The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  • Before the party

    Before the party

    Compare our political parties to a man who is neither alive nor dead, happy nor sad, partying nor mourning, drunk nor sober. We might call it a recovering coma, a never-never-land of ambiguity.  That is our two political parties today. The APC thinks it is in office whereas it merely enjoys officialdom. The PDP, now limping out of a court victory, is an adult in diapers.

    That contrasts with the state of the country itself. Hunger reels in most homes. Infrastructure, whether as roads or power, flounders along. We are in the after-heat of whether we are running Muslim or Christian curriculum when greater debates like the absence of chairs and literate teachers lurk over virtually every school. Our president is gushing with our money in an unnamed hospital with an undisclosed affliction abroad when he has no clear vision for the poor Nigerian dying daily from malaria and malnutrition.

    Above all, the nation roils in an existential boil as to whether we want to be together or asunder. Biafra cries, Afenifere clamours, militancy still skulks in Niger Delta, Boko Haram is on a sort of rebound, herdsmen defy and slaughter humans like their cows, a senate coos for corruption, a governor who mocks an idea now lead its panel, southern Kaduna a metaphor for northern minorities, the northwest is a lone pro that cons the debate to restructure.

    Yet, no political party can be said to be robust at this moment. How can we then move forward? The Makarfi PDP has hailed the court verdict. But it is a Machiavellian victory over a Machiavellian. Sherriff was the first Machiavellian. He fell for the bait of party leaders frail from the 2015 defeat. They preyed on Sheriff’s pocket while the party gathered its limbs.

    Sherriff raved with a few court victories. But the Supreme Court ruled for order. Not for Sheriff a carpet bagger, an opportunist. The Makarfi faction was no saint either. It was an opportunist upending another opportunist. This is no moral victory, even if we agree it is a legal one.

    Though in diapers, its big and battered mammals are emerging from hibernation. These include ex-governors, businessmen and ministers.

    They will be gunning for relevance. They do not have the big barn of government as resources. It will belong to those who have deep wells. Some of them may be wary. Others may show off to wield influence. But now is the time to craft spheres of influence.

    It implies a party in throes, in the process of calibrating its powerhouses and titans. How are the power blocs going to emerge? Who will yield for whom? How does it pick its flag bearers and pitch them against a possible APC candidate post-Buhari?

    As for the APC it ceased to be a party in a cohesive sense once the Bukola “Eleyinmi” Saraki became senate president. It was due to raw miscalculation or wilfulness of President Buhari not to understand that presidential power does not begin and end with executive powers. It works with coalition. His naivete birthed confusion from the beginning. Eleyinmi’s forays to undermine the acting president started before Buhari limped out of town. He has been for nobody, including himself and his party.

    Even his presidency has been in disarray with two factions fighting over Magu. Also, the National Assembly has railed at the executive’s fight against corruption, and wants Magu out. Eleyinmi crowed over EFCC hounding high-profile thieves because his case was in court. He goes free from the law, not from conscience, a terrible thing when “it accuses man or boy,” according to Charles Dickens. But for men of Oloye’s ilk, they don’t see the ink stain. Their consciences have been “seared with hot iron,” according to Apostle Paul.

    As if to mock the process, Nasir El Rufai heads the APC committee on restructuring. Is he there to recant, or recount the opportunists?

    The APC is not sure who is Judas and who is Jesus. Speculations abound of those raring to join the PDP. Will Buhari return to meet faith among his party men? What will the old New PDP men who helped the greatest party coalition in history do? Will they hop back home? If they do, will it put APC in a vulnerable or honourable shape? Free of backstabbers? The so-call NPDP mavens may turn PDP into a house of horrors with giants wrestling for power and glory.

    Such tensions will grip the parties while the nation bleeds with hunger and ignorance. Our political parties are in what psychologists call a state of fugue, neither dead nor alive like the main character in the new play, While I am Waiting, by Syrian writer Mohammed Al-Attar on his war-ravaged land. Everyone is trying to help a dying man while all of them confess their roles in his dying.

    We hope the party of jollification comes like in Mrs. Dalloway, Virginia Wolf’s novel. Everybody’s antic is unveiled before the party. Not many know if the party will be a happy or sad one. Barbarians of hunger are at the gate. The army – our political parties – are not ready.

  • Season of diatribe

    It would appear the spectre of incendiary attacks by sections of the country set in motion by a coalition of Arewa youths is not about to abate. Not with the recrimination that has inundated the nation’s political space despite the deft moves by acting President Yemi Osinbajo to stem the tide.

    Not only have such attacks increased in momentum, they are assuming such a complex texture that could further complicate issues and rupture the fragile peace in the country. The same Arewa youth that issued the quit order to the Igbo resident in the north has had other outings as potentially explosive as their first. Masquerading under groups in the coalition, sundry persons claiming leadership positions have come up with statements that have had the net effect of heating up an already tensed polity.

    One Gambo Gujungu purporting as the national president of Arewa Youths Forum, issued a stern warning to politicians in the south-west to stop any game that may rob the north of its rightful slot to the presidency in the interest of peace and unity. He said the north was aware of plans by the south-west to push out Buhari through a campaign of calumny using his health as a cover and vowed that they would resist any plan to take over power from them either now or in 2019.

