The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  • Extraordinary Evans

    A curious detail came with the news of the arrest of big-time kidnapper Chukwudubem Onwuamadike, alias Evans. A report in The Guardian said:  ”Early bystanders claimed Evans had exchanged gunshots with the officials before he was captured. A ritual where a broom was inserted into his private organ was then performed as a sort of spiritual disarming before he was handcuffed.”

    Did this happen? If it did, what does it say about the Nigeria Police Force and its methods? If it didn’t happen, what does it say about news gathering and news presentation? The piece of information about the “ritual” reinforced the thriller, no doubt.

    A police source was quoted as saying: “Someone called and gave information on his whereabouts. When we got there, he hid inside the roof of the house. He could not withstand the pressure on him from the police. While Vampire was the most deadly kidnapper in the history of Nigeria and was caught some months ago during a gun battle, Evans remains the most brilliant, richest and craftiest kidnapper in the country’s history.”

    It is remarkable that the police moved with unusual speed in this investigation. Evans, a native of Umudun, Nnewi, Anambra State, was arrested on June 10, at his classy home at Magodo, Lagos, about three weeks after the announcement of N30m bounty by the Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris, for information that could lead to his arrest. He has been on the wanted list of the police in three states, Edo, Anambra and Lagos, for over four years; and police interest in him was renewed by his alleged involvement in the abduction of Innocent Duru, the owner of a multi-national pharmaceutical company in Ilupeju, Lagos.

    He was paraded with others: Felix Chinemerem, Nwosu Chikodi Chukwuma (aka Sado), 42, Suoyo Paul (aka Nwana), 42, Ikenna Emeka, 28, Uchechukwu Amadi and Ogechi Amadi. Evans painted a picture of how he started kidnapping, which added flavour to the thriller: “I was into auto spare parts importation but lost all my money (over N25m) when Customs seized my goods. From there, I relocated to South Africa, where I started peddling drugs. But along the line, my business partner shot me and passed me off as dead. I recuperated, returned to Nigeria and decided to start kidnapping rich men for ransom.”

    Within 10 years, Evans acquired a reputation as a high-profile kidnapper.   A report that captured his criminal trajectory said: “Chief Raymond Okoye was kidnapped in 2015 and was detained for two months until his relatives raised $1million. A trader, Uche Okoroafor, was whisked away in 2015 and held captive for three months until his family paid $1 million. Another businessman, Elias Ukachukwu, was kidnapped in November 2015. He paid $1 million. But the kidnappers refused to release him after collecting the initial ransom.  They demanded another $1million on grounds that the victim’s relatives were rude to them. Ukachukwu stayed in their den for several months and it is unclear how and when he regained freedom. Francis Umeh, an auto parts dealer, was kidnapped in July 2016 at Raji Rasaki Estate, Ago Palace Way, Okota, Lagos. He spent two months in the kidnappers’ den and paid an undisclosed amount of dollars.”

    The report continued: “Evans and his gang met their waterloo with the kidnap of billionaire pharmacist Innocent Duru, who they wanted to kill after collecting a ransom. The victim was with the kidnappers at 21 Prophet Asaye Close, New Igando, Lagos, for over five months. He eventually escaped and gave the police the information which led to the busting of the gang.”

    How Evans managed to evade arrest before he was caught may not necessarily be a credit to him, but a discredit to the police.  Evans gave an insight into how he succeeded as a kidnap kingpin: “I have people heading different sections. There are two gangs that work for me in every operation.  It is not all the time I follow them for the job. Most times, I control them on phone. The two gangs do not know themselves and neither of them knows my house.”

    When Evans expressed remorse after his arrest, it signalled the triumph of good over evil.  ”I am feeling bad. People who are still into kidnapping should quit. They should learn from what has happened to me, “he said.  His unveiling at the Lagos Command Headquarters in Ikeja, Lagos, was a moment of self-assessment and self-judgement. His message to the public is useful and welcome: Crime doesn’t pay.

    After enjoying the proceeds of crime, it is now time for Evans to pay for his crime.  It is noteworthy that  Police spokesman Jimoh Moshood said Evans had two mansions in upscale Magodo GRA Phase II, Lagos, worth about N300 million. He also said Evans “has two houses in highbrow area of Accra, Ghana, among many other properties, such as exotic cars, expensive watches, jewelry he bought from ransom.” The police reportedly recovered AK47 and AK49 rifles, double-barreled long guns, and magazines with ammunition, from the gang, which further reflected the threat they posed to the society.

    The police deserve applause. According to the police spokesman, the operation to catch Evans was successfully carried out by the Inspector General of Police’ (IGP) Intelligence Response Team (IRT), Anti-Kidnapping Squad of the Lagos Police Command and Technical Intelligence Unit (TIU). It is reassuring that he was quoted as saying: “The force would build on this success and continue to prevent kidnap cases and criminality in the country.”

    Now that Evans is in the cage, the case against him and his gang must be pursued with focus. It is noteworthy that, in February, Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode signed a law stipulating death penalty for kidnappers whose victims die in their custody, and life imprisonment for kidnapping. The Evans case will be an interesting test for this law.

    There are still kidnappers, small and big, outside the cage.  How did Nigeria become a country where kidnapping is big business and kidnappers make mind-boggling money?

  • Threats and counter threats

    There are many angles to the threat issued by a coalition of Arewa youths to the Igbo residing in the north to vacate. Interpretation is bound to vary on its overall objective; those behind it and some of the combustible claims. Opinion will also differ on why Arewa youths made the confiscation of Igbo property a priority in their weird agenda.

    It is good a thing however the threat has attracted wide condemnation with calls for the arrest and prosecution of its masterminds. The first of such calls came curiously from Governor Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State in whose domain the action was hatched and executed.

    Perhaps, his quick reaction was to stave off possible criticisms especially given that the Arewa House where the press conference held is under the supervision of that state government. So, he could not have feigned ignorance of it. If his quick reaction was to save face, it is doubtful if that objective was achieved.

    Even then, no right thinking person (except Arewa chieftain Ango Abdullahi) could have identified with the false and incendiary claims bandied by those youths. The same youths also had the temerity to address another press conference with some modifications on their earlier stand. Off course, nobody has been arrested neither is it likely any arrest will be effected.

