The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emeka Omeihe

  • Anambra market prayers

    In the last one month or so, there have been developments within the markets in Anambra State that should be of more than a passing interest to all.

    At the end of July, the president-general of Anambra State Amalgamated Traders Association (ASMATA), Ikechukwu Ekwegbalu had announced the banning of prayers in all markets across the state. The reason he gave was that politicians had hijacked the exercise; “What we see now is extortion and conversion of the prayer sessions to political rallies”.

    Just last week, the state government threw its weight behind the ban. Why it took the government one month to come public on the matter remains a matter of conjecture. But a statement by the state commissioner for information and public enlightenment, C. Don Adinuba went at length to show why the prayers can no longer serve the best interest of the state by the way they are organized and conducted.

    In their narrative, they said evidence abounds that a certain preacher conducting regular prayers in the various markets in the state had created a culture of fear and was spreading rancour in the markets. They also accused the unnamed pastor of being in the habit of ascribing every failure to the spiritual wickedness and manipulation of family members and fellow traders.

    They were also no longer comfortable with the compulsory closure of markets for prayers every Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays from morning till noon as it was depriving traders the opportunity to do their businesses. The government shared the complaints of traders that frequent closure was driving away their customers to markets in neighbouring states and even outside the country.

    To checkmate this trend, the government directed each market to decide on a day and time in a month to shut down and hold prayers while encouraging traders to hold their individual prayers. With the measures, the government envisages that all challenges thrown up by the previous order of conducting prayers in markets would have been stymied.

    It is good a thing the state government felt sufficiently worried by the mode, frequency of such prayers and the challenges they threw up that they had to intervene to restore sanity in the markets. All the reasons adduced for banning the prayers in the mode and frequency they were hitherto conducted cannot be faulted irrespective of the sensitivity of issues that impinge on the religious realm.

    Issues bordering on religion can be that sensitive and may have accounted for why the state government appeared to have shut its eyes to inherent challenges and dangers in allowing all markets to be shut for six hours in those three days just to enable traders pray. It is not clear whether that praying order and the shutting down of the markets had the approval of the government before they started being enforced by the traders’ union. It is also unclear how the unnamed preacher emerged to the point of monopolizing all prayer sessions in all Anambra markets.

    Though the state government did not explicitly indicate how the prayers evolved and the process leading to the selection of the offending pastor, the impression one gets is that it had been the sole responsibility of that pastor to hold prayers in all markets in the state. And the three days set aside for prayers were to enable him alternate and superintend over prayer sessions in the major markets in the state. How one pastor was allowed that kind of uncommon leverage in a state with diverse Christian religious denominations including animists and traditional religion adherents remains largely curious.

    But one fact that has emerged is that whoever allowed a single pastor to monopolize prayer sessions in all the markets for that long was vicariously responsible for the abuse the program suffered. Given the sensitivity of religious adherents to their peculiar modes of worship, allowing one pastor to force down on others his own worshipping prescriptions and prayer mode was a time bomb waiting to explode. One is surprised that it took that long before the government came to terms with traders’ dissatisfaction with the situation in the markets.

    It should not be a surprise that much of the complaints that trailed the activities of that pastor had their root in the incongruity in finding the right mix that satisfies the worshipping peculiarities of the various religious adherents he was ministering to. The pastor was accused of ascribing all misfortunes to the spiritual wickedness and manipulation of family members and fellow traders. This cannot go down well with a lot of people even as its capacity to create rift and bad blood among traders cannot be underestimated. He was said to be responsible for the frequent market closures and making a fortune out of it. He may not be alone in this.

    He cannot wield such awesome powers without connivance from highly placed officials either from within the markets’ union leadership or officials of the government. The state government should have gone a little further to unearth how the whole arrangement was conceived and nurtured. Such investigation will definitely expose all that went wrong with that contentious praying arrangement.

    Had consultations been adequately made in conceiving the prayer sessions, it would have struck the organizers to work out a mode of worship with appeal to sensibilities of the diverse denominations being aggregated to pray together. An inter-denominational prayer session involving diverse preachers would have offered a better option. Having neglected that vital consideration, it was a matter of time for the bubble to burst.

    It is little surprising that traders have had to complain not just about the propriety of frequent markets closures but the exploitation and fake prophesies of the pastor that had set families against one another and traders against their fellow traders. The antics of the offending pastor is neither entirely new nor is he alone in it. Many families have sordid tales on how fake prophesies from fake pastors and others in similar mould claiming supernatural powers inflicted incalculable harm amongst them. It is either that someone is holding your luck or there are ancestral curses from forefathers that are vitiating progress among members of the family for which that pastor has the supernatural powers to neutralize.

    I had in this column sometime ago, written about a particular pastor in Owerri, Imo State whose technology in attracting members lay in his claims to neutralizing ancestral curses. He produced an Igbo radio jingle of immense alliterative appeal which he constantly beams on radio stations urging his audience to approach his worship centre to have such curses remedied. You cannot but be attracted to his jingle: Ibibi abubu onu, Bibie abubu onu (neutralizing ancestral curses, neutralize ancestral curses). That has been his selling point. Only God knows how many of the gullible who flooded his worship centre had the touted curses neutralized. Only his visitors can say how effective the pastor has been in making good his claims and the turn around it has unleashed in their lives.

    Your guess is as good as mine. But one thing that remains certain is that the pastor does not neutralize curses for free. That is the nature of abuse religion has been subjected to in the hands of unscrupulous preachers and pastors.

    The danger encapsulated in such false preaching was poignantly underscores by the Federal Road Safety Commission FRSC in its ‘ember months’ sensitization program last year.  The commission had while speaking on the theme ‘safe Driving, Safe Arrival’ told the public to stop believing the existence of blood-sucking demons that kill travellers on the roads during the yuletide as most accidents are caused by human factors.

    More fundamentally, the furore generated by the prayer sessions would have been averted had its authors paid attention to the distinction between matters of ecclesiastical and corporeal realms. Had the state paid heed to St Augustine’s allegory of the two cities-the city of God and the city of man, the current pass would have perfectly been averted. That is the message.

  • Beyond Ekweremadu’s ordeal

    Condemnations trailing the humiliation of former deputy senate president, Ike Ekweremadu by some Igbo youths in Germany are clear indicators of public dissatisfaction with the unruly conduct of his assailants.

    As I was writing this article, I had cause to replay a video clip in which the group identified as members of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra IPOB chased the former deputy senate president as he ran for his dear life. It was hard for me to control my emotion seeing how the alleged IPOB members almost tore his dress to shreds.

    It then dawned on me that the incident was anything but a civil protest. It was a violent encounter that exposed the life of Ekweremadu to mortal danger. Even the most unrepentant antagonist of Ekweremadu would deprecate the action of that mob irrespective of whatever grievances they have. There are more civilized ways of registering such grievances than the lynch mentality that hijacked the unfortunate encounter.

    Yes, the alleged IPOB members have a right to their grievances. They are also within their rights to convey their disapproval on issues they consider detrimental to the wellbeing of their people to those representing their interests at decision making levels of the federation. They may have seen Ekweremadu as one of those key leaders of substance and decided to vent their anger on him. It is not unlikely they saw him as a target of impact to most poignantly drive home whatever grievances they have against Igbo leaders and the federal government. Ekweremadu thus, denoted a metaphor of all that is wrong with the country in two respects.

    For one, they considered him a symbol of the federal government authority having occupied the number four position in the country. And since they have had a running battle with that government over their agitations for self-determination, attacking him may have been envisioned as an attack on the federal government. Secondly, and as a key Igbo leader, he may have been seen to represent all that is untoward about Igbo leadership. Hence the attack!

