortunately truncated by government policies.

    Religion is considered very important by 89.8%; another 7.7% find it rather important, while only 2.5% feet it is not important. Here is another case of the inconsistency of our value espousal with outward conduct. We go to church, mosque, and Orisa shrine. Yet, however, like Pharisees of old, our practical conduct, including our relationship to others, hardly demonstrates the core values that our religious beliefs espouse.

    Most striking is the response of volunteers to the question of what qualities are important for children. 78% mention hard work; 59.8% mention tolerance and respect for other people; 80.9% mention determination and perseverance; 72.7% mention religious faith; while unselfishness is mentioned by 31.7%.

    78.7% of our folks are active in church or religious organization while only 12.0% are active members of a political party. On the question of interest in politics, only 24.5% say they are very interested, while 43. 4% are not interested. 15% say most people can be trusted while 85% say one should be careful with others.

    As mentioned above, 76.8% believe that work is very important. However, only 17.3% believe that hard work brings success and a better life. Others believe that success is a matter of luck and connection. Here, then, is another clue to our predicament. Gone are the days when every child grew up believing that if they worked hard and played by the rule, they didn’t need a godfather or godmother. And the frustration that comes with the feeling of helplessness after you have done the part that society demands of you–go to school, acquire knowledge, and expect a good paying job–could be depressing and crippling.

    Finally, in the matter of trust, the findings are not inconsistent with public chatter. Only 7.8% of respondents completely trust members of other nationality. Just 10.3% completely trust people of other religion. 21.8% trust the armed forces, while only 7.7% have confidence in the police. 8.9% have confidence in the government while 23% have none; 11.7% in the courts while 13.3% have none. 9.3% have a great deal of confidence in the parliament while 21.5% have none.

    I do not believe that government alone is culpable in the matter of the vicious conduct of citizens. But I believe that, by virtue of its constitutional responsibility vis-a-vis the “Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy” chapter, government has a greater role to play in desirable value reorientation.

    While other organizations including religion may have particularistic interests, government has a universalist interest in the pursuit of desirable values in citizens. To fulfill its constitutional responsibility, it must first change its approach to human development by prioritizing it. Second, it must work with nongovernmental institutions including religion, the family, and civil society organizations to break the jinx of vicious conduct.