    That is however besides the major thrust of this write-up. The first issue relates to the objective meant to be served by the threat. Were the youths serious with it and do they possess the powers to drive the Igbo out of the north? And are there no consequences of such an attempt on the corporate existence of the country? My reading of the entire scenario is that they had no intention to make good their threat. They neither have the powers (even as their capacity for crisis cannot be underestimated) nor will they stand to benefit from its wider repercussions. Riots and killing of innocent people which could result from such action (as severally witnessed in the past) will eventually be put down by the nation’s security even as their leadership is in the hands of northerners. If this is so, what did they really set out to achieve? Why did they issue a threat they are incapable of enforcing?

    The reason can be captured within the context of balance of terror-an attempt to checkmate agitations for self-determination by the pro-Biafra groups especially given the success of their sit-at-home order. They even alluded to that. The entire idea is to frighten the Igbo with the relocation threat in anticipation that it will cause division among them and possibly throw spanners into the momentum of the Biafra agitation. This conclusion is further given fillip by the threat to take over their properties in the north.

    Given that the Igbo are known to have huge investments in all parts of the country, raising the prospects of property ambush, could divide opinion especially among the propertied and influential segments of that population. This will presumably come with dire consequences for agitations for self-determination. Those were the calculations. It was a careful script written for the so-called youths by their self-serving sponsors.

    There is also the other dimension that such a threat would further heat up the system and elicit some other consequences that could fast-track the vaulting ambition of its sponsors to maintain their stranglehold on power. The dark political cloud hovering over the country is cited in support of this school of thought. After all, some politicians were accused some weeks back of approaching the military for some unconstitutional action.

    But this calculation lost sight of the fact that those in the vanguard of Biafra agitation have little to do with property ownership. Property owners and other parasitic elite from that area could be part of the problems of those canvassing for Biafra. The agitation is not an elite affair. So introducing the prospects of property loss is neither here nor there. Nobody knew about Nnamdi Kanu before he was thrown into prominence by the agitation.

    If the threat was designed to set in motion the dialectics of balance of terror, it turned out counterproductive. If it was just to fly a kite, that kite failed before it could take off. Balance of terror will rather re-awaken the consciousness of the pro-Biafra groups to the stark realities of their grievances. We saw that in the threats and counter threats between the north and people of Niger Delta during the second term presidential ambition of Jonathan. Their net effect further exposed the fault lines of our federal system and hardened positions. That was going to be the outcome in the instant case but for the timely intervention of Vice President Yemi Osinbajo.  At any rate, Niger Delta agitators have also added to the threats.

    This country is not entirely new either to threats of excision of parts from the rest or expulsion orders to segments. The Orkar coup attempted to excise some states of the north while the Boko Haram insurgents issued orders to southerners and Christians to leave the north. So the minister of information, Lai Mohammed was right when he averred that the threat by Arewa youths is not new.

    But such dismissive conclusion neither whittled down the inflammatory nature of the action nor its capacity to set in motion a cycle of events whose outcome nobody could predict. Dismissing the threats offhandedly in the face of the invectives, vile and inflammatory allegations hurled by the so-called youths on an ethnic group of over 50 million people, including those older than their grandparents is to say the least, in very bad taste.

    Arewa youths accused the Igbo of funding Boko Haram by selling arms to them. They accused the Igbo of being behind the killings, raping of women and despoliation of communities usually attributed to Fulani herdsmen in various parts of the country.

    They could as well accuse the Igbo of masterminding the kidnap of the Chibok girls; the various religion-induced riots and killings that have been a recurring decimal in that part of the country, for which the Igbo lost gravely in both human and material capital. Perhaps, Igbo people were also among the Fulani herdsmen that demonstrated around the premises of the Taraba State House of Assembly against the anti open-grazing bill with some of them clutching guns. That is how ridiculous the youths went in pushing their heinous ethnic agenda. And they claim they are leaders of tomorrow. A tomorrow led by youths who thrive in bare-faced deceit, falsehood and vile propaganda just to oil ethnic predilections, leaves no hope at all.

    Arewa youths also displayed lack of clarity of thought when they called for a referendum to determine the Biafra agitation. You cannot be expelling them; taking inventory of their property with a view to confiscating them while at the same time calling for a referendum. The former should have preceded the latter if at all the touted expulsion and property confiscation are permissible.

    One is disappointed at the very brash manner the youth reacted to the vexatious issues of our federal order thrown up by the Biafra agitation. I had expected a more frank, realistic and passionate discussion on the issues that have held this nation down and stagnated its progress. A youth of the future should have come up with workable suggestions to move the nation forward if they really appreciated why this federalism has failed to work 57 years after independence.

    Threats and counter threats will not help matters. Neither will the current structural distortions that confer undue advantage to sections against others subsist for a long time further. Those seriously desirous of progress must support the imperative of urgent discussions on the type of federal order that will best approximate the collective desires of the component units. With that, the root of the schism and fission that has been the greatest challenge to nation building would have been largely stymied.

    It is only then the envisaged constitutional spirit of ensuring that loyalty to the nation overrides sectional loyalty can be realized. But the grand norms for genuinely evolving a nation out of the competing centers of loyalty must be laid down by the government. That has been the missing link- a task Buhari/Osinbajo must now confront.

  • Biaxit

    Biaxit

    If we were to follow history, it will be easy to dismiss Nnamdi Kanu, Ben Nwabueze, Nwazuruike, as well as the other cohorts of MASSOB and IPOB. The reason is that they often fail. The secessionist ends in a riotous divorce. Free, proud, but broken.

    Southern Sudan reels in blood and bile. Eritrea stews in want and lies prostrate, often envious of its former cousins. In Europe, the remnants of old Yugoslavia are quiet, but sniff no greatness ahead. The Basque separatists in Spain are a shadow of their historic bluster. Scotland saw their dreams scuttled. It is now more difficult since the last elections. Once proud, it now limps.

    Those calling for Biaxit, or Igboxit, or eastxit, or eaxit, should better think again. They should be grateful that Nigeria has never come part. It is not only in the southeast but in every region that thanks should trump tanks of war.

    If Biafra were born today, the battle for the soul of the new country will eclipse in the face of new insular agitations. The Owerri area show resentment for Enugu’s proprietary hubris. Today, all of Igboland cannot agree on a new state.  Wawa will assume new and truculent meaning in Igbo lexicon.

    The frenzy to go over the border for business may steam up passions. The nostalgia for trading in Kano, lap up Lagos profits, sprout up high rises in Abuja will compound the absence of protein in a land-locked country. No access to the water through Port Harcourt, or meat through other south-south states will loom with the spectral skeletons of old Biafra. Immigration men and women in stolid visages will stand guard. If, that is, a Trumpian wall is not in the offing.

