The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  • Modu Sheriff’s PDP

    The furore over the appointment of former Borno State governor, Ali Modu Sheriff as the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party PDP seems to have fizzled out unilaterally. Though a forum of ex-ministers of the PDP had stridently opposed his emergence on the ground he is not the kind of person the party needed to re-invent itself at this challenging moment, all indications are that Sheriff’s appointment has come to stay.

    He has been charged with the duty of preparing a timetable for the national convention of the party by May during which its substantive national chairman is expected to emerge. Apparently conscious of the criticisms that trailed his appointment, Sheriff has said he will not stay beyond the stipulations of his party’s constitution. If that constitution is strictly adhered to, he is expected to exit that office this month when the tenure of the last substantive chairman, Adamu Mu’azu will expire.

    But the mandate given him by the national leadership of the party seems to have foreclosed any idea of his vacating that office before May. Sheriff appears conscious of this fact. And has used every opportunity to reassure party members especially those opposed to him that he is capable of leading the party to glory. He even boasted that the controversy and panic over his appointment was because the leadership of the ruling party is aware of his capacity to unite the PDP and also bring back those who defected to the APC.

    But he failed to disclose why his emergence allegedly sent the ruling party panicking. Perhaps, there are things he knows that are not readily available to the public. If there was full disclosure, we would have been in a position to know the extent to which his credentials would positively impact on the fortunes of PDP which at the moment, is reeling under credibility crisis due to the high number of its leaders arraigned for allegedly milking the nation dry.

    No doubt, the PDP is currently facing the greatest challenge of its life- a crisis of relevance. Not only did it lose the last election after staying in power for 16 years, it has been accused of running down the economy. The current regime has used every opportunity at its disposal to highlight the mismanagement of the nation’s economy during the years they held sway and this is bound to create credibility problems for that party.

    How far Sheriff and leaders of his party can go to reverse this waning image perception and pull a big surprise come 2019, is left to be seen. He may have to initiate a number of far-reaching actions in several fronts with a large measure of success to be able to make a head way. For now, that possibility is still within the realm of conjecture.

    But Sheriff appears to have hit at the crux of the recurring crisis in his party when he said last week that PDP will not be run by impunity with a promise to return the party to its real owners such that everybody will be happy. Hear him: “By the time we finish congress, everybody will be happy. PDP will not be run by impunity. The party will be returned to its owners”.

    By this, he seems to have recognized that one of the biggest challenges of the party – a challenge that brought it to its current pass – has been its utter disregard for internal democracy within its fold. Not only were the people- the real owners of the party serially shunted out in the election of their leaders at all levels, the congresses of the party were manipulated to achieve predetermined outcome oftentimes resulting to the imposition of unpopular candidates.

    There was also the ruinous feeling the party could field any manner of candidate and still win in elections that are expected to be manipulated given its control of the coercive apparatus of the state. Recurring complaints by members of lack of internal democracy and impunity in the party were treated with scant disregard. Ironically, these were some of the grievance of those governors who decamped from the party to the APC shortly before the elections – a move that largely led to its loss in that election.

    If the PDP is now singing the new song of internal democracy, it is compelled to do so by the inevitability of the situation in which it has now found itself. It seems to have no other choice than allow the people take control of electing those to preside over the affairs of the party at all levels. It either allows internal democracy to reign supreme or go under. That is the foreboding reality. The things that make internal democracy inevitable within the party are already here.

    So Sheriff is neither saying anything new nor does he have an alternative than to allow the rules of democracy to play out. Even then, as a party whose slogan is ‘power to the people’, it is a huge contradiction that it has been serially found wanting on this basic principle. Since old habits die slowly, it may not surprise anyone that there may be some within the party who because of their privileged positions would still want the decadent order.

    That would be at a great expense of the party. Those who want the PDP to survive as a virile opposition may not be doing so out of their love for that party but for the foreboding prospects of the nation sliding to a one party state. For whatever misgivings we may have for that party especially given its handling of the nation’s affairs in the last few years, it is still vital that it is in such strength of health that it can provide credible opposition to the ruling party.

    This will strengthen democracy given the plurality of choices it will provide to the electorate especially in a clime with the tendency for people to gravitate towards the ruling party. Before now, it has been argued in some quarters that Africans do not tolerate opposition. That was why we had some people canvassing for benevolent dictatorship and all manner of contraptions as a way out of the cycle of political instability that characterized the continent a couple of years ago.

    Though some progress has been recorded within the continent in the rungs of the democracy ladder, still palpable evidence of this tendency to be with the ruling party is there. The plethora of decamping from the PDP to the APC says it all. It is amazing how key party leaders who hugely benefited while the PDP was in power have since after the elections been decamping as if principles and party ideology meant very little to them.

    Yes, it is still part of democracy for anyone to decide which political party to identify with. But the way our politicians have exercised that right seems to amplify the view that Africans have little place for opposition. What this suggests is that there is a natural tendency in this clime for gravitation towards a one party state.

    Unless conscious efforts are mounted by all institutions to check this slide, we are bound to have problems with the kind of democracy we run. This fear was real during the days the PDP held sway. It is also no less relevant now. The INEC and all the arms of the government have a crucial role to play to ensure that this tendency does not become a self-fulfilling prophesy. Free, fair and credible elections represent the irreducible decimal out of this danger.

    That danger was at an all time high before the Supreme Court delivered its judgments in the governorship election petitions in Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Delta states- states considered key to the strength of the PDP given the resources available them. Though those judgments attracted a barrage of criticisms bordering on their alleged inability to give justice to the petitioners through its reliance on legal technicalities, they seem to have opened a new window for the PDP to survive.

    Perhaps, had they gone the other way, the PDP would have been in a very feeble position to mount credible opposition. That could have been the undoing of democracy on these shores. So the issue of justice copiously canvassed to fault the Supreme Court judgments in those governorship petitions, could find counterbalance in the unintended prospects of the rulings to stabilize multi-party democracy in this country. If they are termed political judgments, the end may have justified the means as democracy will be better for it.

  • Native doctors and their cross

    Caught in the crossfire of a battle between the Osun State government and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) opposition, native doctors must be wondering about a cross they have to bear. It is a heavy cross indeed.