    “These south-west people think we don’t understand the politics they are playing, we will shock them when the time comes. Some people want to show us that they understand the game of politics more than us. But they are in for a surprise”, he averred.

    Another group of northern youth led by one Abdulazeez Suleiman said in a press conference that they have written the United Nations UN to declare the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra a terrorist organization. It wrote the UN “to invoke the relevant statutes to which Nigeria is a signatory to pronounce Kanu and IPOB as terrorist outfits; proscribe their activities and initiate criminal actions against them”.

    Keen watchers since a coalition of northern youth ordered the Igbo to vacate the north by October 1, may begin to construct a correlation between that order and the staccato of incendiary statements emanating from sundry northern youth groups. Due to the relative ease with which they got away with their initial provocative threats, the coalition quickly dissolved into amorphous groups issuing statements on behalf of the same north. Curiously, nobody has come out to distance that part of the country from some of these reckless and ridiculous statements. It is however, getting increasingly clearer that there is more to this cacophony of voices than ordinarily meets the eyes.

    There must be an issue of interest the north is seriously committed to that has given rise to the recruitment of sundry characters to foul the political air. In this wise, the agitation for self-determination by the pro-Biafra groups may not be the real issue. It may have been deliberately raked up as a launching pad for the actualization of a very selfish and parochial agenda that is at serious straits at the moment.

    The question that is yet to be answered especially in respect to the threat by the northern youth against the Igbo is, on whose behest were they issuing the warning order?  If those seeking self-determination want to exit the Nigerian federation, is it in the place of the youth from a geo-political zone to appropriate that challenge on behalf of the federal government? Is there any exclusive loss they stood to encounter over and above other federating units that should warrant the indecent haste in appropriating a challenge to the Nigerian state? Or what stakes if any, do they have over and above other federating units to the point of taking up a fight on behalf of the federal government?

    Perhaps, the clue to this riddle can be found in the threat issued by Gujungu against the south-west. In that statement, he spoke of plans to deny the north of their right to the presidency either now or in 2019 with a vow to resist them. As if the threat was not enough, he chided the south-west for living under the illusion that they understand politics more than the north with a promise to show them northern dexterity in the art and game of politics. Call it the usual arrogance associated with northern stranglehold on power and you will be right. Call it kite flying and you will also not be wrong.

    There has been no response from the south-west even as the purport of the statement is not lost on them.  The issues in contention are clearly not in doubt. They pertain to the current predicament wrought on the nation by the failing health of President Buhari. With little information on the exact state of health of the president after many weeks of medical treatment abroad, there are fears of the north possibly losing power.

    This is more so given that the acting president is from the south-west. There is fear of the possibility of acting President Osinbajo taking over power in the event of the worst outcome. So what the youth are saying is that if the need arose for the constitution to be activated in this regard, that would not happen. We do not pray for the worst case scenario. All well-meaning people sympathize with President Buhari and wish him very quick recovery.

    But, it offends public sensibilities for the northern youth leader to simulate calamity and on that basis prescribe situations that would amount to a subversion of the grand norms governing this country. If we show such disdain for the constitution of the country, then we are definitely in for grave danger. We have trod this dangerous path before. But for the intervention of the National Assembly, the consequences would have been very catastrophic. Nobody should again take us through that ominous path.

    We say so given that a couple of weeks back, the Chief of Army Staff complained publicly of attempts by some people to drag the military into some unconstitutional action. It would appear the scenario painted by Gujungu can only come through unconstitutional action. And that is where the danger lies.

    If the above portends grave danger for our democracy, the call on the UN to classify the IPOB as a terrorist outfit is not only dangerous but a great disservice to this country. It would appear the youth, in desperation to get even with the IPOB, lost sight of the dire repercussions of the UN labelling that group a terrorist outfit. By their calculations, once the UN makes such a pronouncement, our security forces will now move in their equipment to wage an asymmetric warfare in the section of the country the IPOB canvasses self-determination for.

    We will now be faced with another war with consequences more grave than what presently obtains in the north-east. Then, the northern youth group would have achieved their devious aim. But in canvassing such a position, they displayed crass ignorance of what constitutes the objective conditions for terrorism. Whatever one may wish to say about Kanu and his group, violence is not part of their agenda. They have made that clear for the umpteenth time. Those who seek to associate them with terrorism aim at settling scores by all means including the sinister.

    The call is a clear and potent danger. Another terrorist group in the country would have satisfied both the necessary and sufficient conditions for Nigeria to be classified as a terrorist state. That will come with dire repercussions. Apart from being a disincentive to foreign investments, it will expose our citizens to profiling-the type the US government is currently pushing against some countries. That was why for many years, Boko Haram insurgency was not labelled terrorist outfit until their international affiliations came obvious. The menace of the Fulani herdsmen should have come first if we are looking for terrorist outfits. These are potent dangers we face settling parochial scores through unwholesome means. We can do with less of this diatribe.

  • Two Friends

    Two Friends

    Joseph Conrad noted in one of his short stories that “there is no friend or enemy like a brother.” This quote rambled into me when I heard of the passing of the high-octane lawyer, Olu Onagoruwa. It was not his great work as a progressive lawyer that struck me but his well-known friendship that turned sour. I refer to his relationship with Gani Fawehinmi, the gadfly of tyrants. I was witness to the friendship. As a reporter with African Concord, I visited Gani’s chambers many times. Not a few times I saw Onagoruwa there. They ate, joked, backslapped together and pursued the law with the same ideological identity. They were not twins but twained. They duelled common foes. Their colleagues stigmatised them as rebels and denied them the land’s highest honour, SAN, for a long time.