    Nor will it be easier in the southwest. The Yoruba, who would be heard rather than be herds, may even be more heady. In Ibadan alone, a battle for a new state of Ibadan state atrophies any prospect of brotherly meal of abula. Ditto in Ogun, and Osun and other parts of Yorubaland, including Lagos where the Awori babel jars aplenty.

    Since the Yoruba wars of the 19th century, the heart of Kaaro Ojire has shrunken from consensus. There is often no ‘us’ or a shadow of consent. What is sometime interpreted as principle or an assertion of independence is an excuse to launch selfish ambition or seek revenge. It has helped well in the context of Nigeria. The southwest has become the conscience of a frazzled hodgepodge called Nigeria. When it fails, all else fail.

    As for the south-south, the contention will be a world tragedy like that of the former Yugoslavia. The Urhobo may marry the Itsekiri but the politics may turn blood from drip to deep like the ocean. Ijaw will look askance at the others. Ogoni will want to rail against the Ikwere, and the many so-called minority will suddenly wake up with egos as large as the Atlantic Ocean.

    Of course, in the middle belt, Kogi is showing the slippery way. But were that region turned into a country, remember Kwara State, riven in parts that look at each other as parasites. Remember Benue between Tiv and Idoma. Plateau was a land of picturesque tranquillity. Now, suspicion has wracked it into a place of spontaneous barbarity.

    Up north, the Christians in Taraba invoke the Holy Spirit against the “unbelievers.” Ditto Adamawa. In Sothern Kaduna, where a call for a separate state has gone the way of all flesh, herdsmen and sporadic hordes raid in murderous glee and rape for spoils.

    We see the triumphalism of the 1804 Jihad of Uthman Dan Fodio will contend with the subordination of the Hausa. The Jihad made the Fulani the lords, a minority though they are over the Hausa. But all of that is not a factor in a Nigeria where there are many others to duel. The enemy of my friend is my enemy.

    In many microcosms, we see these tensions. In a small state like Edo, all the tendencies thrive, north versus south, big group against the smaller, Christian versus Muslim. Nigeria is a state of multifarious midgets with big egos. They have been kept in line under a big, sprawling umbrella of a federation.

    The issue of Biafra is still gaining traction in some parts of the east because it is now only an emotional matter. If it goes into an intellectual mode and debates light up, it may look like the story of Quebec in Canada. The yes voters began gradually to understand that being a north American island was going to give them a pride and a fall. If Biafrans start to understand that business will stunt their riches, their land will suffer human overload, and know that the Yoruba they love to hate so much is the reason to love to go back to Nigeria, and the Hausa they loathe loads them with a lot of patriotic raison detre, they will start to keep the Kanus and the gang in the lurch. Reason will mix with emotion. Biafra suddenly will become a castrated bull.

    If the United States calls itself a melting pot and Canada a mosaic, Nigeria is a web. All the strands exist like chaos but they are bound. Every family has an inter-ethnic link. An Itsekiri cannot forget the Yoruba tie, nor the Onitsha the Kogi link, nor the Hausa the Ogbomosho provenance, etc. So, those who tend to call for division should not forget many who do so want to pursue selfish agenda. They are opportunist careerists. It recalls what the novelist Walter Scott wrote, “what tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive.” The more they try to divide us, the larger the connectedness.

    The battle for federalism means all should be fair. We all know we run a skewed and ethnically rigged federalism, which makes it no federalism. We need to have a federalism where the small is no smaller than the biggest part of it. That means a south-south community that suffers from oil spill should not get 13 percent of its own gift without its permission. Federalism without democracy is hegemony. It is such matters we should bring on the front burner.

    The call for restructuring is a great call, but it is not our greatest drawback. It is a sense of suspicion and failure of high values like fairness and honesty. If we give every ethnic group its state, and very region its due, we shall still rail at each other because, at bottom, we still suspect each other. We need to cut through official hypocrisy, and say truth to ourselves and not try to use power of tribe over us. It is then that we shall be a true web and ignore poet Blake who wrote, “The bird a nest, the spider a web, men friendship.” We need a web of friendship, not of tribe.

    Or else, it will look like the story of the Osage Indians, as related in an important new book titled, The Killings of the Flower Moon by David Grann. They were a small group driven from place to place in the United States until they found a dry, craggy land for them to suffer and die in the 1920s. It turned out it was sitting on oil. They became per capita the richest people in the world. The U.S. government took the back seat while the Osage were systematically killed and eliminated in order to take the oil wealth from them, including through cynical marriages. The investigations of these tragedies led to the birth of the FBI. That is a travesty of federalism. It had no democratic content because the Osage people had no say in their own country. Federalism is about sharing, not parasitic.

    We need Nigeria, but we need it for all and not a few. But we cannot do it by following the path of the Kanus who point an anarchic alternative. We are better under a Nigeria. But we have to make it work as insiders, not as outsiders. That way, we can turn the web into wealth for all.

  • 200 million plates

    200 million plates

    Some frown because he sports a wild and luxuriant beard, as though it were a crime to be devout and be a governor at the same time. The same people have applauded the bombshell of hair around Fidel Castro’s chin when he dared the world’s powers, enthroned a system and rallied a lowly people against capitalist interlopers. Castro’s beard was no believer of Christ or Allah. It is atheist and proclaims no god except the man who bore it.

    Some did not like his vocal ways. But being vocal was not the issue. They just did not want such a man to be bold.

    But Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola’s foes clutched to excuses as launching pads to assail. Men in the political class, ecclesiastical order and even some in the media, shut their eyes to virtue. They saw only errors and when they erred they lacked the humility to acknowledge him. Rather they have cloaked repentance with silence. I must admit that some of the contrition is also a factor of ignorance.

    Some of the ignorance arises from a puny media unwilling to balance familiar harangue with unfamiliar accolade. Some of the bad press began with salary deficit. The point has been made with as much authenticity as with malice that his government had what might be called an excess of zeal. It started with ambition and swallowed up project after project.

    Whether it was a mammoth education project of N30 billion or the construction of roads and bridges and drainages to end the vehicular burden of the Lagos- Ibadan Expressway, or whether it was the tablet, or opon imo, to simplify learning through technology, no one questioned him then. They actually saw the vision, which they praised in silence. There are others, including the social welfare programmes, the massive investment in small entrepreneurs. They came as O’Beef, for cattle. O’pig for piggeries, or O’honey for honey.

    All of these were intended to raise the profile of a so-called backwoods state with knowledge and prosperity. But he did not anticipate, like many others, the dip in revenue after the fall of the naira. It hit the pocket books and the projects. But several months of salary arears became a rallying point.