    The weight of the cross was highlighted by the Osun State chapter of the PDP which alleged that Governor Rauf Aregbesola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) was planning to sack striking doctors in the state and replace them with traditional healers. The party’s spokesman, Diran Odeyemi, said in a statement on February 21: “Now that all the ill-conceived measures to cow the doctors have failed and the Plan “B” of replacing them with new intakes had been frustrated by the Nigeria Medical Association (NMA), Governor Aregbesola, wants to experiment with the use of native doctors.”

    The reaction of the Osun State government didn’t reduce the weight of the cross. A statement by the Director, Bureau of Communication and Strategy, Office of the Governor, Semiu Okanlawon, said: “Weird is the logic of PDP and nothing can change the illogical reasoning of people whose illogical ways brought Nigeria to her present predicament. Because of those who abandoned their jobs as a result of seemingly irreconcilable terms, the government has left no one in doubt on its efforts to deploy doctors from the state Ministry of Health, doctors in the Security agencies in the state to complement the consultants and local governments’ doctors who are working.”  The statement added: “The native doctors’ idea is in the imagination of those who are touting it and honestly such thoughts can only come from PDP and no other party on earth. It amounts to a waste of time not to ignore PDP.”

    This unflattering exchange should fuel the efforts of the National Association of Nigerian Traditional Medicine Practitioners (NANTMP) to lessen the burden native doctors carry. Interestingly, NANTMP President Prof. Omon Oleabhiele reportedly called for a traditional medicine bill at an event organised by the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) to mark the 2015 African Traditional Medicine (ATM) Day in Lagos State. Oleabhiele urged the National Assembly to sponsor a bill in support of traditional medicine and its practitioners in the country. He also argued for the creation of a Traditional Medicine Board in all the states of the federation for the regulation of traditional medicine.

    It is an indication of the importance of traditional medicine and traditional healers that since 2003 African Traditional Medicine Day has been observed every year on August 31. Ministers of Health adopted the relevant resolution at the 50th session of the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Committee for Africa in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. The special day is meant to promote the critical role of traditional medicine in Africa.

    African traditional medicine has been described as “the African indigenous system of health care”.  It has been argued that “In fact, the frequently quoted statement that 85 per cent of the people in Africa use traditional medicine is an understatement because this figure is much higher and continues to increase”.

    A picture by M. Kofi-Tsekpo illustrates the thinking about African traditional medicine at decision-making levels since the 1970s: “At the Alma Atta Declaration of 1978, it was resolved that traditional medicine had to be incorporated in the health care systems in developing countries if the objective of the “Health for All by the Year 2000” was to be realised. Notwithstanding this strategy, African countries did not come near the objective at the end of the 20th century. Therefore, the Member States of the WHO African Region adopted a resolution in 2000 called “Promoting the role of traditional medicine in health care systems: A strategy for the African Region”. This strategy provides for the institutionalisation of traditional medicine in health care systems of the member states of the WHO African Region. Furthermore, the OAU (African Union) Heads of State and Government declared the period 2000 – 2010 as the African Decade on African Traditional Medicine. In addition, the Director General of the World Health Organization also declared 31st August every year as African Traditional Medicine Day. All these declarations signify the importance and the approval by Governments and international institutions of the need to institutionalise African traditional medicine in health care. Therefore the mechanisms for institutionalisation have to be developed to make these resolutions a reality.”

    Clearly, the unfavourable perception of Nigerian traditional medicine reflected in the comments of the combatants in Osun State has to do with its infirm institutionalisation in Nigeria’s health care system. The clash shows that the establishment of NANTMP in December 2006 by the Federal Government through the Federal Ministry of Health, although well-intentioned, has not made traditional medicine more acceptable at formal levels of governance in the country. At the time, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was the President and Prof. Eyitayo Lambo was the Minister of Health.

    A NANTMP communiqué is worth quoting: “We thank the Governors of the states that have formed the Traditional Medicine Board in their states such as Edo, Lagos, Anambra and Bauchi states. We urge other Governors whose Commissioners of Health and State House of Assembly have not created the Traditional Medicine Board to kindly request them to do so with dispatch.”

    The body added: ”We also pray the Governors to ensure that genuine and registered members of the NANTMP be made Chairmen and members of the Board to protect the interest of the practice, unlike the present practice in some states whereby Medical Doctors and Pharmacists are made Chairmen of Traditional Medicine Board. What does a Medical Doctor who doesn’t want traditional medicine to be given to his patient want to do in a Board that is set up for regulation and promotion of Traditional Medicine Practice?”

    If native doctors are formally integrated into the country’s health care system, there won’t be this kind of politically motivated attempt by the Osun State PDP to ridicule their role as healers. Also, there won’t be this kind of defensive effort by the state government, which had the effect of ridiculing traditional medicine practitioners.

  • Arewa/Ohanaeze parley

    An event of immense significance for the overall progress of this country took place last week in Enugu, Enugu State. It was a landmark parley between two of the nation’s key socio-cultural groups- the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) and the Ohaneze Ndigbo.

    Though that outing lacked the usual media blitz that should ordinarily accompany it, its absence did not in any way, whittle down its larger heuristics especially at this point  when ethnic, primordial and religious cleavages seem to be on high ascendancy. Given the foreboding scenario, it remains largely curious why such an important event attracted very little or no media attention.

    It is either the organizers opted to keep the media off that symbolic outing or the media did not quite appreciate the larger implications of socio-political groups interfacing on how to move the country forward especially in view of our current experiences.

    Be that as it may, the meeting came out successful as its outcome, made available through a communiqué signed by the national chairman of ACF, Alhaji Ibrahim Coommasie and national president of the Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Gary Enwo-Igariwey respectively, vividly indicates. The two groups while reaffirming their belief in the corporate existence of Nigeria with justice, fairness and equity to all, pledged their total support for the war against terrorism and corruption even as they urged all citizens to cooperate with the federal government in these areas. They also resolved to meet regularly to discuss the state of the nation and forward their decisions to the federal government to aid good and equitable governance.

    The meeting is symbolic in more ways than one. Perhaps, it is the first time in recent times the ACF and the Ohanaeze Ndigbo will be putting heads together to share each others’ views and feelings on the multifarious problems buffeting the country. For another, most of the objectives they set out to achieve are at the root of the cycle of instability which this nation has had to contend with since independence. Coming from the ethnic nationalities themselves, the initiative gives a rare of hope that there may be light at the end of the tunnel. This should be something to cheer.