    And what are the issues? They were heard during the unfortunate encounter accusing their victim of sitting-by while their relations at home are killed, maimed and raped daily by the rampaging herdsmen without any concrete action by the federal government to tame the scourge. They also complained about the dire economic situation in the country and the mismanagement of our collective patrimony by rapacious and uncaring leaders. They also have issues with situations in the country that forced them out to foreign lands in search of greener pastures despite the enormous resources mother nature bountifully endowed this country.

    Ekweremadu was therefore a symbol of an incompetent federal government and an uncaring Igbo leadership. The traditional dress designed with Nigerian coat of arms he wore to the occasion and the high positions he variously occupied at the senate appeared to have reinforced this perception. These may have accounted for the tearing of his dress as a mark of protest and to make the greatest impact.  And they appeared to have achieved it. Yet, their action went beyond tolerable limits.

    It would have made better sense if they carried placards expressing their grievances. They could also have heckled and prevented him from addressing the audience without physically bullying him to the point of tearing his dress. These would have been better approaches at driving home most strikingly whatever points they wanted to register. The violent manner they went about it casts serious slur on whatever grievances they may have had.

    Yet, we run a grave risk if we ignore the overall import of the encounter. It would amount to throwing away the baby with the bath water if we fail to reason beyond the actions of the protesters or allow their faulty approach to becloud a potent danger we are confronted with. Even as it was widely reported that the IPOB is responsible for the attack, it will amount to a grave error to view the attackers solely from the prism of disenchanted proscribed members of the IPOB.

    Even when their local chapter has sought to claim responsibility for their conduct, there are no sufficient indicators that all those involved in that encounter belong to the organization. The right approach is to view the attackers as Nigerians of Igbo extraction dissatisfied with the way this country is run and the apparent inability of their local leaders to redress the situation. That is the substance of the matter.

    If we must avert reoccurrence of such disgraceful incidents, it is imperative to venture beyond their faulty approaches to the substantive issues that propelled them into such unruly conduct.  The fact remains there is a wide gamut of resentment among the burgeoning population of our youths against leaders at all levels of government.

    This feeling of resentment, despair and frustration is not peculiar to our citizens abroad but constantly fuelled by the suffocating and dehumanizing conditions in which they have had to eke out a living in foreign countries. They easily get angry when they recall the enormous resources this country is bountifully endowed with but which are regularly frittered away by some rapacious and rogue leadership. They get impatient each time our leaders jet out to foreign lands for medical tourism because they left a decrepit health care delivery system behind.

    Our citizens abroad hear of humongous sums of money stashed away in foreign banks by some of those who have had the fortune or misfortune of presiding over the affairs of the country. Some of them are even better informed about the level of stolen public funds hidden in foreign banks than those of us at home. And they get easily irritated by it.  They are piqued at the low rating of the country in all human development indices in spite of the huge earnings that should have catapulted quantum economic development if effectively deployed.

    They are no strangers to the reality that at no time has Nigeria been so divided and fragment along primordial, ethnic and religious lines than now. It worries them that the fears expressed by Chinua Achebe in his book “There was a country’ are quickly assuming the toga of a self-fulfilling prophesy as they may have no country to return. All these evoke feelings of despondency, frustration and despair. And they are spurred to hold our leaders accountable wherever they find them.

    It would be an underestimation of the matter to view the development as the mischievous escapades of a proscribed group of trouble makers. We will be oversimplifying the inherent contradictions at play to consign it to an Igbo affair. It definitely goes beyond that. The reality is that our citizens are increasingly losing patience with the wobbling and fumbling that have characterized statecraft in the last few years.

    They are increasingly getting more disenchanted with frittered opportunities and the reluctance or outright refusal by those in authority to take the right decisions to reposition this country on the path of steady development, peace and progress.  It is a wake-up call on the federal government that many of her citizens outside our shores are tired of business as usual and something urgent has to be activated to redress the situation.

    It just started with the incident in Germany. There have also been threats against other personages beyond the Igbo race of dire consequences should they venture into foreign countries. Nobody can say for certain the dimension such protests will assume in the future. Not with the common chord its message struck with the #RevolutionNow movement, protests anchored by detained Omoyele Sowore.

    More seriously, its message should not be lost on Igbo leaders whose actions, inactions and utterance have tended to compromise the collective interests of their suffering people. Those of them notorious for sabotaging the collective interests of their people for a mess of porridge have a bitter lesson to learn. Governors of the southeast seem to have quickly got the message as evidenced by their open letter to President Buhari on the difficulty in assuaging their peoples’ impatience with the rising insecurity and debilitating economic challenges in the zone. But they have their own roles to play to mitigate the situation.

     

  • Between Makinde and Ihedioha

    Events in Oyo and Imo since after the elections, recommend the two states to some form of comparison. They have a lot in common in terms of shared characteristics especially since the new governors mounted the saddle of leadership. But they also have their distinctiveness.

    These will come handy in understanding the nature and character of current dispute between governors Seyi Makinde; his predecessor Abiola Ajimobi on the one hand, Emeka Ihedioha and Rochas Okorocha on the other. One significant thing though, is the similarity they share as the two states in the southern part of the country the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress APC lost to the opposition Peoples Democratic Party PDP in the last governorship elections.

    Both states share this similarity. And events since the swearing-in of the two governors seem also to be following the same pattern. But there are sharp departures also. Why are events in the two states seemingly following the same predictable pattern? Is there anything in the style of governance of the two states or the personalities of their former helmsmen that predispose them to the altercations and rancour they have been embroiled in since the change of leadership? Or can it be said as Okorocha has alleged that his current predicament is motivated by witch-hunt or vendetta because he is of the APC stock even when he is still on suspension by that party?

    To resolve these posers, it is vital to identify the issues in contention. What are they? Before we go into them, it is apposite to point out that Oyo and Imo states are by no means the only states in the country where the opposition wrestled power from the ruling party. Neither was such change of baton only to the advantage of the opposition as the ruling party equally benefited from it. So looking at the recriminations between the two governors and their predecessors from this prism could obfuscate the salient and more serious issues of governance that are at the root of the matter.

    Now the issues! Both governors had complained of arbitrary actions and looting of government property in the last days of their respective regimes. We shall look at specific cases of alleged infractions and how the new governors went about them.

    The direction of Makinde’s line of action was set when he declared, “all transactions either contractual or in terms of appointments and promotions between March 11, and May 28, 2019 would be given closer scrutiny particularly because of the obvious mischief that had been introduced into governance within the period”. The period under review falls within the time a new governor had already been declared following the outcome of the last elections.

    In specific terms, there were allegations of last minute promotions and appointments into the states civil service. There was the hurried elevation of about 15 permanent secretaries with scant regard to extant regulations; allegations of looting of government property especially vehicles by officials of Ajimobi’s regime. There were issues also with a plethora of last minute spending and refusal by the Ajimobi regime to cooperate with the transition committee set up by his successor. These were viewed as deliberate attempts to strew thorns on the path to the effective take off of the new regime.

    How did the governor go about tackling them? He did not waste time in reversing some of these promotions including the appointment of permanent secretaries on the eve of the departure of the last regime. Makinde also empanelled a committee on the recovery of assets and properties illegally taken away by officials of the previous government.

    This saw the governor and his predecessor in a diatribe on the propriety of the claims that government properties and cars were looted without regard to extant regulations. Ajimobi had described the allegation as a minor issue claiming that his aides paid for the vehicles they took away in keeping with subsisting understanding. But Makinde countered that they are concerned with only official vehicles carted away without legal instruments.