    Aregbesola became the poster man of financial imprudence. A few months after, it became clear that it was not Osun alone. Even at the time his story was trending, Imo State crawled under the same deficit. More states, including the oil-rich ones, began to unveil their books as workers groaned from months without pay.

    But Aregbesola was not to be forgiven. Those governors who could not pay their salaries piled on with media frenzy and political gamesmanship to pillory him. The game was still unknown to many then. With the fall of Ekiti State, they wanted Osun out of his hands.

    He prevailed with a clear victory in his return election. The people were more in touch with him than his assailants. That rattled his foes with deeper malice. But they have been unable to shake him out of his seat. Meanwhile, while other states have yet to get to the bottom of their salary issues, Ogbeni has hunkered down to business.

    Today, he has reached a deal with the workers, and some of this news is known only under the bushel. How many of his detractors know that the majority of Osun workers have been paid their full salaries to date. Workers from grade level 01 to 07, have received their full salaries up till May. The deal was to pay those from levels 08 to 10 the package of 75 percent of their salaries. They have received that till date. Those above that level have had 50 percent.

    In spite of this, they do not include the fact that cost overrun of government still goes on. This year, Osun has received only N2 billion in federal allocation, and its pay load in a month will gulp nearly all of it. Few have asked the question: how has he been able to do it?

    This is the other side of the story. He has combined other forms of budget support, including internally generated revenue. If he has been accused of recklessness in the past for not anticipating revenue shortfall, no one has had time to wonder how he has done it now, even if they are too proud to praise. If he was footloose in the past, he is rooted now.

    In spite of this, one of the great welfare work of this generation is flourishing nonstop on his watch. No other state comes close. His school feeding programme, that is. It is a project that defied low funds availability. As of last December, over 200 million plates of food had been served to the school children. This is a gift for a generation. I recall, as a kid in Methodist Primary School, Oke-Ado, Ibadan, how we looked forward to our meals and how they nourished our learning.

    At a young age, especially in an impoverished country such as ours, school feeding may be their main source of daily nourishment. It plants the seed for future prosperity by breeding wards with healthy brains.

    In infrastructure, few know that the financial crisis did not stop work. Over 800 kilometres of roads with drainages have been completed. He is still working on the Orile Owu-Ijebu Igbo road, Omoluabi Motorway that spans Gbogan and Akoda, Os ogbo Old Garage to Ilaodo as well as Oba Adesoji Highway.

    There is more, but it is better for people to go and see. Sometimes leaders wait for history to vindicate them. But in such cases, it indicts the age for closing their eyes for historians to see. In the United States history, one of the great victims of such blindness was Harry Truman, who some historians have elevated from inept to near great. Because of the colour and swagger of John Kennedy, he is often overrated. They tend to judge him by what he might have achieved than what he actually accomplished. History, after all, is no impartial arbiter.

    Ogbeni’s story is still evolving as governor for the next 500 days.

  • Paying for FRSC’s failings

    James Akor’s (not real names) new drivers’ license recently expired. To get it renewed, he is required to visit a licensing office. On getting to one in Lagos, he was asked to produce a passport photograph and pay the prescribed fees which vary depending on who you meet.

    Having paid the necessary licensing fees, he was issued a laminated temporary drivers’ license with his passport photograph embossed for duration of three months. It was envisaged that at the end of the period or before it, his valid drivers’ license would have been ready for collection.

    So he left full of expectations since he could operate on the roads with the temporary license. A couple of weeks after, he travelled out of Lagos and while he was there, the temporary license expired. He had not completed the assignment that took him there and could therefore not return to Lagos immediately to collect the license which he envisaged, would have been ready then.

    Three days later, he was stopped by an official of the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC) for routine check. The following conversation occurred:

    FRSC: Good morning sir

    Akor: Good morning.

    FRSC: Can I see your drivers’ license?

    Akor: Here it is (producing the expired temporary drivers’ license from his breast pocket)

    FRSC: It has expired and I am going to book you.

    Akor: Well, it just expired. I had paid the necessary fees in Lagos and would have to finish my assignment here before going back to collect the permanent one. The lady officer took pity but cautioned that the police and other agencies may have a different view of the matter if and when they stopped him.

    Not far away from that vicinity, a contingent of the police on routine check flagged him down. This time, all explanations to the effect that it is no fault of his as he had paid all the necessary fees and would only be able to collect the permanent one when he goes back to Lagos, fell on deaf ears. Not even the explanation that the temporary license just expired three days ago and he would ordinarily require some days of grace impressed any one. Off course, he had to grease the palms of that officer before he was let go.

    On return to Lagos and as he made his way to the licensing office the next day, he was again stopped by another set of FRSC officials who as usual, demanded for his drivers’ license. On producing the expired temporary license, they held tight to it. All efforts to explain that he has been out of town and on his way to collect his permanent license, which had been paid for since three months fell on deaf ears. He parted with some money before they allowed him to go.

    Ironically, when he got to the FRSC’s office, his permanent license was not yet ready. They had to make a photocopy of the expired temporary license, stamped and extended it for another three months. This time, what he has as his driving permit, is a piece of paper that could tear or deface any moment.  And he is expected to use it for another three months, at the end of which he will have to abandon whatever he is doing just to collect a valid drivers’ license.

    By that time, it would have at least, taken six months for him to collect a drivers’ license that will last for three years. If the license starts counting from the day it was paid for, Akor has just two and a half years to commence the same ritual again. It is therefore to be imagined the amount of valuable time he will spend just to renew his drivers’ license each time it expires.

    Elsewhere, a lady pharmacist who was rushing home at the close of work to attend to her baby was stopped by a FRSC officer in a busy street in Lagos. She had a hell of time protesting to the officials about the inconvenience in abandoning her job to be hanging around the licensing office for a license she had since paid for to no avail. She had asked them to tell her whose fault it is that a license she had paid for, should now be a subject of constant harassment. She said she has a tight job schedule and could only go to the licensing office when she is free. The protest was so intense that it attracted a large crowd in sympathy. It took the intervention of a senior police officer to allow her go.

    These few instances mirror vividly, the experiences of most drivers since the introduction of the new drivers’ license some years back. They bring to the fore the hardship and exploitation many drivers encounter in the hands of sundry enforcers of road traffic regulations. But more importantly, they highlight the contradiction in punishing innocent people for the failings and incompetence of the issuing authorities.

    Ironically, the same authorities that are responsible for late issuance of licenses months after the due fees had been paid would turn round to fleece the public for no fault of theirs. It strikes as a big contradiction that it takes up to six months just to renew a drivers’ license in this country.