    Gani used to say he did not trust anybody. He did not socialise outside his office or home. Olu broke the rule. They completed each other’s sentences, glad-handed, frothed over choice liquor. Gani invited Olu to pounded yam parties in his house with the Ondo goat meat delicacy called asun. Gani was wary of his travels. But at one time, they left town together every Friday night or Saturday morning, Gani to Ondo and Olu to Ijebu, and they kept company until the parted ways on the express. But the soul tie lost its soul with Abacha’s Hemlock when he called Olu to serve as minister for justice and attorney general.

    Gani warned, carped and cried over Olu’s choice to work with the brute. Olu said he was not going to compromise his principle. Gani’s point was that taking the job was a compromise already. I thought so too. Olu was not alone in this Abacha surrender. Men like Lateef Jakande and Ebenezer Babatope also lolloped into the cabinet. Like Olu, Babatope and Jakande have had their image battered by that choice, less so for Jakande because of his taciturn airs and his accomplishments as governor. Olu left Abacha’s government when his views ran riot against the despot. Months later, they killed his lawyer son. He also lost his wife. He shed tears at the Oputa panel in quest for justice for his son, Toyin. Gani, not a saint, but he gave him the counsel of a saint and he did not heed.

    Olu’s story shows how one choice can sully a lifetime of nobility. History records such many cases. May it not happen to anyone. Olu died out of public spotlight, apparently in deference to his son and his diminished profile. In his book, he wrote: “So Toyin was one of those killed to give Gen. Abacha the rest he will never have.” I wonder if Olu had any rest before he died over his decision to join Abacha. Apart from his son, he lost a friend and brother in Gani.

  • The corpse

    Some may say it has a new life. Others call it alive but with a false breath of life. Others will conclude that Biafra is not alive, but dead. Others still observe that the so-called southeast maelstrom is merely imbuing Biafra with a life that is not there.

    If it is dead, why are we discussing it? Why is a freebooter with a spectacle and a bigoted register at the head of its boil? if it is boiling, does it make it alive? If it is alive though, what kind of life can we attribute to an agitation that the Igbo elite are too ashamed or timid to define or associate with in clear language? Why is the acting president convening dialogues, why are senators sniping, a former central bank boss (Soludo) a sympathiser, an Igbo intellectual like Nwabueze lying from both sides of his octogenarian mouth to appease the cause?

    But for this writer, Biafra is dead. It is only pretending to be alive, propped up by phony leaders, polemicised by unfledged intellectuals, triggered by a lure of enterprise and profit, backed by incendiary propaganda machine, fired on by an imperial state of mind, enriched by a tribe of gullible followers and riven by a lack of ideological or cultural clarity.

    For all those who know this and still war on, they say in their minds, “Biafra is dead. Long live Biafra!” The irony and hypocrisy fascinate. They know that the pursuit of an independent state of Biafra is like Samuel Becket’s waiting for Godot. It is like a song, an intoxicant, an aphrodisiac, a rallying cry. It is melodious, beautiful, demoniac, soulful, lurks in the heart, burns the adrenaline, and no more.

    Biafra had life once, and breathed into being in the tactile air of tyranny. It was a great and worthy cause then. It rose on the ashes of tribesmen and women slashed and daggered to death in pogroms. Its leader, Odumegwu Ojukwu with his immaculate diction and soaring rhetoric, jolted the nation and, some may say, the world in its early months. Until it fell foul of its own logic by owning other Nigerians in what is now the Niger Delta. Biafra lost it moral impetus for everyone except the southeast. Since then it has flailed to its death. It had neither the support nor sympathy of the southern minorities. Biafra literally shot itself in the foot.

    After the hostilities ceased, Biafra has only lived in fantasy. Ojukwu knew that when he returned from exile. He did not pitch his tent with his southeast political brotherhood, but dined with the same seance against which he asked his fellow tribes men to fight and die. The NPN, that is. So, he did not really hate those for whom he asked his people to die. The poet Yeats captured this in these lines: “Those I fight I do not hate/ those I guard I do not love.” By that very association of surrender with the NPN, Ojukwu resounded the gong and euthanasia of Biafra. He embalmed the idea. All his protestations for Biafra after that misadventure were like trying to save a beheaded John the Baptist.

    Since then the mention of Biafra has been a romance with the dead. It has been a corpse that has refused to decompose, but a corpse all the same. It reminds one of the Spanish film, the Corpse of Anna Fritz, where the body of a model captures the erotic embers of some young men who make love to it in the mortuary.  Senegalese Poet Leopold Senghor describes it as the “dead who have refused to die.” It is gone but not in the fantasies of the obsessed.

    The golden age of Biafra was, unfortunately, an age of misadventure and failure. The Chinese leaders of the 20th century have characterised the 19th century as their age of humiliation, where nations like Japan and Russia made mincemeat of the people that once towered over the east. Biafra’s age of humiliation was the 1960’s. It duelled and expired in the dust of heroic miscalculations and strategic naiveté.