    Yet for another, the visionary outing came at a time centrifugal forces have been on top gear such that led two former heads of state to lament that even those who have before now, been ascribed the role of patriots were beginning to question the continued basis for the unity and indivisibility of the country.

    That was about two years back when the resort to parochial and primordial attachments became the order of the day. That was at the time when a study group in the United States of America (US) predicated that Nigeria would break up come the 2015 elections. Events prior to that election did not help matters as threats and counter threat from groups on the dire consequences that awaited the country should any of the contending forces fail to win that election held sway. By divine providence however, that doomsday prediction failed to materialize due to the acceptance of defeat by the government in power- a feat that attracted acclaim from world leaders.

    But not much has changed in terms of the dispositions and loyalty of the various nationalities to the Nigerian state. Not only is the war against the Boko Haram insurgency that is bent on levying an Islamic state on the country still on, separatist tendencies still hold sway as evident from the rise in tempo of agitations for the sovereign state of Biafra and the renewed blowing up of oil installations in the Niger Delta region. There is also, a pervading air of mutual suspicion, hate and distrust among the nationalities.

    All these are palpable signs of the impatience and dissatisfaction of the federating units with the capacity of the system to do justice to the subsisting units. Matters are not remedied by the ambivalence of the Buhari regime on the implementation of the report of the National Constitutional Conference convened during the last administration- a conference seen by many as holding the ace for much of the nation’s problems.

    In the absence of any concrete commitment to the implementation of that report and increased impatience of the inclusive units with extant structure of the federation leading to separatist agitations or threats, the bottom up initiative of the ACF and Ohanaeze to solving the fission within the polity, offers another veritable window.

    They hit the kernel of the sources of this schism when they spoke of their commitment to the corporate existence of Nigeria where justice, fairness and equity will reign supreme. The purport of this resolution is that the country can only count on the loyalty of its citizens and make real progress when it is seen to be just, fair and guarantees equity to all citizens. These are the irreducible decimals the component units demand from those who preside over our national affairs.

    It is also an admission that much of the destabilizing tendencies we have witnessed in recent times derive in the main, from the glaring inability of the central government to guarantee these minimum conditions for co-habitation. It is heart-warming that the groups resolved to meet regularly to brainstorm on the state of the nation and pass their recommendation to the government to aid good and equitable governance.

    In this wise, they intend to expand the meeting to involve the Afenifere, the Itsekiri, Urhobo, South-South Peoples’ Assembly and all ethnic nationalities to find common ground on all issues stoking division amongst them. It is their calculation that consensus reached at such meetings when implemented by the government, would go at length to eliminate sources of friction and mistrust among our diverse peoples.

    If conducted with a high sense of patriotism and responsibility, the enlarged meeting of ethnic nationalities may be the elixir out of the fissiparous tendencies that have made national integration very elusive on these shores. Not surprisingly, in the absence of that sense of common belonging and identity, the primordial units have had to compete with the government for the loyalty of the citizens. Today, despite all posturing and pretensions, the influence of these parochial loyalty centres on the citizens is still very pervasive.

    They subsist due to lack of confidence in the ability and capacity of the central authority to guarantee justice, fairness and equity to the component units. A situation where certain sections feel the country belongs to them or where certain positions are reserved for some people is a negation of a just, fair and equitable order.

    Such a system cannot make for stability and progress. And in it can be located most of the nation’s multifarious problems- the pervading corruption, centrifugal tendencies and the inability to imbue a sense of nationalism in all. That also accounts for the loose moral bearing associated with affairs that impinge on the civic public.

    Incidentally, the elite have a penchant for parroting and grandstanding on these pristine principles. They are not lacking in identifying what needed to be done for us to make quick progress. But when it comes to the necessary sacrifice or compromises that will bring these ideals to fruition, parochial considerations and the tendency take undue advantage over others, overshadow all senses of rationality. That has been the problem.

    If the ethnic nationalities eschew this self-serving predilection; if they are genuinely committed to these irreducible decimals for order and good governance, and the government listens to them, then we are on the right track out of our woes. We now have a new window to tap the feelings of the people at the bottom to effect those necessary changes that are direly needed to build a nation where citizens will first see themselves as Nigerians rather than members of their ethnic groups. That challenge must be taken up by the government now.

  • The king reigneth

    The king reigneth

    His real name is not King. But his lifestyle was. He snagged the name to match the majesty of his position. His real name is Chukwuemeka Ezeugo. He had a regal life until he thought everything he did was legal.

    Silence had drowned his drama of about a decade ago until the Supreme Court’s gavel fell. Death by hanging to the king. Some are rejoicing. Others are mourning. But most of these emotions are alive for the wrong reasons.

    Those who are rejoicing are thinking revenge, or revenge as justice. Those who are mourning are his followers, although some of them think that he will never die. Did Jesus not say, “some of you will never taste of death?”

    Those who are thinking revenge as justice miss the point. The man deserves to be punished, but it has nothing to do with the future. A hanged king will not wipe out the sort of followers of the Christian Praying Assembly. He will die, but the gullible will crave for and believe in the coming of another king. In fact, the dying of a king will only pave the way for another.

    It is like the endless yearning for a hero. We seek them. They materialise and answer our material needs. It does not matter that their lifestyles and preaching contradict each other. They are human when they sin, but they are divine when they preach. For their followers, the dichotomy is easy. They put the men of God in context and they are at peace with God.

    Reverend King was one of such lucky fellows. Until last week, that is. He was like the rich man in the story of Lazarus. He was on the table that flourished with the opulent cuisine, and wine, and fruits. Lazarus is not angry. He is grateful for a place on the floor. In his benevolent plenty, the rich man tolerates him in spite of his ruffian’s appearance and ulcerous sores. Crumbs drop from the rich man’s table and sustain the humble mendicant.

    Reverend King was not only a preacher of the word. He was a lecher of the world. He combined the flesh and spirit to win over the people for God. For those who say he was a lecher and a fake, his followers will point to examples of miracles, of their changed lives, of his spiritual gifts. Some will say he healed them of cancer. He made them rich. They found love, they found family. They found joy. So, argue with them, and you fail against the evidence of their eyes.