    If the long period of delay is worrisome, the penchant by sundry traffic enforcement officers including the very FRSC to exploit the situation to the detriment of drivers is even more confounding. One had expected the FRSC should have shown more understanding given that it is no fault of drivers that their licenses take that long before being issued to them. But that would not be.

    Having paid for the renewal of a license; issued a temporary one, it is taken that the license has been renewed. At the expiration of the period indicated on the temporary one, sufficient time should be allowed to enable the holder make time to visit the licensing office especially given the daily struggles to eke out a living in a very harsh economy. To require people to be thronging the licensing offices everyday conveys the erroneous impression that life is all about drivers’ license.

    That is the contradiction in the entire exercise. Worst still, the same office responsible for the tardiness, would send their men to the streets to harass people for the monster they created. We have heard there is a week or so of grace for such renewals. But enforcing officers usually feign ignorance of it just to continue with their self-serving activities.

    It is vital for the FRSC, the police and other agencies that regularly enforce traffic regulations to come public on what the law says about days of grace. Sensitization of the public on their rights should form a crucial aspect of law enforcement. This is very vital to obviate the penchant by unscrupulous officials to prey on the ignorance of the people.

    Given the foregoing, the recent order by Governor Akinwumi Ambode of Lagos to officials of the FRSC to withdraw from state roads and streets and concentrate their activities on federal roads is a step in the right direction. For some time now, there have been concerns over the constant duplication of functions and harassment of motorists by FRSC officials, the Police and Vehicle Inspection Officers (VIO’s) in inner streets and roads instead of the highways.

    Apart from compounding the traffic situation in the state, their desire to meet questionable revenue targets has brought undue suffering to the public making it difficult for some businesses to operate for fear of indiscriminate fines. They can go ahead with their spurious revenue targets. But the activities of the FRSC should be along the federal roads.

    One FRSC commander in a neighbouring state vowed a fortnight ago not to leave state roads because accidents occur there also. That could be true. But it cannot compare with the fatality of accidents that occur on federal roads. There are little or no accidents on some of the streets we see the FRSC officials on a daily basis. They have no business there as the police can always fill any gap that may arise. We commend Ambode’s response to other state governors.

  • A phony intellectual

    A phony intellectual

    When a man has lived a long life, and has attained the age of 80, you don’t expect to agree with all he has said or done. His human foibles should not be allowed to overshadow his moments of light. But some indiscretions can stand out, though, and may haunt his hoary journey to the end. Professor Ben Nwabueze has often affected to be an intellectual, and at times, he has shown himself one. He is a constitutional lawyer by some standards. He is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, although not many agree with the judgement of those who dole out the SANs these days.

    Recently though, Nwabueze associated with Nnamdi Kanu of IPOB, and called him a great Igbo man. Hear him: “Today is one of the greatest days of my life, meeting you.”

    But he lacked the courage to say the man is calling for Biafra. This is a fork-tongued intellectual licking two soups at the same time. He says, the Biafran advocate is not fighting for “secession but for regional autonomy.” May I ask the learned prof what Biafra means?

    Did we not fight a war over that? Has Kanu not in many ways and on many platforms called unequivocally for Biafra. Is the professor lost in some sort of octogenarian fancy, the delusion of age? Is associating with Kanu not a cowardly way of accepting Biafra without the liver to say it in plain language?

    In Jonathan’s time, he was cosy with the inept Azikiwe, visiting him at Aso Rock and offering him advice. How many times did he complain when Jonathan accommodated his kinsmen. He did not caution his kinsmen from a pig’s embrace of a man who conned the Igbos by giving them elite positions but did nothing concrete in terms of infrastructure and other deliverables of government. This is the way of hypocrisy, not of an intellectual. If his intellectualism is about embracing a secessionist, he has made himself a friend of an enemy of our sovereignty. He has led a group called Patriots. He is the least qualified for that position, except if he agrees he is not a Nigerian patriot. To embrace Kanu would make him an impostor.

  • Biafra fire

    efore the Independent Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), and its noisy leader, Nnamdi Kanu, there was the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), and its equally loud leader, Ralph Uwazuruike.  Before these separatist reincarnations, there was the Biafran idea that became a dream and culminated in the three-year Nigerian Civil War that ended on January 15, 1970, following the surrender of the Biafran troops to the Federal side.  As observed in The Tragedy of Victory, a civil war account by Alabi Isama, the conflict ended without ending the centrifugal tendencies in the country’s space.

    The resurrection of Biafran separatism and the ramification of the revolt are full of lessons. In December 2015, Uwazuruike must have thought he was taking the idea to the next level. After unveiling his group’s new identity and announcing his new leadership title, he released plans to set up a parallel government in the country’s Southeast and South-south.

    The Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) was renamed Biafra Independence Movement (BIM), and Uwazuruike said he should be recognised as BIM leader instead of MASSOB leader.

    “Old members will now belong to the new Biafra Independence Movement (BIM) while the MASSOB structure will be reorganised as the youth wing of the Biafra struggle,” Uwazuruike said during a meeting of his group’s zonal and regional administrators. In other words, the struggle was still alive, but would be carried on under a redesigned banner.

    Uwazuruike must have been under the impression that he moved closer to actualising his separatist dream by presenting what was called the 2016 Biafra Budget at the Ojukwu Memorial Library in Owerri, the Imo State capital.   Was Biafra already a reality, and no longer an objective? Who was responsible for making the budget? Who approved it? Where would the funds to operate it come from? Did this budget presentation explain or justify the efforts to generate revenue internally by, for instance, selling so-called Biafra passports as well as MASSOB customised vehicle number plates? Of course, these specific examples were scams.

    Also, Uwazuruike announced the appointment of Rev. Fr Samuel Aniebonam, a Catholic Priest, as the Chairman of the Biafra Independent National Electoral Commission (B-INEC). Uwazuruike said: “The chairman, with other anointed men and women of God as members, will supervise the internal election into the offices of the new Biafra Government on February 22.” How could a group’s “internal election” be for the election of Biafra government officials?

    He continued: “Our election will not be like Nigeria’s election, it will be a transparent one. In Biafra, there won’t be electoral fraud. The tenure of the elected Regional Governor or Minister would be four years and nine months. There shall be no second tenure. Once you are defeated, you won’t appeal in a tribunal against your opponent. This is why members of the commission would be men and women of God.”  He sounded like a Constitution, or like the Constitution. Was there a Biafra Constitution? Who drafted it? Who ratified it?