    The ethnic entrepreneur, Nnamdi Kanu, has been owned by his followers in high and low places in the east as a pretext to fight for restructuring, a voice not heard in the buccaneering days of Jonathan. Now they are saying that we are all Biafrans. By that they mean anyone who is up against the inequity of this federal contraption is riding on the genius of Kanu.

    Kanu is an opportunist just like Judas Iscariot. His votaries are conjuring his name to push for a fairer arrangement. He has entered the fray to corrupt it. Judas Iscariot came to the life of Jesus to corrupt the cause. The crucifixion happened and Christians claim redemption from the betrayal of Judas. But the same Judas has been dismissed as a son of perdition. No one thanks Judas for betraying the lord.

    For those who say we all are Biafrans, they are not only wrong but wrong-headed. Kanu, for instance, claims that Biafra will extend to the animated states of the Niger Delta, including Rivers, Delta, Akwa Ibom, etc. The fellow recently claims he inspired a great crowd in Port Harcourt. As I noted last week, he rallied Igbos, not the indigenes. The phrase “we are all Biafrans” is an imperial insult on the South-south. That mindset has not learned from the remonstrations of the minorities against the injustices Biafra inflicted them with during the war. They are trying to levitate Kanu, a fringe felon, to a mainstream hero. They are trying to legitimise a cynical buccaneer.

    Meanwhile, they are carrying the corpse along, and hoping that someday it will come back, breathing and jerking like a new-born, the failure of a fantastic necrophilia. It’s like the family in William Faulkner’s novel, As I Lay Dying, where the children take their mother’s corpse on a journey to a place they want it buried. She is laid to mother earth when the stench makes everyone unhappy. If Biafra is so beloved, its fanatics should let it down before it suffocates others. They should make Biafra, in the words of Charles Dicken, “a lovely corpse.” Not a stinking one.

  • Makarfi: beyond the victory

    hose hitherto worried by the lingering crisis in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) must have heaved a heavy sigh of relief at the Supreme Court’s validation of the leadership of the Ahmed Makarfi-led caretaker committee.

    Before now, a dark cloud hung around the future of the main opposition party due to the crisis that erupted at its last national convention in Port Harcourt. Its outcome, pitched the former national chairman, Ali Modu Sheriff against the caretaker committee which enjoys the support of the mainstream organs of the party. Efforts to evolve a political solution proved abortive due mainly to the intransigence of Sheriff. He had insisted on certain conditions the Makarfi group and key organs of the party deemed unacceptable.

    Judicial solution seemed preferable especially after the case had run through the Appeal Court, surprisingly in favour of Sheriff and his picked loyalists. Buoyed by his victory at the Appeal Court, Sheriff became something else, defied reason and wriggled to foist himself on the majority without regard to its repercussions on the unity and survival of that party.

    Tempers rose so high especially after the last effort by former President Goodluck Jonathan in Abuja to evolve a political solution. Sheriff walked out of the meeting and it became obvious that court option remained the only solution even as it goes with uncertainties and certain risks. The court option offered two possibilities with different payoff – Sheriff wins and Makarfi loses and the vice versa.

    But each of these possibilities goes with a different set of consequences for the party. The first option of Sheriff winning at the Supreme Court is loaded with grave danger for the survival of the party. Sheriff does not enjoy the support of any of the organs of the party. He neither has the support of the PDP governors, the Board of Trustees nor the national executive committee. Elected members of the party in the National Assembly and former ministers are against him. He could not even count on the staff of the party. Not only did these organs oppose him publicly, they swore never to work with him again accusing him of being a mole to destabilize the party for self-serving interests.

    It was obvious that even if the court judgment went in favour of Sheriff, the Makarfi group, together with all the key organs of the party would leave him with carcass of the party to inherit. There were even speculations that the group already had a plan B in its kitty, should the worst case scenario play out. In fact, it was rumoured that the group had registered a new political party so as not to be taken unawares especially given the jolt they suffered by the outcome of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

    Though the Makarfi group had serially denied this, but the body language of its officials continues to point to that direction. What this underscores is that victory for Sheriff would have led to the disintegration of the party. That prospect was indeed very high. In an article in this column titled “PDP without the people”, I had ruminated on a scenario where Sheriff came victorious and the likely outcome of events. The main thesis of that presentation was that Sheriff’s victory would amount to a coup against the people and a destruction of the PDP.

    He could cling on to power; commence recruitment of sundry characters to confer contrived legitimacy to his leadership but all that will lead the party only to a predictable path-destruction. That was bound to be the eventual outcome of victory for Sheriff. Yes; the Makarfi group could float another political party, strive to position it for the challenges ahead. But they would have lost much time. Sheriff, in his new position, would rave up the spoiler game making it difficult for the splinter party to have a smooth and quick sail.

    Opposition would have been rendered prostrate because Sheriff’s PDP would not be able to muster enough muscle to mount a serious challenge while the splinter party would battle with organizational challenges. There would be no strong alternative platform in the coming national elections. This country’s democracy with its increasing slide to one party state would have been worse for it.

    The second possibility of Makarfi emerging victorious is the outcome we now contend with. By that victory, the danger of mass exodus through an alternative platform has been clearly foreclosed. The party will continue from where it stopped since all its organs, structures and properties are intact. It enjoys the support of its governors and that will make things a lot easier. It will inherit all there is to the PDP and move fast to reposition for the challenges ahead. But the roadmap is not going to be that smooth.