    The government said most of the vehicles carted away illegally are new and in good working conditions. And they had no issue with vehicles boarded and paid for by officials of the last government. The government has therefore vowed to retrieve all such vehicles and properties. There are also issues bordering on poorly executed contracts and abandoned road projects. These are the issues in contention and have more to do with probity and accountability in public offices.

    And what do we find in Imo State? Okorocha and his aides were not only accused of mindless looting of sundry government property but the clinical manner it was executed was legendary. Overnight, every household item in the government house quickly developed wings and fled as if an army of occupation had just evacuated. Government properties in some other establishments especially conference centres suffered the same fate.

    Okorocha also initiated actions in several fronts in his last days in office to constrain the in-coming government. It was a bazaar of promotions and illegal employments as cronies, relations and accomplishes were given accelerated promotions with some of the letters of appointment back-dated. The former governor was to emerge one afternoon to announce the establishment of six new universities, four polytechnics and two colleges of education on the eve of his departure. Not done, he also proceeded to announce appointments into the commanding heights of those institutions.

    Boards of statutory bodies, agencies and departments were also curiously constituted on the eve of his exit even when he showed strong aversion to these when he held way. When you pair these with his refusal to cooperate with the transition committee set up by his predecessor, what you find is a deliberate attempt to lay landmines against the effective take-off of the new regime. The reasons Okorocha went into frenzy when he realized he was living on borrowed time are not hard to fathom. For a man that had run the government as family estate courting the unenviable record of publicly showing strong aversion to due process, it was not surprising that he saw any attempt to hold him accountable for his actions as an act of vendetta and witch-hunting.

    Besides, his scant regard for due process, gave rise to indiscriminate award of contracts such that the Council for the Registration of Engineering Practice in Nigeria COREN warned that bridges being constructed by Okorocha were “accidents waiting to happen as they had no engineering designs”. Before then, it had become an open fact the roads constructed by that government had earned the sobriquet ‘China roads’- a mark of sub-standard execution.

    Ihedioha like Makinde set up a taskforce to retrieve all stolen government vehicles and properties. He also commissioned integrity tests on those bridges and flyovers suspected to be death traps. Their findings have been quite revealing of the mindless looting and sub-standard projects that hallmarked that regime. The governor also set up a high-powered committee on the six phoney universities and other tertiary institutions. A committee is to investigate the funds of the 27 local governments in the last eight years even as a judicial commission of inquiry into land matters from 2006 to 2019 has been empanelled. Ihedioha also reversed some of the illegal appointments and promotions done in the last days of the Okorocha regime.

    All these have not gone down well with Okorocha and he has bandied allegations of attempts to discredit him. Of recent, he alleged the measures were against the APC and President Buhari just to curry sympathy and cover up the mess he left behind. But the same man had before now alleged that the APC was conniving with the EFCC to arrest him when he leaves office. He had even gone to court to stop such arrest. And since he left office, many properties traceable to him and his family have been sealed by the EFCC.

    Okorocha has serious issues with Imo people. He has issues with the EFCC; he is haunted by his scant regard for due process and rule of law. He is being called upon to justify his actions. He must rise to that challenge, take his destiny in hands and desist from blaming phantom enemies for self-inflicted injury. His fate is not different from those of his former colleagues who saw governance as family estate.

  • Bush insurgency

    It would appear we are faced with bush insurgency. We may have to find escape route by blaming the bushes for the wanton killings and kidnappings that have become regular features on our highways.

    Or how else do we account for the discordant views on whose shoulders to rest the blame for the senseless killings and kidnapping for ransom on our highways perpetrated by faceless elements hiding under the cover of seemingly impenetrable bushes. From Boko Haram insurgency to armed banditry, kidnapping to the insurgency of the herdsmen, all enjoy one common denominator of launching their dastardly and mortal escapades from the bushes.

    Perhaps, with the exception of the Boko Haram insurgents, there has been some difficulty pinpointing precisely those responsible for the killings and kidnappings that have now reduced journeys on our highways to a dreadful enterprise. In the far north, we hear of bandits that raid villages killing people at random and abducting others for ransom. There is also the phenomenon of cattle rusting and the hostilities it engenders; killings associated with illegal mining for gold in Zamfara State and ancillary criminal activities.

    In the Middle Belt states of Plateau, Benue and Taraba, there are killings, sacking and despoliation of communities that are blamed on the herdsmen. Those who perpetrate these dastardly acts also operate under the cover of the bushes and mostly at nights when the indigenous people are asleep. They strike their targets with utmost precision leaving in their trail sorrow and awe.

    The southern parts of the country are home to killings and kidnapping for ransom on the highways, armed robbery, cultism and sundry criminalities. But unlike in the past when armed robbers waylaid their victims, dispossessing them of their money and other valuables, the narrative now is that of well-armed people emerging from the bushes, killing travellers indiscriminately and taking others for ransom. They operate with great speed and precision only to flee into the bushes with the victims who are made to face debasing assault, raping and all manner of cruelty.

    Those who have had the ill-luck of encountering these men of low means say they are Fulani herdsmen. They were fingered in the killing of the daughter of the leader of the Afenifere. Blames traded and sentiments raised on that singular killing are still very fresh in our minds. Pastors of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, RCCG, kidnapped in Ogun State a fortnight ago had similar stories as to those they encountered when taken into the bushes.

    But despite this seeming convergence of views on those largely responsible for the bush insurgency in the southern parts of the country, it would appear no group wants to take responsibility for the criminality. That is why each time killings and kidnapping take place; the police blame bandits for culpability even as the source of the criminality does not seem to be in doubt. The police authorities may be right in their position especially given their inability to get a handle to the rising spate of insecurity on our highways.

    Because of this difficulty, they attribute all criminalities on the highways to bandits whoever they are. Yes, there are armed robbers and kidnappers on the highways who may have nothing to do with cattle breeding. It is also quite possible for the criminal activities of this group to be attributed to the herdsmen. We cannot rule out the possibility that some of them may even disguise as herdsmen to carry out their dastardly activities. This dimension exists.

    Yet, these are not sufficient to exculpate the herdsmen from the accusations levied against them in the rising killings and kidnappings that have reduced travelling on our highways to a nightmare. The fact that other criminals could disguise as herdsmen and commit crimes suggests that something is wrong with the way herding is done in this clime. Apart from the account of those who have encountered these criminals, one thing that reinforces the culpability of the herdsmen is their affinity with the bushes. They live in the bushes; graze their cattle in the bushes and are more familiar with bush terrains even when they are not indigenous to those areas.

    And because they can easily be found in bushes where people dread to enter, they become easy suspects for most of the criminalities coming from there. Moreover, herdsmen are known to be wielding AK-47 riffles against the usual sticks and knives they hitherto used to drive their cattle and for self-protection. It was not for nothing that some governors in the north-east recently passed a resolution to disarm herdsmen and sundry armed groups in the zone.

    Perhaps, if the police had been more efficient in bursting those responsible for the anarchy on our highways, the identity of the masterminds would have been exposed and the nation saved the attendant speculations and altercations. In the absence of that, the various nationalities especially in the south have had to hold herdsmen liable for much of the criminality on our highways. The herdsmen may not be alone in this.  But their affinity with the bushes and the fact that they are found in the remotest parts of dreaded bushes seem to give them out.

    One thing that stands out and very distinctly too, is that we are confronted by the insurgency of the bush. The bush has become our greatest problem; our undoing in effectively protecting lives and property in this country. The bush has become our albatross. It provides cover for all manner of criminalities and has become our greatest challenge. We must confront the bushes with the entire military arsenal at our disposal such that will make it a risky enterprise for any human to hide there and levy war on the rest of us.