    The group’s National Director of Information, Sunny Okereafor, was quoted as saying only members of MASSOB and BIM were qualified to vote and be voted for in the elections. Were these the only Biafrans, or the only enfranchised citizens of Biafra? Was the group the same thing as Biafra, or was Biafra the same thing as the group? Okereafor said: “The electioneering has begun; we are conducting elections into all offices from wards to the zones, to elect leaders to administer Biafra. We are going to show Nigeria how to conduct free and fair elections without rigging, intimidation and favouritism.”

    He added: “Biafra will be a country where others would come to learn how democracy works… We want freedom; Biafra is the answer.”  Okereafor reportedly said Biafra would re-introduce its currency as soon as the elections were concluded and winners sworn in.

    The reinvention that invented BIM should be appreciated in its proper context.  As background, it is noteworthy that a faction of MASSOB led by Uchenna Madu had expelled Uwazuruike for alleged misappropriation of funds. Madu was the Director of Information under Uwazuruike in the old power structure.

    The complexion of the conflict was obvious following Uwazuruike’s allegation that Madu got money from the Federal Government to stop pro-Biafra protests. In response, a statement by MASSOB’s Secretary, Ugwuoke Ibem, attacked Uwazuruike and threatened to expose his “atrocities, sabotage and deviation from Biafra’s actualiastion.”

    The statement said: “As the closest officer to the former leader as well as the image maker, our new leader has vowed to expose Uwazuruike’s dealings with the Federal Government under Jonathan; Ezu River case, death of Innocent Ogbuehi (ex-Umuahia MASSOB leader), and other illicit affairs.”  It added: “MASSOB, under Madu, will continue its non-violent agitation with other pro-Biafra groups.”

    How many pro-Biafra groups exist today?  This question is pertinent in the light of developments concerning what may be tagged “The Biafra Project.” It is no news that IPOB, another enthusiastic pro-Bifara separatist group, continues to make the headlines on account of the activities of its leader, Kanu, who is facing treason-related charges for illegally running Radio Biafra.

    When Kanu was granted bail by a Federal High Court on April 25, the joy of his supporters understandably knew no bounds. This report captures the family backing Kanu enjoys concerning his separatist ambition: “The IPOB leader’s mother said she had been having sleepless nights while her son was in detention and thanked God for answering her prayers. Mrs. Kanu thanked all those who stood firm for the Biafra cause and prayed for her son’s release, urging them to keep the faith. Asked if she would advise her son to discontinue his agitation, she cried: “No retreat, no surrender. Biafra is a divine project.”

    The report continued: “Kanu’s mother said the arrest of her son popularised the Biafra agitation and vowed to keep supporting the movement. “My son was raised by God to deliver Biafra and as God delivered Israel so he will deliver Biafra because my son is fighting for his right,” she said.”

    It remains to be seen whether such separatist impulses can correct the imperfections of the country’s federalism.

  • Echoes of Biafra

    Echoes of Biafra

    Two events of last week reawakened discussions on the Biafra question. First was “Biafra, 50 years after” organized by the Yar’Adua Centre in Abuja. It had in attendance, acting President Yemi Osinbajo, former President Olusegun Obasanjo, president of Ohaneze Ndigbo, John Nwodo jr and a host of other distinguished personalities.

    It was closely followed by a sit-at-home order by pro-Biafra groups to mark 50 years of the declaration of Biafra and in honour of those who lost their lives during the three-year civil war.

    The first event must have come to many as a surprise. It was perhaps, the first time in recent memory that an official of government at that level would be participating in commemorating the Biafra war. It is not clear how that event came to be put together or the objective it was meant to achieve. There was no communiqué at the end and it appeared to be a mere talk shop.

    But discussions seemed more realistic and a sharp departure from the stereotypes we had hitherto been treated to. They tended to a better understanding of the variegated issues that confront this nation for which she has known no peace 50 years after it fought a civil war.

    Osinbajo came closer to the crux of the matter when he opined that there was nothing wrong in discussing the corporate existence of the country even as he appealed for moderation. Obasanjo captured his views in two allegories- that of the husband and wife, as well as in his notion of the sharing of the cake.

    Hear him “it’s like a husband and wife. If when you have issues, your wife would always say she is fed up and wants to go. And every day, that is what you get; one day, you would become fed up and say, ok you can go. But if there is any misunderstanding and you come together and solve it then you would almost live forever”.

    He went further: “And I would say that we should even appeal, if anybody says he wants to go; not that we will say okay you can go if you want to go. Do not go. There is enough cake for each of us. And if what you are asking for is more of the cake, then try to ask in a way that is pleasant not in a way that could make others feel that you are not entitled to what you are asking for”.

    By extrapolation, Obasanjo is saying in the first allegory that we should come together as husband and wife to resolve our misunderstanding for us to co-exist harmoniously. That is a trite statement. But the question he may perhaps answer is why 50 years after the civil war, the same manifestations that heralded that unfortunate episode rather than abate are further being reinforced with greater ferocity?  Why has it been difficult to develop that kind of love that enables husbands and wives to settle their disagreements amicably in a way to make us live harmoniously in this unity in diversity? Why have we been insincere in providing solutions to nagging problems when the path to progress revolves around them?

    Obasanjo offered no clues to these nagging posers. And to that extent, his suggestions have all the trappings of the usual pontificating and insincerity that have dogged the national question. This is especially so given the opposition coming from usual quarters (those who profit from the inequities of the system) against the imperative of restructuring the polity.

    Yes, we should appeal to those dissatisfied with the running of the country not to go. But that is not all there is to it as such appeals must be backed by concrete and concerted actions to eliminate all sources of friction, frustrations and inequity in the Nigerian state.

    But then, there is something anomalous and demeaning in the allegories presented by Obasanjo. While the former is suggestive of superiority and inferiority relationship (one group in position to call the shots), the latter is guilty of reductionism as it narrowed down the systemic defects that activate separatist feelings to a mere dissatisfaction with cake sharing formula. That is an oversimplification of the matter. Issues of equity, balance and true federalism go far beyond agitation for more cake. They go beyond giving people fish to eat to providing the needed environment for them to fish, if and when they want to do so. They have more to do with self-actualization, self-esteem and citizenship rights. Matters of this nature have little to do with the logic of the stomach.

    If the system was to be fair to all, demanding for more cake in a pleasant manner and not in a way to make people believe you are not entitled to it would not arise. Government, as a social contract, has a bounden responsibility to provide public goods and services very equitably to the constituents. That is the way to engender loyalty and patriotism. You do not look at faces to run a good government. You do not have to wait for agitations before public goods and services are distributed equitably.