    Sheriff and his band of supporters are not in short supply of options. They could find accommodation in any party of their choice or float another political party entirely. But they will not be able to make any meaningful impact for lack of numbers. They will not make any difference if they pitch their tent with any of the exiting parties with the exception of the ruling party. Their strength in sustaining the fight lay solely in capturing the PDP brand in a coup fashion and deploying it to whatever end it pleased them. Once that vaulting ambition failed, all their calculations collapsed like a pack of cards.

    Aligning with the ruling party is also fraught with serious danger.  It will lend ample support to the accusation that Sheriff was all along working for the government. That will dent whatever is left of his credibility and cast some slur on the ruling party for attempting to muscle opposition through unwholesome means. Even the ruling party will be reluctant to admit him at this point in time. That is the credibility baggage Sheriff has to contend with at least for now. He had good opportunities for a fair bargain but blew it all.

    But they still have the option of finding accommodation within the PDP. They could now seek reconciliation; an option they serially rebuffed through the obduracy of Sheriff. Good enough, the Makarfi PDP has sent an olive branch to all genuine members for reconciliation with a caveat that such will be based on fairness; equity and values. What these principles would translate to in actual terms is left to conjecture. They have also announced a policy of no victor, no vanquished. But contrary to the avowals of the new PDP leadership, there are winners and losers.

    It is a verity of the two person zero sum game. There are bound to be losers and winners. Sheriff is the loser and has to contend with the outcome of his short-sightedness. For dragging his party to the precipice, it is unlikely he will find favour in that party again. Given that the strength of political parties lies in their membership, the party would definitely need many of those in Sheriff’s camp. But it is likely going to be on the terms it will dictate. It would appear group negotiation with dissenting members does not offer much prospects any longer. The party could go ahead to resolve disagreements within some state chapters but it is unlikely to supplant their executives to accommodate the Sheriff group. That is where the loss actually begins.

    Beyond this victory, the PDP still has to contend with all the issues that brought about the current pass. Chief among them is impunity resulting in the imposition of candidates and inability to allow internal democracy to reign supreme. Apparently blinded by its hold on power, it had behaved as if it was above the people who at any rate remained the ultimate sovereign.

    The party must also come to terms with the reality that it lost elections and things are no longer the same again. It has to contend with the campaign mounted by the ruling party against it in the fight against corruption irrespective of the selectivity of that crusade. Its current challenges (though self-inflicted) provide a good opportunity for serious introspection.

    To make real progress and command the confidence of the people, it must strive to prove to Nigerians that it is no longer business as usual. The tea party is over. Nigerians are more than ever before eager to hold the government accountable. The Supreme Court verdict makes meaning only if it re-awakens the party to the primacy of the people as the fulcrum for democratic action.

  • Makarfi, Sherriff, PDP, et al

    The verdict that gave the Makarfi faction of the PDP victory over Sheriff was expected. But that is beside the point now. What is more significant is that it brings our politics to an autumnal moment. Autumns, also called fall, is the weather that forces all leaders to reveal their true colours and the weak ones fall off the tree ahead of a wintry turbulence.

    So, with the verdict, all those who belong to APC in PDP will start to show themselves, and vice versa. The quiet storm in APC will also join a narrative of the 2019 elections that is on everyone’s lips but no one is ready to roar.

    We cannot escape it. Who will line up behind Buhari’s APC? Will it still remain APC or a ghost of its old vigour? Will it reenergise or fall in smithereens? Are the old PDP guys coming back to their old fold, and how will all these gladiators live together in a fierce battle ahead?

    What will Buhari do, if he will do something? Will he be good enough to run a hectic campaign? It is the season of the political patriarchs and duel in the mud. Garcia Marquez’s novel, The Autumn of the Patriarchs, comes to mind, except that he x-rays the bestialities of dictators. We are bracing for a new season where our politicians will show their true colours. We expect night meetings, money peddling, crafting of new platforms and coalitions. Backstabbing, strange bed fellows, rhetoric of abuse and embrace. The histrionics will excite, but will they ennoble? Will they help us or the self-styled leaders? Stay tuned.

  • Corruption has friends too

    It is intriguing that a federal legislator proposed a corruption-friendly law that is antagonistic to the country’s fight against corruption. It is unclear whether the idea belongs to the proposer, or whether the proposer is just a messenger who is delivering a message packaged by champions of corruption who are desperate to corrupt the anti-corruption war.

    The so-called Economic Amnesty Bill is particularly thought-provoking because it demonstrates the power of corruption and how the powerful can abuse power in favour of corruption. A report said: “The bill was introduced and read for the first time on June 14, 2017 on the floor of the House and awaits a second reading in July when it would be debated.”

    As the public awaits the debate on the bill in the House of Representatives, there are strong signals that the proposal is unpopular in the public space and offensive to right-thinking people. Did the proposer anticipate the degree of public opposition that the proposal has attracted?  Or did he expect a smooth ride?

    Here is a picture of the bill: “The bill seeks to give looters leeway to escape any form of probe, inquiry or prosecution after satisfying certain conditions. The proposed law is titled, “A bill for an Act to establish a scheme to harness untaxed money for investment purposes and to assure any declarant regarding inquiries and proceedings under Nigerian laws and for other matters connected therewith.”