    Men like King combine what Dostoyevsky, in his Brothers Karamazov, sees as the trifecta of control: authority, mystery and miracle. Hence the Russian novelist writes, “anyone who can appease a man’s conscience can take his freedom.”

    Such anecdotes lift the man on the throne. Everything he says becomes everything God says. Mysticism overthrows materiality. He lived the glamour life. Mansion. Food. Limousines. Women. Wine. The blessing of the Lord maketh rich. Who can argue with that? If you tell the adherents that God that made you rich does not condone a pastor that makes you a fool. They will say they are no fools. They believe in God and his prophet, so their lives are established. And, a God that says thou shall not kill would not condone a servant who burns a person alive, pouring petrol on the flesh and his eyes still light up with righteous indignation. They will say the Lord works in a mysterious way. It is wrong to question the servant of God.

    Then you quote Prophet Jeremiah: “A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land. The prophets prophesy falsely and the priests bear rule by their means, and my people love to have it so.” Or you quote Jesus: “They be blind leaders of the blind. If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the dish.” Or Isaiah: “The leaders of these people cause them to err, and they that are led of them are destroyed.”

    They will merely respond that you quote the Bible upside down. So the solution is not in hanging the leaders like King and others who mislead.

    Around the world we have such groups, and they have not stopped erupting. We had Jim Jones and we have many around. A few years ago, some students in Obafemi Awolowo University waxed into a suicidal group. In Colorado, a cult leader, Warren Jeff, led his cult from prison. The evisceration of one group does not destroy its rebirth.

    Such leaders have special gifts, which for lack of a better word, we call charisma. They have, what the Bible calls appearance of holiness. They have smooth tongue, vast knowledge pool, suave manners, intuition, street wisdom, and they are clever risk takers. Those who are not suave have the façade of noble rascals, strong, aggressive but strategically kind.

    Such pastors are still around, and it only takes the wise to discern the word from the sword of rascals. It is about religion, but it is not about religion alone. It is the people’s search for identity, for a place on earth. Once they meet that leader who can flatter their secret hopes, they yield. Like a smart Alec as suitor. The fair lady falls.

    Did we not see men of God ape Jonathan and even campaign for him? If they had vision, why did they not warn us about the filth in Jonathan’s cupboards, the billions stolen, the reckless fascination with filthy lucre? Were they asking us to vote in another season of kleptomania? Since the flood of revelations, none of the clerics has explained to their adherents how they led them to vote for thieves when the good books says, thou shall not steal. In spite of how bad things are, imagine if we would have Nigeria today if Jonathan got re-elected? I believe all the clerics who roared gospels to support Jonathan’s re-election owe everyone an explanation, or an apology! They have misquoted Romans Chapter 13 and distorted the term higher powers to mean all adherents should be subject to the government of the day when it means the church authority that does right.

    Many died. Families fell out of joint because of Jonathan-era thieving. Many followed apishly. They are not different from all the King’s brethren.

    And the solution is education? Not necessarily book education. I swear that Reverend King had well-read people as followers. Just like Jesus of Oyingbo who married mothers and daughters and their daughters of his own flesh. His incestuous holiness!

    The Islamic world has the same hobgoblin. An expert said some Western girls flocking to ISIS are merely sex-starved, seeking a romp with the “spirit.” King is no better than Yusuf who birthed Boko Haram.

    We need emotional education, psychological education. Jack was sent to school to learn to be a fool. Book education is not adequate. And it is not about religion alone. Our politics is full of it. People rally behind men who appeal to tribe and faith.

    We sometimes kid ourselves that because we are in a democratic era, men like King cannot con us. History tells us that moments of democratic impulse yield to the eruption of monarchs. In his great study, Michael Scott captured this in his book, From Democrats to Kings, where he tracks the downfall of Athens to the “epic rise of Alexander the Great.” Napoleon also prospered on mass movement.

    Whether King dies or lives, the king reigneth in the eyes of his followers.

  • The slaughter of kings

    The slaughter of kings

    Thank God for democracy. Thank God for kings. It is a contradiction that works well here. No matter how avidly we proclaim our republican virtues, we are, at heart, all royalists.

    The earlier we admit this to ourselves the better it is for us to make our so-called republic worth the while. Recently, a ranking of Yoruba monarchs stirred a little unease in some quarters. The Alake of Egbaland, Oba Adedotun Gbadebo, unveiled the hierarchy from his own point of view. He said the Ooni of Ife was numero uno, followed by the Alafin of Oyo and Oba of Benin respectively.

    In a brilliant but characteristically unwieldy rebuttal, Odia Ofeimun harks back home and anoints the Oba of Benin on the prime spot. Ofeimun begins by disavowing any fidelity to kings, and apes the chic fashion of calling oneself a republican.

    I am not interested in the hierarchy. But neither am I happy with the slaughter of kings. By the way, that phrase comes from the Bible where Abraham makes mincemeat of pagan kings.

    Since the British slaughtered our kings metaphorically to make Nigeria a colony, we have pretended to have outgrown them. But the wise among us know better. So, they engage the royals. We can recall the recent spat between Oyo State Governor, Abiola Ajimobi and the Olubadan-in-council over the elevation of the irritant Ladoja and other chiefs without regards to due process.

    It was billed as a standoff of two antipodal worlds. Modern versus ancient, republican versus royalist, bureaucratic versus traditional, the past versus the future, indigenous versus foreign.

    But the cards lay in the governor’s hands. The law gives him the power. He held his grounds. But some elders pitched in and they both etched peace and ended the furore. That was principally because the governor understood the intricacy of traditional mores. The matter was resolved with the understanding that their elevations held as long as they provided documents of their medical and security screening.

    Gov. Ajimobi showed a hand of cultural nuance and maturity rather than a modern radical in power. He did not act like President Kongi in Soyinka’s bleak play Kongi’s Harvest, who places the king under lock and key.

    But not long after, Ibadan tells us another story. The Olubadan dies and a transition beckons. But not to worry. There will be no night of long knives dripping with intrigues and backstabbing. No dark horses emerging, no permutations, no politicking, no underhand manoeuvres. Forget the tale of bribery from a chief. The rules shun the stealth of filthy lucre.