    The insurgency of the bush was in action and effective in the Sambisa forest as it nurtured the Boko Haram insurgency in the north-east. For years, that forest was the bastion of the onslaughts of the insurgents against our soldiers. Our soldiers dreaded that forest and have bitter tales on the difficulties it posed in “technically” winning the war on terrorism. That the war is still far from being won, illustrates very poignantly the potent danger the bush has become in the maintenance of law and order.

    We are confronted by the same predicament in the southern parts of the country and the Middle Belt. We must confront the bushes; forests and dislodge all those who hide there to make life difficult for ordinary citizens. We must get to the locations where human activities especially herding is carried out inside the bushes and have effective surveillance over them. With this, it will be easy to determine who exploits the cover of the bushes to make life miserable for the rest of the society. Nigeria is currently gravitating towards unmitigated disaster should the insurgency of the bush be allowed to continue unchecked. There is a grave risk in ignoring the recurring blame trading as to those exploiting their affinity with the bushes to hold others to ransom.

    The way out is to invade the bushes and clear them of undesirable elements. Once our security agencies are able to penetrate the bushes, we will begin to understand the nature of activities that go on there and those responsible for them. If we find the predominance of herdsmen in some of the flashpoints of the killings and kidnappings, then the issue of whom to take the blame would have been largely resolved.

    Where we find other sets of humans inhabiting the bushes, they should be made to account for what business they have there. But if we really want to resolve altercations arising from killings emanating from the bushes, there has to evolve very effective monitoring of the activities of the herdsmen.

    It is time to do away with their itinerant nature; confine them to specific locations where there activities can be effectively monitored. That is the safest way of reducing the tension arising from suspicions that herdsmen are largely responsible for much of the criminalities on our highways. We need total conquering of the bushes such that will make it difficult for the criminal minded to take advantage of their impenetrability to levy war on the rest of us. If it takes confining herders to areas they can be easily monitored or flushing them out of flashpoints of insecurity, so be it.

  • Botched security summit

    It is increasingly clearer that we are not getting the right handle to the degenerating security situation in the country. Even as the authorities give copious assurance of their resolve to tame the mortal danger posed by heightened insecurity, the fact on the ground is that ours is turning to a verity of the state of nature where life has at once become nasty, short and brutish.

    Insecurity is perceptible from the escapades of the Boko Haram insurgents; wanton killings and kidnappings by the so-called bandits, kidnappings that are largely attributed to herdsmen on highways, armed robbery and sundry criminalities. The matter has gotten to such a head that it is now a risky venture to travel on our highways especially the ever-busy Lagos-Benin expressway.

    Not unexpectedly, the rising spate of kidnappings especially in the southern parts of the country has been largely blamed on the herdsmen because of the similarity in their conduct and style of activity with those of the kidnappers. Accounts of many of those who had fallen victim of kidnapping seem to largely corroborate this suspicion.

    This has brought in its wake allegations and counter allegation. Southern leaders are now pitted against their northern counterparts on the masterminds of the kidnappings and killings in the southern parts of the country. This is sequel to accusations that most of the rising criminalities in the south especially on the highways are traceable to the herdsmen. The matter appeared to have been exacerbated by the recent killing of the daughter of the leader of Afenifere socio-political group.

    It was a scene of threats and counter threats as tempers flared up on account of the callous manner the lady was mowed down. The level of ethnic bitterness it raised saw some groups and individuals threatening reprisals if the killings continue without sufficient measures by the government to stem the tide. We also saw for the first time, calls from groups in the north on the herdsmen to leave the southern part of the country. Though the calls were not and not likely to be heeded, we seem to be confronted by bottled up grievances that could easily burst if nothing substantial is done to reassure the nation that there is no hidden agenda behind killings.

    Even then, ethnic distrust is now at an all time high. Nigerians have never been so divided along ethnic, religious and other fault lines as they have in the last few years. The issue is not remedied by the tepid manner the government has gone about handling the challenge often living in denial on the gravity of the situation. This has tended to reinforce allegations that the government is only interested in resolving the contradiction raised by the insurgency of the herdsmen on terms favorable to them even when we have been told that many of them are foreigners.

    That accounts for the strident opposition against some of the measures the government floated as solutions to the lingering insecurity. As at now, the government appears in a fix as its neutrality in the escalating crises cannot be trusted. It is confronted by a crisis of confidence such that any move it makes to evolve therapeutic responses is viewed with serious suspicion and apprehension.

    The way things stand the government is constantly losing the confidence of the people on its capacity to evolve solutions that will satisfy the constituents. This conclusion can be discerned form the quick speed with which some of its programmes- Ruga settlements, grazing zones etc were shot down. The government found itself retreating from the Ruga policy albeit temporarily. But suspicions linger that it is bidding its time and may soon come about the same rejected policy through other means.

    So the suspicion rages with the nationalities highly sensitized and poised to challenge any policy that will snatch their lands and hand them over to herdsmen some of whom are foreign nationals. Irredentism and ethnic chauvinism have been revved up and they are not about to peter out so soon. If the country is to overcome this ominous cloud of insecurity, it is imperative that some form of intervention is called into action by well-meaning citizens to evolve generally acceptable and lasting solutions to the lingering challenge. We need to diffuse the tension in the land arising from suspicions and mistrust among the distinct nationalities brought to the fore by the poor handling and mismanagement of the crises by the government.

    Perhaps, it was with this in mind that former military Head of state, Abdulsalami Abubakar convened a security roundtable of key nationalities in Minna, Niger state last week. Presumably, Abubakar had arranged that summit to explore ways to diffuse the tension, mistrust and acrimony that have seen the nationalities in blames and counter blames.

    Invited to the meeting were leaders of the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum SMBLF composed of the Afenifere, Ohaneze Nidgbo and Middle Belt Forum. Also invited were Miyetti Allah cattle breeders association, Gan Allah Fulani Development Association, heads of the security forces and other notable Nigerians.

    But events soon turned awry. The SMBLF was later to turn down the invitation raising serious reservations against some groups invited to the same meeting. In a letter rejecting the invitation, they seriously objected to the invitation extended to Miyetti Allah and the Gan Allah Fulani Development Association. They contended that they do not know members of the Gan Allah group while the “lumping of Miyetti Allah, a trade association for cattle breeders whose members have been accused of violation of rights, including life, across the country sends worrying signals to us”

    They considered this a grave insult as “coming to a roundtable with the group would mean acquiescence to the narrative that put us in the same bracket with those wielding illegal AK-47 all over the country and inflicting terror on fellow citizens”. With these reservations, the roundtable was dead on arrival and another opportunity to diffuse the charged political atmosphere lost.

    So we remain trapped in the same vicious cycle. We seem to be held up by contradictions of sorts from getting our acts right. Issues have been traded as to the propriety of the action of the SMBLF. Some have even gone ahead to suggest that they should have overlooked those issues attend the roundtable as no sacrifice will be too big in the quest to restore peace.

    It is a matter of opinion. But that the group rejected the invitation on those grounds shows how seriously they felt and their distrust in the capacity of that summit to do justice to security issues that were bound to arise. It was an obvious vote of no confidence on the neutrality of organizers of the summit. It is for them to explain from where they floated the Gan Allah group and why Miyetti Allah fits into the mould of the socio-cultural groups that make up the SMBLF. This is more compelling given that in the past, the presidency had made futile attempts to categorize Miyetti Allah as sharing the same characteristics with Afenifee, Ohaneze and Middle Belt Forum.

    Given the controversy that categorization generated then, Abukakar obviously underestimated how bad these nationalities felt on that issue. I guess he must have learnt one or two lessons from the development. The fact remains that there is wide suspicion that the government and its agents are not showing enough sincerity in finding lasting solutions to the security challenges that have pitched parts of the country against others.