    Here is an elaboration of the bill: “According to the sponsor of the bill, Linus Okorie (Peoples Democratic Party, Ebonyi State), the bill “seeks to allow all Nigerians and residents, who have any money or assets outside the system or have acquired such money or assets illegally (looted or any variant of the cliché) to come forward, within a set time frame, to declare same, pay tax/surcharge and compulsorily invest the funds in any sector of the Nigerian economy; and be granted full amnesty from inquiry or prosecution.”

    It is easy to see how this bill will help the corrupt and help corruption. Is it possible that Okorie’s proposal reflects the thinking about corruption in his federal constituency?  Are his constituents fully behind him in this pro-corruption campaign?

    Predictably, Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), said in a statement that showed deep disgust: “In spite of the steep decline in the sense of morality and values in Nigeria in the last 16 years, particularly since this Eight Session of the National Assembly was inaugurated, Okorie’s blatant and brazen advocacy of free looting is nevertheless still shocking to the senses.”

    Sagay added: “That a Nigerian legislator (a lawmaker) can have the effrontery to promote a bill which if enacted into law, will enable looters of our treasury and national patrimony to keep the loot, if only they can acknowledge it as looted, provided they undertake to spend it in Nigeria, is breathtaking. In summary, what Mr. Okorie is encouraging is free plundering of state funds without consequences.  Simply put, it is the legitimating of treasury plundering.  It is clear that if such a bill becomes law, the anti-corruption war is doomed.”

    It is understandable that anti-corruption warriors are shell-shocked by Okorie’s pro-corruption move. It is beyond question that this condemnable looters’ bill further calls into question the quality of lawmaking and the quality of lawmakers in the  federal legislature. What Okorie’s proposal suggests is that there are members of the National Assembly who lack a fundamental understanding of the developmental essence of the legislative role. Certainly, Okorie’s proposal cannot be regarded as an example of progressive thinking.

    There are similar instances of unprogressive thinking that corrupts the image of the federal legislature.  This information illustrates another instance: “A similar move had been suggested at the Senate in May 2016 when the Chairman, Senate Committee on Gas, Bassey Akpan, advocated special amnesty for owners of Nigeria’s stolen money stashed in the various banks across the world should such looters be willing to bring back the money and invest it in the country.”

    It is disturbing that this corruption-friendly idea reportedly suggested by a member of the Senate last year is the same idea that has been formally proposed by a member of the House of Representatives this year, indicating that there are members of the National Assembly who are on the same page on this issue of giving corruption a chance to breathe.

    Okorie’s proposal should have no place among honourable men and women in honourable legislative chambers.  It is an egregious idea that should be treated with utmost contempt.  While its introduction and first reading may be regarded as procedural stages, when it is time to debate the bill, there can be no excuse for not shooting down the absurdity.

    Sagay asked: “Now, what shall we do with Linus Okorie?” He supplied an answer that deserves to be taken seriously:  ”I propose that the House of Representatives should regard Okorie’s bill to be so impertinent and scandalous as to earn him a suspension from the House, for the rest of the Eight Session, i.e., until July 2019.That should serve notice that Nigeria will no longer tolerate such brazen impunity and corruption or its promotion thereof.”

    Perhaps Okorie deserves a more punitive penalty.  It may not be extreme to call for Okorie’s recall.  It is a point to ponder that there has been no reported expression of disappointment and disgust by Okorie’s constituents. The fight against corruption must be fought with every possible lawful weapon.  It is noteworthy that Sagay argued: “Section 15(5) of the Nigerian Constitution provides that ‘the State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.’ Should a legislator, a ranking public officer, be seen committing a breach of the Constitution, which at the same time constitutes assault on our sensibilities with relish?”

    Clearly, there is a need to improve legislative thinking in the National Assembly, given the negative example of Okorie’s proposal. The country deserves an apology from him for his indecent promotion of an unprogressive  idea that is essentially corruption-friendly.

  • Maitama Sule and I

    Maitama Sule and I

    I met Maitama Sule three times. Twice at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs in the early 1990s.They were debate sessions. We sparred over the state of the country, journalism, international politics. In his colourful babanriga, feisty spirit and ringing voice, he spoke with me as though we were contemporaries. We were at polar points but we exchanged ideas with cheer. He came across as a profound follower of news and events around the world. Our last tango was about American anchor Walter Cronkite. He wished we could replicate his stature. Cronkite made President Lyndon Johnson not to run for re-election.

    The last time I saw him, he could not see me. I was compere at a book launch. He grabbed my hands and poured out a visceral prayer. It was a divine meeting. As he goes home, I also pray for him from the bottom of my heart. He was a great man.

  • Ahiara diocese: Quo vadis

    Perhaps, before this article is published, the final outcome of the crisis rocking the Ahiara diocese of the Catholic Church following the rejection of Bishop Peter Okpaleke consecrated four years ago, would have become clearer.

    By July 9, the deadline by Pope Francis to every priest or ecclesiastic incardinated in that diocese, whether he resides there or works elsewhere, even abroad to write a letter of apology asking for forgiveness would have lapsed. The Catholic pontiff had in the directive warned whoever fails to comply within 30 days will be suspended from divine functions and lose his current office.

    Obviously pained by the sad development, the Pope said whoever is opposed to Bishop Okpaleke taking possession of the diocese “wants to destroy the Church” and the measures became necessary because “the people of God are scandalized”.