    Ibadan has a smooth transition. The successor is known and he will step right on the throne of the fathers once all rites are fulfilled. Yet Ibadan history is rooted in the republican principle. Founded on a highland, it gathered migrants from the wars bursting all over Yorubaland. The new citizens made themselves a new society with kings not based on the old ways. It was a town of generals. The men who rose were not of the royal blood line. They were swordsmen who shed blood for the new land. The Ogunmolas and Latosas earned their epaulets by gallantry.

    But the society has not ended up a democracy, but a feudal redoubt. That’s the irony. It is like Igboland, where kings are nothing, but it blends republican ethos with social rules that invoke a feudal milieu. In Ibadan, it is a sort of gerontocracy, where the oldest becomes king. It works and our politicians have called for a politics where rules work, not chaos. Not the power of the strong man.  In Ibadan, they teach us the supremacy of the rule of law.

    Unlike our politics where a transition leads to fear and trembling, and where in some kingdoms heads roll, Ibadan is easy. The departed Olubadan embodied the full persona of Nigerian power, and Gov. Ajimobi serenaded him as a soldier, politician, bureaucrat, king.

    All of that is in us. We may say we are no royalists. But we show it everyday. We bow to the elder. In Urhoboland, the younger says migwo, (I am on my knees) to the older person. The Onyisi syndrome is alive and well in Igboland. The Yoruba still gleefully prostrate. In weddings, a 30-year-old suitor prostrates to a two-year-old in-law, at least in theory. The baba gan refrain riffs through the culture. Ranka dede, a northern term of obsequious subordination, only became temporarily antiquated in the last election cycle when Buhari’s fans chanted Sai Baba.

    The top of all obeisance lies in the throne. It is the apex court of genuflection. It is only the king that cannot bow, a taboo that Soyinka hints at with revulsion in Kongi’s Harvest.

    In my first visit to the United Kingdom, a hotel hand was cross at me for ruffling a British currency note with the picture of the queen. Oliver Cromwell who presided over the killing of Charles 1 was not bold enough to decree a farewell to the monarchy. Part of the sanity of the British democracy comes from the stabilising awe of royalty.

    For all his republican craving, Napoleon Bonaparte crowned himself king in Rome and his seductress and wife Josephine as queen. In the United States, we see the appetite of royalty. Once, the Kennedy family was their unofficial royalty. In their absence, we have all forms of royalty, high like the imperfect Bush family, or low like the Kardashians. It is probably the reason America is the celebrity capital. As men seek gods, societies seek kings and princes. In fact, some Americans wanted George Washington to be crowned king. Others wanted him to reign as president till death. It is not for nothing that this celebrity fascination has drowned the world. In his novel, The Prince and the Pauper, Mark Twain, an American, emphasised the integrity of royalty by showing that a prince could never act as a pauper, or vice versa.

    In Yorubaland, a saying goes thus, “we cannot serve the father and also the son.” That has been used with the Awo clan. That is probably reinforced because the palaces in Yorubaland still retain a certain grandeur. We were all witnesses to President Jonathan’s peripatetic folly of begging about the palaces of the Southwest.

    I know many who say bad things about royalty in a democracy. If, for instance, chieftaincy titles were stopped, they would be the first to cry foul.

    Rather than disavow royalty, we should learn how to make it work. We already have it in the way we organise our families, villages, local government, politics, business, etc. Rather than deny, let us explore it and make something out of it as Governor Ajimobi did. We may devise a new society and ideology from it. Just maybe. We may call it royal democracy. As we have social democrats, Christian democrats, etc, we may have royal democrats. Rather than savage the kings, we could salvage a system.

  • Temple of buyers and sellers

    WHERE justice can be bought and sold cannot be called the temple of justice. It may be more appropriately labelled as the market of justice.  A temple is not a place for buying and selling, except for those who are controlled by market forces.

    The temple concept is at the core of the justice business, which is not to suggest that justice delivery is a business activity. But when the pure idea is corrupted by impurities and justice becomes buyable and sellable, the business side prevails to the detriment of justice.

    This is the picture as lawyers and judges in the country collectively face an ironic public trial on account of the spotlight on the putrefying underbelly of their work.

    It is a sign of the times that some lawyers, provoked by group stigmatisation, have formed a collective of “Concerned Lawyers” to reject the stigma. The lawyers, led by activist lawyer Femi Falana (SAN), on February 18 took their case to the Lagos office of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) where they were received by EFCC Chairman Ibrahim Magu.

    Interestingly, Falana said to Magu:  “We also want to urge you to beware not to fall into the fallacy of generalisation. There are bad lawyers and judges, but there are also good ones.” This logic is understandable, but perhaps the greater logic is that justice is too important to be left to the logic of good and bad. In other words, although the categorisation may be considered a fact of life, there should be no place for bad lawyers and judges in the temple of justice.

    Falana continued: “We are embarrassed by a few of our privileged colleagues who bribe judges, talk to them behind doors to pervert justice…We have a duty to this country as ministers in the temple of justice.”

     When a temple is corrupted by unholiness, there are unholy consequences. A portrait of corruption in the temple of justice was painted by no less a person than the Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee on Anti-Corruption War, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), in a recent interview.

    Sagay said: “When we talk of the judiciary, we are talking of judges. As far as I am concerned, the judiciary is not the most blameworthy. That is the truth of the matter. The most blameworthy are senior lawyers – a number of senior advocates who have made it a speciality; who have developed particular skills to kill corruption cases so that their clients, after many years of delays and frustrations of prosecution, end up going away with their loot. And such lawyers, of course, share in the proceeds of crime. They get a part of the loot and that is why you see them buying private jets and so on. That amount of money from the proceeds of crime has completely blunted their consciences and they are as active as the accused persons – the looters – in trying to protect the loot because part of the loot now belongs to them by association.”