    What we find is an increasing proclivity on the part of the government and her agents to seek the resolution of the insurgency of the herdsmen on terms favorable to the herders, their sponsors and sympathizers at the corridors of power. It is hoped Abubakar is not doing the bidding of any of these interests. But as long as this jaundiced handling of the matter persists, so long will a quick return to peace and normalcy continue to be an illusion. There are quick fixes to the insurgency of the herdsmen. But will the government toe that path?

  • Makinde’s assets

    It is not surprising that the declaration of assets worth about N50 billion by Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State has continued to generate considerable public interest.

    This is perhaps, the first time in recent times a governor would make public his assets. He also set record as the first public officer to file details of those assets on the eve of his inauguration even when the laws establishing the Code of Conduct Bureau CCB stipulated a three-month timeframe for the exercise.

    These should have stood him out for commendation given the high prevalence of corruption in our public life and the imperative to stem the tide. By the measures, Makinde has provided the template for the public to hold him accountable in and out of office. The point he seemed to have made is that if assets worth more than his official earnings are traced to him on exiting office, he should be made to face the raw teeth of the law. That should be something to cheer about.

    But we live in a clime of abject poverty with a few swimming in scandalous opulence. It is therefore little a surprise that the disclosure of such huge amount of funds and assets has come with its own challenges. Issues have been raised in some quarters as to how a single individual could possibly amass such huge amount of money and assets in the face of debilitating poverty. And this has tended to take off the shine from an action that should ordinarily, have been received with considerable applause.

    Read Also: Makinde sends commissioners list to assembly

    But the governor did no wrong. Nigeria’s poor rating in the world’s poverty index is none of his making. Neither can he be possibly held liable for the woes of this country. He was only obeying extant regulations regarding assets declaration by public office holders. If he is considered stupendously rich by local standards, it is no fault of his. After all, the capitalist system we run thrives on such inequalities. Makinde seemed to have followed the pattern set by late President Umaru Yar’Adua when in June 2007 he made an open declaration of his assets. Yar’Adua had then asked his vice to follow his example but his ill-health and subsequent death did not allow that visionary move to be fully appreciated.

    Before now, some key public officials of the government have been arraigned at the Code of Conduct Tribunal CCT for either failure to declare assets, concealment of assets or lack of full disclosure. The case of the immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen is still very fresh in the mind. Makinde was just being mindful of all that.

    Curiously, questions have been raised as to how he could have acquired such stupendous wealth in this country. Issues were bandied in some quarters as to the amount of taxes he pays to the government and his level of social responsibility to his constituents. Some even went to the ridiculous length of calling on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission EFCC and other relevant bodies to have him investigated. Investigate him for what offence?

    Sadly, what should have stood out as an example of emulation was seemingly diminished by scathing remarks as to how he made his money, the level of taxes paid and the corporate citizenship of some of his companies. By dwelling more on the negative side of the action, we lost a good opportunity to appreciate the heuristic vale of the exercise. For a government that has the war against corruption as one of its cardinal programs and had taken some unconstitutional steps to hound those suspected of fraud related offences; that was a good opportunity to celebrate the gains of the war.

    One would have expected the government to positively hype up that development commending the approach to other elected and appointed public officials. But for some inexplicable reasons, that opportunity was allowed to be drowned by derisive remarks and unhelpful scepticisms.

    Now what are the issues? Here is a governor that dutifully declared his assets in keeping with extant regulations. He did not just stop at that, but went further to make them public even before being sworn-in. And that has become his crime for which he must be hounded? What an irony! If he had opted to go it secretly as most public officers do, would anybody have known the worth of his assets to warrant calling for a probe? And which of the two options serves public interest better- secret declaration as has been the order of the day or open declaration on the eve of inauguration now pioneered by Governor Makinde?

    The later obviously better serves the course of probity and accountability. It is a sincere move stemming from the heart of one who has nothing to hide. The impression it generally conveys is that of one who made his money genuinely and therefore has nothing to fear by making that information public. I stand to be contradicted.

    Questions as to how he made his money, the amount of taxes he paid and his overall positive impact on the society are essentially diversionary. They are not relevant to the situation and cannot be used to smear an example worthy of emulation. Moreover, there is the inherent danger that such negativism could scare away public officers who may wish to toe the same path.

    We would have lost a lot of mileage in the war against corruption if by those scornful remarks and negativism we end up discouraging those who might be spurred by Makinde’s action to follow the same line. But then, probity and accountability in public offices would be better enhanced if public officers are bold enough to make public the overall worth of their assets. It will also give inkling on income distribution within the Nigerian society.

    How people make their money, the level of taxes they pay and issues of corporate citizenship are not entirely out of place. But they are irrelevant at the point of assets’ declaration. There are statutory bodies charged with those responsibilities. If they fail to discharge their duties as at when due, that is their cup of tea.

    And if one may ask, what have we done with those few Nigerians that control the entire wealth of the country almost exclusively? Why have our anti-graft agencies not probed into the sources of their wealth including those of them that have held public offices in this country? That should be the real issue and not the avoidable distraction in attempting to stigmatize a governor, honest enough to avail the nation of his total assets standing.

    It is for the relevant agencies of government to verify the claims contained in his assets declaration forms to ensure that all his depositions conform to facts on the ground. That is the way to go; the basis for holding him accountable when he leaves office. Anything other than that will be diversionary and counterproductive. We should encourage others not only to make their assets declaration public but to do so a few days before they assume office. This will stem the observed penchant by unscrupulous ones for anticipatory declarations within the three months’ timeframe.

    But more seriously, the CCB must buckle up in its verification of claims deposed on oath by public officers. It does not speak well of the agency that little is heard of discrepancies, concealment of information or lack of full disclosure in the assets declaration forms of key public officers except when they have issues with the authorities.

    That was exactly the situation with the former senate president, Bukola Saraki. Onnoghen’s case also followed the same predictable pattern. These tend to convey the miserable impression that the CCB just like its EFCC counterpart are increasingly becoming tools in the hands of the government to hound perceived enemies. These key institutions must be retrieved from increasing slide to partisanship to remain relevant to their mandate.

  • Of inverted patriotism

    There exists some understanding that definitional issues in social analysis are rather inconclusive. That is why you find varying definitions of a given concept or phenomenon by scholars. But in this seeming divergence, there still exists a convergence of views on the confines of the subject matter.

    Though perceptions may slightly differ, there is always a common strand of exactitude running through all these definitions. At the end, you can easily isolate features common to the concept that differentiates it from what it is not. That way, you can assign practical expression and meaning to abstractions and constructs.

    Even then, it is not uncommon to see political leaders and sundry personages misconstrue and exploit some of these concepts to serve ends that detract substantially from their real essence. The above scenario played out last week when President Buhari accused unnamed Nigerians of unpatriotic acts for seemingly criticizing his current handling of the worsening insecurity in the country.

    Apparently reacting to mounting criticisms on his handling of the degenerating security situation, the president had said “those who politicize the isolated incidents of insecurity are not patriotic Nigerians. I am confident that this administration will use all resources at its disposal to protect the lives of all Nigerians and not just prominent Nigerians, but all”.

    There are inherent flaws in the above assertions. The first is the difficulty in understanding what the president actually meant by politicization of insecurity. And what the dividing line is between informed criticisms and politicization of the subject matter. The second relates to his notion of what constitutes isolated incidents of insecurity while the other hinges on his promise to protect all and not just prominent Nigerians. We shall return to these later.