    Pope’s intervention followed the crisis that engulfed the diocese soon after the appointment of Bishop Peter Okpaleke. Then, about 400 priests from the Mbaise clan rose to reject the choice of the Bishop who hails from Anambra State. They alleged irregularities in the nomination of the bishop and also made it unequivocally clear they wanted one of their own to be appointed instead.

    Bandying sundry arguments, they claimed the Igbo dialect spoken by Bishop Okpaleke is quite different from the one spoken by people of the diocese and would largely constrain him in the performance of his duties. They further said with over 750 priests from the diocese, they cannot accept a situation where none of theirs is found worthy to be made a bishop.

    They swore never to allow the Bishop take charge of the diocese such that law-enforcement agencies had to intervene to restore law and order. The priests in connivance with the laity have since the past four years, made good their threat, rebuffing all appeals and physically disallowing the bishop from taking charge.

    Pope’s intervention was therefore to redeem the image of the Catholic Church and put the matter to rest. Curiously, as soon as the order was made public, a delegation of the protesting priests sought audience with the Imo State governor. It is not clear what the objective of such a meeting was or the role they expected the governor to play in an issue of this nature. But the state government was later to advise them in a statement to accept the Pope’s decision as the supreme pontiff of the Catholic Church.

    But the desperate outing indicated their discomfort with the Pope’s directive. Some of their leaders have even spoken against the Pope’s decision alleging that those who briefed him did not avail him of all the facts. There are claims that the priests have complied with Pope’s directive. But if events of last week in that diocese are anything to go by, it is obvious the crisis is far from being over.

    Thousands of Catholic faithful, apparently instigated by priests, stormed the Cathedral in protest against the failure of the Vatican to appoint another bishop to replace Okpaleke whom they still vowed not to allow on their soil. Those who spoke seemed to have modified their position when they indicated a willingness to allow any other bishop from the province but definitely not Okpaleke.

    This appears a huge contradiction given that one of the conditions for the letter of apology is that the priests must indicate their willingness to “accept the bishop whom the Pope sends and has appointed”. Could it be that after accepting the conditions enunciated by the Pope, the priests turned around to insist they do not accept the bishop he appointed? What of the army of undertakers masking under garbs alien to the Catholic Church that have been floated to garner support for the dissenting priests?

    There does not seem any remorse. Not only have such groups maintained their allegation of sundry misdeeds against the Catholic Church, they insist on not accepting Okpaleke.  As if to give credence to the fact that the laity and the phoney groups were being goaded by the priests, one of the priests equally reaffirmed their opposition to Okpaleke. Given unfolding events, would it not amount to a repudiation of their undertaking (if they actually had one) to still insist they would not succumb to the authority of the appointed bishop?

    It is getting clearer heads will definitely roll at the expiration of the deadline. There are two sets of priests that are likely to fall victim of the hammer of the supreme pontiff- those who refused to write the letter of apology and those whose letters may not be acceptable to the Pope. There could be a third category of priests who are seen as ringleaders of this huge embarrassment to the Catholic faith.

    This can be gleaned from the letter of reminder by the Apostolic Administrator of Ahiara diocese and Archbishop of Abuja, John Cardinal Onaiyekan. He had reminded priests still doubting the authenticity of the Pope’s order that each letter will be given an individual written response in conformity with the instructions of the Supreme Pontiff.  For him, “there is no more time for playing games or prevaricating. It is obvious this is a very serious matter”.

    It would appear the Pope is going to wield the big stick against priests who flouted his order and others fingered as prime movers in this gross act of disobedience against the authority of the church. The matter is even more disconcerting when it is realized the protesting priests swore to an oath of obedience to the authority of the Church.

    By refusing to accept the decision of the Pope in the past four years, preventing a bishop duly appointed from performing his duties, Ahiara priests repudiated their oaths of office. Even then, some of the reasons they adduced for their action gravitate between the ridiculous and the infantile. For one, there is no law of the Catholic Church that says a bishop must be appointed from the area he will be posted.

    Most of the serving Catholic bishops are in dioceses other than theirs. The facts are self evident to the protesting priests and they should know better. It was also very ridiculous listening to priests argue that Okpaleke speaks a different Igbo dialect and it will constrain his communication with the faithful. It is a shame such hackneyed arguments are being canvassed by priests.

    If we were able to contend with white priests even when the literacy level was abysmally low, it is a big scandal for any person to finger Igbo dialect as a reason for rejecting a consecrated bishop in any part of Igbo land. At any rate, Anambra dialect is understood by every Igbo man and woman. It would seem the lure of office is at the heart of the current crisis. That makes the matter more worrisome for the Catholic institution that depends largely on the goodwill of the faithful for survival.

    Nobody has queried why only a few of those admitted into our seminaries are ordained priests. Is it not a maxim in that vocation that many are called but few are chosen? How the few is chosen may soon become an issue of unionism and placard carrying if we allow the Ahiara priests get away with this unmitigated assault to the Catholic faith.

    Or, could there be a correlation between the current posturing of Ahiara priests and their serial inability to qualify for the bishopric? The Catholic Church is neither a democratic institution nor does it claim to be one. So flaunting a strength of 750 priests on which basis they demand a fair share of the bishopric, completely lost sight of St Augustine’s allegory of the two cities- the city of God and the city of man. The arguments canvassed to sustain the crisis are of the corporeal rather ecclesiastical. They are clannish and self-serving and cannot stand the rigors of the ecclesiastical order.