    It is a mirror of the level of injustice that pervades the entire landscape that we should be talking of constituents demanding for more cake in a pleasant manner. There is everything wrong with governments that have overtime consistently been found wanting in building the needed consensus that would engender national unity and cohesion. That inability has been serially reflected in the constant separatist agitations that have stretched the government beyond its capacity.

    So we should not be talking of agitations for cake sharing in a decent manner. A responsible government; a government that is not goaded by ethnic, primordial and religious predilections would have no difficulty identifying sources of friction and taking the desired steps to redress them. That has been the missing link.

    All the same, we have come closer to admitting some of the challenges standing on the way to our nationhood. Before now, key officials of the government or those who reap from the imperfections of the convoluted federal order have been largely hostile to these issues.

    When Biafra agitations were reinforced with the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu, the reaction of former head of state Yakubu Gowon was that ‘with Biafra it is finished’. He made references to the reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction mantra of the post civil war era suggesting they had perfectly addressed all injustice arising from that war. The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) in its own reaction said Biafra was settled in 1970. There were also those who held the view that Biafra is dead and buried.

    This column had then argued that even if Biafra was dead and buried as claimed, it was buried in a hurry and in a very shallow grave. And because the undertakers failed to accord its full rights of passage, its ghost still hovers around and may begin to haunt us someday.

    With unfolding events, it is evident that neither is the issue finished as suggested by Gowon nor was it settled in 1970 as the ACF would erroneously make us to believe.  The spirit of Biafra is still very much alive and curiously among those who knew nothing about events of that war. That should be a serious cause to worry about. If people not born during that episode now rise to press for its actualization in the manner we have seen, it is suggestive of one or two things.

    It is either a vote of confidence for the reasons that led to the declaration of Biafra in the first instance; a vote of no confidence to claims that events that heralded that war have been resolved in a manner to imbue confidence in the capacity of the government to provide a level playing ground for all to exert their potentials to the fullest or both.

    The agitators are not asking for extra favour; they are not necessarily routing for more cake. They are asking for full and unfettered rights consequent of their citizenship. And to borrow from Nwodo, they want a federal republic of Nigeria collectively owed by Nigerians as opposed to one that would be perceived as “the private property of one group or groups of ethnic groups depending on who was in office”.

  • The rich are also poor

    It was the kind of news that was no news.  What the Oxfam International’s Inequality report said was not news to many Nigerians. The report, released on May 17, stated that the combined wealth of five richest Nigerians, put at $29.9 billion, could end extreme poverty in the country. The report, titled ‘Inequality in Nigeria, Exploring the Drivers,’ highlighted the immense and increasing gap between the stinking rich and the stinking poor in Nigeria. Oxfam is “an international confederation of charitable organisations focused on the alleviation of global poverty.”

    Who are these super-rich five whose prosperity could make a difference to the landscape of poverty?  Quoting Forbes, the agency listed the five richest Nigerians as Aliko Dangote, with a net worth $14.4bn; Mike Adenuga, $9.9bn; Femi Otedola, $1.85bn; Folorunsho Alakija, $1.55bn; and Abdulsamad Rabiu, $1.1bn.

    It is thought-provoking that the report said 112 million Nigerians lived in abject poverty, and that the richest man in Nigeria earned 8,000 times more in one day than a poor citizen would spend on basic needs in a year. The report listed Nigeria as one of the few countries where the number of people living in poverty was on the increase despite the growth of the economy, adding that 69 per cent of citizens in the North-East states were living below the poverty line, compared with 49 per cent in the South-West.

    These identified five filthy rich Nigerians may need to enlighten their compatriots, especially the filthy poor, on what they consider to be the purpose of wealth, or what they think should be the point of prosperity. Beyond the phenomenal and dazzling affluence of these Nigerians, and the international focus on their billions of dollars, the question must be asked: How has the country which provided the space for their outstanding success benefited concretely from their deep pockets? In other words, what efforts have they made to help their poor compatriots rise materially?

    Perhaps more fundamentally, it is important to reflect on not only the concept of social responsibility, but also the idea of wealth responsibility or the social duty of the wealthy.  It is illuminating that the legendary US billionaire, Bill Gates, named the world’s richest man by Forbes, provided what may be regarded as a useful guiding principle for the super-rich. He said in an interview: “I’ve been very lucky, and therefore I owe it to try and reduce the inequity in the world. And that’s kind of a religious belief. I mean, it’s at least a moral belief.”

    It is noteworthy that Gates initiated The Giving Pledge campaign in 2010 with co-US billionaire Warren Buffet. This is officially described as “an effort to invite the wealthiest individuals and families in the world to commit to giving the majority of their wealth to philanthropy.”  It is noteworthy that the pledge is “a moral commitment to give,” and “the donation can happen either during the lifetime or after the death of the donor.”   A report said: “An estimate of the contribution promised by the first 40 donors, based on their aggregate wealth as at August 2010, was at least $125 billion…As of April 28, 2011, 69 billionaires had joined the campaign and pledged to give 50% or more of their wealth to charity…As of January 2015, 128 billionaire or former billionaire individuals and couples have signed the pledge.”

    What are Nigeria’s Forbes billionaires doing?  Or perhaps more significantly, what are they thinking of doing? It cannot be enough to luxuriate in luxury, without a thought for the wretched of the country. However, it may be observed that the business of redeeming the country’s numerous poor is probably too critical to be left to what the super-rich might be thinking of doing or what they could do based on their thinking. The poverty of the affluent may be that they are not thinking of doing something or anything for the poor, or that they are doing little or nothing for the poor.

    The Oxfam report also alleged that public office holders stole an estimated sum of $20tn from the treasury between 1960 and 2005. “Despite being Africa’s biggest economy, the share of the national budget allocated to education, health and social protection is one of the lowest in the region,” said the report.  It added:  “In 2012, Nigeria spent just 6.5 per cent of its national budget on education and just 3.5 per cent on health. By comparison, Ghana spent 18.5 per cent and 12.8 per cent, respectively in 2015. As a result, 57 million Nigerians lack safe water, over 130 million lack adequate sanitation and the country has more than 10 million children out of school.”

    The portrait of indigence and its consequences is an inexcusably tragic irony for an oil-rich country, and puts a huge question mark on not only the quality of governance at all political levels in the country, but also the quality of the social responsibility of the rich.  It goes without saying that the country’s poor deserve an urgent solution.