    With the killing last week of Funke Olakunri, daughter of leader of the Yoruba socio-political organization, Afenifere by suspected herdsmen, key Nigerians came down heavily against the rising insecurity in the country. Among the most vocal were former presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan. Nobel laureate, Wole Soyinka also lent his voice to the issue even as there were other voices from concerned groups across the country. If the concerns expressed by these groups and individuals amounted to the politicization of insecurity in the thinking of the president, then he got it all wrong. There is always a dividing line between informed criticisms and politics.

    There is also a big flaw in what the president called isolated incidents of insecurity in the country. Isolated? For a country that is buffeted in all fronts by all manner of security challenges that have stretched the security agencies to elastic limits, it is amazing that any person could describe the mortal danger posed by insecurity in such patronizing manner. Not with the festering Boko Haram insurgency, armed banditry, kidnapping, armed robbery and the insurgency of the herdsmen that have left the country a verity of the Hobbesian state of nature.

    Holes can also be picked in his promise to protect all Nigerians and not just the prominent ones. Coming on the heels of heightened emotions on the callous and senseless killing of Funke Olakunri by suspected herdsmen, such a statement would appear insensitive to the mood of the times. It would have made more sense to rehearse such trite statements and platitudes without bringing in the distinction between prominent and non prominent Nigerians. The import of that curious distinction is not lost on very discerning minds. And it says a lot about the mind frame of the president in the instant case.

    Beyond these, there is a fundamental conceptual mix-up in the assertion that those who politicize incidents of isolated insecurity in the country are not patriotic Nigerians. Our reading of this is that those who criticize government’s handling of the escalating security situation in the country are not patriotic Nigerians. In this wise, the alarm on the degenerating insecurity raised by Obasanjo, Jonathan and Soyinka among others with recommendations on ways out, would fit into unpatriotic acts. It is difficult to fathom how that claim could possibly stand.

    And that raises definitional and conceptual issues as to the precise meaning of the word patriotism. It is apposite to define that word for us to contextualize Buhari’s statement. Stephen Nathanson categorized patriotism in Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy in the following terms: ‘Special affection for one’s own country; a sense of personal identification with the country, special concern for the wellbeing of the country and willingness to sacrifice to promote the country’s good’.

    And what did Obasanjo and others say? They draw attention to the inherent dangers in allowing pervading insecurity to get out of hands; they also proffered suggestions on how to stem the tide and ward off the drift to anarchy. Obasanjo made copious recommendations on ways out including an urgent summit of all nationalities and prominent Nigerians where observed grievances will be tabled and trashed out. Jonathan drew attention to the recommendations of the 2014 national conference report which he said contains vital recommendations on how to resolve the nagging insecurity in the country.

    Other suggestions include the convocation of a national conference, security summit and restructuring. What is expected of a sensitive and caring government is to take advantage of these suggestions and tackle the scourge of insecurity headlong. Taking refuge on banal allegations and name calling offers no remedy on the debilitating situation. Even if these personages were seemingly hard on the government for not living up to its statutory duties, they had genuine intentions and suggestions on ways out. Their aim is to get the government arrest the degenerating security situation and retrieve the country from impending catastrophe.

    Can we possibly tag such dispositions as unpatriotic acts? And which of these two dispositions serves our national interest better: to keep quiet and allow the situation get out of hands or draw government’s attention to the drift with a view to finding lasting solutions to it? It is obvious that the later is in conformity with acts of patriotism and love for one’s own country.

    Undoubtedly, the interventions by Obasanjo, Jonathan and Soyinka amply stand them out as those who care for the collective wellbeing of their country. They share common concerns for their country and would not want acts of omission or commission on the part of the government to railroad it to avoidable danger. They are concerned about the survival of the country and would want quick therapeutic responses to retrieve it from the impending doom. Their actions therefore qualify them as patriots. If Buhari had them in mind when he made the accusation, he got it all wrong. He may well have been afflicted by a wrong notion of what constitutes patriotism.

    This view is given succinct credence by Igor Primoratz when he wrote on patriotism as follows: “such identification is expressed in vicarious feelings: in pride of one’s country’s merits and achievements and in shame for its lapses or crimes (when these are acknowledged rather than denied)”. He has said it all.

    Those who criticize the tepid handling of the insecurity that is tearing the country apart are only expressing frustrations and discomfort with the situation. They are ashamed of the lapses arising from the inability or reluctance of the government to decisively stem the tide. They are the real patriots and not those who pretend all is well in the face of potent danger. It would appear Buhari saw patriotism from the prism of its inverted variant. It is a convoluted perception of the subject matter; one that satisfies the whims and caprices of the leader.

    But we must be careful of the mortal danger in equating patriotism with blind trust on anything a leader says. For, history is replete with accounts of leaders who displaced national goals with their self-serving interests. Such goal displacement leads to dissonance between what that leader considers to represent the national interest of a country and the collective interests of the constituents. It is a frightening prospect that must be watched carefully.

  • Imo’s failed projects

    The quality of projects executed by the regime of Rochas Okorocha in Imo State has of recent been in the public domain. Attention to the integrity of those projects was apparently sequel to photographs in the social media of a failed bridge on a federal highway in the state.

    A senior journalist had posted photographs of the collapsed Orashi River Bridge on the federal highway linking Imo and Anambra states along the Orlu/Ideato axis. It is the only federal road connecting Imo State capital directly to Awka, the Anambra State capital.

    The author of the post had explained he personally took the pictures and that he would not have believed that a bridge on a federal highway could be constructed without iron rod reinforcement if he did not personally see the bridge. His fears were soon proven as some commentators disputed what they saw in the pictures. While some insisted that the features depicted more of a failed road than a bridge, some others contended that it was actually a bridge.

    At the end, it was apparent that even the proviso by the author that he personally took the pictures and would not have believed it if he was not personally there, still failed to convince some as to the visual accuracy of the pictures. But implicit in that disagreement is the uncanny contradiction which that structure called a bridge posed. And that captures the difficulty Governor Emeka Ihedioha would encounter dealing with many of the failed and substandard projects executed by his predecessor.

    Read Also: Laying the markers for a new Imo

    All the same, it is good a thing such substandard projects are being exposed to the public. This is more so given that Okorocha is well known for his loquaciousness. He even boasted he has done any and every development project the state needed leaving the incoming administration with nothing again to do. For such a character, it would be a grave risk not to let the public into the substandard and makeshift projects he bequeathed the state. Those who found it hard to believe that the features were that of a bridge could in all fairness be excused. Their handicap stemmed from the shoddy conceptualization and execution of that project and they are not to blame for it.

    The reality however, is that it is a bridge on a federal highway constructed by the Okorocha regime less than three years ago. It is Okorocha’s version of a bridge aka ‘China bridge’ It is a bridge constructed without engineering design. Due to that technical defect, it is difficult to distinguish whether it is really a bridge or a culvert. All the technical rules guiding the construction of such projects were observed in their breach for some inexplicable reasons.

    Ironically, by the side of that failed bridge, one can still see the disused one-lane bridge constructed by the colonial masters. The colonial bridge is still hanging well above the water level. But Okorocha’s variant steeped so low that it is almost at the same base with the flowing water level. The road is so abnormally steep that hardly a week passes without a trailer falling across it. I guess the idea of reducing such a critical bridge to the verity of a culvert was possibly to cut costs or corners. But that has turned out the greatest undoing of that project and its initiator.

    As someone from the area and very conversant with the bridge, it would amount to an abdication of responsibility not to add my voice to that death trap called a bridge. This is not the first time it is collapsing. At least in three different occasions since it was built, the bridge had scandalously caved in exposing the shoddy job and death trap it was.