    The Pope has spoken. Catholics who challenge his authority have no business in the faith. Ahiara diocese is in the news for a very wrong reason. They will have to contend with the backlash of this scandal for a long time to come. Enough of that hot air!

  • All because of politics

    What is unfair can’t be fair. It is unfair that local council aspirant Bode Adeosun was forced to give up his political ambition following the kidnap of his daughter by kidnappers who demanded his withdrawal from the councillorship race as a non-negotiable condition for the release of the 20-year old kidnapee.

    Adeosun, who was an All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate in Ward C1B of Odi- Olowo/Ojuwoye Local Council Development Area (LCDA) of Lagos, narrated what happened on June 20: “My daughter, Bukola, was sent on an errand with her younger sister by their mother around 9pm, but only the little sister came back saying she could not find Bukola. We subsequently went around looking for her but on our way back around 1:39am we got a call from the kidnappers confirming that Bukola is in their custody. I have also reported the matter to the Divisional Police Officer in Ilupeju. The number was hidden. My daughter would be 20 years on Saturday (June 24) and she just concluded her JAMB exams.”

    When his daughter was released three days later, Adeosun extended his narrative: “My daughter’s abductors were in constant communication with me since the day she was kidnapped. They demanded I should withdraw from the political race if I wanted my daughter back alive. I agreed with their terms and condition because I did not want any harm to befall the innocent girl…Since I am not in the position to announce my withdrawal from the race, the APC chairman in Odi-Olowo/Ojuwoye LCDA did during the APC state rally held on Thursday for all party candidates in all local councils. I assumed the informant of my daughter’s abductors attended the rally. When they heard the announcement from the APC chairman in our council, they called me around 7pm to come to Ifo area of Ogun State to pick up my daughter.”

    He continued: “I pleaded with them to bring her back to the spot she was kidnapped. They hung up and called back around 12am. They said I should pick my daughter up in Danmegoro Street in Mushin. We found her blindfolded and tied with chain. She was almost passing out.”

    A report quoted a source as saying: “Immediately his daughter was released, he removed all his posters around and burnt them right in front of his house, in the full glare of everyone.” Interestingly, this isn’t the first time Adeosun has been pressurised into rethinking his political aspiration. The source also said:  “When he contested in 2002, under the umbrella of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) his house was burnt and he was forced to step down. He had stepped down on two other occasions, until the mandate was given to him now to run. But that again, has been stalled.”

    It is curious that since Adeosun was forced to forget his councillorship dream for his daughter’s sake, things have progressed as if nothing happened.  When the incident happened, a report said: “Contacted, the command’s spokesman, Olarinde Famous-Cole, an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), said the police were only aware of a case of missing person. He said: “The family actually reported a case of missing person at the station. They said she went to buy fish within the vicinity around 9pm, but she didn’t return. We are investigating to get more facts from the family.”

    Now that Bukola has been found, it is unclear whether the police have stopped their investigation and closed the case, despite details linking her disappearance with abduction. As things stand, this case is far from closure.

    It is condemnable that the abduction happened. It is even more condemnable that it happened for political reasons. It is unacceptable and should not be allowed to pass without a resolution that would uncover the identities of the abductors and punish them for the crime.

    It is thought-provoking that the APC has not responded to the incident, suggesting that what happened was Adeosun’s business and none of the party’s business.  If Adeosun pulled out of the contest as a result of such brutally coercive action by others interested in the same political position, it should be a matter of serious concern to the party.  Obviously, the method employed to ensure Adeosun’s exclusion had little or no respect for fair play.

    A report said: “A crowd made up of sympathisers and politicians had stormed Adeosun’s home, on Shyllon Street in Ilupeju, following the news of his daughter’s release. Adeosun described the incident as an “unforgettable experience,” saying his daughter was subjected to physical and psychological torture because of politics.”

    What happened to Adeosun’s daughter, and what happened to Adeosun himself, cannot be a positive advertisement for the APC and its claimed progressivism.  If a so-called progressive party can accommodate the unprogressive thinking that led to the unprogressive action, it calls into question the party’s definition of progressive politics.

    There is no doubt that desperadoes planned and carried out the kidnap, which says something about the quality of the party’s membership and leadership. The party’s image has been tainted by the abduction and the surrounding circumstances. The APC needs to move in a concrete way to remove the stain.

    What signal does this kidnapping send to the public, considering the possibility that whoever sponsored it and forced Adeosun to drop his councillorship dream may win the council seat at issue?  Of course, there is also the possibility that the abductors were self-sponsored, and carried out the abduction to pave the way for the election of the person they wanted. Or could the abduction have been done by outsiders, meaning people outside the APC, for the benefit of an aspirant in another party?

    Clearly, Ward C1B of Odi- Olowo/Ojuwoye Local Council Development Area (LCDA) of Lagos is a ward of interest, and it would be interesting to see how things develop there with the approach of the July 22 local government area and local council development area elections in Lagos State.  If the APC’s candidate wins the election in the controversial ward, the winner will carry the burden of the abduction. That may well be the case too, if a candidate from a different party wins.

    It is important to get to the bottom of this curious kidnap and its various dimensions.