    Sagay added: “What I am saying, therefore, is that this is where it starts. These are the people who carry huge sums of money behind chambers to judges. They are the ones who corrupt judges. Really, if the struggle is going to be effective, we have to mark down the lawyers who are behind all these, not just judges. In fact, there are some retired judges too that are in the game. They are called consultants and they carry huge sums of money to their juniors they left behind in the judiciary and use their influence to get them to simply abandon justice and do the bidding of corrupt persons. It is a very serious situation. But, as I said, the very first port of call would be the lawyers that are behind it. Right now, they are doing it without control; they are doing it without consequences…”

    Relevant to this background, and perhaps a momentous test case, is the ongoing drama involving Lagos lawyer Ricky Tarfa (SAN) who is accused of willfully obstructing two officers of the EFCC, Moses Awolusi and Sanusi Mohammed, from arresting Gnanhoue Sourou and Nazaire Odeste, Benin Republic nationals suspected to have committed economic and financial crimes.  Also, and perhaps more significantly, Tarfa is alleged to have engaged in improper communication with Justice M. N. Yunusa of the Federal High Court, Lagos, and said to have sent money to him, while the case between the EFCC and two others was pending before the judge.

    Even more damaging is the EFFC’s allegation that Tarfa’s law firm made a habit of asking the Chief Registrar of the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court to assign his cases to Justice M. N. Yunusa, suggesting an unseemly rapport between him and the particular judge.

    Imagine a defence team made up of 99 lawyers, including 32 Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN). This curiously large team of defenders of Tarfa was announced at a Lagos High Court in Igbosere on February 16. Was the intention to intimidate the judge with an army of lawyers, senior and not-so-senior? The trial judge reportedly “bemoaned the number of counsel” in court for the defendant.  She also noted that there was no need for such mega support which she interpreted as harassment and intimidation of the court. The judge’s observation is thought-provoking.

    There is no doubt that lawyers and judges have a defining duty to keep the temple of justice sacred. When the temple’s sacredness is desecrated, it is the beginning of the end not only for the temple but also for the society that depends on the temple for justice.

    There is no room for bad eggs in the temple of justice, and there is no argument for their accommodation. Justice is so socially pivotal that its devaluation is a societal minus; and the temple of justice should be so morally unassailable that only good eggs are allowable.

  • Foreign Fulani herdsmen

    During his interaction with farmers in Akure, Ondo State on the recurring attacks by Fulani herdsmen, the Inspector-General of Police (IG), Solomon Arase dropped a lead that should not be allowed to pass unnoticed. For, in that disclosure could be located the complex dimension clashes between local farmers and Fulani herdsmen have assumed in recent times.

    Perhaps also, that hint may proffer partial explanation for the increasing resort of Fulani herdsmen to such violent activities as armed robbery, kidnapping and the sacking of whole villages with sophisticated weaponry. Arase had in answer to a question from a farmer said, most troublesome herdsmen were not Nigerians but foreigners who entered the country with their cattle due to the porous borders.

    In his words, “Most of these herdsmen are not Nigerians. They are people from Mali, Chad who came into our system. So that is why we have to be careful. Our borders are porous. Predominantly, our own herdsmen are law abiding people”. He further said that when people come from outside with their cattle, we should not deny them entry because of ECOWAS protocol but at the same time, we should not allow them to embark on criminal activities

    The issues raised by the IG are as weighty as they are controversial. Though he may be hard put when tasked on statistical evidence of the correlation in the violence index between foreign and local herdsmen, nevertheless, there is no denying the fact that many of these herdsmen are foreigners from neighbouring countries. It will therefore amount to an undue dissipation of valuable energy to venture into the veracity or otherwise of which of the two classes of herdsmen are responsible for the rising criminality as corroborative data may not be readily available. For now, it is safer to presume that both share responsibility for the criminal activities that are now associated with Fulani herdsmen.

    However, there is no denying the fact that unhindered migration of foreign herdsmen and others into the country is not new. There are also issues of sanguinity, religious and cultural affinity which impose serious constraints in differentiating between Nigerian herdsmen and their foreign counterparts from Niger, Mali or Chad.  All these have had the combined effect of levying serious security challenges on this country. It is for the same reasons that we were encountering so much difficulty confronting the Boko Haram insurgency resulting in the formation of a multi-national military taskforce.

    It is hoped after the conclusion of the current war against insurgency in the north-east which shares borders with some of these countries; our government should undertake serious identification, demarcation and policing of the nation’s borders. A nation that does not know what happens at its various borders cannot in all seriousness, lay claim to sovereignty and inviolability of its territory.

    The IG attributed the relative ease with which foreigners including the herdsmen enter our country to porous borders and the ECOWAS protocol on free movement of peoples of member countries. But he went off tangent when he sought to convey the impression that the protocol allows foreign herdsmen or any other citizen of member countries to cross into our country with cattle or other items of trade without passing through some formalities. It is not exactly so.

    If they have been doing so, they operated illegally. For, no article of that protocol allows such unrestricted movement. Article 3(1) stipulates that “any citizen of the country who wishes to enter the territory of another member state shall be required to possess a valid travel document and international health certificate”. And this is further amplified in Article 3(2) which makes it mandatory for such citizens to enter the territory of that state through the official entry point free of visa requirement.

    What this implies is that those herdsmen from Niger and Chad have been entering the country illegally and therefore not covered by the ECOWAS protocol as the IG would want us to believe. It is one thing to admit that they entered the country illegally on account of our porous borders and entirely another thing to contend that we cannot deny them entry because of ECOWAS or that its protocol covers such illegal entry. It does not. If they must enter this country, they must satisfy the conditions laid down by the protocol for that purpose. In this context, we expect them to pass, together with their items of trade (cattle) armed with the stipulated documents through the official entry points into this country.

    For one, it enables member countries to keep a tab on all those who enter their territory. In these days of the transfer of all manner of communicable diseases (human and animal) from one country to another as was the case of the Ebola virus, no country can afford the fatal consequences of such unrestrained influx of aliens within its territories. Moreover, it comes with serious security repercussions as we are witnessing with the Boko Haram insurgency.

    Again, the ECOWAS protocol has yet to abolish tariff among member countries. So a lot of revenue that should accrue to this country in the form of duties on the herds of cattle ferried into it by the herdsmen is lost to the government. After all cattle rearing is a big time business. Those who bring their cattle into the country, apart from satisfying the veterinary standards required of their animals, must also be made to pay the necessary duty on them. All these will be in their breach if foreign Fulani herdsmen continue in their uncontrolled influx into this country on account of unmanned borders.