    But each time it failed, the state government had a curious way of patching up the failed section. It was obvious however that makeshift solution was not the answer but complete demolition to give way for a more enduring structure. It did not come as a surprise two weeks after the departure of that regime, that bridge collapsed irretrievably. But the scandal in the entire narrative is that the bridge links Okorocha to his ancestral home. Standing at that point, one can see very clearly the palatial home of the former governor. That he could not construct a durable bridge across a federal highway near his ancestral house says volumes of his eight year regime. Very sad indeed!

    It must be observed that the bridge at Orashi River is not the only failed bridge constructed by that government without iron rods and engineering design. There is the fifth inland bridge inside Owerri as well as the two flyovers initiated by his predecessor but which he completed in the same shoddy manner. This should not come as a surprise. In January last year, the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria COREN had warned that bridges constructed by the government of Okorocha were disasters waiting to happen.

    COREN president, Kashim Ali told the senate president during a courtesy visit that “tragedy is about to happen in Imo State. Bridges are being built in Imo State without engineering design; it is a disaster waiting to happen”. So what we are seeing now had been forewarned by COREN. The collapse of the Orashi and the fifth inland road bridges may be a tip of the iceberg.

    There are heightened fears that some of these structures may put the public in harms’ way. So the decision of the new administration to shut down the two flyovers due to observed cracks while ordering integrity tests on them is a step in the right direction. The overall idea is to ascertain their qualities and save the public from the impending calamity envisaged by COREN.

    The Orashi and fifth inland bridges failed integrity tests on their own. It is clear the failed bridges will eventually be pulled down and reconstructed to satisfy the regulations of COREN. If the two flyovers also fail the integrity tests (as is almost obvious), they may be shut down permanently or pulled down to give way for more enduring structures.

    All these have dire consequences for the new administration and cannot just be ignored or covered up. The first is that all monies spent on them would have gone down the drains. Secondly, the government will have to source and deploy funds it would have used to execute new projects in rebuilding bridges poorly executed by his predecessor. The state is worse for it as it has the prospects of distracting the new administration from implementing its electoral promises to the Imo electorate. It is akin to laying landmines to constrain the effective takeoff of the new regime. We also saw this crude devious disposition in the number of hurried appointments made by that government on the eve of its departure and the inexplicable refusal to formally handover.

    So it is only proper that all these scandals are placed in the public domain so that the intentions of the new government are not misconstrued especially given surreptitious musings to have these failings covered up. Not surprisingly, these have come in the form of accusations of witch-hunting and suggestions that the new government should concentrate on its own projects rather than dissipate energy faulting his predecessor. Nobody is on a voyage of fault finding or witch-hunting. Nobody blew up the bridges.  They have been collapsing even with Okorocha still on the saddle.

    If the new regime is going to deploy public funds to bridges that were ostensibly built and commissioned by the previous regime, the public deserves to know. This is more so given that from what we know of Okorocha, he could still turn round to claim credit for the new bridges if and when they are constructed. And some may believe him. That is why the public must be properly sensitized to the calamity those projects are.

    It has nothing to do with witch-hunting or settling political scores. It relates to probity

  • Umahi and Ruga narratives

    It is good a thing the federal government has suspended implementing the Ruga policy which seeks to permanently re-settle herders in all parts of the country. With that action, the cloud of uncertainty hovering over the country appears to be clearing, albeit temporarily.  But narratives emerging from the suspended scheme do not imbue much hope that we have seen the last of that controversial exercise.

    Stories from the National Executive Council, NEC, on farmers/herders crisis and officials of the federal and state governments miserably raise doubts as what exactly to believe in respect of that contentious policy. In all, what seems palpable is a conspiracy of some sort not to let the public into what the critical details of the policy are and the real intentions of the government on them.

    Or how else do we explain the discordant tunes from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Governor David Umahi and the president’s Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu on the Ruga policy? Umahi had while announcing the suspension of the Ruga programme, left no one in doubt that the programme as being implemented by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources is substantially at variance with the recommendations of the NEC on herders /farmers conflicts and the federal government’s approved National Livestock Transformation Plan NLTP.

    According to him, the approved policy had provision for the rehabilitation of Internally Displaced Persons IDPs arising from herders and farmers crisis and the development of ranches in any willing state of the federation. “The NLTP, its beauty is that what NEC and the FG approved is a voluntary programme to all the 36 states who may like to participate. It is not compulsory; it is for any state that is willing. Any state that is interested in this programme is required to bring up development plan in line with our programme that is unique to his state based on its challenges in respect of the crisis” Umahi said.

    But in his reaction to criticisms that trailed the exercise, Garba put up a strong defence for the programme even as he admitted it is not compulsory as only states that indicated interest would take part in it. For him, the advantages of the programme both in stemming crisis between herders/farmers and improving the yield from animal husbandry are so substantial to justify its implementation. He equally claimed that beneficiaries of the Ruga settlement programme will include all persons in animal husbandry and not just only herders.

    Shehu stirred the hornet’s nest when he said “it is true that the government at the centre has gazetted lands in all states of the federation but because the idea is not to force this programme on any one, the government has limited the take-off to the dozen states with valid requests”.

    Apparently piqued by Shehu’s claims on gazetting of lands in all states for the purpose, the Benue State government came out to put a lie to it. It said no land in Benue State was gazetted for grazing routes, grazing reserve, cattle colony or Ruga settlement contrary to claims by the presidency. It challenged the presidency to show evidence of such acquisition, the compensation paid and the endorsement of the state governor who controls and administers lands in the state in trust for the people.

    So, we are left with discordant tunes from the three quarters. Governor Umahi was unequivocal that the recommendations of his committee approved by the federal government were for a comprehensive programme for the re-settlement of IDPs and ranching for willing states.

    The implication is that at no time did the Ruga settlement policy feature either in the recommendations of the council or the approvals of the government on the resolution of the herders/farmers crisis. The question then is at what point did the Ruga policy crop up and which authority made such approval? Could the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources have invented and commenced the implementation of the policy on their own? And if it was entirely their initiative, what accounted for the strident defence of the exercise by the presidency if they were neither the authors of that policy nor privy to its critical details?

    It is obvious we are yet to hear the real story on how the Ruga policy came about. But even in the midst of this seeming confusion or refusal to full disclosure, there seems to be an unseen hand manipulating the entire process. It is increasingly becoming very clear that there are interests that want the recurring conflicts between herders and farmers resolved on terms comfortable for the herders and their sponsors despite the fact that much of the burden of that conflict is borne by the farmers.

    Why nothing was again heard of the plight of the IDPs before the Ruga policy rolled into action is at the root of the raging suspicion that the federal government is on a voyage to fulanize the country. It smacks of insincerity to embark on the re-settlement of herdsmen on the soils of those who continue to suffer immeasurable losses both in human and material capital on account of the conflicts herders largely stoke without giving a thought to how to mitigate the plights of those at the receiving end.

    That is what exactly the authors of the Ruga settlement policy did when they ignored the recommendations for the establishment of ranches by willing states and the re-settlement of IDPs. It shows ample bias in government’s perception of the problem and a deliberate effort to foist pre-conceived agenda on the country. This agenda was given further fillip by the presidency when it claimed that lands have been gazetted in all the states of the federation for that contentious policy. The government was speaking from both sides of the mouth when it claimed Ruga is not only for herdsmen but all those involved in animal husbandry.

    The Land Use Act vests the control of lands on governors. So who approved the lands said to have been gazetted for the Ruga programme? This question must be answered given the confusion that now trails the claim. Benue State has challenged the presidency to provide evidence of such approvals. The onus is on the presidency to rise to that challenge and disabuse the minds of the public that it has not grabbed states’ lands by force in furtherance of a dubious pet policy.