    The overriding concern is whether the people in power and the people who have the power of money are sufficiently interested in providing poverty-reducing opportunities, or even whether they care about anything beyond their pockets. In the final analysis, the picture is that the country’s poor languish at a hard place between the prosperity of power and the power of prosperity.

    It is alarming that the Minister of State for Budget and National Planning, Mrs. Zainab Ahmed, responded to the report without appreciating its signification. The minister, who was represented by the Director of International Cooperation in the ministry, Mr. Eloho Samuel, said: “I was worried by the language, tone and style of the report, and this made me to ask what was at the back of the mind of the authors when the report was being written? Oxfam needs to tune the report and put in an element of diplomacy. The methodology used in the report also raises some questions. Is it for empirical or theoretical purpose? Oxfam needs to tell us in the report what it intends to achieve, what data was gathered, where it was gathered, the sample size and the uses of the data.”

    Ahmed continued: “When I looked at the report, I was worried about certain concepts such as ‘who are the elite?’ There was no definition of terms, such as elite and poverty. More worrisome is if the report falls into the hands of aggrieved individuals, how would they react?

    This is a big question. How would the people react to the news that is no news? There is no doubt that there is a ticking time bomb, which means a bomb blast is predictable.

  • How not to make a hero

    How not to make a hero

    In demeanour, he does not stoke a crowd. His rhetoric, even when on fire, does not burn down a leaf. He walks even with dignity, like one accustomed to the deference of crowds. He calls himself a Jew, in the pious not in the symbolic terms that accommodates modern Christians. Bespectacled, and sometimes with a walking stick and a fan, he conveys the carriage of an elder even though he is in his middle years.

    When he addresses a crowd, Nnamdi Kanu comes away more as a balm than an argument. Maybe that is why he is dangerous. Men do not have to carry the fierce visage and towering diction of an Odumegwu Ojukwu to send shudder to a ruling elite. After all, Awo had no gift of the garb in the 1960’s when he soared in the courts and in rallies. The soft-spoken swagger of the Ikenne denizen piqued the men of power enough to consign him to the confines of solitude. The power of suggestion sometimes comes in the conviction of kings than in the laws of the monarchy. De Gaulle was no orator. Neither was Washington. Pol Pot had a silky voice.

    Whether we like it or not, we have made Nnamdi Kanu into a substance, from being a mere agitator in the shadows. He no longer is a poison-free serpent lurking in the hedges of Nigerian unity. His neck sprouts out, his tongue forked, venom drips. He has become more than a shadow of a titan, if a budding one.

    It was not his doing. During the Goodluck Jonathan years, we could have called him a thing without a sting. If you thought so, you no longer think so after what happened in the southeast about a week ago. IPOB called the indigenous people of Biafra to stay home. Not since June 12, when a certain Ubani skulked the government of the day, had a people shrunken out of daylight. Some say it was out of the fear of punishment. Others counter that it was an act of conscientious solidarity. Whatever it was, Igbos abandoned profits for cause. The last time they started it, 30 months of gunshots, and bombs, and fratricidal dislocations turned Nigeria into a hump of a nation. About a week ago, the verve of Onitsha market, the cacophony of Owerri streets, the hum of Umuahia offices paid homage with their silences to the subversion of a former nonstarter.

    He might have been nothing, if the Igbo elite were not compelled, including the erudite Pat Utomi, to ask the federal government to release the man. He was a subvert, an anarchist even, a lawless, demoniac spirit in the federation. But the nation had no right to subvert his rights in the pursuit of the purity of right in the country. We made him a hero by undermining a straightforward adherence to our own law. If we wanted to prosecute him, it meant we had the law on our side. But if we overturned that law, we had no superior moral fibre or constitutional claim. We made Kanu our equal in impunity.

    So, while he was in detention, we lionised him. We made him a rebel with a cause, and he became caustic by the hour. His people cried for him, wielded sticks and machetes for him, died for him. If that is not how a cause grows into myth, how else?

    Even a certain story gained momentum when his handshake reportedly healed somebody of stomach ache. Is that not how legends are made? In historical tales, we read of men who die as gods. In our age of celebrity, we are like the stories of the Greek myths where stalwarts live as gods. If Ogun, Oya, Sango, all died into deity, we are not so patient. In our lifetime, some Nigerians saw Awo in the moon. Black Scorpion, who stung Biafra many a time vanished in the battlefield. In the slavery era, a black man equated Abraham Lincoln with Jesus, saying “he walk the earth like de Lord.” French philosopher Montaigne mused in one of his seminal essays why the greatest general of all time had a reputation of giving off a scent while he sprinkled no oil on his body. He was, by nature, a scented genius. So lofty was Alexander the Great that he did not need a “cologne” to please the nostrils.

    Little anoints Kanu as a force more than the court’s decision to grant him bail. Why is Sambo Dasuki still sulking behind bars? Why is the Shiite leader Ibrahim El Zakzaky not out on Zaria alleys? They were three whom the federal government have locked up against their rights. Forget the farce of conditions that the judge gave Kanu. It was an act to save the faces of a besieged judiciary. It was also to bow to the pressure of the streets and turbulence of media onslaughts. Kanu has become a hot piece of yam we must either eat or leave on the plate.

    He might not have been a gentleman. He might not have been one of the men to stand up to the creme-de-la-creme of the Nigerian society. But we have, by our own fear of him, made him an icon of sorts. When Buhari won the election and became president, he looked at the man with contempt. It was naïve, and he must take responsibility for alienating a people he should have clasped into his bosom, the same way the DSS has given his Katsina home the divine right to gulp the lion’s share of recruits into the intelligence agency. Nothing but limp logic has tried to explain away that lopsided extravaganza.

    Rebels are not always for good causes even when they ride populist support. U.S. confederate general Robert Lee was described as “legend incarnate” and a gentleman. He led forces to support what he and his cohorts called state’s rights. But it was a right to uphold slavery in a society that described blacks as a fraction of the human soul. Some top southern politicians still echo that toxic euphemism. Even Reagan roared his support for state’s rights. Trump is the modern-day champion.

    The rebirth of Biafran anger must be traced to our habitual contempt to solve our crisis. We keep hopping from crisis to another, hoping they will just go away. Yakubu Gowon said there were no winners or losers. The Igbo believe they have been treated as losers, a cry that was almost non-existent when Jonathan, who called himself Ebele, garlanded them with choice positions. The Igbo caulked voices of dissent. They felt part of the governing elite. A Kanu would have been anathema then. He is an item today because Buhari made him.

    How Buhari handled Kanu and the Biafran uproar is an example of how not to make a hero, especially in the aftermath of the relative quieting of Niger Delta militancy.