    Beyond these however, there are wider security dimensions to the revelation that most violence and criminality associated with the Fulani herdsmen are in fact perpetrated by their foreign Fulani kinsmen. In this wise, the unprovoked kidnapping of elder statesman, Chief Olu Falae right in his village and the kidnapping and subsequent killing of the Obi of Ubulu-Ukwu in Delta state may have been masterminded by foreign herdsmen. These incidents speak volumes on the mortal risks we now face.

    By the same inference, constant clashes in Benue State and many other parts of the country in which dangerous weapons were freely deployed and many killed with their villages sacked are largely the handiwork of these foreigners.  It is really interesting to hear this. It will imply we are really at the mercy of these herdsmen. If they could freely operate in the manner they have done in this country, then nobody is really safe. Not with the sophisticated weapons they now wield. Not with their presence in bushes at the nooks and crannies of the remotest villages of this country.

    The revelation will also bring to serious question some of the suggestions that have been put forward to resolve the main cause of friction between local farmers and the herdsmen- right over grazing land and destruction of crops of local farmers. Conceived this way, one will have issues with the suggestion that grazing routes or land should be mapped out for the herdsman from other peoples’ ancestral lands.

    Are we now going to make our ancestral lands available to Chadians or Malians to appease them not to attack and kill our people? What business do we have with their commercial business of cattle rearing which rakes in huge sums of money for them? Is it not a commercial venture for which the herdsmen should acquire land for that purpose?  If the government and the police are working out an arrangement to build ranches as the IG hinted, such ranches should be run as purely commercial businesses.

    Before then, our law enforcement agencies must apprehend herdsmen who enter the country illegally since they have been fingered as purveyors of the criminality that has smeared the image Fulani cattlemen.

  • Fest of the First State

    Fest of the First State

    Governor Akinwunmi Ambode inaugurated a committee to showcase Nigeria’s iconic city and state at 50 last week. To chair it is our own Wole Soyinka, whose trajectory has been tied to this city. Lagos deserves all the attention. It began, like New York, as a small trading post. It once was specially occupied by the British and later annexed, and then blossomed with the genius and fortitude of its people. It buoyed into a renaissance by the burgeoning presences of the Yoruba in the southwest.

    It has become over the years not only iconic, but a beachhead of progress. Nothing is authentically Nigerian until it is Lagosian. Governor Ambode knows that, and it cannot be a Nigerian fest alone. That is why he chose W.S., who will bring to bear the prowess of his imagination and the breadth of his influence to make the celebration a world-class showcase.

    Lagos has also had the example of the stellar governors beginning with Mobolaji Johnson up till the evolving saga of Ambode today.

    We await the fest of Nigeria’s first state.

     

  • Semantics of Boko Haram ‘defeat’

    Semantics of Boko Haram ‘defeat’

    It is difficult to ignore the narrative of Senator Baba Garbai (Borno Central) on the current state of the Boko Haram insurgency in Borno State. For one, he represents an important segment of the state’s senatorial districts which places him in a vantage position to monitor the facts on the ground and feelings of his constituents on the progress of the war.

    For another, he recently visited that constituency to commiserate with and share relief materials to those displaced by the murderous attacks of the insurgents which left 85 people dead with thousands displaced. When in the course of that visit, he cried out that insurgents are still present in more than 20 local government areas of the state, it was difficult to dismiss him with a wave of the hand.

    This is more so as he is not known to harbour any ulterior or political motive to have spoken the way he did. He must have spoken out of frustration due to the wide disparity between what he had previously been fed with and the stark realities on the ground.

    But he shocked the nation when he claimed that only the three local government areas of Maiduguri metropolis, Kwaya Kusar and Bayo are safe from Boko Haram menace due to strong presence of the military and police; while three others- Mobbar, Kala Balge and Abaddam are 100 per cent held by the insurgents.

    Apparently rattled by this, the Director of Defence Information Brig-Gen Rabe Abubakar and Borno State Governor, Kashim Shettima made spirited efforts to clarify the state of the war. Before then, President Buhari had in an interview with the BBC restated that Boko Haram insurgency has been “technically defeated”. He had also towards the end of last year, declared that Nigeria “has technically won the war” against Boko Haram.

    When prodded further by the BBC on the claim given recent attacks on Dalori and others, he said: “My own description is that they can no longer mobilize enough forces to attack police and army barracks and destroy aircraft like they used to do. But they can regroup and go after soft targets”.

    For Shettima, “in the past Boko Haram used to come in commando style to attack, seize and occupy communities and hold residents hostage and administer territories; that is occupation. We no longer have that in Borno”.

    Abubakar on his part said “attacks on soft targets do not translate to occupation of territories or some parts of Borno state or the North-East”.

    We shall examine the interpretations given by President Buhari, Shettima and Abubakar on progress in the war vis-à-vis what Garbai actually said. The senator’s view was that Boko Haram is still present in 20 local governments of Borno State. He mentioned the three local government areas that are in the full hands of the murderous sect. But Shettima and Abubakar want us to draw a line between Boko Haram seizing and occupying territories and Boko Haram attacking communities (soft targets). By their logic, the group no longer occupies communities, hold residents hostage and administer such territories. But they attack communities.

    The key terms here are occupation, administration of territories and holding residents hostage. And we are being made to believe the absence of all these constitute both the necessary and sufficient conditions to declare the war against insurgency in the North-East won. That is where the problem lies.

    Even if we admit this account of the story, how correct will it be to claim as the authorities have severally done that Boko Haram has been totally decimated? To what extent can we sustain the claim that the war has been technically won on account of these claims? Or, are those who attack communities without occupying and administering them as used to be the case; operating from the moon? Would it have been possible for a decimated rag-tag insurgent group to wreck the huge havoc that left Dalori and other communities, a former ghost of themselves if they do not occupy some space in that state?

    If these posers do not sufficiently shed light on the inherent contradictions in the verdict that the war on Boko Haram has been won, or the claim that the sect does not occupy any territory in Borno, the statement by the Nigerian Army last week in which they catalogued the successes they made in the fight speaks for itself. They gave a detailed account of the various Boko Haram camps they cleared and hundreds of civilian hostages they freed. At the terrorists’ camp in Bulagana, troops rescued 40 civilians held hostage there while at another in Bubumri village they killed 25 terrorists, captured eight and freed 103 hostages among others. There would have been no hostages to free or camps to clear, if the sect does not occupy any territory. That is the contradiction that has been laid bare.