    If lands have truly been gazetted in all the states for re-settling herdsmen and all those involved in animal husbandry under a policy tagged ‘Ruga’, do we need further evidence to sustain suspicions on the fulanisation of the country? The foreboding scenario is one in which separate enclaves will be created for Fulani herdsmen in all states of the federation. Ironically, many of these herdsmen are foreigners fleeing harsh climatic conditions and civil strife in their home countries. It is hard to fathom how such a policy of dispossessing locals of their ancestral lands to re-settle foreigners can possibly stand.

    We need to get at the root of the claims and counter claims on the Ruga re-settlement policy. If there is no deliberate plan to foist a hidden agenda on the people; if the government is seriously committed to lasting solutions in the herders/farmers crisis, it must institute a commission of enquiry on how the Ruga policy came about. We are told Ruga is a Fulani word. How suitable that word is for the purpose is left to be conjectured.

    More seriously, if the Buhari regime is seriously and genuinely committed to lasting solutions to the herders and farmers conflicts, ranching offers the best prospects. Inventing all manner of terms to conceal touted plans for cattle colony will prove counterproductive. The polity is already sensitized to manipulations of the government on this singular issue such that extreme care must be taken not to further overheat the polity.

    But if Ruga policy or cattle colony is implemented in those states that are preponderantly Fulani as the Bauchi State governor claimed, the attraction to export them to other cultural settings will fizzle out unilaterally. So they can have it funded by their state governments.

  • Herdsmen vigilante!

    At the heat of the bloodletting in parts of the country arising from clashes between herders and farmers, prominent northern leaders had protested what they called the wrong profiling of the Fulani race. Their grouse then was with the labeling of herdsmen as Fulani herdsmen.

    The argument was that such profiling connoted the impression that all Fulani people were herdsmen and therefore vicariously liable for clashes between farmers and herders. Some even went extra lengths to posit they knew people of other ethnic groups including the Igbo who are involved in the herding business. Thus, the incongruity of the term Fulani herdsmen as it had no way of capturing other ethnic groups involved in herding business, they argued.

    Their argument drew considerable sympathy resulting in public de-emphasis on the term Fulani herdsmen in preference for herdsmen. It is not for nothing, that much of the references to that group in public discourse had since been left at herdsmen in deference to these sensibilities.

    But that sympathy got a serious jolt last week when leaders of the herders association, the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) spoke at a security summit organized by the Southeast Chamber of Commerce Mines and Agriculture in conjunction with Southeast Governors’ Forum. Their leader let the cart out of the bag when he called for the establishment of Fulani youth vigilante in communities in the southeast to compliment security efforts in the zone.

    Hear him, “the Fulani youth vigilante body will be working with the security, the neighborhood watch or vigilante to ensure security in all communities, as it was done in Enugu State”. For them, establishing Fulani vigilante groups in all communities should be seen as part of the contributions of the Fulani people to the security of lives and property in southeast.

    But what seemed a harmless suggestion was immediately greeted with serious suspicion and virulent opposition. While some pressure groups from the southeast called for the heads of the governors from the zone for allowing MACBAN to get away with that controversial proposition, some others saw the call as reckless, insensitive and a subterfuge for a covert agenda.

    A measure of the distastefulness of the call can be gleaned from the avalanche of opposition it generated across the country. The Afenifere, PANDEF and other interest groups were quick to join their counterparts in the southeast in condemning the suggestion. They were all unequivocal and vehement in their opposition especially given the quarters that suggestion was coming from.

    From the look of things, the mere mention of Fulani youth vigilante was all that was needed to poison the whole idea. The reason for that is not hard to fathom. Before delving into why Fulani youth vigilante cannot sell, MACBAN by that suggestion sadly re-opened the argument as to the propriety of the term Fulani herdsmen. Why that organization was particular that only a vigilante composed of all-Fulani youths was all that was required to secure peace in the southeast remains a moot issue.

    Beneath that proposal however, is the view that Fulani youths have certain skills and technology in security maintenance and enforcement that should be availed to the southeast to guarantee its safety. That is the purport of that suggestion. You cannot give what you do not have. That could as well be.

    But in singling out Fulani youths for that job, MACBAN wittingly or unwittingly raised the bar on the profiling of Fulani people in the recurring security challenges in this country. Why Fulani youth vigilante instead of one that involves other ethnic groups in their state of domicile if we must go that way? Or are there some other things Fulani youths know about the security of the southeast that is not readily available to locals to warrant their involvement?  What is there for them to protect, the ordinary indigenes or their cattle? And what is the population of such youths, some of whom we have been told are even foreigners?

    There is need for full disclosure on the specific skills Fulani youths possess that they must be allowed to secure communities outside their states of origin. We have now been told Fulani youths have special skills in vigilante services. That amounts to the same profiling which some of their leaders have complained about. Now the labeling is coming from within, do we still blame others for seemingly assigning pejorative connotation to such terms? Or is there no link between the skills of those youths in security matters and the rampant killings and destructions that trail conflicts between herders and farmers? These are the searing posers brought to the fore by the contradiction of a Fulani youth vigilante to secure the south east.

    There is also the larger question of the propriety of the Fulani youth vigilante and whether it is all that is needed to secure the southeast. Curiously, most of the states with a predominant population of the Fulani people are currently buffeted by one form of insecurity or the other that has defied efforts of the nation’s security architecture. If Fulani youth vigilante has such a high security enforcement worth to be exported to other zones, they should have been able to tame the embarrassing insurgency, banditry, kidnapping and other criminal activities in their zones. In the absence of that, it is doubtful they would be of value in securing other zones when theirs are burning.

    Since charity ought to start from home, the minimum expectation is that they should have been able to demonstrate that dexterity in crime fighting in their states. But we have seen none of this. The suggestion is therefore nothing but a similitude of the man whose house is on fire, only for him to be pursuing rats fleeing the inferno. There is good reason for the outrage that trailed the suggestion.

    But more seriously, crime fighting is more or less a localized issue. That is why there have been strident agitations for state and local police. This prism has also found ample demonstration in the northeast through the concept of civilian joint task force. The overriding philosophy is that locals understand their security peculiarities more and therefore better positioned to fight crime and criminal activities in such areas.

    It is therefore left to be conjectured the angle the idea of a Fulani youth vigilante for communities in the southeast is coming from. Even then, there is everything wrong with the timing of the proposal. Currently, Fulani herdsmen are not seen as good neighbors given the long drawn crises they have been engaged with farmers. Many of the states in the north-central including the southeast have sad tales of their relationship with the herdsmen.

    That is why opposition has continued to mount against such proposals as grazing routes, grazing reserves and cattle colonies. Of late, we are being inundated with the phraseology of Ruga settlements, whatever that means. But from the outline of what it will entail, it is the same cattle colony now wearing the toga of Ruga settlements. President Buhari said he is committed to finding lasting solutions to clashes between herdsmen and their host communities.

    He should be encouraged to do so. But there is everything wrong in finding that solution on the terms of the herdsmen and their patrons as every indication point to. We are told about 12 states have embraced the cattle colony or Ruga settlement idea. So be it. For those states indigenous people are largely cattle breeders, we do not envisage problems. But the wisdom in deploying huge federal resources to fund businesses that are better left to private hands, call for serious introspection.

    For many of the states that are opposed to this strategy (and they are many) ranching is the way to go. No attempt should be made to coerce them into succumbing to ideas that are at once in conflict with the wishes and aspirations of their peoples. The southeast is vehemently opposed to cattle colonies or any other form in which it is currently masquerading.

    Governor, Dave Umahi said the zone is opposed to Fulani youth vigilante. Good! But we need to be told how the Fulani youth vigilante is currently operating in Enugu State as claimed by their leader. That claim should not be swept under the carpet by the Enugu State government.