    When you pair the above with the attacks the insurgents mounted in the last couple of weeks, the contention that they no longer occupy territories and therefore cannot mount serious attacks, breaks down irretrievably. So also is the conclusion that the war has been won since the assumptions on which it was premised, cannot stand empirical test.

    As evident from the account of the army, Boko Haram still has camps and harbours hostages in the state. If they do not control parts of the state, they would not have been in a position to detain the hostages freed by the army. That is just commonsensical. Even then, administering territories; attacking military and police barracks and holding residents’ hostage is not all there is to the war.

    The next issue copiously canvassed to support the alleged defeat is that they have been so decimated that they now take resort to attacking soft targets. By this, the impression is created that the so-called soft targets are of no serious consequence in the overall calculations of the war. Its corollary is that once it has come to attacking soft targets, then we can safely presume that the war has been largely or technically won.

    This cannot also stand especially given that the so-called soft targets were the main objects of attack by the insurgents at the budding stages of their campaign. Churches and other places of worship bore the brunt. The objective was to create maximum impact and instill fear in the people and they succeeded. Attacks on soft targets cannot be consigned to the realm of insignificance in the overall assessment of the progress of the war. Ipso facto, that war cannot be said to have been won when soft targets are again under unrestrained assault.

    Those who canvass this view seem to have lost sight of the reality that we are concerned with an asymmetrical warfare. Given the fact of the above, the argument that the war has been won because the insurgents are no longer in a position to attack police and military barracks or bring down aircrafts cannot fly. Of much concern in the overall assessment of the progress of the war is the relative ease with which the insurgents destroy, raze down, kill or abduct these soft targets.

    Beyond this, the problem that has brought the government to this pass is the issue of deadline and the attempt to make political capital of the fight. Had they not been a hurry to set a tenuous deadline for such a non conventional war as terrorism, perhaps they would not have found themselves in the current position of speaking from both sides of the mouth.

    For now, the advice of US Assistant Secretary, Bureau of African Affairs, Ms. Linda Thomas-Greenfield should suffice. She had while addressing US House of Representatives at the Capitol Visitor Center last week said “There are no overnight solutions. The challenge of defeating Boko Haram is going to require long term dedication to this effort”. I hope somebody is listening!

  • Hurricane Muhammed

    It may not be an extravagant exaggeration to paint General Murtala Muhammed as a hurricane. His brief rule as a military head of state in the 1970s had the intensity of a hurricane. So intense was his touch, and so consequential, that the effects and after-effects endure as the country remembers his assassination 40 years ago on February 13, 1976.

    Muhammed was 37 when he died after being shot by coupists who took advantage of his fatalism. He was under-protected on the road when his killers struck. The black Mercedes Benz saloon car in which he was shot on his way to work in Lagos lies in a museum with all the blood stains of the bloodshed. Muhammed’s Aide-De-Camp (ADC), Lieutenant Akintunde Akinsehinwa, was in the car with him and was also killed. The historically significant car is a grim signification of times when the gun was the governor.

    It is a striking irony that a military ruler could have been so carefree concerning his personal security that only a pistol carried by his orderly, who was also in the car, suggested protection concerns. It is curious that Muhammed apparently underestimated his vulnerability, despite his leadership style that attracted hostility from enemies of his messianic zeal and the change he symbolised.

    The failure of the coup attempt led by Lt. Col Buka Suka Dimka, and   Muhammed’s succession by the thenChief of Staff, Supreme HQ, Olusegun Obasanjo, trigger reflections on what might have been and what might not have been.

    What if the coup attempt had succeeded? What if someone else, not Obasanjo, had succeeded Muhammed? What if Obasanjo did not have greatness thrust upon him at that critical juncture?  It may be said that the country’s political trajectory since Muhammed’s assassination cannot be divorced from his assassination.

    After the hurricane, there is The Hurricane, a new book on Muhammed by Taiwo Ogundipe, which will be presented on February 20 at the Coronation Hall, Government House, Kano. The book launch is part of activities organised by the Kano State government to mark the 40th anniversary of Muhammed’s assassination.

    The author said in a statement: ”To date, most of the books that have been written by some of the major participant-observers on the military’s involvement in Nigeria’s governance have only made passing references to Murtala. A number of books, which have been specifically written on his tenure, focus largely on his administrative policies and pronouncements. None so far has given a detailed human-angle account of his life and death.”

    Ogundipe described his book as “a product of extensive research and interviews.” He added: “This book traces the roots of the General and his progenitors. It also focuses on his birth, his growing up years, his schooling days, his life as a young man, his military training and career. The book also highlights his marriage and family life, his performance as a soldier, his involvement in the post-independence crisis that engulfed the nation, his emergence as a national leader, his role as head of state, his tragic death and finally the after-effects.”

    According to the publisher, Topseal Communications, “The Hurricane, after a thorough assessment, secured the official approval of the Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council of the Federal Ministry of Education, Abuja, and has been certified suitable for use in  Nigerian educational institutions and recommended for the general public.”

    It is a testimony to the weight of Ogundipe’s book that no less a person than ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo wrote the foreword. This is the same man that succeeded Muhammed and realised his plan for civilian rule by handing power over to Shehu Shagari on October 1, 1979. This is the same man that sensationally returned to power as an elected president in 1999 and completed two terms.

    Obasanjo said: “General Muhammed may have been in power for only six months, before he was tragically assassinated, but those are six months that are indelibly embossed on records of modern Nigeria. For they were six months when Nigeria intensely experienced leadership that was focused, dedicated, dynamic and selfless. Most importantly, those six months provided the launching pad for the most positive developments in leadership orientation in this country, including the handover of power to the elected government in 1979.”

    Obasanjo continued: “The Hurricane has effectively captured the historical perspectives of the work of the General, depicting his effort to bring about discipline and sanitisation of the military and the Nigerian civil society. Given the present moral condition in Nigeria, where corruption is so pervasive, this book is a refreshing opportunity for reflections on the past…and the man who has since come to symbolise the crusade for the good of our country.”

    The crusade continues. After the hurricane, there is The Hurricane.